[–] HappyMealBullshit 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

All biology is on the verge of becoming extinct due to a shortage of carbon dioxide in the air

You really think the idiot who wrote that has the slightest fucking clue what he's talking about? Please OP, pretending this is science is so goddamn intellectually dishonest. Have some self-respect for christs sake.

[–] shrink 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

And the next sentence or two after that proves he has zero comprehension of any botanical evolutionary history whatsoever. This is an incredible amount of ignorance, like claiming all life is about to be extinct in Florida because it's not underwater anymore, and everything needs water to survive. Incredible.

[–] HorseIsDead 1 points 4 points (+5|-1) ago 

Shitty argument, CO2 is not considered to be a current major issue but is projected to be in the next 100 years. Methane from animals farting is the main concern.

[–] kobold 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

methane might be a better fuel source than hydrogen

[–] HorseIsDead 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Methane is, yes. You turn it into a bit of CO2 which is magnitudes less potent. Methane would likely not be sustainable for long, it's mainly a result of processes that humanity is likely to ultimately phase out at one point or another in the future, we get it from stuff like rotting garbage and crude oil processing. Solar is not a "pipe dream", it's quite possibly the ultimate energy form humans will harness on earth. No one can promise fusion reactors will ever work, even in a million years. There are lots of stepping stones along the way though. Methane could be a good one.

[–] kalgon 1 points 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

CO2 is codeword for people

[–] lord_nougat 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

CO2... what a bunch of bastards!

[–] Laurentius_the_pyro 1 points 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

**All biology is on the verge of becoming extinct **due to a shortage of carbon dioxide in the air, which is needed for photosynthesis.

Jesus fucking Christ this is retarded, the fact that someone this stupid doesn't believe in global warming is a huge boost in credability for GW.

[–] 1Iron_Curtain 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

It basically boils down to the first and second law of thermodynamics(the first would say that CO2 is not enough to destroy the Ozone because the energies of the Ozone cannot be destroyed; so in a sense it still can impact the Ozone, but cannot destroy it entirely, and if the Ozone was so weak it would have went down during major Meteor impacts 66 million years ago and then finally the chemical makeup of the Ozone layer is going to be at an equilibrium, since the atmosphere is entropic and it goes through reversible change.

The whole global warming argument is an attempt to implement an environmental tax, which would crush corporations(the Sanders bunch), to implement stupid social and political reforms(that would ironically make the environment far worse off), and to create a sort of "doomsday" kind of thinking that is used to crowd people in society.

If they were so legitimately opposed to Global Warming they would be trying to find alternative forms of energy besides than oil. These people are stupid and hypocritical.

[–] ardvarcus 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

The biosphere of the Earth is a single, living, reactive, self-compensating system. It has shaped the planet we live on -- the reason the Earth is what it is today is because living things made it that way; the reason we have the climate we have is because living things want it that way. Our ecosystem can adjust to changes and can compensate for them. Our optimal percentage of CO2 in the air is certainly higher than what we have today, but the biosphere has compensated by changing the character of the forests and by making animals smaller and lighter, among countless other things too numerous and too complex to mention or even comprehend. Compared to the subtilty of the living Earth, human attempts at "climate engineering" are equivalent to a cave man trying to fix a Swiss watch with a wooden club.

[–] shrink 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

the reason we have the climate we have is because living things want it that way.

Incorrect. You have it totally backwards. The salinity of the ocean does not change to suit the fish, nor does that kind of mechanism occur anywhere else. Organisms do change their local ecosystem by virtue of existence, but there is no intentional, concerted effort to obtain an intended result. The organisms who cannot thrive in a certain environment or ecosystem die, and the ones that can, survive and reproduce. Living things do not make the entirety of the planet change to their own needs, Nature is the arbiter.

[–] kingminos 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Living things may make the entire of reality conform to its own needs. See the ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE for details. Self-aggrandizing non-linear feedback in biosystems is very like a Hamiltonian in classical mechanics. The 19-th Century determinist/random TOE you worship is decades old and miles wrong.

[–] juicedidwtc 4 points 1 points (+5|-4) ago 

one day in the future, when the earth still has not warmed in any meaningful way, people are going to have to accept that global warming was just one big scam for scientists to get research grants, politicians to get feel-good votes, and its going to be up to us to ensure that those scientists are never given any credibility in any scientific field, ever again.

