There's a climate denier myth near the top of this webpage. Did you notice it?

Fact: The Rain Forrest is Greener because of the added Co2 in the atmosphere." [sic]

No. That's untrue. The earth's rain forests aren't getting any greener because of increased amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere.

An argument made by those who prefer to see a bright side to
climate change
 is that
carbon dioxide
 (
CO2
) being released by the burning of fossil fuels is actually good for the environment. This conjecture is based on simple and appealing logic: if plants need
CO2
 for their growth, then more of it should be better. We should expect our crops to become more abundant and our flowers to grow taller and bloom brighter.









http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-plant-food.htm (http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-plant-food.htm)

Nitrogen is PLANT FOOD.

Carbon Dioxide is necessary for Photosynthesis, a process used by plants and other organisms to convert light energy, with the resulting O2 output

Oxygen in not a human food.  So what?

I wonder who started that stupid " MYTH"???

Only one part in 2597 of Earth's atmosphere is carbon dioxide. Yet, plants make themselves    from it. A very substantial oak tree is made from what seems like a few    insubstantial air molecules. Plants use photosynthesis to make themselves from water,    carbon dioxide and energy from the Sun. Atmospheric oxygen is a byproduct of    photosynthesis. Animals reverse photosynthesis. They eat plants or they eat animals that eat    plants. Animal metabolism consumes oxygen and releases carbon dioxide and water. The net    effect of all this is a constant movement of carbon between plants, animals and the    atmosphere.
   
    Carbon dioxide and water vapor are the most important greenhouse gases. Without    greenhouse gases, Earth would be an ice planet and there would be no life.

With more atmospheric carbon dioxide available to convert to plant matter in photosynthesis, plants are able to grow more. This increased growth is referred to as carbon fertilization....There is a limit to how much carbon plants can take out of the atmosphere, and that limit varies from region to region. So far, it appears that carbon dioxide fertilization increases plant growth until the plant reaches a limit in the amount of water or nitrogen available.

A new NASA modeling effort found that in a doubled-carbon dioxide world plant growth could lessen global warming by about 0.3 degrees C globally. The same model found that the world would warm by 1.94 degrees C without this cooling feedback factored in.

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/cooling-plant-growth.html (http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/cooling-plant-growth.html)

DaBoz: "I wonder who started that stupid " MYTH?"

DaBoz,

That stupid myth originated with stupid deniers of human-caused global warming, stupid deniers like you.

chuck_curtis: "Oxygen in not a human food.  So what?"

That's a red herring, chuckles. Who said anything about oxygen being a "human food?"

DaBoz: "I wonder who started that stupid " MYTH?"

DaBoz,

That stupid myth originated with stupid deniers of human-caused global warming, stupid deniers like you.


LINK
Too any special group you referenced or my claim,, because I just posted what plant food is,,, why the hell do you need to act like a shit when I post what you agree with??

Deniers of a false claims are called truthers. You have proven nothing you claim to be true. Just conjecture.


So call me a "Truther" from now on.

There's a climate denier myth near the top of this webpage. Did you notice it?


   
Carbon dioxide emissions help tropical rain-forests grow faster: Study shows trees absorb more greenhouse gas than expected.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2891432/Carbon-dioxide-emissions-help-tropical-rainforests-grow-faster-Study-shows-trees-absorb-greenhouse-gas-expected.html



Trees use Photosynthesis to turn Co2 and water into sugars that it then distributes among its trunk and branches for growth. In most cases, oxygen is also released as a waste product.  Photosynthesis also maintains atmospheric oxygen levels and supplies all of the organic compounds and most of the energy necessary for life on Earth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynthesis
 

Gee,, I don't see anyone here claiming that CO2 is "Plant food"/// I did not see any of our names in the article that say we said it... yet this trud comes on here and spouts all these vicious accusations and spewing hate at everyone,,,, based on WHAT??? AND WHY???

DaBoz,

Your post is a RED HERRING.

Yes. Nitrogen is a plant food and carbon dioxide is necessary for photosynthesis. But that information is irrelevant in this discuss. Someone--jivin' jim, I presume--posted a favourite denier claim that's based on the logical fallacy of special pleading. The argument carefully avoids admitting that human activity caused an increase of CO2 in the earth's atmosphere that's causing global warming. But, instead, argues that the increased greenhouse gas in the atmosphere is actually a good thing, because it's beneficial to the planet's flora. 

Thanks Hawks for pointing out that climate change is nothing more than the OPINION of the SCIENTISTS doing the research




Skeptical Science (occasionally abbreviated SkS) is a climate science blog and information resource created in 2007 by Australia blogger and author John Cook. In addition to publishing articles on current events relating to climate science and climate policy, the site maintains a large database of articles analyzing the merit of arguments commonly put forth by those involved in the global warming controversy who oppose the mainstream scientific opinion on climate change.

Hawky lost that one...

Jesus, Hawks.  You are undeniably the stupidest fucking lame assed Libber on this board.  Bar none.

Well we now know for sure that 1965hawk does not beleive that CO2 is plant food,,, and that is good.

Anyone who thinks an increasing CO2 environment does not promote greater plant growth is definitely a denying flat-earther, and must get her education from stupid warmer blogs.

