1. Standard memberAThousandYoung
    Insanity at Masada
    tinyurl.com/mw7txe34
    Joined
    23 Aug '04
    Moves
    26660
    27 Sep '14 20:09
    Originally posted by wolfgang59
    I think you are joking.

    Decay, decomposition, bacterial action. Ultimately its back to CO2.

    There are some Carbon sumps but food isn't one!
    Where did petroleum come from?
  2. Joined
    31 Aug '06
    Moves
    40565
    27 Sep '14 21:02
    Originally posted by whodey
    I concede that living organisms have some effect on the never changing weather. For example, dino's created more cabon emissions than humans. Did their passing gas kill them all off? I've not heard a scientist suggest this, yet they expect me to believe we will kill ourselves doing much of the same?
    Do you ever stop to read what you've written, think it through, before you hit post?

    Organisms have an effect on the never changing weather?

    Are you also seriously suggesting that scientists believe human farts are responsible for climate change?

    Really? 😕
  3. Standard memberwolfgang59
    Quiz Master
    RHP Arms
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    48793
    29 Sep '14 07:161 edit
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    Where did petroleum come from?
    It did - and still does - come out of the ground.

    It was created by large amounts of dead sea creatures being covered
    by sediment and therefore deprived of oxygen they did not decompose
    in the normal way (and release their Carbon). Under heat and pressure
    the gooey mess became crude-oil, further heat and pressure produces
    natural gas (I think). The process took Carbon out of the Carbon Cycle
    and reduced atmospheric CO2.

    I think that's about right but will concede that's just a Primary
    School Teacher's take on it! There are plenty of bright sparks
    here who will correct me. 😀
  4. SubscriberWajoma
    Die Cheeseburger
    Provocation
    Joined
    01 Sep '04
    Moves
    78042
    29 Sep '14 07:48
    Originally posted by wolfgang59
    It did - and still does - come out of the ground.

    It was created by large amounts of dead sea creatures being covered
    by sediment and therefore deprived of oxygen they did not decompose
    in the normal way (and release their Carbon). Under heat and pressure
    the gooey mess became crude-oil, further heat and pressure produces
    natural gas (I think). ...[text shortened]...
    School Teacher's take on it! There are plenty of bright sparks
    here who will correct me. 😀
    So there was a time in the past when all that CO2 was in the atmosphere?
  5. SubscriberWajoma
    Die Cheeseburger
    Provocation
    Joined
    01 Sep '04
    Moves
    78042
    29 Sep '14 07:591 edit
    Originally posted by wolfgang59
    I think you are joking.

    Decay, decomposition, bacterial action. Ultimately its back to CO2.

    There are some Carbon sumps but food isn't one!
    I believe the question was: Does man contribute to CO2 in the atmosphere regardless of fossil fuels. I agree that once a human is living and breathing they are part of their own cycle, consume carbon in their food release CO2 in their breath, round and round.

    Do you think all tree and plant matter is returned to the atmosphere through decomposition and insects?

    I contend that through agriculture (regardless of fossil fuels) and mans ability to inhabit more and more of the worlds barren areas or through congregating in cities in very dense populations each new human adds their own CO2 'bank' to the atmosphere.

    The only reasonable argument against this that each human removes other critters from the equation and thus balances out or that the human population of the world is static (clearly not the case).
  6. Standard memberwolfgang59
    Quiz Master
    RHP Arms
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    48793
    29 Sep '14 09:10
    Originally posted by Wajoma
    I contend that through agriculture (regardless of fossil fuels) and mans ability to inhabit more and more of the worlds barren areas or through congregating in cities in very dense populations each new human adds their own CO2 'bank' to the atmosphere.

    You can contend what you like but you are wrong.

    This is very simple science - easy to check out on the internet so I'll finish
    this lesson here.
  7. SubscriberWajoma
    Die Cheeseburger
    Provocation
    Joined
    01 Sep '04
    Moves
    78042
    29 Sep '14 09:181 edit
    Originally posted by wolfgang59
    You can contend what you like but you are wrong.

    This is very simple science - easy to check out on the internet so I'll finish
    this lesson here.
    Well I did say 'reasonable argument' and it appears you have none.

