Maui Wildfires

[fsu1jreed]

How do human CO2 emissions compare to natural CO2 emissions? | CO2 Human Emissions

Before the industrial revolution, the CO2 content in the air remained quite steady for thousands of years. Natural CO2 is not static, however. It is generated by natural processes, and absorbed by others.

www.che-project.eu

Tonga Eruption Doubles Concentration of Carbon Dioxide in Air, Researchers Say----Chinese Academy of Sciences

english.cas.cn

First sentence

Before the industrial revolution, the CO2 content in the air remained quite steady for thousands of years

 

[fsu1jreed]

Must have struck a nerve with a settled science guy, So angry?

It stupid that in 2023 people are still spouting this ignorant crap, I debunked it on this very site TWENTY years ago...I can't wait till someone says, "volcanoes add more CO2 to the atmosphere than humans"

 

[fsufool]

More than 1,600 scientists, including two Nobel laureates, declare climate 'emergency' a myth

The global coalition of scientists say that politics and a journalistic frenzy has propelled a doomsday climate change hysteria. The signatories also ask other scientists to "address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming."

justthenews.com

I know two folks working in the climate change space as scientist. Both are not alarmist, but concerned. The concern is more about water management as we have seen a recent change in the intensity and range of rain events. They both agree that CO2 has a part in climate change, but can't give a percentage figure to the part CO2 plays. Both work out west and think that migration to the west (increasing population in certain areas) are more of an immediate concern.

 

[fsufool]

Who opposes real vaccines?

Oppose or asking questions about?
Some people think that asking questions is a problem........

 

[GeddyLee09]

Please cite that

Anthropogenic carbon emissions - Energy Education

energyeducation.ca

"Scientists have had to work hard to show that climate change is caused by the greenhouse gasses that humans emit. Part of the reason that this was tricky is that nature does emit nearly 20 times more CO2 into the atmosphere than humans do, but it's the new carbon that humans introduce that changes the amount of carbon in the system."

Here is a very basic tutorial on the subject.

Carbon Dioxide 101

WHAT IS CARBON DIOXIDE? Depiction of a carbon dioxide molecule. Carbon dioxide (commonly abbreviated as CO2) is a clear gas composed of one atom of carbon (C) and two atoms of oxygen (O). Carbon dioxide is one of many molecules where carbon is commonly found on the Earth.

netl.doe.gov

It was really a question but here is where it came from. Ill let you decipher and explain since you understand the science.

 

[GeddyLee09]

I know two folks working in the climate change space as scientist. Both are not alarmist, but concerned. The concern is more about water management as we have seen a recent change in the intensity and range of rain events. They both agree that CO2 has a part in climate change, but can't give a percentage figure to the part CO2 plays. Both work out west and think that migration to the west (increasing population in certain areas) are more of an immediate concern.

My big question is how much room is there to play with in the cycle? In other words if the earths carbon cycle can absorb everything it emits (balance) what are the tolerance levels and how much has the manmade emissions put that out of balance? If that's the case why doesn't volcanic activity put things out of balance? They have to emit more CO2 than humans. That's where there seems to be some disagreement. Also, if we did put it out of balance we can mitigate it.

 

[GeddyLee09]

Oppose or asking questions about?
Some people think that asking questions is a problem........

In some places questioning is considered opposition. I think that's mainly communist and fascist type countries.

 

[seminole72]

The aspect of the COVID vaccines that matters to me and motivates me to get the updated formulation whenever available is the reduction in serious illness and hospitalization. I have also seen some data indicating that being up to date on vaccinations is correlated with a lower likelihood of experiencing long COVID symptoms.

Here's another POV

Cause unkown

 

[NoleinATL]

Here's another POV

Cause unkown

Even if one does not take into consideration the data or lack thereof used to make some conclusions in the book,
It is difficult to take Ed seriously when he makes false claims such as sudden adult death syndrome had been mysteriously created in 2021.

 

[trunole1]

It stupid that in 2023 people are still spouting this ignorant crap, I debunked it on this very site TWENTY years ago...I can't wait till someone says, "volcanoes add more CO2 to the atmosphere than humans"

Are you going Fauci on me? lol
From my link
After the Tonga volcano erupted in January 2022, carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations near the volcano soared to around 414 parts per million (ppm), according to researchers. Compared with estimated 412 ppm had the volcano not erupted, the increased 2ppm equaled a whole year's CO2 emission on earth.

 

[trunole1]

While certainly air travel releases CO2 high in the atmosphere most released on land returns to the earth since CO2 is heavier than air. It doesn't go up like hydrogen and water vapor. Name calling and personal attacks are not appropriate.

 

[trunole1]

First sentence

Before the industrial revolution, the CO2 content in the air remained quite steady for thousands of years

And this assertion is proven by what scientific study of the atmosphere?

 

[trunole1]

Even if one does not take into consideration the data or lack thereof used to make some conclusions in the book,
It is difficult to take Ed seriously when he makes false claims such as sudden adult death syndrome had been mysteriously created in 2021.

Unless comprehensive long term data is accumulated the best answer is we don't know the effects of repeatedly getting jabbed messing with the immune system.

 

[GeddyLee09]

And this assertion is proven by what scientific study of the atmosphere?

This is what I don't understand. Are they comparing samples taken from ice cores to actual instrument readings from the present day? Is that a reliable method to test a delta or increase?

 

[GeddyLee09]

It stupid that in 2023 people are still spouting this ignorant crap, I debunked it on this very site TWENTY years ago...I can't wait till someone says, "volcanoes add more CO2 to the atmosphere than humans"

 

[NoleinATL]

Unless comprehensive long term data is accumulated the best answer is we don't know the effects of repeatedly getting jabbed messing with the immune system.

Agreed, but that has nothing to do with what I posted so not sure why you would choose to quote my comment about Ed's book.

 

[CC0492]

GO UTES! Beat those shiteatinggators!

 

[seminole72]

Agreed, but that has nothing to do with what I posted so not sure why you would choose to quote my comment about Ed's book.

I believe his central point is no one knows, including Ed, what are the long term effects of injecting people w/ an experimental chemical compound created by an experimental method. The lack or rigor by the Department of health and CCA in this process is empirically proven. Could be all fine, or it could prove to have serious longterm consequences. Ed's book is anything but scientific, but the so-called vaccines certainly didn't follow the scientific method in their development.

 

[NoleinATL]

I believe his central point is no one knows, including Ed, what are the long term effects of injecting people w/ an experimental chemical compound created by an experimental method. The lack or rigor by the Department of health and CCA in this process is empirically proven. Could be all fine, or it could prove to have serious longterm consequences. Ed's book is anything but scientific, but the so-called vaccines certainly didn't follow the scientific method in their development.

Agreed, which is why a belief affirming book that becomes a best seller is more dangerous than helpful. Bad or incomplete data used to make declarations leads to more and more people using that data to further their point when it is possibly not valid.

Could you cite your source when stating that "the vaccines didn't follow the scientific method in their development"?

Based on information I have read, work on an mRNA vaccine has been in development for decades,
and that learned technology is what enabled President Trump to utilize Operation Warp Speed to get the vaccine to market so quickly. So I would be interested to read through your sources which detail differing information.

Here is an interesting read, pre-covid concerning mRNA development.

 

[seminole72]

Agreed, which is why a belief affirming book that becomes a best seller is more dangerous than helpful. Bad or incomplete data used to make declarations leads to more and more people using that data to further their point when it is possibly not valid.

Could you cite your source when stating that "the vaccines didn't follow the scientific method in their development"?

Based on information I have read, work on an mRNA vaccine has been in development for decades,
and that learned technology is what enabled President Trump to utilize Operation Warp Speed to get the vaccine to market so quickly. So I would be interested to read through your sources which detail differing information.

Here is an interesting read, pre-covid concerning mRNA development.

The traditional rigor for vaccine development required extensive testing on animals, then humans that provided a clear record of how the proposed vaccine functioned in real time, under controlled monitoring. The mRNA process essentially used computer models to project outcomes. To my knowledge, those models were never subjected to objective analysis to determine if the assumptions were in fact proven, or simply accepted to avoid slowing the process down. Clearly the Phizer labs had a significant monetary incentive to reach certain conclusions that were never subject to peer review or any of the traditional reviews that have been part of the scientific method for centuries.

BTW, I agree that publishing a book based essentially on random observation of unrelated events is unhelpful in determining the facts. But you get those kinds of behaviors when the factual record is withheld and obfuscated.