Why not start one on

MYTH: Hillary,, 3 lesbians trysts or 4

Someone--jivin' jim, I presume--posted a favourite denier claim that's based on the logical fallacy of special pleading. The argument carefully avoids admitting that human activity caused an increase of CO2 in the earth's atmosphere that's causing global warming. But, instead, argues that the increased greenhouse gas in the atmosphere is actually a good thing, because it's beneficial to the planet's flora.
 
 
Sometimes its more beneficial to point out the good parts of flying rather than focusing on the few crashes that take place.
(how's that for an analogy?)

It took that nutcase 6 years to figure out that putting CO2 into his Scott spreader did not make his lawn grow.

 For only "pennies a day," any greenhouse owner can produce CO2 to help increase plant yields in their greenhouses. That's the message on CO2 generators sold by greenhouse supply companies across the United States and Canada. "1,500 ppm [of carbon dioxide] can be achieved... these generators automatically provide the carbon dioxide needed to meet maximum growing potential for only pennies a day," the ad says.

View it yourself in this picture taken from a greenhouse supply magazine:
 (http://www.naturalnews.com/images/CO2-Generator-Section.jpg)


(http://www.naturalnews.com/images/CO2-Generator-Section.jpg)







(http://www.naturalnews.com/gallery/300x250/Misc/CO2Burner-Greenhouse.jpg)


CO2 generators "improve plant quality" and "increase production." They're made in the USA and run on propane or natural gas, turning fossil fuels into carbon dioxide.

Why does this work to radically improve plant growth, health and yields? Because -- are you ready for the truth? -- CO2 is a plant NUTRIENT.



Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/040890_greenhouses_carbon_dioxide_generators_plant_growth.html#ixzz3Vmh3CNJl[/COLOR]]http://www.naturalnews.com/040890_greenhouses_carbon_dioxide_generators_plant_growth.html#ixzz3Vmh3CNJl (http://[COLOR=#003399)

Is hawks fucking retarded??

That was freshmen biology in High School....You know....The CO2 Cycle....Jesus.....You'd HAVE to practice to be that stupid.....

Nothing like going "green" with CO2...   (http://www.aesopsretreat.com/forum/Smileys/classic/grin.gif)

Proof 1965hawks will believe anything, no matter how ridiculous, the liberal sewer stream media(Democrat party) tells him!

Mindless servility!

jivin' jim: " The Rain Forrest is Greener because of the added CO2 in the atmosphere." [sic]

A bogus argument used by those who attempt to rationalise the detrimental effect of anthropogenic global warming, caused increased amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2) being released  by the burning of fossil fuels, would have us believe that the burning of fossil fuels is actually good(!) for the environment. This sophomoric conjecture is based on simple and appealing (but flawed) logic: If plants need CO2 for growth, then more of it should be better; more carbon dioxide in the earth's atmosphere would cause Earth's vegetation--especially agriculture!--to become more abundant. So even if burning fossil fuels has increased the amount of carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere, plants need CO2 for growth. So more of it in the atmosphere is beneficial.

 http://www.skepticalscience.com/Increasing-Carbon-Dioxide-is-not-good-for-plants.html (http://www.skepticalscience.com/Increasing-Carbon-Dioxide-is-not-good-for-plants.html)

That argument, of course, is sophomoric--an argument that, on its face, appears plausible, but, in actuality, is misleading and fallacious.
Carbon dioxide is not a "plant food." In other words, increased amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere isn't tantamount to abundant plant life. More carbon dioxide is not necessarily good for plants. On the contrary, too high a concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is actually detrimental to plant life.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-plant-food.htm (http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-plant-food.htm)

Now go back and read the cut-and-paste jivin' jim used as evidence. The article is actually is about deforestation. Evidently you and your supporters missed The article clearly states that forests like the Amazon rain forest are essential for "soaking up excess greenhouse gases." Those "excess greenhouse gases," of course, are produced by the burning of burning fossil fuels and also--as the article points out-- by burning immense tracts of forests during deforestation.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2891432/Carbon-dioxide-emissions-help-tropical-rainforests-grow-faster-Study-shows-trees-absorb-greenhouse-gas-expected.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2891432/Carbon-dioxide-emissions-help-tropical-rainforests-grow-faster-Study-shows-trees-absorb-greenhouse-gas-expected.html)

 http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/deforestation-and-global-warming/ (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/deforestation-and-global-warming/)











[JUSTIFY]
[/JUSTIFY]
[JUSTIFY]
[/JUSTIFY]



 
   

sweetwater5s9: " For only "pennies a day," any greenhouse owner can produce CO2 to help increase plant yields in their greenhouses."

It is possible to help increase the growth of some plants with extra
CO2
, under controlled conditions, inside of greenhouses. It is based on this that 'skeptics' make their claims. However, such claims are simplistic.



http://www.skepticalscience.com/Increasing-Carbon-Dioxide-is-not-good-for-plants.html (http://www.skepticalscience.com/Increasing-Carbon-Dioxide-is-not-good-for-plants.html)

jivin' jim: "Sometimes its more beneficial to point out the good parts of flying rather than focusing on the few crashes that take place. How's that for an analogy?

