Page 10 of 17
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 28 Aug 2019
by diminished
Yeah it's a catastrophy.
And there are probably some critters or plants in that forest that carry the cure for aidscanceralzheimers.
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 28 Aug 2019
by EnochLight
Kenni wrote: ↑28 Aug 2019
Last Alternative wrote: ↑27 Aug 2019
Why isn't Al Gore & Friends making a scene to stop the Amazon fires which by the way, the Amazon produces TWENTY % OF THE OXYGEN ON EARTH?
I'm just going to nitpick here, since it's very up-there with popular news items these days.
The Amazon produces less than 1% of the Earths oxygen. When I say less than 1%, it's closer to 0 than 1, on a global scale.
The Amazon is a biotope. That basically means it consumes almost all the oxygen it consumes. I know NGO's, the media, and celebs has been using the "Worlds lungs" term freely, and also the "fact about the 20% of the planets oxygen" misinformation.
All that misinformation does is take away focus about something that should matter more: The killing of local tribes and the destriction of a very biodiverse area on Earth. It's just, people seem to have forgotten all about Borneo. The real issue with this world is people being super duper hypocrites and pointing fingers at each other for not doing enough. Buy local food instead, force companies to stop import and export. It's as simple as that.
The Amazon isn't the "worlds lungs". Almost all the oxygen on the planet comes from the oceans, and there's plenty of oxygen for millions of years. Please don't be fooled by the media and NGO's.
Kenni wrote: ↑28 Aug 2019
The net production of oxygen from the Amazon is close to 0. Almost all oxygen produced by the photosynthetic process is consumed by microbes and insects consuming dead branches, leafs, roots etc, in a never-ending cycle.
For a positive net production of oxygen, organic deteriation needs to happen in environments where there's either little to no oxygen consumption, or the production of oxygen changes environments on the get-go like at either the bottom of the sea or the surface. That's why nearly all of the net production of oxygen happens on the surface of the oceans by algea (through photosynthesis, yes) and let in to the atmostphere where none of the marine organisms can consume it.
Edit: I never said water was turned into O2 in the process, although evaporation does release oxygen as well.
^^ ALL OF THIS ^^
It's refreshing to see a scientifically literate response.
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 04 Sep 2019
by Creativemind
D'you know what, I still don't think people are taking climate change seriously, even now.
Been watching some Extinction Rebellion videos, quite scary.
Also, why would the media say the Amazon Rainforest is responsible for 20% of the worlds oxygen then?
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 04 Sep 2019
by EnochLight
Creativemind wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
Also, why would the media say the Amazon Rainforest is responsible for 20% of the worlds oxygen then?
Because the media is often wrong, and rarely verify or understand the complete science of the subject they're talking about when they're faced with the choice between that or selling clicks, ads, and views.
As for the science, phytoplankton makes anywhere between 50% to 85% of the world's oxygen, so while saying the Amazon rainforest makes 20% may not be wrong, as discussed above, it's
net contribution is just as important.
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 04 Sep 2019
by diminished
Again, we don't have an O2 deficit but a CO2 surplus.
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 04 Sep 2019
by Kenni
diminished wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
Again, we don't have an O2 deficit but a CO2 surplus.
And that is very true - It
will increase and contribute to the amount of CO2 surplus. I specifically used the word "nitpick" to point out that the global oxygen net production won't be influenced by the Amazon fires (or any forest fire for that matter). This seems to be (or have been) the main selling point for NGO's, celebrities and news media all over the world.
I also acknowledge the issues the increase of CO2 levels since the industrial revolution presents, but in this particular matter, I really believe that the native tribes and flora/fauna damaged by the fires are the biggest issue with deforestation in general. As I said, people themselves have the option to influence the supply and demand chains and the amount of import and export of goods needed.
This is
the long term solution.
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 04 Sep 2019
by EnochLight
Kenni wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
but in this particular matter, I really believe that the native tribes and flora/fauna damaged by the fires are the biggest issue with deforestation in general.
Well, to be fair - the native tribes and flora/fauna were screwed the moment
ol' whitey showed up in 1492. But that's a topic for another discussion..
#conquistadors
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 04 Sep 2019
by Andy
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 04 Sep 2019
by EnochLight
Full disclosure for those who don't know: the video above is sponsored by The Heritage Foundation, and many of its talking heads. By definition, this organization defines its "mission" as:
to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.
This is an organization dedicated to those things, and it also finds favor with those who oppose women's rights to abortion, as well as any policies addressing climate change if it affects commercial interests.
Maybe they can pray the climate change away, along with cancer and gluten?
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 04 Sep 2019
by Andy
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 04 Sep 2019
by diminished
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 04 Sep 2019
by Andy
Be the change you want to see by giving up your cars etc.
or else
"The world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change" - Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
Clocks ticking.
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 04 Sep 2019
by EnochLight
Andy wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
youtube.com/watch?v=JYQ6eZDXXRE
LOL!!! Mike Huckabee? Sure, a conservative Christian new-evangelical ex-Fox News talking head. I'm sure he has some riveting valid insight into climate change.
