Have you looked at the North Pole lately?

[St. Phatty]

Sticking with the example of growing weed.

> CO2 ... the more there is the better

That simply isn't true. It isn't true for humans (sure we exhale CO2, but a human organism does not require CO2 itself to survive -- we do require the byproducts of CO2 as input to photosynthesis, but not CO2 directly. astronauts don't bring CO2 with them to orbit). It isn't true for plants, either. If you put a plant into a 100% (ie 1,000,000 ppm) CO2 environment, it would die. Its roots would not be able to absorb the mineral nutrients needed to keep it alive. As you well know, roots need oxygen.

Or, as the old saying goes: The dose makes the poison.

> reducing CO2 will kill plants meaning no food or oxygen meaning no human life

That simply isn't true either. Atmospheric CO2 concentration has been less than 300 ppm for all of human history until 1950. Today CO2 concentration is 424.1 ppm. A year ago it was 420.9 ppm.

I suggest the book "Symphony in C", by Geologist Robert Hazen.

He talks about how Carbon is recycled, including CO2 & Oxygen, during the life of the Solar System & Earth, including how Carbon stores are affected by modern plant and animal life.

 

[Frosty Nuggets]

Exactly.
It is shockingly easy to motivate people by fear. It is shockingly easy to convince people to ignore their own capacity for reason, their own experience, and take up a cause to forestall some vague-but-terrible doom. This fear that drives you here of a one-world government is, I think, a boogeyman. It is a fantasy meant to capture your attention and imagination and keep you from thinking thoughts that would be inconvenient for certain oil industry executives and shareholders.
You know from your own experience this fact: plants need Oxygen -- without it roots don't function. For some reason you have been convinced otherwise. You are willing to claim that more CO2 is better for all things, even though that claim is in conflict with your own lived experience.
I'm here to say you ought to trust your own capacity for reason. You can examine critically the things that you are saying here, and confront those things with evidence and critical thought, with reason. That is where understanding comes from.

> Three Berries: How much CO2 is too much?
350 ppm. That is my opinion.

Where did I say anything about 100% CO2? That is reductio ad absurdem.
In the past CO2 was at 2000ppm and plants were thriving, there were forests everywhere even in the deserts of today, that is how much CO2 we need in the atmosphere, back them the planet did not boil away as you seem to think it will like all climate change alarmists.
Mars has near 100% CO2 and it isn't boiling hot.
Of course plants need oxygen for their roots but where does it come from? Plants, the upper part.

You are the one manipulated by fear, fear of climate change which is natural NOT man made.
People seeking to control the world is very real, they have been trying for thousands of years.

 

[GenghisKush]

thousands of years you say? who is they?

 

[greencalyx]

Important to note that Mars has just 1% of the atmospheric pressure of earth. Very thin atmosphere.

It also recieves less than half of the amount of sunlight that earth does. Not really a good comparison.

 

[Three Berries]

Under 300 ppm and plants start to die out. I agree 2000 ppm and plants go crazy. Then they increase in mass and act as a carbon sink. It's a natural cycle.

In the summer here in Illinois the daily CO2 swing will go from mid 600s in the early morning to mid 300s early evening.

 

[chilliwilli]

Then they increase in mass and act as a carbon sink. It's a natural cycle.

Only if there are the right conditions for them to grow.

 

[Three Berries]

Only if there are the right conditions for them to grow.

Yes which happens to coincide with favorable conditions for mammals. As the ice sheets grow the CO2 drops to plant extinction levels. If we had 2000ppm CO2 it would be a jungle out there.

 

[St. Phatty]

Under 300 ppm and plants start to die out. I agree 2000 ppm and plants go crazy. Then they increase in mass and act as a carbon sink. It's a natural cycle.

From watching Blackberries grow, I can't help but wonder if the relationship between Growth and CO2 levels is Non-Linear.

i.e. a little extra CO2 and the Blackberries grow twice as fast.

Last year the blackberry plants near my house grew 24+ feet. WAAAY more than previous years.

I was waiting for the "perfect moment" because I had birds that eat the blackberry leaves and I didn't have a way to keep them from eating the leaves after spraying.

So the blackberries grew some more !

Now I realize, cutting and hauling blackberries is an obvious temporary solution, but if you don't spray them, or rip up the Entire Root Network, it's almost a waste of time.

So I got my sprayer ready with Cross bow.

 

[Three Berries]

From watching Blackberries grow, I can't help but wonder if the relationship between Growth and CO2 levels is Non-Linear.

i.e. a little extra CO2 and the Blackberries grow twice as fast.

Last year the blackberry plants near my house grew 24+ feet. WAAAY more than previous years.

I was waiting for the "perfect moment" because I had birds that eat the blackberry leaves and I didn't have a way to keep them from eating the leaves after spraying.

