User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 10:54:06 AM EDT
[#1]
oh well it was good while it lasted.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 10:58:01 AM EDT
[#2]
So how did the plants get by before there were mammals emitting carbon dioxide?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 10:59:30 AM EDT
[#3]
So much for living forever....
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:01:09 AM EDT
[#4]
Well we better party like we only got 100 million years to live.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:03:39 AM EDT
[#5]
Oh dear Marklar.
For every psuedo science reaction there's an equal and opposite psuedo science reaction. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:05:24 AM EDT
[#6]
C02 existed prior to animals. It is a natural element. It is found in natural reservoirs such as forests, soil, oceans and rocks. And while it is the lower levels of C02 which have prevented Earth from becoming a Venus like oven as the sun has grown brighter and hotter, that continued drop in C02 will someday no longer be able to perform the balancing act that sustains life on the planet. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:05:57 AM EDT
[#7]
Ummm, that isn't psuedo science. The only thing in debate is "when." While some suggest as early as the next 100 million years, estimates of 500-700 million are probably more accurate. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:11:45 AM EDT
[#8]
I read the "end of evolution" by Peter Ward, good book. The only problem with your/his argument is that it doesn't include human factors.... The fact of the matter is that Co2 is on the rise, no if ands or buts, it IS NOT DECREASING.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:13:38 AM EDT
[#9]
You used the words 'fact' and 'liberal' in the same sentence. How opposite can 2 words be?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:14:49 AM EDT
[#10]
Seems backwards to me.
According to some scientific studies I have read, humans are reproducing at a rate of 40 gajillion a second and tearing down rainforests at a rate of 400 trillion acres an hour. Since plants put out oxygen and people put out carbon dioxide, I would think we would all die from too much CO2 and not enough plants to convert it back to oxygen. I dunno. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:15:10 AM EDT
[#11]
Are you talking about in the last 100 years or in the last million? Humans are a factor but not the ultimate factor. Just as we likely cannot CAUSE runaway global warming we will not prevent the inevitable loss of Co2 in the next 500 million years. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:15:54 AM EDT
[#12]
about the same as "conservative" and "free thinking" |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:20:40 AM EDT
[#13]
I don't be either are universally true. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:21:08 AM EDT
[#14]
I'm talking about the last 150... Common sense should tell any human that we are causing dramatic changes to our climate... the magnitude of it depends on people like G.W. Bush, you and me. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:21:42 AM EDT
[#15]
the atmosphere originally had a lot more CO2 and hydrogen there is lots of information on the evolution of earth's atmosphere, its an interesting subject |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:22:28 AM EDT
[#16]
Hmm....we got some time. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:25:44 AM EDT
[#17]
"Common Sense" told people of 600 years ago the Earth was Flat. "Common Sense" told people of 800 years ago the Earth was at the Center of the Solar System. "Common Sense" of 200 years ago said people could not fly. "Common Sense" of 100 years ago said peple could not go faster than sound and live. "Common Sense" of 50 years ago said people would never walk on the moon. But let's not let Scientific fact get in the way of "Common Sense" for a "feel good liberal cause". |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:26:02 AM EDT
[#18]
Current CO2 emissions are on the rise, humans are responsible for most of it as are volcanoes. So before humans or other animals you still had CO2 in the atmosphere from volcanoes.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:27:34 AM EDT
[#19]
In the end, I don't think we will offset anything in any significant way no matter what you, me or George Bush does. This included anything our children may or may not do. In about 500-700 million years the Earth will be a brown planet hosting only microbrial life. Our current generation of green house gasses will buy us only a small amount of additional time. But my main point is while "global warming" advocates decry green house gasses, they are what are actually sustaining life on the planet. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:29:36 AM EDT
[#20]
Wow. I think your trying to be a feel good guy. Don't worry, those huge stack of black smoke just go away. Smog is not real. Caps are not melting. We don't create trash. We aren't breeding out of control. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:30:01 AM EDT
[#21]
Certainly. Hell the species might not even still exist by that point. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:30:14 AM EDT
[#22]
yeah... and in a few billion more we will be consumed by the sun. That's not the point to me... To me the point is to try to make it as good for everyone for as long as we can. Because if you argue "we are all dead anyway" let's just nuke the fucking place and end it all now. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:37:36 AM EDT
[#23]
We are actually saying the same thing. I'm not saying "screw it we are dead anyway." I'm trying to point out that the "average" global warming dumbass (not you mind you) doesn't know what he's talking about and doesn't realize that C02 is NECESSARY to sustain life and the loss of Co2 below a certain level will be the end of most life on the planet. More importantly, our current increase in Co2 is actually buying us a little more time in the final result. I not sure it is possible, let alone likely, to generate so much Co2 that we can cause a Venus "greenhouse." |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:39:44 AM EDT
[#24]
We just need to bioengineer a plant that produces carbon dioxide. If everyone plants a lawn grown from a genetically altered grass seed we will all be saved. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:41:09 AM EDT
[#25]
WTF??? What are they basic that on? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:43:05 AM EDT
[#26]
Wow I'll bet you're a butterfly scientists or something eh?
