18 months to save the planet

[Compassionist]

Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-48964736

Please also see: http://data.footprintnetwork.org and https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46384067

I am really worried that we are destroying our planet and creating the sixth mass extinction right now. We should work together to save the world by consuming less, reusing more and recycling more. We should strive always to live with the minimum ecological footprint possible. Thank you for doing your part in saving the world.

[shnarkle]

Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-48964736

Please also see: http://data.footprintnetwork.org and https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46384067

I am really worried that we are destroying our planet and creating the sixth mass extinction right now. We should work together to save the world by consuming less, reusing more and recycling more. We should strive always to live with the minimum ecological footprint possible. Thank you for doing your part in saving the world.

China no longer buys our garbage to recycle so a number of large cities are no longer sorting or recycling their garbage anymore. It's up to you to stop using plastic. The government isn't going to be able to do anything short of putting corporations out of business in order to stop them from producing these PCB's etc. that just break down and get into everything. Stop buying it, and they'll stop making it.

One of the biggest problems is pollution, but most people have become distracted by a false narrative that suggests CO2 is what is going to destroy the planet. CO2 is as necessary to life as water. CO2 levels are also dangerously close to extinction levels, and need to be raised, not lowered.

So while we're all focusing on this problem that isn't a problem at all, gross polluters continue to pump pollution into our waterways and atmosphere with impunity.

[Compassionist]

Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-48964736

Please also see: http://data.footprintnetwork.org and https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46384067

I am really worried that we are destroying our planet and creating the sixth mass extinction right now. We should work together to save the world by consuming less, reusing more and recycling more. We should strive always to live with the minimum ecological footprint possible. Thank you for doing your part in saving the world.

China no longer buys our garbage to recycle so a number of large cities are no longer sorting or recycling their garbage anymore. It's up to you to stop using plastic. The government isn't going to be able to do anything short of putting corporations out of business in order to stop them from producing these PCB's etc. that just break down and get into everything. Stop buying it, and they'll stop making it.

One of the biggest problems is pollution, but most people have become distracted by a false narrative that suggests CO2 is what is going to destroy the planet. CO2 is as necessary to life as water. CO2 levels are also dangerously close to extinction levels, and need to be raised, not lowered.

So while we're all focusing on this problem that isn't a problem at all, gross polluters continue to pump pollution into our waterways and atmosphere with impunity.

I agree that we should stop polluting the waterways and the atmosphere. Are you not familiar with climate change and its causes? Please see https://climate.nasa.gov/causes

[shnarkle]

Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-48964736

Please also see: http://data.footprintnetwork.org and https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46384067

I am really worried that we are destroying our planet and creating the sixth mass extinction right now. We should work together to save the world by consuming less, reusing more and recycling more. We should strive always to live with the minimum ecological footprint possible. Thank you for doing your part in saving the world.

China no longer buys our garbage to recycle so a number of large cities are no longer sorting or recycling their garbage anymore. It's up to you to stop using plastic. The government isn't going to be able to do anything short of putting corporations out of business in order to stop them from producing these PCB's etc. that just break down and get into everything. Stop buying it, and they'll stop making it.

One of the biggest problems is pollution, but most people have become distracted by a false narrative that suggests CO2 is what is going to destroy the planet. CO2 is as necessary to life as water. CO2 levels are also dangerously close to extinction levels, and need to be raised, not lowered.

So while we're all focusing on this problem that isn't a problem at all, gross polluters continue to pump pollution into our waterways and atmosphere with impunity.

I agree that we should stop polluting the waterways and the atmosphere. Are you not familiar with climate change and its causes? Please see https://climate.nasa.gov/causes

yes, I'm familiar with the causes. When one looks at all the overall causes of climate change, the human contribution is minimal. This isn't to say it has no effect, but just to put it into its proper perspective. I'm familiar with the fact that the climate on this planet has been changing for millennia, and the overall trend is not accelerating in any significant manner that should be cause for alarm. in other words, our contribution isn't going to create a greenhouse effect that the earth has never seen before. Did you read what I posted?

[Compassionist]

Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-48964736

Please also see: http://data.footprintnetwork.org and https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46384067

I am really worried that we are destroying our planet and creating the sixth mass extinction right now. We should work together to save the world by consuming less, reusing more and recycling more. We should strive always to live with the minimum ecological footprint possible. Thank you for doing your part in saving the world.

China no longer buys our garbage to recycle so a number of large cities are no longer sorting or recycling their garbage anymore. It's up to you to stop using plastic. The government isn't going to be able to do anything short of putting corporations out of business in order to stop them from producing these PCB's etc. that just break down and get into everything. Stop buying it, and they'll stop making it.

One of the biggest problems is pollution, but most people have become distracted by a false narrative that suggests CO2 is what is going to destroy the planet. CO2 is as necessary to life as water. CO2 levels are also dangerously close to extinction levels, and need to be raised, not lowered.

So while we're all focusing on this problem that isn't a problem at all, gross polluters continue to pump pollution into our waterways and atmosphere with impunity.

I agree that we should stop polluting the waterways and the atmosphere. Are you not familiar with climate change and its causes? Please see https://climate.nasa.gov/causes

yes, I'm familiar with the causes. When one looks at all the overall causes of climate change, the human contribution is minimal. This isn't to say it has no effect, but just to put it into its proper perspective. I'm familiar with the fact that the climate on this planet has been changing for millennia, and the overall trend is not accelerating in any significant manner that should be cause for alarm. in other words, our contribution isn't going to create a greenhouse effect that the earth has never seen before. Did you read what I posted?

I read your post but your post contradicts what the NASA website says.

[shnarkle]

[Replying to post 5 by Compassionist]

The NASA website doesn't tell the whole story.

Here's another revealing link you might want to check out:

https://whatsyourimpact.org/greenhouse-gas-emissions

Here's the pertinent information with footnotes:

42.8 percent of all naturally produced CO2 emissions come from ocean-atmosphere exchange. Other important natural CO2 sources include plant and animal respiration (28.56%) as well as soil respiration and decomposition (28.56%). A minor amount is also created by volcanic eruptions (0.03%)

Denman, K.L., G. Brasseur, A. Chidthaisong, P. Ciais, P.M. Cox, R.E. Dickinson, D. Hauglustaine, C. Heinze, E. Holland, D. Jacob, U. Lohmann, S Ramachandran, P.L. da Silva Dias, S.C. Wofsy and X. Zhang. Couplings Between Changes in the Climate System and Biogeochemistry. In: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 2007.

U.S. DOE. Carbon Cycling and Biosequestration: Integrating Biology and Climate Through Systems Science; Report from the March 2008 Workshop, DOE/SC-108. U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science, 2008.

Did you notice the total percentages? Add it all up and you get 99.95% Did you see humanity's contribution listed anywhere in that equation? Perhaps you'd like to believe it is mixed in with "plant and animal respiration". Nope, and I'm not holding my breath if you think suggesting we need to be responsible with respiration is going to fly as an argument. The article states that "There are both natural and human sources of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions ", it then proceeds to list human sources followed by "naturally produced CO2 emissions".

So our TOTAL contribution is 0.05%. That's not five percent. It's not half a percent. It's five hundredths of one percent, and that's only counting the last 150 years, and only because of the Industrial Revolution. If we average it out over the lifetime of human existence on this planet since we began to kindle fire and fart, the number dwindles down to somewhere around 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001

give or take a few zeros, and a few million suckers pulling their uncle's finger.

[Compassionist]

[Replying to post 5 by Compassionist]

The NASA website doesn't tell the whole story.

Here's another revealing link you might want to check out:

https://whatsyourimpact.org/greenhouse-gas-emissions

Here's the pertinent information with footnotes:

42.8 percent of all naturally produced CO2 emissions come from ocean-atmosphere exchange. Other important natural CO2 sources include plant and animal respiration (28.56%) as well as soil respiration and decomposition (28.56%). A minor amount is also created by volcanic eruptions (0.03%)

Denman, K.L., G. Brasseur, A. Chidthaisong, P. Ciais, P.M. Cox, R.E. Dickinson, D. Hauglustaine, C. Heinze, E. Holland, D. Jacob, U. Lohmann, S Ramachandran, P.L. da Silva Dias, S.C. Wofsy and X. Zhang. Couplings Between Changes in the Climate System and Biogeochemistry. In: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 2007.

U.S. DOE. Carbon Cycling and Biosequestration: Integrating Biology and Climate Through Systems Science; Report from the March 2008 Workshop, DOE/SC-108. U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science, 2008.

Did you notice the total percentages? Add it all up and you get 99.95% Did you see humanity's contribution listed anywhere in that equation? Perhaps you'd like to believe it is mixed in with "plant and animal respiration". Nope, and I'm not holding my breath if you think suggesting we need to be responsible with respiration is going to fly as an argument. The article states that "There are both natural and human sources of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions ", it then proceeds to list human sources followed by "naturally produced CO2 emissions".

So our TOTAL contribution is 0.05%. That's not five percent. It's not half a percent. It's five hundredths of one percent, and that's only counting the last 150 years, and only because of the Industrial Revolution. If we average it out over the lifetime of human existence on this planet since we began to kindle fire and fart, the number dwindles down to somewhere around 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001

give or take a few zeros, and a few million suckers pulling their uncle's finger.

