Posted on 03/20/2015 8:46:38 PM PDT by grundle
Editor’s Note: Patrick Moore, Ph.D., has been a leader in international environmentalism for more than 40 years. He cofounded Greenpeace...
Human Emissions Saved Planet
Over the past 150 million years, carbon dioxide had been drawn down steadily (by plants) from about 3,000 parts per million to about 280 parts per million before the Industrial Revolution. If this trend continued, the carbon dioxide level would have become too low to support life on Earth. Human fossil fuel use and clearing land for crops have boosted carbon dioxide from its lowest level in the history of the Earth back to 400 parts per million today.
At 400 parts per million, all our food crops, forests, and natural ecosystems are still on a starvation diet for carbon dioxide. The optimum level of carbon dioxide for plant growth, given enough water and nutrients, is about 1,500 parts per million, nearly four times higher than today. Greenhouse growers inject carbon-dioxide to increase yields. Farms and forests will produce more if carbon-dioxide keeps rising.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.heartland.org ...
The warmists say CO2 levels are the highest in history; what gives?
the reason you should be a ‘man-caused’ climate change skeptic (big difference between ‘climate change skeptic’ and ‘man-caused climate change skeptic’ is because our atmosphere has only 0.04% CO2 in it, of that man is only responsible for 3.4% which means that man’s CO2 level in the atmosphere makes up only 0.00137% of the atmosphere
That is why you should be a ‘man caused climate change skeptic
Another reason is because CO2 rises LONG AFTER temperatures rise, therefore CO2 can not be causing climate change
the 0.00137% of the atmosphere that has CO2 in it as a direct result of man’s production of CO2 can’t possibly capture enough escaping heat AND back radiate it to change earth’s temperatures one iota- only a small fraction of any heat escaping earth that gets trapped by man’s 0.00137% CO2 actually gets back radiated to earth The bulk of it gets radiated in the wrong directions
IF our atmosphere has only 0.04% CO2 in it, then that means 99.96% of the atmosphere has NONE- meaning heat has NO barrier when escaping earth- the overwhelming majority of heat escapes out into space where it is cooled
There are many great reasons to be a ‘MAN-CAUSED climate change skeptic” and LOGIC and COMMON SENSE are two great reasons to be a skeptic because a careful look at the actual data shows that man can not possibly be causing climate change, nor can nature for that matter- there simply is NOT enough CO2 to capture nearly enough heat and back radiate it (while maitainign the actual heat I might add- over thousands of miles of travel) and release that heat and have that heat overwhelm the cooler temperatures to the point hwere it actually causes temperatures to artificially rise
Like I said, the vast majority of heat simply escapes earth and never returns, only a VERY TINY fraction of the heat actually gets trapped and back radiated- not nearly enough to do ANYTHING to our earth’s temperatures!
Re: “The sun is an ongoing violent nuclear reaction. It is not a light bulb...that puts out constant energy levels.”
Like you, I am deeply skeptical that man is significantly changing the climate.
However, you might want to recheck your conclusion about energy output.
From memory - the peak to trough change in energy output during any solar cycle is less than 0.1% (one tenth of one percent).
I recall being shocked the first time I saw that number.
As I recall, the greatest solar impact (cooling and warming) comes when the Earth’s second rotational “wobble” (precession?) lines up in certain ways with the long term variations in Earth’s revolution around the Sun.
This is a great article. Which leads me to a global warming solution which takes money out of the lefts pocket as well as exposes them as frauds.
Change the message of greening to mean the planting of trees and food crops. Which means desalination plants run by solar/wind/water power. Build infrastructure to move water inland. Build these plants all along our coasts where the democrats rule.
Fresh water, more veggies and trees and jobs with the “this is the real way to save the planet” meme. Al Gore has an ocean view off of Malibu? Put 2 there. Do our own environmental impact study which says that is the best place for it.
First, one must define history. For most, that only begins the day they are made aware of it.
