Crazy talk. There are plenty of reasons to eat veggies for non-mineral reasons.
Also, one concern we all need to have is with bad mineral uptake by plants. For instance, fluoride is extremely high in most tea from China, while Japan does not seem to have this issue. Also, chocolate can be very high in arsenic, cadmium, and even lead.
Do we really want more toxic minerals in our plants? I didn’t think so.
Complete poppycock.
Learn the carbon cycle and understand photosynthesis or just shut up.
This has been reported in the past. What the article doesn’t say is that the small deficit in nitrogen is more than made up for in increased volume.
That’s why people pump CO2 into greenhouses, to make it difficult for plants to obtain the minerals necessary to grow and provide nutritious food.
Since CO2 is soluble in water and the oceans cover a majority of the Earth's surface, the oceans sequester more CO2 than any other CO2 sink.
Because of the inverse solubility of CO2 with temperature, the colder the oceans get, the more CO2 they can absorb.
Conversely, when the oceans get warmer, they expel CO2.
Atmospheric CO2 therefore follows global temperatures, it does not cause them.
You can see the yearly atmospheric CO2 fluctuation in the Mauna Loa, Hawaii Observatory graph as the Pacific Ocean warms and cools with the seasons.
The "settled science" that CO2 is a "greenhouse gas" that causes "climate change" is therefore a complete and utter lie.
I call BS. It’s all about the soil, sun, and water. Microbes in the soil are the most important as the help the plants absorb what’s in the soil. Good old compost, manure, ask anyone who gardens.
INCREASING LEVELS of coming up with silly theories while ignoring the air pollution being spewed out every day in China leads to severe mental illness.
My very FIRST question/response is to require the Institute for Plant Science to divulge the source of their funding for these studies, period. I was in university research for 30 years and that is always the first question if you want to know the validity of a ‘study.’
Oh, I forgot, they're too busy fill kids heads full of crap that they have no time for science.
Plants grown under elevated atmospheric [CO2] typically have decreased tissue concentrations of N compared with plants grown under current ambient [CO2]. The physiological mechanisms responsible for this phenomenon have not been definitely established, although a considerable number of hypotheses have been advanced to account for it. In this review we discuss and critically evaluate these hypotheses. One contributing factor to the decreases in tissue N concentrations clearly is dilution of N by increased photosynthetic assimilation of C. In addition, studies on intact plants show strong evidence for a general decrease in the specific uptake rates (uptake per unit mass or length of root) of N by roots under elevated CO2. This decreased root uptake appears likely to be the result both of decreased N demand by shoots and of decreased ability of the soil-root system to supply N. The best-supported mechanism for decreased N supply is a decrease in transpiration-driven mass flow of N in soils due to decreased stomatal conductance at elevated CO2, although some evidence suggests that altered root system architecture may also play a role. There is also limited evidence suggesting that under elevated CO2, plants may exhibit increased rates of N loss through volatilization and/or root exudation, further contributing to lowering tissue N concentrations.
Half-baked hypotheses to promote Climate Change.
But...but...plants LIKE CO2! And return O2 to us via respiration!
Baloney. CO2 is the life breath of plants. The highest CO2 levels on the planet were the cause of the green world with megafauna supported by megaflora we do not have today.
Experts must be smoking something; was taught CO2 was the basic item for plant photosynthesis, without it they will die.
Sure, and less air is good for you.
During the Mesozoic era (The age of the dinosaurs), the Earth’s atmosphere had much higher CO2 concentration than current day, and that Era which was hundreds of millions of years in length, is noted for the explosion of life and overall warmth planet-wide. There weren’t even any ice caps on the planet, and the daily temps were around 120 degrees F.
Generally speaking, warmth is conflated with life, and to worry about it getting too hot is anti-science. We are never going to have a runaway greenhouse effect on Earth, as seen on Venus. We are too far from the Sun for that to happen.
Bull***t!
So, healthy plants make unhealthy food?
Sure...right...
Years ago, the oceans hadn’t warmed as much as computer models required to prove global warming. The warmists speculated that warm water was locked at the bottom of the sea by the colder water above. Apparently this was the well known scientific principle where warm water sinks and cold water rises.
Rather than reduced crop yields from less, or no, nitrogen fertilizers they will blame it on climate change.
Climate cnange causes everything bad, people. /s