Doesn't matter if they are or not - can you PROVE it's due to humans. Come back when you can.
Again another brillian quote. Come back when you can tell me how many cubic yards of trash we produce in the US on a yearly basis - and what is the square mileage of the US.
Obviosly not, as we can still feed everyone. Again come back when you do a calculation on the density of NYC compared to the population of the world. Compute how much of an area it would take to house everyone if you could build a 'mega city' that housed the Wold's current population at NYC level densities. Then look up the area of a large state (say Texas). Then come back and we'll discuss the issue. |
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:43:55 AM EDT
[#27]
Gas Name Chemical Formula Percent Volume Nitrogen N2 78.08% Oxygen O2 20.95% *Water H2O 0 to 4% Argon Ar 0.93% *Carbon Dioxide CO2 0.0360% Neon Ne 0.0018% Helium He 0.0005% *Methane CH4 0.00017% Hydrogen H2 0.00005% *Nitrous Oxide N2O 0.00003% *Ozone O3 0.000004% |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:44:27 AM EDT
[#28]
Talk about taking the easy way out of an argument. 
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:45:01 AM EDT
[#29]
If deforestation continues at it's current rate... we will be screwed. There is one good side to global warming when it comes to oxygen/CO2 production/conversion. It's the theory that the vast frozen tundras of the artic will be able to support plant life again when global tempratures rise and thaw them out. It will create millions of acres of grasses and plant life that will help convert o2/co2. I'd rather see it stay the same... but at least it's some kind of hope
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:46:31 AM EDT
[#30]
1-4: Atmospheric Composition, Carbon Dioxide The earth's atmosphere, as discussed in unit 1-2, is mostly nitrogen and oxygen. These two constituents alone account for 99.03% of all atmospheric "dry air" gases below 100 km (water vapor accounts for 0-4% depending on latitude, altitude and weather conditions). Concentrations of trace gases are given in Table 1. Water vapor, carbon dioxide, and ozone are, to different degrees, variable in concentration, but all others are relatively stable. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:47:06 AM EDT
[#31]
The FACT is that 99% of the Co2 in the atmosphere comes from natural sources, one volcanic eruption puts out more Co2 than several years of human activity. What is happening now is all a part of the natural cycle that has been going on for millions of years, it is the utmost conceit to believe that humans can overpower the natural cycles of the planet. The entire product of mankind is nothing but a pimple on Mother Nature's butt. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:48:32 AM EDT
[#32]
As plant life is critical to photosynthesis and a habitable planet, if we reduced plants below the level necesssary to sustain life, we will be screwed. I'm not sure what the currently level of deforestation is however. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:49:39 AM EDT
[#33]
Hit probablility...98%. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:51:39 AM EDT
[#34]
news.mongabay.com/2005/0502-rhett_butler.html If one is wrong, can the others not be questioned ? I live just a few miles from the Houston Ship Channel and can tell you that all that "smoke" you see is usually nothing more than steam. This was not the case when I moved here in 1961 |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:53:50 AM EDT
[#35]
Not really... Earth, I can agree with. When you are talking about a giant rock floating through space. But in terms of life on planet earth... to think we are not causing dramatic changes to "mother nature" is quite insane. Would rivers be catching on fire if man wasn't around... would shark populations in the North Atlantic be down over 85% from a hundred years ago... would entire species of animals and plants be wiped out daily? The thought that we don't have an effect on LIFE on the planet is just wrong. But I agree 100% that there is no way humans can alter the orbit, speed or direction of this earth... but we are causing dramatic changes to the miniscule portion of this planet that is able to sustain life. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:57:41 AM EDT
[#36]
The dinasaurs would disagree with you. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:58:10 AM EDT
[#37]
It should be easy enough to determine the CO2 content of our atmosphere historically and estimate where it's going. Having not read the book, I wonder how he is estimating future volcanic outgassing. As far as some mentioning how much CO2 people put into the atmosphere, it's a minor thing. People have only been around a short time and I doubt in a few hundred million years that we would have been anything but a tiny blip in history.