Allowing Marxists (Climate control freaks are all Marxists) to control the means of production without any thought to the ramifications too their actions. Because once control is complete the political opposition no longer exists - Euro Social Democracies = Marxism Lite. Once there is no opposition, there is no more need for Great Masses, since the ability to provide has ceased to produce excess; cutting back on populations by genocide, war, or controlling the allowing ceiling on who lives....
The solar winds vary significantly with solar cycles. That in turn significantly affects the earth’s magnetosphere. That in turn affects a long list of things... It also affect cosmic ray densities which appear to affect cloud formation. Cloud formation makes a big difference on how much solar radiation is reflected back out into space. And when you consider we are at 300 K (Kelvin) 0.1% is about a 0.3 C difference which isn’t all that small.
Did you know what I meant?
You did?
No need to be pedantic then.
OK!! Everybody pay attention!
Lesson for today:
1. The sun is 1,300,000 times as big as the earth.
2. The sun is a ball of fire that controls the climates of all its planets.
3. The earth is one of the sun’s planets.
4. The earth is a speck in comparison to the size of the sun.
5. Inhabitants of the earth are less than specks.
Study Question: How do less-than-specks in congress plan to control the sun?
HURRAH I commend your humanitarian efforts to Re C..O2 “The Planet”.
BEAN POWER!!
“How do less-than-specks in congress plan to control the sun?”
Through exercising the Height Of Arrogance!
Their Secret Cultic Slogan:
“If We Believe it...It Is So!!”
Occasionally a liberal will go on a climate change rant in my presence. I will usually listen respectfully for about a minute. At that point I will interrupt and say, “When I see Barack Obama, Al Gore, and the Clintons make substantial changes in their lifestyles to dramatically reduce their carbon footprints, and sustain their low carbon lifestyles at least a year, I will begin to give serious consideration to your point of view.”
All democrats are liars... every last one of ‘em.
Which is a great question, leadin to the truth which is “they don’t really want to control the sun. They want to control us...”
As you say, land plants photosynthesize the C from CO2 into larger carbon molecules such as cellulose and lignin and emit the O2 from CO2 back to the air.
Likewise in the ocean, where the largest mass of plants are algae and plankton. Most of the Oxygen on earth is produced/photosynthesized by plankton and algae blooms, which are driven by the nutrient cycle, and are the base of the food chain in the oceans.
A large portion of these algae and plankton does not enter the food chain. It just dies and sinks to seabed. That's where our oil came from. Back in earlier times the atmosphere was richer in CO2 and the earth was covered in warm shallow seas there was a lot more algae and plankton created which was covered over, then thru time, temperature and pressure, decomposed into oil. We find oil today in yesterday's basins such as the Permian basin and Williston basin. Oil is stored sunlight(energy) and stored carbon, which drove the growth of all that plankton and algae.
Way back when, all the land plants on earth were small because they were not structurally strong enough grow large. But the botanical world evolved and developed lignin which is lightweight, strong, and flexible. This is what allowed plants to grow large, take up more CO2, combine with sunlight, and produce a much larger mass of plant material.
All the critters and creatures that decomposed plants back then didn't know how to decompose lignin, and it would take millions of years for the critters to evolve to where they could decompose lignin.
For a very long period, a great deal of woody plant material would grow and die but would not decompose. It would accumulate, get covered over, then thru time, temperature, and pressure, become the coal that we burn today. Its just yesterday's stored sunlight(energy) and carbon.
Women, children and minorities to be hardest hit.
bkmk
This is not the Patrick Moore who wrote voluminously on astronomy. That Patrick Moore died in 2012.
I think you misunderstood my comment.
I was responding to an earlier comment that implied the energy output of the sun was highly variable because the sun is an incredibly huge nuclear reactor.
In fact, the energy output of the sun varies only 0.1% or less over long periods of time.
Obviously, how much of that energy reaches the Earth’s surface, or is retained in the Earth’s atmosphere, is influenced by many other factors.
This one:
Editor’s Note: Patrick Moore, Ph.D., has been a leader in international environmentalism for more than 40 years. He cofounded Greenpeace...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.