re: WH Science Adviser: Make CO2 Emissions 'Close to Zero

quote:

---

I asked a simple question which was dogged by many including yourself. Those on here that place all their faith in science and consider it the," end all be all"

---

Are you really making this a science vs. non-science issue?

I'm a christian who thinks the WH Science advisor is clearly a nut. But, I most certainly am on the "science" team.

quote:

---

Are you really making this a science vs. non-science issue?

---

No I'm not. I'm aware that there all levels of people's reliance on science. Some don't put much faith in it. Some, it really is like a religion to them where it's raised above every other thing. And then there is a wide variety of those in between.
My post and initial comments were to those who accept everything science says as fact and, if they accepted this guys assertions as fact.

quote:

---

Then since you are in the middle camp and neither follow science blindly

---

Not even science blindly follows science. In fact, science's number one goal is to frick with science.

quote:

---

he talkin bout NET emissions.

---

Anything else would be crazy right?

quote:

---

6 billion more humans converting oxygen to CO2

---

NET EMISSIONS

quote:

---

so where is all of this accumulated CO2 that wasn't absorbed into the carbon cycle? Is it hiding?

---

umm, guess i can make this easier to understand for the slow uptakes.

about 40 percent of the net human contributed carbon emissions are not absorbed by the multiple carbon pathways in the atmosphere and ocean atmosphere

its rather rapidly and disturbingly raised the ppm CO2 concentration in our atmosphere from 300 to 405 ppm in just over 55 years...


took nearly 10000 years the last time it happened naturally.

so no its not hiding, its collecting in the atmosphere as a greenhouse gas, slowly acidifying the ocean.

quote:

---

udtiger

---

NET EMISSIONS, NET EMISSIONS, NET EMISSIONS

after reading your post here, you should join Revelator on the sidelines of posting about climate matters, you lack the game to contribute anything meaningful as well.

but here is a little lesson for you from just googling the subject.

Climate Myth...

Breathing contributes to CO2 buildup
"Pollution; none of us are supporting putting substances into the atmosphere or the waterways that might be pollutants, but carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. If Senator Wong was really serious about her science she would stop breathing because you inhale air that's got 385 parts per million carbon dioxide in it and you exhale air with about ten times as much, and that extra carbon comes from what you eat. So that is absolute nonsense." (Ian Plimer)

The very first time you learned about carbon dioxide was probably in grade school: We breathe in oxygen and breathe out carbon dioxide. Any eight-year-old can rattle off this fact.

More specifically, the mitochondria within our cells perform cellular respiration: they burn carbohydrates (in the example shown below, glucose) in the oxygen that we breathe in to yield carbon dioxide and water, which we exhale as waste products, as well as energy, which is required to maintain our bodily processes and keep us alive.
C6H12O6 + 6O2 ? 6CO2 + 6H2O + energy
carbohydrates + oxygen ? carbon dixoide + water + energy

It should come as no surprise that, when confronted with the challenge of reducing our carbon emissions from the burning of fossil fuels, some people angrily proclaim, "Why should we bother? Even breathing out creates carbon emissions!"

This statement fails to take into account the other half of the carbon cycle. As you also learned in grade school, plants are the opposite to animals in this respect: Through photosynthesis, they take in carbon dioxide and release oxygen, in a chemical equation opposite to the one above. (They also perform some respiration, because they need to eat as well, but it is outweighed by the photosynthesis.) The carbon they collect from the CO2 in the air forms their tissues - roots, stems, leaves, and fruit.

These tissues form the base of the food chain, as they are eaten by animals, which are eaten by other animals, and so on. As humans, we are part of this food chain. All the carbon in our body comes either directly or indirectly from plants, which took it out of the air only recently.

Therefore, when we breathe out, all the carbon dioxide we exhale has already been accounted for. By performing cellular respiration, we are simply returning to the air the same carbon that was there to begin with. Remember, it's a carbon cycle, not a straight line - and a good thing, too!

quote:

---

You really are a trip with delusions of grandeur.

---

What did he say that was false?

quote:

---

I can't breathe.

---

The real question is why aren't liberals applauding the NYPD's efforts to reduce CO2 emissions?

quote:

---

We don't "produce" CO2 from nothing. All the carbon we exhale ultimately comes from plants (sometimes with animals as a middleman). And the plants got it... from the air.

An increase in the human population just means more carbon in the current cycle spending time in human bodies and human-cultivated vegetation. It doesn't add any net carbon to the atmosphere.

Now, bringing up carbon that has been sequestered underground for millions of years and burning it? That's different.

---

Unless he responds with "Thanks, i didnt know that. Ive learned something new and retract my previous statement" we know that he is a brick wall.