Be Afraid, be very afraid

[amorphous_constellation]

Don't forget that methane (far more dangerous) looms increasingly large.

Well, that occurs naturally too. I'm sure something the plant kingdom will suck it up. Swamps don't seem to mind a heavily gaseous environment.

 

[metis]

And so you did!
We're not doing very well disagreeing here.

Indeed, the world must be coming to an end. I'm so depressed that I'm outta here until tomorrow, so we'll have to work on things that we can say then that'll really **** each other off.

 

[Revoltingest]

Well, that occurs naturally too. I'm sure something the plant kingdom will suck it up. Swamps don't seem to mind a heavily gaseous environment.

I don't think we can count on plants to mitigate methane.
But there's a potential problem that as things warm, sequestered icy methane will release increasing amounts.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

Oh and hasn't Venus and Mars also been rising in temperature over the past 20 years ?

Huh.. that might be something to look at.

 

[Eliab ben Benjamin]

My long-time rule-of-thumb is that it is always wise to lean in the direction of safety, and that can be applied to a great many things, including this. Why take a chance, even if one had doubts? Or, an analogy that I like to use, before taking a high-dive into the pool, it's probably best to check the depth of the water first.

There are many benefits to going "green" that go beyond global warming.

Yes, i just installed solar panels on my roof last week, and reduced my usage by installing
LED light bulbs etc.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

I don't think we can count on plants to mitigate methane.

Methane is contained in stuff like cow manure and swamp muck, chemically whatever the compounds are it seems to make for good fertilizing material though, right?

 

[Revoltingest]

Yes, i just installed solar panels on my roof last week, and reduced my usage by installing
LED light bulbs etc.

I'm spending thousands on LED bulbs just to save money.
(The trick is to account for the cost so that the IRS doesn't
detect this, because it's not a deductable expense.)
Solar panels aren't cost effective yet.
And their tax disadvantages are even worse.

 

[Revoltingest]

Methane is contained in stuff like cow manure and swamp muck, chemically whatever the compounds are it seems to make for good fertilizing material though, right?

If airborne, we can't use the methane.
But it can be cost effective to recover & burn it.
But those aren't the sources which concern me....
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...e-threat-that-nobodys-even-talking-about-yet/

 

[amorphous_constellation]

If airborne, we can't use the methane.
But it can be cost effective to recover & burn it.
But those aren't the sources which concern me....
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...e-threat-that-nobodys-even-talking-about-yet/

Huh.. well is it typical for microbes to break things down into methane in other places, like in the tropical areas with a quick plant rot rate? What specific microbes are the bad ones?

 

[DLR]

Those who deny that we are in a period of global warming are either scientifically illiterate or have bought into the idea that the vast majority of climate scientists are on the "take". The fact of the matter is that what we have seen happen is not based on estimates but on real measurements that have been collected for over 200 years now. .

It may be arguable how much control we have over it, but the fact it is occurring is hard to argue. It doesn't matter how cold it got or how much it snowed in Boston last month. Visit the polar ice cap and the change is very real. It didn't happen because we had a warm year or two. We are going to have some severe adjustments to real estate values if it continues.

 

[Revoltingest]

Huh.. well is it typical for microbes to break things down in methane in other places, like in the tropical areas with a quick plant rot rate? What specific microbes are the bad ones?

This would be above me pay grade.
We need Painted Wolf for such answers.

 

[metis]

Yes, i just installed solar panels on my roof last week, and reduced my usage by installing
LED light bulbs etc.

Ah, you're ahead of me on that. I'm using the CFL's still, and using solar panels here where I live is pretty much fruitless because of our cloud cover and snow.

 

[Revoltingest]

Ah, you're ahead of me on that. I'm using the CFL's still, and using solar panels here where I live is pretty much fruitless because of our cloud cover and snow.

CFLs still?
What a backwards enemy of the environment you are!

 

[Draka]

I have no doubt that the plants will survive, probably along with cockroaches, so can we only imagine what intelligent beings might look like millions of years from now?

Why does all this make me think of the movie "The Happening"? Yep, let's keep polluting and poisoning our air, land, and water...the plants will strike back.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

I don't know maybe the plants are trying to get rid of us. I mean, the situation doesn't seem like it's going to end life for them anyway. Once we are gone, they'll just soak up all the gas we made.

That puts it in perspective.

Most plants arose with vastly higher levels of CO2 'pollution' >7000ppm in the Cambrian

They still prefer far higher levels 1200- 1500 ppm today.
Plants consumed and depleted this natural resource over millions of years, the pre- industrial 275ppm represented near starvation levels, opening up vast deserts that used to be lush.


All we are doing is re-cycling a tiny amount of this vital nutrient; 1.25 extra molecules in 10,000 of air.

We are helping restore a slightly more natural balance encouraging plant growth and drought resistance, the idea that it also somehow causes bad weather is simply scientifically illiterate.

Outside of convoluted computer simulations there is no connection

 

[amorphous_constellation]

Plants consumed and depleted this natural resource over millions of years, the pre- industrial 275ppm represented near starvation levels, opening up vast deserts that used to be lush.

Huh, interesting..

All we are doing is re-cycling a tiny amount of this vital nutrient; 1.25 extra molecules in 10,000 of air.

You mean 1000.. or am I misunderstanding you

We are helping restore a slightly more natural balance encouraging plant growth and drought resistance, the idea that it also somehow causes bad weather is simply scientifically illiterate.

I've been reading some articles on the differences between how Co2 affects c3 and c4 type plants. I guess a big concern is with some c4 crops like corn, open air testing doesn't seem to reveal enhancements. But corn, for all the concern, can still be replaced by the c3s..