So the blackberries grew some more !

Now I realize, cutting and hauling blackberries is an obvious temporary solution, but if you don't spray them, or rip up the Entire Root Network, it's almost a waste of time.

So I got my sprayer ready with Cross bow.

I love the wild raspberries around me. Use to be a raspberry farm a 100 years ago they say after the initial clear cutting. Then they made it into a golf course. then a pasture, then a rural subdivision.

It's the thorny greenbrier that is evil......

 

[igrowone]

From watching Blackberries grow, I can't help but wonder if the relationship between Growth and CO2 levels is Non-Linear.

i.e. a little extra CO2 and the Blackberries grow twice as fast.

Last year the blackberry plants near my house grew 24+ feet. WAAAY more than previous years.

I was waiting for the "perfect moment" because I had birds that eat the blackberry leaves and I didn't have a way to keep them from eating the leaves after spraying.

So the blackberries grew some more !

Now I realize, cutting and hauling blackberries is an obvious temporary solution, but if you don't spray them, or rip up the Entire Root Network, it's almost a waste of time.

So I got my sprayer ready with Cross bow.

what bird eats blackberry leaves?

 

[St. Phatty]

what bird eats blackberry leaves?

Jungle Fowl of Southeast Asia AND chickens.

 

[igrowone]

Jungle Fowl of Southeast Asia AND chickens.

interesting, not many birds can digest leaf material, or so I think
edit: let me correct myself, quite a number of birds can digest leaf to some extent,never saw one actually munching on leaf

 

[St. Phatty]

interesting, not many birds can digest leaf material, or so I think
edit: let me correct myself, quite a number of birds can digest leaf to some extent,never saw one actually munching on leaf

Don't let them near your Cannabis plants unless the plants are BIG.

I have one male Cannabis plant that has been stripped twice by the birds and is now back indoors under lights making food again.

 

[Three Berries]

 

[St. Phatty]

Deep Carbon Observatory | ROBERT M. HAZEN

Mostly what these guys do (or Did) is to study Carbon, so they're basically Geologists who also study the atmosphere.

But they haven't been updating their website. Maybe they ran out of grant money.

 

[Frosty Nuggets]

CO2 IS GOOD. Listen to Greenpeace co-founder Dr. Patrick Moore, what he got to say about CO2​

 

[St. Phatty]

CO2 IS GOOD. Listen to Greenpeace co-founder Dr. Patrick Moore, what he got to say about CO2​

It's like Fish debating whether Water is Good.

Life on Planet Earth didn't really get going until there were Plants and Animals.

Their chemistry is inextricably intertwined.

Animals consume the waste products (O2) and babies of the plants.

Plants consume the waste products (CO2, Urine, AND Feces) of the Animals.

And there's a million little animals & plants that live on the waste products in between.

e.g. Bacteria, Mold etc. that turn human feces into something plants can use.

If the media was capable of discussing the science of CO2, they would also be comparing the optical properties of CO2 and Ozone, to discuss how the creation of CO2 partially replaces the proverbial Ozone Layer, related to absorbing UV light.

 

[trichrider]

First Observational Evidence of Beaufort Gyre Stabilization, Which Could be Precursor to Huge Freshwater Release

---

May 8, 2023

Woods Hole, Mass. — A new study provides the first observational evidence of the stabilization of the anti-cyclonic Beaufort Gyre, which is the dominant circulation of the Canada Basin and the largest freshwater reservoir in the Arctic Ocean.
The study uses a newly extended record of “dynamic ocean topography” satellite data from 2011-2019 provided by two of the co-authors, along with an extensive hydrographic dataset from 2003-2019, to quantify the changing sea surface height of the gyre in recent years.
Previous observations and modeling that relied on earlier dynamic ocean topography data up to 2014 have documented that the gyre has strengthened and increased its freshwater content by 40% compared with 1970s climatology. Stabilization of the gyre could be a precursor of a huge freshwater release, which could have significant ramifications including impacting the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC), a key component of global climate.
The Beaufort Gyre “has transitioned to a quasi-stable state in which the increase in sea surface height of the gyre has slowed and the freshwater content has plateaued. In addition, the cold halocline layer, which isolates the warm/salty Atlantic water at depth, has thinned significantly due to less input of cold and salty water stemming from the Pacific Ocean and the Chukchi Sea shelf, together with greater entrainment of lighter water from the eastern Beaufort Sea. This recent transition of the Beaufort Gyre is associated with a southeastward shift in its location as a result of variation in the regional wind forcing,” according to the journal article “Recent state transition of the Arctic Ocean’s Beaufort Gyre,” published in Nature Geoscience.
“Our results imply that continued thinning of the cold halocline layer could modulate the present stable state, allowing for a freshwater release,” the article states. “This in turn could freshen the subpolar North Atlantic, impacting the AMOC.”
Because there could be many potential local and remote impacts of the changing gyre on the hydrographic structure, physical processes, and ecosystem of the Arctic, “it is of high interest to better understand the factors associated with such changes—including the underlying causes,” the article notes.
“People should be aware that changes in the circulation of the Arctic Ocean could threaten the climate. It’s not only the melting ice and animals losing their habitat that should be a concern,” said Peigen Lin, lead author of the paper. Lin, who is an associate professor at the Shanghai Jiao Tong University’s School of Oceanography in China, conducted his research as a postdoctoral investigator at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) in Massachusetts.
With the gyre being the Arctic Ocean’s largest freshwater reservoir, “if that freshwater gets released and ends up spreading into the North Atlantic, it could impact the overturning circulation, and, in an extreme case, disrupt it,” said co-author Robert Pickart, a senior scientist in WHOI’s Department of Physical Oceanography.
Collecting measurements in the ice, the western Arctic Ocean (Photo by Peigen Lin ©Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution)

The study, which includes an examination of long-term trends of the Beaufort Gyre and the causes of the thinning of the cold halocline layer, quantifies the evolution of the gyre in terms of its sea surface height as well as its freshwater content. “Both of these indicate that the Beaufort Gyre has stabilized in the second decade of this century,” Lin said.
The study also addresses the causes of the halocline thinning considerably as the gyre has evolved. The study notes that the recent decrease in the amount of Pacific origin winter water exiting the Chukchi Sea explains some of the thinning, and that the enhanced influence from the eastern Beaufort Sea – due to the gyre’s southeastward shift– likely also contributes to the thinning.
The recent documented state of the gyre “does not represent a return to the initial condition of 2003 when the gyre was weak and located partially in the southeastern basin. Instead, under the strengthened wind stress curl, the gyre has continuously intensified even though it has contracted, and it has maintained its excess freshwater storage,” the article notes.
Lin said a goal regarding the gyre is to understand the mechanisms behind its changes, which ultimately could allow scientists to predict what the gyre might do in the future.
“The community has been confounded by the fact that this gyre has kept growing and growing, and everyone is expecting it to release,” Pickart said. “Wouldn't it be something if the gyre system and its freshwater accumulation and release could be become somewhat predictable? Then, perhaps, we could also shed light on what a warming climate is going to do to this system.”
Funding for the study was provided by the National Science Foundation; the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; the Shanghai Pujiang Program and Shanghai Frontiers Science Center of Polar Science; the European Space Agency Project and Natural Environment Research Council; the Arctic Challenge for Sustainability projects of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan; and the Arctic Challenge for Sustainability II (ArCS II). Co-authors Harry Heorton and Michel Tsamados of University College London provided the updated dynamic ocean topography data from 2011-2019 for the study. Co-authors Motoyo Itoh and Takashi Kikuchi of the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology (JAMSTEC) provided the mooring data regarding the Beaufort Gyre source water.

First Observational Evidence of Beaufort Gyre Stabilization, Which Could be Precursor to Huge Freshwater Release

Significant ramifications including impacting the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, a key component of global climate, are possible.

www.whoi.edu

​

 

[trichrider]

Impact of Changing Greenhouse Gas Concentrations on Ontario’s Climate

W. A. van Wijngaarden

Department of Physics and Astronomy, York University, Canada, [email protected]

May 10, 2023

The effect of changing greenhouse gas concentrations, most notably carbon dioxide, CO2,
on climate was examined. In particular, calculations of the climate sensitivity, the warming
of the Earth due to a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide, are discussed. Greenhouse
gas concentrations, as determined from air bubbles trapped in ice as well as at Mauna Loa,
Hawaii are presented. The greenhouse gas amounts generated by Canada and Ontario were
used to estimate their respective contributions to global warming. Ontario was responsible
for only 0.35% of the world’s CO2 emissions in 2019 and this amount was 20% lower than
in 2005. The predictions of Global Climate Models (GCMs) regarding temperature, polar
ice caps, oceans, precipitation and extreme events were compared to observations. Records
since 1880 show an overall warming of about 1 oC. However, the GCMs do not account for
observed decadal temperature fluctuations and consistently overestimate the warming. Ontario’s contribution to global warming is only 9.2×10−5 oC/year using the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) recommended climate sensitivity value. Measurements of the polar ice caps reveal a decrease in the minimum September Arctic sea ice extent during 1979-2022 but the trend levelled off after 2007; while the average Antarctic sea ice extent slightly increased. Sea level increased slightly throughout the 20th century. Ontario’s contribution to anthropogenic sea level rise is about 0.005 mm/year. Sea level along Ontario’s Hudson Bay coast is decreasing due to isostatic rebound of the land following the last Ice Age. The change to ocean acidity due to CO2 absorption from the atmosphere is negligible compared to that due to tides, ocean depth and seasonal effects. Ontario’s contribution to ocean acidification is estimated to be 6×10−6 pH/year. No changes in precipitation in North America over the 19th and 20th centuries, nor at Toronto since 1843, were found. The Great Lake levels are remarkably constant over the past century showing no evidence of a change in the incidence of flooding. No evidence was found that the frequency of extreme events such as hurricanes or tornadoes increased during recent decades. The number of forest fires in Canada and Ontario decreased during 1990 to 2020......

5 Summary
Table 5 summarizes the evidence. In 2019, Ontario generated only 0.35% of global CO2
emissions. This amount was 20% lower than in 2005. This record of greenhouse gas reduction
is nearly unparalleled in the world!
The Earth’s average surface temperature has increased by about 1 oC since 1880. Global
climate models are not able to account for substantial decadal variations. The most signifi-
cant of these is the abrupt warming that occurred in the 1990s followed by the so called hiatus from 2000 to about 2016. A comparison with observations shows a consistent overestimation of the warming by nearly all GCMs.
The 0.5 oC warming from 1900 to 1940 at relatively low CO2 levels show natural temper-
ature fluctuations are a substantial part of the overall 1oC warming from 1880 to 2020. It is
reasonable to conclude that about half of the temperature rise since 1880 is due to increasing
greenhouse gases. Substituting 0.5 oC into equation (1) and using the corresponding CO2
concentrations in 1880 and 2020 gives a climate sensitivity S = 1 oC. This is less than the
2021 IPCC climate sensitivity range of 2.5 to 4 oC. If one attributes all of the observed 1 oC
warming from 1880 to 2020 to increasing greenhouse gases, the climate sensitivity is only 2 oC.
Ontario’s contribution to global warming can be estimated using its fraction of world
CO2 production. Using the 2021 IPCC recommended climate sensitivity, S = 3 oC, gives
a contribution of 9.2 × 10−5 oC or 92 microdegrees C per year to global warming. This is
dwarfed by that of other countries, especially China, U.S. and India.
There has been a significant reduction in the Arctic ice cap since satellite measurements
began in 1979. However, the extent of minimum sea ice in September appears to have
stabilized after 2007. Extrapolating the 1979-2022 data to determine when there will be an
ice free Arctic Ocean gives a date of 2077. Using the 2007-2022 data changes the ice free
year to 4729. Records of Greenland suggest that the warming of the last few years is less
than that experienced in the first part of the 20th century. The dramatic retreat of glaciers
such as in Glacier Bay, Alaska during the 1800s and early 1900s occurred when greenhouse
gas emissions were relatively low and is likely due to warming fo the Earth following the
end of the Little Ice Age. For Antarctica, there has been a slight increase in average sea ice
extent since 1979 although a slight reduction in recent years.
Sea levels have continued increasing throughout the 20th century at a rate of 2 to 3.5
mm/year. This is likely a continuation of a natural process that began at the end of the last
ice age. Ontario’s contribution to anthropogenic global sea level rise is only 0.005 mm/year.
For Ontario’s sea coast bordering Hudson Bay, sea level will likely continue a significant
decline due to isostatic rebound of the land in response to the end of the last ice age. The
acidity change due to absorption of CO2 by the oceans is small compared to tidal and season
effects as well as the pH change experienced when one dives below the surface. Ontario’s
contribution to ocean acidification is a minuscule 6 × 10−6 pH/year.
North American precipitation records show no change over the past two centuries. Precipitation recorded at Toronto from 1843 to 2020 is remarkably stable. Over a century of
measurements show no significant change of flooding caused by high Great Lake water levels.
The frequency of extreme events was examined. No change in either the number of
total hurricanes or severe hurricanes during 1981 to 2021 was found. Similarly, tornado
observations using modern Doppler radar show no change for either the number of total
tornadoes or strong tornadoes from 1995 to 2020 in the U.S. The number of Ontario tornadoes shows no overall trend from 1950 to 2007 but there appears to be a decrease from 1978 to 2007. The annual number of forest fires decreased in Canada and Ontario from 1990 to 2020 and the area burned shows no clear trend.

In conclusion, the author wishes to emphasize that application of well tested physics
shows an increase of greenhouse gases will cause some global warming. However, contrary
to the United Nations claim, there will not be catastrophic climate change within 10 years
[1], nor should one overlook the beneficial aspects of increased carbon dioxide for promoting
plant growth. The impact of Ontario’s anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases on global climate is minuscule.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2305.05500.pdf

 

[Frosty Nuggets]

So where is the static model of the climate that proves CO2 is causing climate change? There is no static model.

1 volcano puts out more CO2 than all of mans efforts and there are hundreds of volcano's around the world.