Quote:
Originally Posted by Granity
I just can't stand all the lies and deceit associated with the greens who seem to put out total misinformation to serve their own ends, whatever they may be. AGW is now discredited due to the behaviour of the leading players concerned and there is so much money to be made by people like Gore out of carbon trading they will do anything to perpetuate the theory.
CO2 is not a pollutant, life cannot exist without it.
|
Unfortunately the environmental campaigners do overstate the case quite shockingly in some cases. But they have been doing that all the time, so no surprise there. But the current anti-AGW
PR is strongly funded by the oil and heavy industrial lobby, and no surprise what they are up to. They are using the same pseudoscientific tactics as they used when they tried to discredit scientists telling us "tobacco is bad for you", "lead is bad for you" and "asbestos is bad for you". Of course the scientists were right. Why would the oil industry not campaign against a movement trying to restrain their output. Of course they will do that. So don't be fooled by them either.
But if we are neutral about it, and look to what scientists are telling us, then the scientific evidence for AGW is pretty incontrovertible. CO2 is a significant atmospheric insulator, demonstrable by experiments going back 150 years. How can a substantial increase in it not warm us up? Here's a bibliography unaffected by dodgy hacked email science and shrill greenpeace campaigners which will take you through it.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/What...l-warming.html
CO2 is a plant fertiliser. So are nitrates. What happens when you put too much nitrate on your fields? Yes it washes into the rivers and sea and creates toxic algal blooms and anoxic dead zones, and kills lots of fish. And we have to process it out of our water supply. The plant fertilisation effect won't take out all the CO2 of an instant. All the CO2 we put in the atmosphere will get washed out in the end. In fact only 40% of what we put out in a single year ends up in the atmosphere at the end of that year. Unfortunately it will take several hundred years to wash it all out, and in the mean time we are at risk of having cooked the place. Too much CO2 will change our climate, and that will be very inconvenient for people who will get flooded out or find they are now living in a desert. They will want to come and move to where you can live, which will be all very costly and frightening to the people who are already there. Think of CO2 reduction as insurance against this happening. CO2 will warm us up, it must do, though precisely how much is not quite clear, because the climate and biological systems are very complex. If it is worth buying flood insurance for your house, it seems to be worth buying climate change insurance for the planet.
Sorry you have been misled by the industrial lobby.