As to edible crop plants, I guess I was thinking that citrus plants might have more of a lead in the future for some reason, but I have to look at more on that. If there is water scarcity or it becomes brackish there have to be some plants that will still be fine. High maintenance things like almonds (takes a lot of water to grow apparently) might be on the way out, but plants like that are kind of living off the fat of the land anyway. Die offs of some things probably will happen, but other things probably will benefit...

I guess another big concern is freshwater scarcity, but that made me think about the everglades, it occurred to me that this water is supposedly brackish anyway. Supposedly, net holdover fresh water quality might go down. In that case, probably delicate fish like trout will be on their way out, but rough fish and ancient surviving marine animals should be fine.

 

[metis]

Why does all this make me think of the movie "The Happening"? Yep, let's keep polluting and poisoning our air, land, and water...the plants will strike back.

I never saw that movie. Should I?

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Huh, interesting..



You mean 1000.. or am I misunderstanding you



I've been reading some articles on the differences between how Co2 affects c3 and c4 type plants. I guess a big concern is with some c4 crops like corn, open air testing doesn't seem to reveal enhancements. Supposedly rain patterns will shift and become heavier depending on the latitude according to some content.

I guess a big concern is also with freshwater scarcity, but that made me think about the everglades, it occurred to me that this water is supposedly brackish anyway. Supposedly, net fresh water quality might go down. In that case, probably delicate fish like trout will be on their way out, but rough fish and ancient surviving marine animals should be fine.

As to edible crop plants, I guess I was thinking that citrus plants might have more of a lead in the future for some reason, but I have to look at more on that. If there is water scarcity or it becomes brackish there have to be some plants that will still be fine. High maintenance things like almonds (takes a lot of water to grow apparently) might be on the way out, but plants like that are kind of living off the fat of the land anyway.

we've increased from 275 to 400 ppm +125 per 1,000,000 = 1.25 per 10,000 .

I think it's a little more clear this way, CO2 emissions are often cited in tons to sound dramatic, but it is a miniscule amount on perspective- particularly when the vast majority of CO2 'emissions' come from natural respiration, not combustion

At these levels CO2 effects plant growth, not the GH effect to any significant degree

The GH effect is dominated by water vapor, not CO2 yes?
That's why the computer sims all depend 100% on simulating hypothetical feedback loops in atmospheric water vapor, NOT CO2- to achieve the Hollywood disaster results.

But most believers don't scratch the surface this far, when somebody likes the 'solutions', they have little interest in scrutinizing the 'problem'

 

[metis]

we've increased from 275 to 400 ppm +125 per 1,000,000 = 1.25 per 10,000 .

I think it's a little more clear this way, CO2 emissions are often cited in tons to sound dramatic, but it is a miniscule amount on perspective- particularly when the vast majority of CO2 'emissions' come from natural respiration, not combustion

At these levels CO2 effects plant growth, not the GH effect to any significant degree

The GH effect is dominated by water vapor, not CO2 yes?
That's why the computer sims all depend 100% on simulating hypothetical feedback loops in atmospheric water vapor, NOT CO2- to achieve the Hollywood disaster results.

But most believers don't scratch the surface this far, when somebody likes the 'solutions', they have little interest in scrutinizing the 'problem'

That simply is false and we've talked about this previously. In order for you to be correct, you would have to explain why climate scientists throughout the world now know, not speculate, that higher CO2 and methane levels are higher and that this is having an effect on our environment. When one sees scientific studies by NASA, NOAA, the NAS*, the Department of Defense, along with other scientific institutions throughout the world all saying the same thing, then it should be very clear to anyone that they must know things that you certainly do not seem to know.


*Note: On a previous post somewhere, I may have written "NSA" by mistake, but I don't know which thread this might have been on.

 

[YmirGF]

Those who deny that we are in a period of global warming are either scientifically illiterate or have bought into the idea that the vast majority of climate scientists are on the "take". The fact of the matter is that what we have seen happen is not based on estimates but on real measurements that have been collected for over 200 years now.

And the idea that we have nothing to worry about certainly goes against what the scientific projections are if we don't stop spewing CO2 and methane gas into our atmosphere, and even our Department of Defense here in the States say it is very much a concern to them, as well as NASA, NOAA, the NAS, etc. But then some people think that they're so much more intelligent than the scientists who work for them and many other agencies.

All that is well and good, but pretty much off topic, as the drooling writer of the OP was raving on about something else entirely and conceded that climate change was real and unstoppable.

If Climate change cannot be stopped, i fear for the lives of Atheists, Gays and minority religious members. Sure climate change itself will kill millions, millions more will starve, fires and floods will kill millions more, but the above will be killed by the dominant religious members

Any thoughts on the rest of the insanity espoused in the OP?

Let us take a step back and realize that these are King/Master religions - born when Kings/Strongmen ruled, Slaves/Servants got down on their knees, shaking with fear, swore undying loyalty(belief) and begged for his mercy and protection. Those who do not swear loyalty must be punished or cast out(Hence the loose talk of Hell) - very primitive and backward ideas

And so when things go bad, the multitude will turn to their religious leaders and ask why Master is punishing us and these leaders will point to the presence of Gays and Atheists as the cause. We know that it is already happening - Gays and Atheists are under attack in several islamic countries - in Nigeria Gays are being hunted and killed!. Once these two are killed, next in line are members of minority religions - a Slave may serve only one master - these people do not kneel to our master - and so they must be killed too

Sounds like a real hate-fest going on against Islam and Muslims in general, if you ask me?