Skip to comments.Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide
Posted on 05/14/2014 10:58:25 AM PDT by givemELL
Item is copyrighted 1998-2008. The bibliography is extensive. The project is all inclusive of data collected to that point.
(Excerpt) Read more at oism.org ...
Crop production needs to be enhanced,not altered for human and animal needs as the first priority and redirected from unnecessary alternative fuel production, which in the case for ethanol from corn and the like is proving economically incompetent.
Famine from cooling is a much bigger and more temporal threat than warming. The best tool for fighting against cooling is, according to the climate project at the link is...CO2.
The bibliography is extensive. The project is all inclusive of data collected to that point. The project was initiated in publication in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons 3 in 1998 and has evolved in the meanwhile, unheralded generally.
It’s got what plants crave.
Facts? We don’ need no steenkin’ facts (libtard Gaia worshippers)
LOL... I suspect you’ve been watching one of my favorite movies.
Indeed, to answer the implied question of the title -
“it makes plants grow better”.
(Humans produce about 4% of atmospheric carbon dioxide. Total carbon dioxide itself is only about 15-20% of the atmospheric greenhouse gases.)
Excellent article, and thanks for posting. All this fuss is over .04% of the Earth’s atmosphere, after all. BTT
That's a very misleading sentence.
There is something called the carbon cycle, much like the hydrologic cycle, by which carbon goes in and out of the atmosphere, with pit-stops in plants, animals, etc. The total amount of carbon in the system changes little if any over time.
Carbon added by burning fossil fuels, OTOH, increases the total carbon in the system.
It's a little like saying you're only adding 1% to the water behind a dam. This may be true, but if it causes the dam to collapse, that's a pretty important 1%.
Humans are at present the cause of pretty much all of the increase of carbon in the ecosphere.
I'm agnostic on what the effects will be, but that we are causing the increase is just a fact.
Environmental effects are all good. End of story.
I’m still waiting for someone to explain why we didn’t all burn up, freeze, or drown in 1991. In one year, Mount Pinatubo dumped more CO2 and other greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere than Mankind has done in its existence.
Greener Planet; CO2 is plant food......
Sierra Madre calling. Sierra Madre calling.
The amount that human activity increases the carbon in the whole eco system doesn’t amount to a fart in a hurricane. Volcanic eruptions, otoh, really DO affect it; but God CREATED it as a self-correcting SYSTEM.
Dr. Arthur Robinson (the author) has a monthly newsletter called ACCESS TO ENERGY.
Consider it as highly recommended. It provides a conservative perspective on issues related to science, technology, medicine and energy. It also discusses home schooling and his election efforts.
Dr. Aurthur Robinson is the Chairman of the Oregon Republican Party and is running again for Oregon’s 4th district in the 2014 elections
A review of the research literature concerning the environmental consequences of increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide leads to the conclusion that increases during the 20th and early 21st centuries have produced no deleterious effects upon Earth's weather and climate. Increased carbon dioxide has, however, markedly increased plant growth. Predictions of harmful climatic effects due to future increases in hydrocarbon use and minor greenhouse gases like CO2 do not conform to current experimental knowledge. The environmental effects of rapid expansion of the nuclear and hydrocarbon energy industries are discussed.
Don’t be agnostic. There is no Greenhouse effect occurring whatsoever.
Laurence N. Johnson
I signed this way back when