Today's problems

[1213]

You are right. One data point doesn't make a trend. It was just an example. An example of a long trend. A trend that becomes visible by the naked eye.

I could pick datapoints so that it would seem climate is cooling. I think trendlines are not good in predicting what happens next, in complex systems.

But, anyway, if climate is really warming, I don’t think it is a problem. And I don’t think it is reasonable to try to decrease the CO2 level at this point. If the content of CO2 would be 3000 PPM, then maybe, but now we are on low level that is almost too little for plants to grow. At the moment the level is about 400 PPM. If we try to make it less than that, it can cause problems for growth of plants and it could cause even famine, which apparently is the real goal of those who try to lower it. Instead of trying to prevent people to cause CO2, I think people should plant trees and other plants.

Sad thing is that it seems some have caused forest fires to make things worse, maybe to support fascistic climate programs.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Please tell how could the climate change claim be falsified?

Since it is based upon basic things such as the Stefan-Boltzmann Law refuting that would refute climate change. Or finding that long term the data does not match up with the predictions, that too would refute it. What you want to do is try to use weather to refute climate and that cannot be done.

 

[Heyo]

I could pick datapoints so that it would seem climate is cooling. I think trendlines are not good in predicting what happens next, in complex systems.

But, anyway, if climate is really warming, I don’t think it is a problem. And I don’t think it is reasonable to try to decrease the CO2 level at this point. If the content of CO2 would be 3000 PPM, then maybe, but now we are on low level that is almost too little for plants to grow. At the moment the level is about 400 PPM. If we try to make it less than that, it can cause problems for growth of plants and it could cause even famine,

Where did you get that information? 60 years ago we had about 300 ppm, 140 years ago it was about 200. We didn't have problems with plant growth connected to CO2 levels.

Instead of trying to prevent people to cause CO2, I think people should plant trees and other plants.

Sad thing is that it seems some have caused forest fires to make things worse, maybe to support fascistic climate programs.

Planting trees and preventing forest fires is a good idea but it is not sustainable. Once the forests have reached their equilibrium, no additional CO2 is taken from the atmosphere. There is no alternative to reducing CO2 emissions.

 

[1213]

Where did you get that information? 60 years ago we had about 300 ppm, 140 years ago it was about 200. We didn't have problems with plant growth connected to CO2 levels.

Can you give the source of that data?

I don’t think people really know the concentration really, but it is interesting that allegedly:

“Five hundred million years ago the carbon dioxide concentration was 20 times greater than today, decreasing to 4–5 times during the Jurassic period and then slowly declining with a particularly swift reduction occurring 49 million years ago.”
Carbon dioxide - Wikipedia

Planting trees and preventing forest fires is a good idea but it is not sustainable. Once the forests have reached their equilibrium, no additional CO2 is taken from the atmosphere. There is no alternative to reducing CO2 emissions.

That would mean trees stop to grow at some point. I don’t think there is any scientific evidence for that.

 

[Heyo]

Can you give the source of that data?

Climate Change: Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide | NOAA Climate.gov
(I admit, I misremembered the earlier number, it was 280.)

That would mean trees stop to grow at some point. I don’t think there is any scientific evidence for that.

Trees can get very old, at least some species. But they all eventually die and decay. (Tree Life Expectancy | British Hardwood Tree Nursery) From that decay greenhouse gases are released. Every forest will reach an equilibrium where the CO2 that is bound equals the CO2 that is released. The only exception is when the decaying matter is cut of from the atmosphere for example when the forest is flooded or buried.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Can you give the source of that data?

I don’t think people really know the concentration really, but it is interesting that allegedly:

“Five hundred million years ago the carbon dioxide concentration was 20 times greater than today, decreasing to 4–5 times during the Jurassic period and then slowly declining with a particularly swift reduction occurring 49 million years ago.”
Carbon dioxide - Wikipedia

Yes, in the past there were much higher concentrations of CO2 than now. And those concentrations also were part of the cause of mass extinctions. What is worrisome is that the rate of increase of CO2 is changing the climate faster than species will be able to adapt. That plus the inevitable flooding of low lands and other disruptions that will occur. Long before low lying islands are covered by sea water they will become uninhabitable due to a loss of aquifers caused by rising sea level:

Low-Lying Islands At The Forefront Of Climate Change

And what people forget is that the Sun has not always been the same temperature. It has very slowly gotten warmer over the years. Back then low CO2 meant ice ages. Today it takes far less CO2 to act as a blanket for us. Referring to amounts hundreds of millions of years in the past is a red herring. Those levels do not apply to today's problems.

That would mean trees stop to grow at some point. I don’t think there is any scientific evidence for that.

Yes, trees only grow to a limited height before they reach their limit. They may expand a bit horizontally but it is very scientific to put an upper limit on the size of any tree.

 

[1213]

Yes, in the past there were much higher concentrations of CO2 than now. And those concentrations also were part of the cause of mass extinctions. What is worrisome is that the rate of increase of CO2 is changing the climate faster than species will be able to adapt. That plus the inevitable flooding of low lands and other disruptions that will occur. Long before low lying islands are covered by sea water they will become uninhabitable due to a loss of aquifers caused by rising sea level:…

Sorry, I don’t believe any of that.

Yes, trees only grow to a limited height before they reach their limit. They may expand a bit horizontally but it is very scientific to put an upper limit on the size of any tree.

But there is no real-life observation to support that idea?

 

[1213]

Climate Change: Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide | NOAA Climate.gov
(I admit, I misremembered the earlier number, it was 280.)

Trees can get very old, at least some species. But they all eventually die and decay. (Tree Life Expectancy | British Hardwood Tree Nursery) From that decay greenhouse gases are released. Every forest will reach an equilibrium where the CO2 that is bound equals the CO2 that is released. The only exception is when the decaying matter is cut of from the atmosphere for example when the forest is flooded or buried.

Ok, thank you, I can agree that even trees die in some point. But as long as they live, they grow normally, unless there is not enough CO2.

However, if we look greenhouses, they use additional CO2 to increase growth, because normal CO2 amount is not good enough. That is why I think, increasing CO2 would also increase plants to grow in nature, which I think would be good.

And by what I know, plants stop to grow, if there is less than 200 PPM CO2. NOAA data shows that there have been many times when plants have not had enough CO2 and I don’t believe it.

 

[Heyo]

However, if we look greenhouses, they use additional CO2 to increase growth, because normal CO2 amount is not good enough. That is why I think, increasing CO2 would also increase plants to grow in nature, which I think would be good.

CO2 does help plants grow - but only to a limited degree that is offset by overall negative effects of climate change.
Ask the Experts: Does Rising CO2 Benefit Plants?

 

[1213]

CO2 does help plants grow - but only to a limited degree that is offset by overall negative effects of climate change.
Ask the Experts: Does Rising CO2 Benefit Plants?

It says "...will likely outweigh...". Therefore that is likely a misleading article to support the "climate change" agenda that is ultimately for to increase totalitarianism, taxes and car sales.