    Edit: Wolfgang stands in front of his class. Todays lesson - "Look on the internet".
  8. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    12857
    29 Sep '14 10:441 edit
    Originally posted by C Hess
    Do you ever stop to read what you've written, think it through, before you hit post?

    Organisms have an effect on the never changing weather?

    Are you also seriously suggesting that scientists believe human farts are responsible for climate change?

    Really? 😕
    Well that's just it. Scientists seem concerned about cows farting, but not humans. Shrug.

    Contrary to popular belief, I'm no fart expert like Al Gore is. 😠
  9. Joined
    31 Aug '06
    Moves
    40565
    29 Sep '14 11:19
    Originally posted by whodey
    Well that's just it. Scientists seem concerned about cows farting, but not humans. Shrug.
    They're concerned about cows farting because the sheer number of cows we breed these days actually increase methane levels substantially:

    http://m.ibtimes.com/cow-farts-have-larger-greenhouse-gas-impact-previously-thought-methane-pushes-climate-change-1487502

    Under normal (non-industrial) conditions cattle wouldn't reproduce this ferociously, and so their farting wouldn't be more than a nuisance to a bystander.

    And by the way, if you're not knowledgeable on cows farting and its effects, why would you even bring it up as an argument in a discussion?
  10. SubscriberWajoma
    Die Cheeseburger
    Provocation
    Joined
    01 Sep '04
    Moves
    78042
    29 Sep '14 12:34
    Originally posted by C Hess
    They're concerned about cows farting because the sheer number of cows we breed these days actually increase methane levels substantially:

    http://m.ibtimes.com/cow-farts-have-larger-greenhouse-gas-impact-previously-thought-methane-pushes-climate-change-1487502

    Under normal (non-industrial) conditions cattle wouldn't reproduce this ferociously, and so the ...[text shortened]... on cows farting and its effects, why would you even bring it up as an argument in a discussion?
    What do you think 'normal conditions' are for humans?
  11. Germany
    Joined
    27 Oct '08
    Moves
    3118
    29 Sep '14 14:02
    Originally posted by Wajoma
    Do you think all tree and plant matter is returned to the atmosphere through decomposition and insects?
    Almost all of the carbon in it, yes.
  12. Joined
    31 Aug '06
    Moves
    40565
    29 Sep '14 17:24
    Originally posted by Wajoma
    What do you think 'normal conditions' are for humans?
    I don't know, but I doubt we have an effect on climate change through our flatulent activities.

    It should be noted that it's not actually the cows farts that's the biggest problem, but when they burp and exhale. That's when they release the most methane into the atmosphere. I just learned that. Fascinating.
  13. The Catbird's Seat
    Joined
    21 Oct '06
    Moves
    2598
    29 Sep '14 21:35
    Originally posted by Wajoma
    I believe the question was: Does man contribute to CO2 in the atmosphere regardless of fossil fuels. I agree that once a human is living and breathing they are part of their own cycle, consume carbon in their food release CO2 in their breath, round and round.

    Do you think all tree and plant matter is returned to the atmosphere through decomposition and in ...[text shortened]... nd thus balances out or that the human population of the world is static (clearly not the case).
    Populations will not remain totally static. The problem is that third world countries contribute the most to population growth, and are unmanageable in terms of the global warming agenda.
  14. The Catbird's Seat
    Joined
    21 Oct '06
    Moves
    2598
    29 Sep '14 21:36
    Originally posted by C Hess
    I don't know, but I doubt we have an effect on climate change through our flatulent activities.

    It should be noted that it's not actually the cows farts that's the biggest problem, but when they burp and exhale. That's when they release the most methane into the atmosphere. I just learned that. Fascinating.
    I agree with your points, but also that there is small chance at all that humans can or will control either CO2 or the climate.
  15. Standard memberwolfgang59
    Quiz Master
    RHP Arms
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    48793
    30 Sep '14 00:22
    Originally posted by normbenign
    I agree with your points, but also that there is small chance at all that humans can or will control either CO2 or the climate.
    The population per se is not the problem - its consumerism.

    http://cotap.org/per-capita-carbon-co2-emissions-by-country/?gclid=CjwKEAjwhqShBRDS95LciqqaonISJADj1rgaCC-PTJJCqqj08hoh2ZR_wdxhMqpFu5RGE-_aiWaCaxoC3T3w_wcB
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree