Binderoid Posted September 23 Share Posted September 23 How is it that we have the technology to change the climate if we just spend enough money but cannot solve the border crisis? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brahamfireman Posted September 23 Share Posted September 23 12 hours ago, JamesW said: The graph produced by NASA is quite correct... have a look at the scales, thousand of years vs hundreds of millions.... and you have missed the point. CO2 has never been higher for the period humans have been around. Ya know, climate that is compatible for us to live... Thats what the graph is trying to show with different scales, which can not be 'seen' on the larger scale. The second point is the dramatic change since the industrial revolution. Again look at the scales for the rate of change, ~200 years since the industrial revolution vs the millions of years of previous changes. The rate of change is unprecedented. Answer me this, have global CO2 levels ever been higher than today???? What was the plant and animal life like if CO2 levels were higher than today. How did those levels get to there? Science and facts prove that today's levels are nothing to worry about Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brahamfireman Posted September 23 Share Posted September 23 One other thing to think about is there's currently 10 billion people on earth, each and everyone is converting oxygen to CO2. It's also quite intriguing that global CO2 levels is increasing that same rate as world population. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-301066460puller Posted September 23 Share Posted September 23 45 minutes ago, Binderoid said: How is it that we have the technology to change the climate if we just spend enough money but cannot solve the border crisis? Because it's only a crisis to us peons... To them it's votes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cattech Posted September 23 Share Posted September 23 Let's say that they're not only correct, but it's much worse than they think.... Global average temperatures are going to go up by say 10 degrees..... Why is this bad? For the most part, the highest density population areas of the world are currently within a +/-30° arc of the equator despite the fact that far more landmass exists north and south of that region. These are all areas that many of us can't imagine living due to being so hot, but those who live there do not object. From what we can deduce, the warmer equator is where early man developed and began to flourish. A 10° change would probably exponentially expand the land available for agriculture and plant life in general. Look at the empty space of Siberia and Canada. Imagine how productive it could be if just a little warmer. When it boils down, mother nature is probably adapting to support the life that is currently flourishing on earth. It doesn't matter if you believe in evolutionary or intelligent design theory, a constant we can agree on is change. God/Nature/Fates allowed us to discover and use Earth's natural resources to our benefit for a yet unknown reason that will some day protect or preserve all life on Earth. Or possibly reach out and give life to a place that has yet to develop it. Everything we know of life here could be the result of an alternate "mankind" (as we know it) that reached out and planting their seeds eons ago. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirt_Floor_Poor Posted September 23 Share Posted September 23 How come nobody ever brings up sulfur in diesel fuel? They took it out because it’s polluting everything. Now farmers have to spread it on fields because the crops are deficient. It’s the same as CO2 being a pollutant. It’s necessary for life. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Beale Posted September 23 Share Posted September 23 If you follow the sources and sinks for CO2 worldwide via the several monitoring satellites you'll find that Australia is a net sink. So you "sinners" in the northern hemisphere owe us reparations. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cedar farm Posted September 24 Share Posted September 24 This stuff has been going on and in flux since "In the beginning God created the heaven's and the earth" The difference is in the ability now to detect it and that of coarse is subject to who interprets it and what agenda they have. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmall Doctor Posted September 24 Share Posted September 24 2 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drysleeves Posted September 24 Share Posted September 24 https://cowboystatedaily.com/2023/09/22/ev-battery-factory-will-require-so-much-energy-it-needs-a-coal-plant-to-power-it/ 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Beale Posted September 24 Share Posted September 24 FWIW "17 years of near-zero trend in September sea ice demolishes claim that more CO2 means less sea ice" https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/09/23/17-years-of-near-zero-trend-in-september-sea-ice-demolishes-claim-that-more-co2-means-less-sea-ice/ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve C. Posted September 24 Share Posted September 24 9 hours ago, Drysleeves said: https://cowboystatedaily.com/2023/09/22/ev-battery-factory-will-require-so-much-energy-it-needs-a-coal-plant-to-power-it/ As the old saying goes, you can't make this stuff up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finney Posted September 24 Share Posted September 24 We have been lied to for so long by people pushing their agendas I believe none of them. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diesel Doctor Posted September 24 Share Posted September 24 21 hours ago, Finney said: We have been lied to for so long by people pushing their agendas I believe none of them. The only fact coming out of Washington is they are spending our money like drunken sailors. No disrespect to the sailors. They will not stop until WE reign them in. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sd186man Posted September 24 Share Posted September 24 I haven’t heard how may years of tier 4 or 5 diesel and gas engine emissions and EV vehicle benefits the Canadian forest fires are offsetting, thinking humanity controls the planet is absurd to me 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zleinenbach Posted September 24 Share Posted September 24 54 minutes ago, Finney said: We have been lied to for so long by people pushing their agendas I believe none of them. ^^ winner 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brahamfireman Posted September 24 Share Posted September 24 3 hours ago, sd186man said: I haven’t heard how may years of tier 4 or 5 diesel and gas engine emissions and EV vehicle benefits the Canadian forest fires are offsetting, thinking humanity controls the planet is absurd to me The news media started spewing just that the last week or so. Star tribune here in MN had front page above the fold stating "decades of work has been erased by canadian fires. Here's a story from NYT, star tribune wants you to pay to read. Both are liberal rags..... https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/20/climate/wildfire-smoke-air-pollution.html My question is if we've made huge gains in air quality in the last 40 years, why am I told we're worse off today??? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iowaboy1965 Posted September 24 Author Share Posted September 24 A thought I had this morning. Catalytic converters and unleaded gas were supposed to save the planet when i was in grade school (early to mid 70s) Now carbon dioxide is killing the world. But it was supposed to be so much better and harmless in the 70s compared to carbon monoxide. So does this mean we might as well stop using catalytic converters because according to "the experts," it's as bad or worse than carbon monoxide? 🤔 🤷♂️ what's the truth here. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
searcyfarms Posted September 24 Share Posted September 24 2 hours ago, iowaboy1965 said: A thought I had this morning. Catalytic converters and unleaded gas were supposed to save the planet when in was in grade school (early to mid 70s) Now carbon dioxide is killing the world. But it was supposed to be so much better and harmless in the 70s compared to carbon monoxide. So does this mean we might as well stop using catalytic converters because according to "the experts," it's as bad or worse than carbon monoxide? 🤔 🤷♂️ what's the truth here. currently truth is whatever someone thinks it is based on a combination of their upbringing, friends, parental opinions, a quick phone search to google and wikipedia, and their own philosophy thrown in because of the right they have to make up and to believe whatever they want regardless of its integrity Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brahamfireman Posted September 25 Share Posted September 25 6 hours ago, iowaboy1965 said: A thought I had this morning. Catalytic converters and unleaded gas were supposed to save the planet when in was in grade school (early to mid 70s) Now carbon dioxide is killing the world. But it was supposed to be so much better and harmless in the 70s compared to carbon monoxide. So does this mean we might as well stop using catalytic converters because according to "the experts," it's as bad or worse than carbon monoxide? 🤔 🤷♂️ what's the truth here. Man you want to get a tree hugger twisted up, explain to them that catalytic converters are directly responsible for the modern day increase in atmospheric CO2 levels!!! Their Heads explode. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hardtail Posted September 25 Share Posted September 25 The fact that the UN convinced countries to sign a treaty for sustainability and focus on the environment in 1992 with agenda 21 when scientists were just getting out of the gate on any studies should say something. There was a dramatic shift in priorities with that agreement and the state of lunacy where we are at today, well into their 2030 great reset currently, the name UN sounds fuzzy and nice, their goals and direction are not. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hardtail Posted September 25 Share Posted September 25 1984 at your door Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTB98 Posted September 25 Share Posted September 25 18 hours ago, iowaboy1965 said: A thought I had this morning. Catalytic converters and unleaded gas were supposed to save the planet when in was in grade school (early to mid 70s) Now carbon dioxide is killing the world. But it was supposed to be so much better and harmless in the 70s compared to carbon monoxide. So does this mean we might as well stop using catalytic converters because according to "the experts," it's as bad or worse than carbon monoxide? 🤔 🤷♂️ what's the truth here. Carbon monoxide is produced by incomplete combustion of carbon fuels. It is a poisonous gas. CO takes the place of O2 in your blood. Naturally CO is a very small part of the atmosphere, measured in parts per billion. CO in the atmosphere will attach to O in the air and form CO2. This process usually occurs in a few weeks or months. So the CO will become CO2 on its own but not before being a dangerous gas. So are catalytic converters helpful? Yes, they reduce pollutants especially in urban or industrial areas where CO levels could be measured in PPM rather than PPB. Did the Canadian fires this summer effect the weather? The amount of particulates in the air definitely darkened the skies across large portions of the US and made for some cooler temperatures off and on throughout the summer. If people want to know the truth you need to do your own research. That’s not watching videos on social media or finding “news” sources that align with what you think is true. Learn the basics of chemistry and physics. Do your own math from the information you can find from different sources, both those you agree and disagree with. They may be the same information just presented differently. They may be wildly different. Is the world ending in ten years? Probably not. And if it is there’s nothing we’re going to do to stop it. Are there people out there wanting to take advantage of the world we live in? Sure, there always have been people like that throughout history. This thread has comments from Creationists who believe the earth is 5,000 years old and those referencing scientific data from billions of years ago. There are those who say to not trust anything from a gov scientist. Well, that’s pretty much all of them. And throws out all of the scientific theories. It’s been interesting to read. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brahamfireman Posted September 25 Share Posted September 25 4 minutes ago, MTB98 said: Carbon monoxide is produced by incomplete combustion of carbon fuels. It is a poisonous gas. CO takes the place of O2 in your blood. Naturally CO is a very small part of the atmosphere, measured in parts per billion. CO in the atmosphere will attach to O in the air and form CO2. This process usually occurs in a few weeks or months. So the CO will become CO2 on its own but not before being a dangerous gas. So are catalytic converters helpful? Yes, they reduce pollutants especially in urban or industrial areas where CO levels could be measured in PPM rather than PPB. Did the Canadian fires this summer effect the weather? The amount of particulates in the air definitely darkened the skies across large portions of the US and made for some cooler temperatures off and on throughout the summer. If people want to know the truth you need to do your own research. That’s not watching videos on social media or finding “news” sources that align with what you think is true. Learn the basics of chemistry and physics. Do your own math from the information you can find from different sources, both those you agree and disagree with. They may be the same information just presented differently. They may be wildly different. Is the world ending in ten years? Probably not. And if it is there’s nothing we’re going to do to stop it. Are there people out there wanting to take advantage of the world we live in? Sure, there always have been people like that throughout history. This thread has comments from Creationists who believe the earth is 5,000 years old and those referencing scientific data from billions of years ago. There are those who say to not trust anything from a gov scientist. Well, that’s pretty much all of them. And throws out all of the scientific theories. It’s been interesting to read. So..... is current atmospheric CO2 levels something to be concerned about???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iowaboy1965 Posted September 25 Author Share Posted September 25 1 hour ago, brahamfireman said: So..... is current atmospheric CO2 levels something to be concerned about???? I'm going with nope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.