|
Post by hunter on Feb 17, 2010 14:21:42 GMT
CO2 has more of an impact on plants than most people realize. Most equate the role of CO2 to plants as being similar to that of oxygen to humans. It's not quite that simple. If an environment has oxygen but will not otherwise support humans, adding more oxygen will not change that situation. However, it has been shown that plants will grow in places with enriched CO2 levels that they would not otherwise grow in at all. CO2 seems to compensate for other factors being unsuitable for plant life. This, of course, implies that not only will crop yields improve with additional CO2, but more of the earth will support farming. The optimum CO2 level for plants seems to be about 1000 ppm. The closer it gets to 200 ppm, the more problems plants have with photosynthesis. What's best for plants is best for the animal kingdom. But if anyone dares talk about upsides to CO2 in the public square, they are run out of town. AGW is a pernicious social movement that has done nothing for the environment, nothing for temperatures and nothing to help the large swath of people for whom they claim to care so much.
|
|
jtom
Level 3 Rank
Posts: 248
|
Post by jtom on Feb 17, 2010 16:45:11 GMT
I have a theory that many people can not accept the possibility that they will live and die without the universe noticing, caring, remembering. They simply can not accept the insignificance of Man in general, or themselves, specifically. Thus, they must attach themselves to some movement which credits them with having a significant impact, for good or bad, on at least the world.
To deny that they have changed the climate is to deny them their latest effort to make themselves meaningful in some way. It is too much for them to bear. They MUST be right, they can not accept otherwise.
|
|