It's a false analogy: Air travel and airplane crashes aren't analogous to anthropogenic global warming.  Do you have another question, jim?

LOL

DaBoz: "Gee,, I don't see anyone here claiming that CO2 is "Plant food"/// I did not see any of our names in the article that say we said it... yet this trud comes on here and spouts all these vicious accusations and spewing hate at everyone,,,, based on WHAT??? AND WHY???

DaBOZO,

that you didn't see jim's insinuation that carbon dioxide is a plant food is due to your poor reading comprehension skills. And your laughable post is due  to your atrocious grammar. Instead of trying to insult me, what your ignorant ass should do is enroll in an ESL class.

Baretta19: "Skeptical Science (occasionally abbreviated SkS) is a climate science blog and information resource created in 2007 by Australia blogger and author John Cook. In addition to publishing articles on current events relating to climate science and climate policy, the site maintains a large database of articles analyzing the merit of arguments commonly put forth by those involved in the global warming controversy who oppose the mainstream scientific opinion on climate change."

Baretta19,

First of all, what source are you citing? Or is what you posted above nothing more that your personal belief...just your gut feeling?  And yes; SKS does indeed maintain a large database of articles analysing the merit of arguments commonly put forth by climate deniers like you and your misinformed supporters in this forum. And I enjoy using it to debunk the spurious claims and preposterous arguments that deny the scientific evidence of human-caused global warming. And, furthermore, and not surprisingly, your cut-and-paste makes no attempt at all to either refute or debunk any claim that Skeptical Science has published relating to climate science and climate policy. Does it?   

CO2 generators "improve plant quality" and "increase production." They're made in the USA and run on propane or natural gas, turning fossil fuels into carbon dioxide.

Why does this work to radically improve plant growth, health and yields? Because -- are you ready for the truth? -- CO2 is a plant NUTRIENT.


The reason the CO2 generators have to run so much is that fans keep blowing the CO2 out to keep the greenhouses cool.   


I know, I had over 28 greenhouses in operation at our bedding plant business and nursery.

Wow, 1965hawks will say anything the Party tells him to no matter how stupid!

Even a fourth grader knows better on this one!

D2D,

Are you going to discuss the issue, or is all you're going to do is waste your time showing us again (like you do every day!) just how fucking stupid and ignorant you are? And speaking of fourth grade, you never made it that far. Your dumb ass finally gave up and dropped out at age thirty in second grade. Remember?

HAHAHAHA

1965hawks what is there to debate?

You are denying facts established more than 100 years ago!

Sucker!

Humour me, DICKHEAD2DUMBFUCK. Tell me exactly what facts I'm denying that were established more than a century ago.

HAHA

Hawky lost this one...  (http://www.aesopsretreat.com/forum/Smileys/classic/cool.gif)

No, sweetnutjob. You've lost your mind.

HAHAHAHA

Sorry, you lost again, hawky... 

China -- the world's biggest polluter -- hasn't set a date for its emissions to stop increasing.


The EU accounts for 11 percent of the world's greenhouse gas emissions, compared to 16 percent for the United States and 29 percent for China.


https://search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?p=The+EU+accounts+for+11+percent+of+the+world%27s+greenhouse+gas+emissions%2C+compared+to+16+percent+for+the+United+States+and+29+percent+for+China.&ei=utf-8&hspart=att&hsimp=yhs-att_001&type=sbc_dial (https://search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?p=The+EU+accounts+for+11+percent+of+the+world%27s+greenhouse+gas+emissions%2C+compared+to+16+percent+for+the+United+States+and+29+percent+for+China.&ei=utf-8&hspart=att&hsimp=yhs-att_001&type=sbc_dial)

sweetnutcase: "China -- the world's biggest polluter -- hasn't set a date for its emissions to stop increasing. The EU accounts for 11 percent of the world's greenhouse gas emissions, compared to 16 percent for the United States and 29 percent for China."



And that proves that carbon dioxide is a plant food?

Yeah, sweetnutcase. You've definitely lost your mind.

ROTFLMAO!

How are your OCD meds working, hawky?   Do you even know?

ROTFLMAO!


CO2 generators "improve plant quality" and "increase production." They're made in the USA and run on propane or natural gas, turning fossil fuels into carbon dioxide.

Why does this work to radically improve plant growth, health and yields? Because -- are you ready for the truth? -- CO2 is a plant NUTRIENT.


The reason the CO2 generators have to run so much is that fans keep blowing the CO2 out to keep the greenhouses cool.   


I know, I had over 28 greenhouses in operation at our bedding plant business and nursery.


You lose again, hawky.   

our society will always produce a certain amount of CO2, nobody is saying our production has to drop to zero sweaty.  you seem stuck on something that makes no sense in the big scheme of things.

In the big picture man contributes only about 3.5% of CO2.    Not much so you need to go after the other 90+%, wvit.

At 385 parts per million (ppm), CO2 is a minor constituent of earth's atmosphere – less than 4/100 of 1 percent of all gases present. Compared to earlier geologic times, earth's current atmosphere is CO2-impoverished.