Climate change deniers I need your help

[Unhappy1]

The minimum CO2 levels for plant growth is around 200-240 ppm IIRC. We are currently around 400 ppm. Plants can tolerate up to 1500 ppm and numerous studies have reported better plant growth in conditions of 700 ppm. There is evidence to suggest that the earth has been greening the past 30 years and it may very well be due to increased temperatures and increased levels of CO2. So one of the positives that may come from increased CO2 is increased crop yield. Obviously more research is needed and I am not suggesting we should pump more CO2 into the atmosphere to increase crop yields or make the earth more green. Just pointing out one of the possible positive effects of increased CO2 in the atmosphere.

Also, I don't think the rate at which we produce CO2 is sustainable in the long run (we seem to double our CO2 every 30-40 years at current rates). I just don't agree with some alarmists views that we should cripple economies with carbon taxes to "save the planet and ourselves" when it is not entirely clear that our contributions are as bad as they claim.

And of course it would be nice if they get ITER to work .

Im not a botanist but im pretty sure we can supply CO2 to the plants through direct means, that doesn't involve the potential harm of CO2 admissions. Second point - I also dont agree that we should cripple our economies but we can still make educated investments in green energy that wont cripple economies, many of the European models are ones that i greatly admire.

 

[Techne]

Im not a botanist but im pretty sure we can supply CO2 to the plants through direct means, that doesn't involve the potential harm of CO2 admissions.

Of course. Though I wouldn't suggest it to commercial farmers . Guard/prepare against potential harms and make use of the actual positives.

Second point - I also dont agree that we should cripple our economies but we can still make educated investments in green energy that wont cripple economies, many of the European models are ones that i greatly admire.

Fair enough, I support good, sound investment in cleaner energy technologies, not government-directed interference in economies.

 

[SoulTax]

The only issue that I take with the arguments for the potential positives that can come out of rising CO2 levels; is that it is so hard to filter the genuine science, from the genuine-yet-agenda-driven-sensationalised-capitalist science. There is no doubt that the current global economy is basically centered around crude oil. People make far too much money off of it to trust that every scientist's research grant does not come with a caveat of some kind.

I don't think that this type of "conspiratorial" situation would be extremely wide spread, but the fact that it is clearly possible simply dilutes the trustworthiness of any research that comes out for the positive effects of climate change.

My opinion is that while this is a real possibility, and we know that rising levels of greenhouse gases have in the past resulted in widespread famine and mass extinction. Granted this is at very high levels. I would say that the responsible course of action would be to spend every effort, now, on researching greener, more sustainable sources of power. Even if we leave billions of tons of fossil fuels untapped, that cannot be a bad thing. But I fear that while fossil fuels are still fairly easy to get hold of, the focus by the super powers will not be on this more responsible course of research.

I just hope that we reach that responsible threshold before we reach the cliff edge of climate change, wherever that edge may be.

 

[killadoob]

Post much information about old science studes that say otherwise (like there are studies from the 80`s that Alan likes posting about the upcoming ice age).

Lie and pretend that its the sun causing the heating ( I know killadoob has much information you can use). (ignore the evidence that shows only the inner atmosphere is heating and not the outer)

Misrepresent the antarctica ice melts and growth. Ie, mention that the sea ice in antarctica is growing but dont mention that the land ice is decreasing.

Pretend its part of some natural cycle. Im sure you can find a period in our history a couple of million years ago where CO2 levels where higher (ignore the extinction events).

Theres plenty BS to spin. What is important in your fibbing is to completely ignore the fact that CO2 levels are increasing and that CO2 levels are a major green house gas. You need to stay away from this at all costs.

The question is climate change deniers, i have never denied the climate is changing.

My bad for thinking the actual thing is giving us heat could heat or cool the planet, ruling out the very thing that gives us heat as the problem is just unbelievable. I don't believe in man made climate change, i believe the extreme weather at present is coming from outside our planet. As in something outside earth is making our weather dramatically change. There is no doubt volcano's on the surface and below the ocean are extremely active and ghoti you cannot tell me man is making them so active.

There is a theory that our core is heating up, plenty evidence to support it but our knowledge to me is lacking on the topic.


