Conversation
georgia
georgia
"conservatives" admit the existence of air/water pollution and claim to want a remedy but they deny that this pollution can have any lasting effect on earths climate. its quite silly.
3
0
1
0
0
0
woodland creature
meowski@fluf.club
@georgia oversimplification and straw man argument but ok i'll take your bait. the point is that human-released CO2 isn't a *significant* driver of global temperature.
personally i do think the CO2 greenhouse effect is real (look at planet venus) but currently it's at 0.4% of our atmosphere and it's been around 5x higher in the past, and the planet survived. if we pumped huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere, we could conceivably have an effect on global temperature. at current levels, it's not significant
ther are a bout 1000 more important environmental issues to worry about right now than our impact on the weather
personally i do think the CO2 greenhouse effect is real (look at planet venus) but currently it's at 0.4% of our atmosphere and it's been around 5x higher in the past, and the planet survived. if we pumped huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere, we could conceivably have an effect on global temperature. at current levels, it's not significant
ther are a bout 1000 more important environmental issues to worry about right now than our impact on the weather
2
0
1
woodland creature
meowski@fluf.club
@georgia i'm not aware of any mass extinction event tied to anything other than cataclysmic events like meteor impacts. look at cambrian era flora and fauna aka the "cambrian explosion" as in, explosion of new species, where life was thriving and CO2 levels were 5x higher than they are now
up to a point, CO2 is a life-sustaining gas for plants and thus animals. doubling atmospheric CO2 in greenhouses approximately doubles crop yields.
https://evolution.berkeley.edu/the-cambrian-explosion/
up to a point, CO2 is a life-sustaining gas for plants and thus animals. doubling atmospheric CO2 in greenhouses approximately doubles crop yields.
https://evolution.berkeley.edu/the-cambrian-explosion/
1
0
0
Parker Banks
parker@dsmc.space
@georgia We are trying to retvrn to the carboniferous era, but don't know how to tell you guys
0
0
0
woodland creature
meowski@fluf.club
@georgia telling someone to "look it up" is not a good argument.
https://ourworldindata.org/mass-extinctions
every one of these mass extinction events happened before humans were here so this is not an argument for man-made climate change triggering one of these events.
climate change is normal and caused by factors beyond our control like the solar system moving within the galactic plane, sun cycles, and so forth.
we're probably going into a new ice age soon- but by "soon" i'm talking geologic time scales not anything that we're going to trigger by the relatively small amount of CO2 we're releasing
i agree microplastics are way more of a concern than the weather. atmospheric pollution even (aside from CO2, which isn't a pollutant) is extremely concerning.
https://ourworldindata.org/mass-extinctions
every one of these mass extinction events happened before humans were here so this is not an argument for man-made climate change triggering one of these events.
climate change is normal and caused by factors beyond our control like the solar system moving within the galactic plane, sun cycles, and so forth.
we're probably going into a new ice age soon- but by "soon" i'm talking geologic time scales not anything that we're going to trigger by the relatively small amount of CO2 we're releasing
i agree microplastics are way more of a concern than the weather. atmospheric pollution even (aside from CO2, which isn't a pollutant) is extremely concerning.
2
0
0
woodland creature
meowski@fluf.club
@georgia p.s. look at the table, it's a lot of "volcanoes, asteroid impact, etc"
0
0
0
1
0
3
0
0
2
2
0
1
Parker Banks
parker@dsmc.space
1
0
0
georgia
georgia
@meowski seems like youre saying "ocean deoxygenation occurred before humans were here so the ensuing extinction event means nothing for the ocean deoxygenation occurring now". do you not see how this is a fallacious argument? if ocean acidification (also linked to previous mass extinctions) and deoxygenation is occurring, then species are and will go extinct.
1
0
0
woodland creature
meowski@fluf.club
@georgia i'm not saying that actually. i reject the premise that a mass extinction event is imminent
loss of biodiversity is a concern though, i think we can all agree that pollution is bad. and i also agree fossil fuels do release pollutants, although CO2 isn't one of them. it's low on the list right above water vapor as the least harmful.
fossil fuel power plants in the west are relatively clean since we have smokestack scrubbers. cars have catalytic converters and particulate filters
but yea we need better power sources. i do not disagree with the general idea
loss of biodiversity is a concern though, i think we can all agree that pollution is bad. and i also agree fossil fuels do release pollutants, although CO2 isn't one of them. it's low on the list right above water vapor as the least harmful.
fossil fuel power plants in the west are relatively clean since we have smokestack scrubbers. cars have catalytic converters and particulate filters
but yea we need better power sources. i do not disagree with the general idea
1
0
1
woodland creature
meowski@fluf.club
@georgia i would argue most if not all of the modern loss of biodiversity is not caused by climate change but by direct human activities
1
0
0
woodland creature
meowski@fluf.club
@georgia i'm not sure about that. 1, it's hard to say that conclusively a 1 degree change in temperatuer is going to do anything in light of all the other confounding risk factors happening simultaneously, and 2, i dispute how much of climate change is caused by humans- not that the climate actually changes (which is natural)
0
0
0