I am confused. Plants absorb CO2 while animals exhale CO2. Why have they grouped plants with animals for respiration? Please see https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads ... makers.pdf

https://whatsyourimpact.org/greenhouse- ... -emissions said the following:

There are both natural and human sources of carbon dioxide emissions. Natural sources include decomposition, ocean release and respiration. Human sources come from activities like cement production, deforestation as well as the burning of fossil fuels like coal, oil and natural gas.

Due to human activities, the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has been rising extensively since the Industrial Revolution and has now reached dangerous levels not seen in the last 3 million years.1 2 3 Human sources of carbon dioxide emissions are much smaller than natural emissions but they have upset the natural balance that existed for many thousands of years before the influence of humans.

This is because natural sinks remove around the same quantity of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere than are produced by natural sources.4 This had kept carbon dioxide levels balanced and in a safe range. But human sources of emissions have upset the natural balance by adding extra carbon dioxide to the atmosphere without removing any.

[shnarkle]

[Replying to post 5 by Compassionist]

The NASA website doesn't tell the whole story.

Here's another revealing link you might want to check out:

https://whatsyourimpact.org/greenhouse-gas-emissions

Here's the pertinent information with footnotes:

42.8 percent of all naturally produced CO2 emissions come from ocean-atmosphere exchange. Other important natural CO2 sources include plant and animal respiration (28.56%) as well as soil respiration and decomposition (28.56%). A minor amount is also created by volcanic eruptions (0.03%)

Denman, K.L., G. Brasseur, A. Chidthaisong, P. Ciais, P.M. Cox, R.E. Dickinson, D. Hauglustaine, C. Heinze, E. Holland, D. Jacob, U. Lohmann, S Ramachandran, P.L. da Silva Dias, S.C. Wofsy and X. Zhang. Couplings Between Changes in the Climate System and Biogeochemistry. In: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 2007.

U.S. DOE. Carbon Cycling and Biosequestration: Integrating Biology and Climate Through Systems Science; Report from the March 2008 Workshop, DOE/SC-108. U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science, 2008.

Did you notice the total percentages? Add it all up and you get 99.95% Did you see humanity's contribution listed anywhere in that equation? Perhaps you'd like to believe it is mixed in with "plant and animal respiration". Nope, and I'm not holding my breath if you think suggesting we need to be responsible with respiration is going to fly as an argument. The article states that "There are both natural and human sources of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions ", it then proceeds to list human sources followed by "naturally produced CO2 emissions".

So our TOTAL contribution is 0.05%. That's not five percent. It's not half a percent. It's five hundredths of one percent, and that's only counting the last 150 years, and only because of the Industrial Revolution. If we average it out over the lifetime of human existence on this planet since we began to kindle fire and fart, the number dwindles down to somewhere around 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001

give or take a few zeros, and a few million suckers pulling their uncle's finger.

I am confused. Plants absorb CO2 while animals exhale CO2. Why have they grouped plants with animals for respiration? Please see https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads ... makers.pdf

https://whatsyourimpact.org/greenhouse- ... -emissions said the following:

There are both natural and human sources of carbon dioxide emissions. Natural sources include decomposition, ocean release and respiration. Human sources come from activities like cement production, deforestation as well as the burning of fossil fuels like coal, oil and natural gas.

Due to human activities, the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has been rising extensively since the Industrial Revolution and has now reached dangerous levels not seen in the last 3 million years.1 2 3 Human sources of carbon dioxide emissions are much smaller than natural emissions but they have upset the natural balance that existed for many thousands of years before the influence of humans.

This is because natural sinks remove around the same quantity of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere than are produced by natural sources.4 This had kept carbon dioxide levels balanced and in a safe range. But human sources of emissions have upset the natural balance by adding extra carbon dioxide to the atmosphere without removing any.

This idea that CO2 levels are "dangerous" is preposterous. CO2 levels have been exponentially higher in the past repeatedly. There are a total of ZERO scientists who deny that CO2 levels are close to historic lows. The levels are rising from not far from the lowest point they can be. At the last ice age, CO2 was around 180 ppm. At 150 ppm ALL life on this planet goes extinct. At somewhere around 250 and 300 plant life dies. Plants grown on open soil are STARVING for CO2. One need look no further than any industrial greenhouse to see the difference.

The biggest and most efficient greenhouse gas is H20. It is THE necessary greenhouse gas that facilitates global warming. It is the biggest link. It is the "feedback" greenhouse gas. Freezing water would make about as much sense to your argument.

[Compassionist]

Please see https://climatecentral.org