I do not discount man making the climate change though, it is possible but i don't think it is us. We have discussed this so many times but the question here has nothing to do with why it is changing. I am assuming there are people who don't believe in climate change. Nothing can explain why anyone would deny climate change.

 

[Swa]

You're missing the point (I'm tempted to say as usual).

This is not about the topic or even about scientific sources. They want to see whether you can create a convincing & compelling argument to sell a bullsht position.

Meaning, it doesn't matter if the theory is full of holes you just need to "sell it" correctly - essentially manipulate the reader. Given the audience reading this post I'm definitely not going to provide specific guidance as to how one might achieve that though.

I'm not going to entertain the BS spouted here, but the point is actually to see if students can grasp both sides of the science behind debates. I.e. not just accept BS theories because the majority are holding to them.

@OP: As I said there are many angles to this. The question is also ambiguous. There are no climate change deniers. So all that's possible as it stands is to clarify that it's not necessarily because of human activities and that the old idea of global warming is being replaced by it because it was never really supported. She should get a clarification on the question and whether or not she actually has to deny it or if it's enough to just clarify the points of skeptics. It's also not clear it this is a purely scientific "essay" or a general one looking at aspects of science.

 

[killadoob]

If the point of the essay is why there is climate change, then she must read this article http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-G...imate-Crusader-Profits-from-Fossil-Fuels.html

Follow al gores way of bsing people while making millions and millions of dollars. There is a reason climate change no longer has MAN MADE in it because there is plenty conflicting data and of course people rule out things like the sun and the solar maximum as a cause and our core heating up, can't be even though we know next to nothing about our core so of course that isn't a valid reason for heating up the planet. The sun may give us heat but it cannot impact our climate according to ghoti . So things like that really make it hard convince anyone of anything but al gore did a great job. Great business man though, he saw a gap and took it. Can't really knock the man for his money making ability.

Ruling out the sun as a possible cause . Al gore did a great job of creating people who have a belief system and nothing else will even be considered. For some it is like a religion. They won't entertain any other theory.

 

[RiaX]

Will we get the marks and credits too?

Lol no but I will look like an awesome BF if you help me out

 

[RiaX]

I'm not going to entertain the BS spouted here, but the point is actually to see if students can grasp both sides of the science behind debates. I.e. not just accept BS theories because the majority are holding to them.

@OP: As I said there are many angles to this. The question is also ambiguous. There are no climate change deniers. So all that's possible as it stands is to clarify that it's not necessarily because of human activities and that the old idea of global warming is being replaced by it because it was never really supported. She should get a clarification on the question and whether or not she actually has to deny it or if it's enough to just clarify the points of skeptics. It's also not clear it this is a purely scientific "essay" or a general one looking at aspects of science.

I agree with you on this. Sorry I called it deniers, the topic is to write an essay from a skeptics point of view on the impact humans are having WRT to global warming and climate change (something along those lines)

 

[killadoob]

I agree with you on this. Sorry I called it deniers, the topic is to write an essay from a skeptics point of view on the impact humans are having WRT to global warming and climate change (something along those lines)

Tell her to research magma activity in the last few years, underwater as well warming the oceans. No one can claim man is causing increased magma activity globally.

 

[zippy]

Tell her to research magma activity in the last few years, underwater as well warming the oceans. No one can claim man is causing increased magma activity globally.

Fat people walking about can compress tectonic plates in one area causing movement. I reckon the fat people in America are causing some movement along the fault lines in the Pacific. And the fat people in Europe cause earthquakes in Iran.

 

[RiaX]

Thanks peeps but the essay is finished and submitted

 

[killadoob]

Fat people walking about can compress tectonic plates in one area causing movement. I reckon the fat people in America are causing some movement along the fault lines in the Pacific. And the fat people in Europe cause earthquakes in Iran.

Can you back this up with some links please, at least ghoti makes his case as do i. You just say fat people are causing it lol. I will ship you a tinfoil hat if you need.

 

[zippy]

Can you back this up with some links please, at least ghoti makes his case as do i. You just say fat people are causing it lol. I will ship you a tinfoil hat if you need.

Thanks bud, my tinfoil hat is a bit knackered.