Andy wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
Be the change you want to see by giving up your cars etc.
or else
"The world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change" - Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
Clocks ticking.
How about buy your electricity from 100% renewable sources if your utility provider offers the option? There's a start.
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 04 Sep 2019
by Andy
EnochLight wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
Andy wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
youtube.com/watch?v=JYQ6eZDXXRE
LOL!!! Mike Huckabee? Sure, a conservative Christian new-evangelical ex-Fox News talking head. I'm sure he has some riveting valid insight into climate change.
Yeh because Mike Huckabee is the scientist spewing facts here. I guess Dr. Patrick Moore would be more credible if he was interviewed by some on CNN. Carry on.
SMH
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 04 Sep 2019
by EnochLight
Andy wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
Yeh because Mike Huckabee is the scientist spewing facts here. Carry on.
SMH
No, he's the conservative Christian new-evangelical ex-Fox News talking head that will host and latch on to any guest that supports his wack ass views.
Even Ken Ham has "scientists" working for him that can "prove" the world is less than 10,000 years old. SMH
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 04 Sep 2019
by Andy
EnochLight wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
Andy wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
youtube.com/watch?v=JYQ6eZDXXRE
LOL!!! Mike Huckabee? Sure, a conservative Christian new-evangelical ex-Fox News talking head. I'm sure he has some riveting valid insight into climate change.
Andy wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
Be the change you want to see by giving up your cars etc.
or else
"The world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change" - Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
Clocks ticking.
How about buy your electricity from 100% renewable sources if your utility provider offers the option? There's a start.
Your car?
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 04 Sep 2019
by EnochLight
Andy wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
Your car?
I walk to work. Yours?
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 04 Sep 2019
by Andy
EnochLight wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
Andy wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
Yeh because Mike Huckabee is the scientist spewing facts here. Carry on.
SMH
No, he's the conservative Christian new-evangelical ex-Fox News talking head that will host and latch on to any guest that supports his wack ass views.
Even Ken Ham has "scientists" working for him that can "prove" the world is less than 10,000 years old. SMH
Oh so you have proof now that Dr. Patrick Moore is working for Huckabee. Gotcha.
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 04 Sep 2019
by Andy
EnochLight wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
Andy wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
Your car?
I walk to work. Yours?
You don't own a car?
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 04 Sep 2019
by EnochLight
Andy wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
Oh so you have proof now that Dr. Patrick Moore is working for Huckabee. Gotcha.
No, I never suggested that. I suggested that Huckabee is not a valid reference for anything being discussed here.
Andy wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
You don't own a car?
Should I? I walk to work.
Also, you never answered my question. Yours?
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 04 Sep 2019
by Andy
EnochLight wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
Andy wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
Oh so you have proof now that Dr. Patrick Moore is working for Huckabee. Gotcha.
No, I never suggested that. I suggested that Huckabee is not a valid reference for anything being discussed here.
Andy wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
You don't own a car?
Should I? I walk to work.
Also, you never answered my question. Yours?
Huckabee is not the reference Dr. Patrick Moore is. You took issue with who doing the interview and completely skipped over who is being interviewed because your politics do not align. Ridiculous. SMH
Do you own a car yes or no?
I own a car and drive it everyday and will continue to do so. I am not the one in here terrified about climate change.
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 04 Sep 2019
by guitfnky
wait, so even if Enoch did have a car, what difference would that make?
drive to work+use coal-powered electricity
vs.
drive to work+use renewable electricity
assuming driving amount and electricity usage are the same, which of those scenarios is more environmentally friendly? they’re not equal.
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 04 Sep 2019
by Andy
guitfnky wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
wait, so even if Enoch did have a car, what difference would that make?
drive to work+use coal-powered electricity
vs.
drive to work+use renewable electricity
assuming driving amount and electricity usage are the same, which of those scenarios is more environmentally friendly? they’re not equal.
Who said they were? LOL
Andy wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
Be the change you want to see by giving up your cars etc.
or else
"The world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change" - Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
Clocks ticking.
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 04 Sep 2019
by guitfnky
Andy wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
guitfnky wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
wait, so even if Enoch did have a car, what difference would that make?
drive to work+use coal-powered electricity
vs.
drive to work+use renewable electricity
assuming driving amount and electricity usage are the same, which of those scenarios is more environmentally friendly? they’re not equal.
Who said they were? LOL
you keep bringing up their car, which is irrelevant to the point.
the only logical assumption available then, is that you believe this theoretical car is somehow relevant at all.
Re: Climate Change
Posted: 04 Sep 2019
by Andy
guitfnky wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
Andy wrote: ↑04 Sep 2019
Who said they were? LOL
you keep bringing up their car, which is irrelevant to the point.
the only logical assumption available then, is that you believe this theoretical car is somehow relevant at all.
Do cars contribute to climate change? Yes or no.
