Comments on: For real progress against greenhouse gases, drop the bureaucracy Mon, 13 Oct 2014 04:50:29 +0000 hourly 1 By: drewbie Wed, 05 May 2010 17:17:21 +0000 Benny, while your chemistry is technically correct, the amount of O2 displaced is negligible comprared to the atmospheric volume.

Since the industrial revolution, CO2 concetrations have gone no where but up. Global temperature, however, has gone all over the place. If there were a direct link between CO2 and global temperature, I imagine it’d be visible in a chart like this one: mmons/f/f4/Instrumental_Temperature_Reco rd.png

Since that graph isn’t (mostly) a straight slope upward, I can only deduce that CO2 does not play a significant part in Earth’s Temperature.

By: Benny_Acosta Thu, 29 Apr 2010 23:49:25 +0000 AGW_Skeptic99

It also needs to be pointed out that the reason CO2 is building up is because of the burning of fossil fuels. High school chemistry teaches us that burning anything uses up oxygen and creates co2 and water. When a volcano erupts, co2 is indeed emitted, but it does not displace the oxygen in the atmosphere. This is because melting something is not the same as burning it. Burning requires the use of oxygen. The heat coming out of the earth is due to the enormous pressures very deep in the earth beneath the mantle and nearer to the core.

Scientists studying atmospheric content have discovered that our oxygen levels have been declining. This only happens when something is burned. And in order to affect level of oxygen in the atmosphere there has to be LOTS of burning going on. And that means US. We burn fuel constantly. And as we add to the co2 levels we also decrease the levels of oxygen available for us to breath. Add deforestation to this mix and it ends up being a really ugly situation. This isn’t just some wild guess with no data to back it up. It’s real. And it’s happening now.

When the hole in the ozone layer was discovered above Antarctica in the 1970’s, it was barely noticeable. Now that barely noticeable hole is larger than the entire continent itself. There is NO denying the reality of what is happening. Denial is a powerful emotion to be sure. But it does nothing to affect the reality we live in.

By: Ghandiolfini Thu, 29 Apr 2010 21:18:56 +0000 AGW_Skeptic99, what about the 79% nitrogen, 20% oxygen and 1% argon rumour ?

Voters are really going to be impressed by another tax, let alone V-A-T.

By: Benny_Acosta Thu, 29 Apr 2010 19:54:05 +0000 OMS

I never said that profit was evil. What I did say was that profit for the sake of profit itself, is evil. To put it another way, you can bring yourself pleasure by doing something meaningful (contributing good to society), or you could do it by doing something destructive, like stealing, or drugging yourself comatose. One path is sustainable and multiplies the benefits for everyone. The other path will destroy you, and quite possibly others around you.

If one profits by solving real problems and providing real service, for the sake of contributing good, there is nothing wrong with this. But when profit is chased for its own sake, you need only look at the state of the economy to see where that can lead. Yes I have A/C, a home, a computer etc. And I’m very grateful for what I have. But nothing I have is the result of my own doing. If it were not for the others that produced what I was able to purchase, there would be nothing for me to purchase.

Hence, it is important to remember that the ONLY reason one is able to profit is because of the cooperation of others. And because of this it is the responsibility of the business owner to contribute positively to the community(s) in which they do business.

Even if global warming isn’t happening (not likely), no one can deny that we pump billions of tons of pollutants into the air every year. No reasonable person would believe that such a condition can go unchecked for ever. Only a fool would believe that. The writing is on the wall so to speak. And it’s time for us to be more responsible with the environment we live in. The Earth will be fine no doubt. But WE will end up killing ourselves by choking on our own garbage eventually unless we change the way we do things.

By: paulos Thu, 29 Apr 2010 19:45:43 +0000 Is there any point in discussing any of this if the global population continues to grow at the rate it is? Over population is behind almost every problem humanity faces, from over fishing, deforestation to the over use of natural resources. There is absolutely no point in doing anything if we are not prepared to tackle population growth. It will simply render all our efforts futile.

By: AGW_Skeptic99 Thu, 29 Apr 2010 19:01:37 +0000 Since there is more misinformation about CO2, also known as carbon dioxide, I will say more.

CO2 makes up about 4 tenths of one percent of the air we breath today. The worst case scenarios presented by the true believers will have this go to half of one percent or maybe all the way to .006 of the total air volume.

No one has suggested that there is anything even slightly harmful to worry about from increasing CO2 in the air except when the global warmers insist that the world will warm so much that we will either drown or fry.

Greenhouses pump much higher concentrations of CO2 into the air because it makes plants grow faster. Stop with the poisonous stuff.

By: AGW_Skeptic99 Thu, 29 Apr 2010 18:50:47 +0000 It is so nice to see civilized and rational discussion of this topic. The author still manages to repeat the quote about polar ice melting, which is no longer true at the north pole and never was true at the south pole, but overall a reasonable presentation.

Very few skeptics would disagree that the world did get warmer between the 1970s and about 1998. There are some who question whether the warming has continued and is likely to continue or not. There many more who question about the degree to which any of the warming is caused by human activity as opposed to normal climate variation.

As the author kindly pointed out, the earth has been experiencing ‘climate change’ for billions of years. Only recently has ‘climate change’ been redefined by global warming advocates to mean that “temperatures are increasing due to human activity and will continue to increase forever unless we drastically change the way we produce electricity and power our cars and trucks”.

Redefining normal words into keywords for true believers is part of the cause for unpleasant discourse. For example, defining carbon dioxide as a pollutant is just nonsense. Mercury, sulfur, nitrogen oxides, and soot are harmful pollutants that should be suppressed because they cause serious harm to humans and other living creatures. CO2 is emitted by humans and the same creatures when we breath out.

By: JJWest Thu, 29 Apr 2010 18:15:53 +0000 “…the United States needs a carbon tax” Are you out of your mind?? Noticeably absent from this article is the FACT that one place in North America already has a carbon tax – British Columbia, Canada. According to media reports it has had ZERO effect on pollution, it has created another self-serving fat bureaucracy, has made BC the most expensive place to live in North America and is a complete FAILURE. The public hates it!! This is just another tax grab by another deficit ridden government — keep in mind that the more complex any bill is, the more easily the true purpose will be buried out of public sight.

By: bruce1963 Thu, 29 Apr 2010 17:31:08 +0000 If you believe in free markets..

and you believe in global warming…

then you have to conclude that a carbon tax is the best possible solution. If carbon emitters have to pay a price, we’ll stop emitting so much carbon through technological innovation, energy conservation, whatever seems to work best.

Actually this applies to any pollution. Tax pollution and we’ll solve our pollution problems.

By: CaptDan Thu, 29 Apr 2010 17:12:35 +0000 Hey Benny_Acosta….. do some research. I hope every person in America will eventually see this video by the man who started the weather channel. This CO2 thing is just another money making/power grabbing scam. If Al Gore more worried about the environment than filling his bank account with money, he’d sell that huge house that uses as much energy as a small city….and stop burning so much jet fuel flying around promoting his self interests. I urge everybody to pass this shortcut on and get the truth out there. I am not suggesting we waste natural resources or abuse Mother Earth any more than the most enthusiastic environmentalist. But I really think this hoax has gone on long enough. er/84148157.html