[–] HorseIsDead 4 points 2 points (+6|-4) ago 

It's hilarious to watch you retards tear apart your own arguments by providing no reasonable explanation for why "dirty kike scientists" would be trying to "screw us over and take away all our freedoms".

[–] Neo-maxi-zoom-dweeby 3 points 4 points (+7|-3) ago 

Are you kidding? A global problem is exactly what Marxists would want in order to demand concessions from anyone that stands in the way of their solutions to the global problem. Government powers can given sweeping latitude to do whatever it takes - forced sterilization of a population, population replacement, limitation on commerce, increases in commerce elsewhere --- anything.

Then when anyone disagrees you just say "YOU WANT US ALL TO DIE, DON' T YOU!!!". That stops dissent.

Even questioning the proposition becomes verboten. People like you are trained to ridicule as crazy conspiracy nuts anyone that dares challenge the status quo. Instead of rightly referring to people who are skeptical about a hypothesis -- they call them "deniers" --- as though it is a foregone conclusion.

You are accepting propaganda blindly. I get that you accept it - but as I have seen this story change over and over again in my lifetime as each new justification fell apart and the goalposts were moved again and again -- I remain skeptical.

[–] juicedidwtc 3 points 0 points (+3|-3) ago 

and yet here you are, the only person in the comments bringing up "dirty kike scientists"

[–] theHare 2 points -2 points (+0|-2) ago 

No reasonable explanation. Funny

[–] Simonsaysgoat 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

Its going,to be an ice age, thats why the elites are building underground

[–] NSAiswatching 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Or maybe it's two minutes to midnight.

[–] Merchant_Menace 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

Burning fossil fuels releases carbon from the remnants of once living plants and animals. The animals got the carbon from the plants and the plants got it from the air. Therefore, burning fossil fuels releases carbon that was once in the air to begin with.

[–] gramman74 [S] 1 points 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

Carbon dioxide absorbs infrared radiation (IR) in three narrow bands of wavelengths, which are 2.7, 4.3 and 15 micrometers (µM). This means that most of the heat producing radiation escapes it. About 8% of the available black body radiation is picked up by these "fingerprint" frequencies of CO2. Climate scientists know that more CO2 does not result in more heat under usual conditions. So the mythologists among them try to salvage the global warming propaganda by pretending that something esoteric occurs higher in the atmosphere. The difference is that the absorption peaks for CO2 separate from the peaks for water vapor. Then supposedly, radiation which misses CO2 does not get picked up by water vapor and travels into outer space; and more CO2 causes less radiation to get missed on the shoulders of the peak

[–] Morbo 1 points 4 points (+5|-1) ago 

I'm with you on this. I've been arguing this point for years but most people have no clue about absorption and emission spectra. CO2 does have some emission bands like 10.2 µM that may play a part, but the emission is too weak given its small percentage of the atmospheric makeup. I've argued that for CO2 to be a significant contributor to heat gain in the system would put its concentration above lethal limits for animal life. None of this warming garbage stands up to the physics. It's just packaged pseudoscience fear mongering propaganda that the masses will buy into. CO2 is not a threat.

[–] Merchant_Menace 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Nothing I said contradicts this, fam. Just making another point bolstering argument against the whole global warming hypothesis.

[–] Morbo 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

You've proven nothing with those words. CO2 is not a contributor to atmospheric heating. OP's assertion on spectral absorption is spot on and provides a valid reason why CO2 is wrongfully accused of something it cannot do. You've basically just parroted some propaganda bullshit without any backing.

[–] Merchant_Menace 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I disproved the runaway greenhouse gas hypothesis independently from OPs claims about C02 absorption characteristics.

[–] HorseIsDead 1 points 0 points (+1|-1) ago  (edited ago)

The earth's surface was once a big sheet of glowing lava. I suppose we should find a way to focus the sun's energy on the earth to turn it into lava again since that would probably look cool and "it used to be like that" right?

[–] Merchant_Menace 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

So when you made that post did it feel like a valid point? Like, do you think the lava was because of the co2? In your little brain, is the timeline something like this: Step 1) lava earth Step 2) microbes Step 3) Venus earth Step 4) Moar microbes Step 5) ???? Step 6) paradise earth Step 7) cars Step 8) lava earth

Is that more or less how you think it works?

load more comments ▼ (3 remaining)