There's also the long term evolution of plants to consider as some require less CO2 than others. How much time that would buy the world... who knows. When talking about hundreds of millions of years, there's a lot that can happen, but a consistant downward trend in CO2 levels is hard to argue with if the data confirms it. Interesting theory. Is it a good read? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:58:13 AM EDT
[#38]
Only recently has it become clear that Ice ages are not the result of some Global shift, POlar Shift, Sudden distancing from the sun, or some other planetary factor, but from the existence of life itself upon the earth. It is a cycle like any other and is created by the interaction of plant and animal life on this earth. It is more or less a recent phenomenon as the large scale volcanic activity on Earth has slowed down, slowing the emissions of naturally occurring CO2.
IT works like this...... Starting with a warm cycle, plants flourish and cover every available inch of land. Algae and other plant life flourish in the oceans. They consume CO2 as part of their life cycle There is a slight imbalance in that the CO2 producing creatures could not ever keep up with, and with the slowed emissions of naturally occurring CO2, the level of CO2 in our atmosphere decreases, lessening the ability of the atmosphere to retain heat. It begins to get colder. The opposite happens during an Ice Age. There is not alot of plant life, as much of the Earth is covered by ice, and the levels of CO2 slowly build. Where I live, and where many of you live now used to be covered by Ice, maybe at one time ocean, forest, lakes, rivers, whatever. This mentality that the Earth is changing OMG!! Life is going to END!!! is ridiculous. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 11:58:32 AM EDT
[#39]
that is why they are dead 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 12:10:07 PM EDT
[#40]
Wow...I was wrong I guess...so what happens to all of the CO2 all animals exhale everyday??? I always figured that O2/CO2 were pretty much a ying/yang thing in balance. Didn't realize that there's that much more O2. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 12:19:07 PM EDT
[#41]
Just to add my .02 cents, one of the biggest producers of CFs is a volcano in the southern hemisphere that can really pump out CO2, CO and CFs like crazy.
If we can believe that the ozone has a huge hole (or the ozone {O3] is depleting) over the Andes, and the Andes are in South America, and the wind patterns between the Northern hemisphere and the Southern hemisphere don't overlap, how, when I was a kid, did my model airplane paint spray can cause the big hole in the Ozone layer over the Andes? That's right, it didn't. Back when I was in High School in the '70s, the science teachers were telling us we should be getting ready for the coming Ice age. This was really weird since we had just come out of a mini Ice Age in around 1850. Sometimes I really feel like I'm surrounded by idiots. And they have driver licenses as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 12:25:15 PM EDT
[#42]
Actually yes. It covers the differnet ways life will end on the planet and the ultimate fate of the planet iteslf. And he actually addresses the grasses (the ones that require far less Co2) that you are probably referring to. And it is with those plants in consideration that estimates were revised from about 150 million to 500-700 million. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 12:26:01 PM EDT
[#43]
yeah thats why its COOLER in the summer here than in the 80's. Common sense tells me the reason the planet's temprature fluctuates is due to the massive ball of burning hydrogen in sky fluctuating. its not a 100 watt bulb working on steady current.
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 12:28:49 PM EDT
[#44]
Actually oxygen breathing animals account for very little of the Co2 in our atmosphere. And the Earth has a finite supply in the soil, oceans, rocks, etc. And basically once that is below a certain level, the Co2 produced by animals will not be enough to sustain plant life and those plants will die. In turn the animals will die. There will still be Co2 and oxygen, just not enough to sustain most life forms. |
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 12:29:45 PM EDT
[#45]
And also, for all the brainiacs out there spouting deforestation, The majority of oxygen on earth is produced by algea in the oceans, not the Brazilian jungle as the nut case enviro's think. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 12:30:14 PM EDT
[#46]
Careful with them easy and obvious answers. We wouldn't want anyone to "learn" anything.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 12:35:02 PM EDT
[#47]
That is because they can't. For goodness sake, we can barely predict the weather ten days into the future! They (the scientists that write all these books about the future) don't really know about the future and not as much as they think they do regarding the past. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 12:35:50 PM EDT
[#48]
Oh God, not another AFRCOM science thread...
IBTPOACB. (In before the plane on the conyair belt) |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 12:40:36 PM EDT
[#49]
Which is why I believe we need to get ALL the buried hydrocarbons topside. It is the duty of the human race to save our planet. Think about how many carbon molecules reside under the surface in various forms! Once the ice caps melt (we need to capture the fresh water there) We can create enough plants and animals to spice up our atmosphere! |
|||||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2005 1:01:44 PM EDT
[#50]
Dude, you are wrong. Most of the animal species (and plants) that have lived on the earth (way greater than 95%) are EXTINCT! and this occured when there were no humans. Get a life and read a real book now and again instead of your liberal propaganda. Humans are not as powerful as some think. |
||
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
