This thing about carbon dioxide as a green house gas has always
perplexed me as I noticed the same thing you did. In addition to
that, the plants need to the co2 to breathe to create
oxygen. Another culprit has been Methane, and according to this
http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/News/2006/January/12010601.asp
which has been released to lots of news agencies, turns out plants
are the #1 cause of that gas.
Now I don't have a link handy, but last year there was a story about
how England had been reducing their Co2 emissions and that there were
Co2 sinks in the ground that started releasing more of the gas than
they were cutting back, which kind of seems to me that there is a Co2
balance and it is going to get maintained regardless of what we do.
How long have we kept global temperatures? Not long in the scheme of
things I imagine. We've had ice ages, we know that. So what
happened? Did the wooly mammoth stop farting and the air cleared up
and the earth froze? Was chili discovered after that by cave men and
their crepitating cause global warming so the ice age stopped?
There is so much about this planet we don't know, we can't even make
it rain, or stop a hurricane, how the hell can we heat up the whole
planet? You see the news about this remote mountaintop where
hundreds of new animal and plant species were just discovered?
At 06:57 AM 2/9/2006, you wrote:
>I see your point.
>
>It's a bit like the Kyoto stupidity that aims to force the signatories to
>reduce their emission of CO2 into the atmosphere to levels lower than 1990.
>It appears that signing the protocol makes you a good person, even if you
>have no intention of meeting your obligations. At this time, it seems the
>only country which has drastically reduced its CO2 emissions is the USA,
>which thankfully did not sign on to the farce in the first place. (But we
>do get blamed for every meteorological event.)
>
>I was checking recently into exactly what constitutes greenhouse gases, what
>the effect of greenhouse gases is and how much CO2 is being emitted by
>humans and came to realize the following (and I am happy to be corrected :)
>
>The Earth in its current orbit would be 30 degrees Celsius colder if it were
>not for the presence of the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. The most
>important greenhouse gas is water vapor, good old H20, which makes up to 4%
>of the atmosphere. This water vapor accounts for about 95% of the 30
>degrees mentioned earlier and water vapor is twice as efficient as CO2 in
>its role as a greenhouse gas. Carbon Dioxide accounts for about 0.03% of
>the atmosphere.
>
>Further, man-produced CO2 accounts for about 0.02% of the total CO2 found in
>the atmosphere. So, 2% of the 0.03% amounts to 0.0006% of the 5% of the
>warming of the atmosphere or 0.00003% of the 30 degrees Celsius above what
>the temperature would be without greenhouse gases.
>
>0.00003% of 30 degrees, that's 0.0009 degrees. Yep, it's time to panic.
>
>I think the scores of billions of dollars to be wasted on Kyoto would indeed
>be better spent looking for heat from the Moon, it's a cold universe out
>there.
>
>Denys
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: HP-3000 Systems Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
>Of Shahan, Ray
>Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 8:08 AM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] OT: I love global warming!
>
>No, no, no *you* don't understand. GWB wouldn't be responsible for
>restoring the Sun's output level, he'd be responsible for the "no bid
>contract" for Halliburton to restore the Sun's output level. And if you
>play the scenario out, Halliburton would spend several years and
>billions of dollars trying to get heat from the moon.
>
>8-)
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Denys Beauchemin [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 7:59 AM
>To: Shahan, Ray; [log in to unmask]
>Subject: RE: [HP3000-L] OT: I love global warming!
>
>No, no, no. You don't understand. If GWB were to restore the Sun's
>output
>level, that would be good for humanity and we can't have that. Don't
>you
>realize that everything GWB does is bad for humanity or the planet, most
>times both.
>
>Denys
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: HP-3000 Systems Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
>Behalf
>Of Shahan, Ray
>Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 7:30 AM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] OT: I love global warming!
>
>Denys reports: " Scientist predicts 'mini Ice Age'
>ST. PETERSBURG, Russia, Feb. 7 (UPI) -- A Russian astronomer has
>predicted
>that Earth will experience a "mini Ice Age" in the middle of this
>century,
>caused by low solar activity. <snip>".
>
>And then Denys adds " I bet you GWB is behind the plot to reduce the
>Sun's output."
>
>Hmmmm, I don't think GWB would be behind that kind of a plot, but on the
>other hand, I could see GWB giving a "no bid contract" to Halliburton to
>restore the sun's output level.
>
>8-)
>
>
>Have a great week!
>
>Ray Shahan
>
>* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
>* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
>
>* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
>* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
>
>* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
>* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
Regards,
Shawn Gordon
President
theKompany.com
www.thekompany.com
www.mindawn.com
949-713-3276
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
|
