NASA Declares Carbon Dioxide Is Greening The Earth

[specsaregood]

I think people get high from too much oxygen.

Oxygen is toxic. too much oxygen will cause seizures and worse at increased pressures.

 

[Anti Globalist]

Who knew that having more of the air that plants breathe would result in more plants?

It's almost as if thats logical and makes complete sense.

 

[timosman]

Oxygen is toxic. too much oxygen will cause seizures and worse at increased pressures.

Oxygen bar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygen_bar

 

[specsaregood]

Oxygen bar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygen_bar

there are no limit to the number of ways that fools can be separated from their money.

Toxicity:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygen_toxicity

 

[timosman]

there are no limit to the number of ways that fools can be separated from their money.

Toxicity:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygen_toxicity

This link is irrelevant to the topic at hand.

 

[Stratovarious]

"Environmental stewardship was created by whites in order to place restrictions on the development of nations with a non-white majority."
-Buzzfeed, probably

Yep,

I remember that from Alex Jones , he probably got it from bzzzz. Either way , they don't
want Africa for instance to go full development , but (lmao) they want us to have 100's
of millions of low iq , 3rd world, sht hole Nation peoples come here and
destroy everything we've built.

 

[Grandmastersexsay]

I think people get high from too much oxygen.

You just breath slower and you are fine.

 

[Grandmastersexsay]

No one ever talks about the benefits of global warming. It should be a strategy to fight the lunatics and power hungry politicians who want to push their climate agenda.

Let's say man could easily control global temperatures at will. What would we do? Would we lower global temperatures, increase them, or leave them alone? There are many benefits we would see from increasing global temperatures and very few downsides. The only real downside is a few people with beach front property my have to relocate in the next decade.

What benefits are there to warmer global temperatures? We can start with the most obvious. The cold kills vastly more people than heat. The most important benefit to humanity though, as this article indicates, are a longer and more productive growing season for agriculture. The global population is increasing by almost 1 billion people per decade while the amount of farmland decreases. Food shortage is humanities largest threat. Global warming is the opposite of a threat. It should be welcomed with open arms.

 

[ATruepatriot]

No one ever talks about the benefits of global warming. It should be a strategy to fight the lunatics and power hungry politicians who want to push their climate agenda.

Let's say man could easily control global temperatures at will. What would we do? Would we lower global temperatures, increase them, or leave them alone? There are many benefits we would see from increasing global temperatures and very few downsides. The only real downside is a few people with beach front property my have to relocate in the next decade.

What benefits are there to warmer global temperatures? We can start with the most obvious. The cold kills vastly more people than heat. The most important benefit to humanity though, as this article indicates, are a longer and more productive growing season for agriculture. The global population is increasing by almost 1 billion people per decade while the amount of farmland decreases. Food shortage is humanities largest threat. Global warming is the opposite of a threat. It should be welcomed with open arms.

I absolutely agree. There is another very good reason to embrace it. So far it has delayed the inevitable in fact.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Oxygen is toxic. too much oxygen will cause seizures and worse at increased pressures.

Then why do pro sports teams use hyperbaric oxygen chambers to help injured athletes heal?

 

[timosman]

Then why do pro sports teams use hyperbaric oxygen chambers to help injured athletes heal?

pressure =/= level

 

[Swordsmyth]

pressure =/= level

Hyperbaric oxygen chambers have increased oxygen levels as well as increased pressure.

I'm sure that there is some level where oxygen is unsafe but it is VERY much higher than current atmospheric levels.

 

[UWDude]

I sure as hell don't want to live on bikini atoll or eat food grown there. I'm sure there are cleaner bombs that can be made but I don't really want to find out what happens when a dirty one goes off. We definitely have the ability to destroy all human life.

Life in Chernobyl recovered far faster than expected. Lifespans would go down, but as found in Chernobyl, life forms mutated and adapted to resistance to radioactive poisoning. Humans would do the same.

Dirty bombs have a much lower area of impact.

But, yes, MAYBE, if humanity focused on mass producing ten million dirty bombs, and delivering them by drone to ten million locations on the planet, and set them all off at once, maybe that would destroy all human life, although, again, I must point out Chernobyl.

Also, during the black death, people started screwing by age 12, and having kids. They wasted no time. They fell in love easy and young, because love is the best comfort for death.

During time of mass death, love would come easy. Even if only one million humans in the most remote areas survive the ten million dirty bombs

It is like the Calhoun Experiment revealed: Utopia breeds apathy. Struggle brings love. Survival brings instinct.

But you are correct, we do have the ability to destroy all human life. All above ground mamallian life. I don't think we could destroy all life in the Oceans. And I don't think we could destroy all plant or reptilian and insect lifeforms.

But we can not change the climate. It's just too big. Although there were some retard scientists advancing theories on how to block the sun, to stop global warming.

 

[specsaregood]

Then why do pro sports teams use hyperbaric oxygen chambers to help injured athletes heal?

short term, but still less than 100% saturation.

Hyperbaric oxygen chambers have increased oxygen levels as well as increased pressure.
I'm sure that there is some level where oxygen is unsafe but it is VERY much higher than current atmospheric levels.

It doesn't need to be at pressures greater than 1ATM. Breathing pure o2 at 1ATM long enough will still cause all kinds of negative effects, especially to lungs and eyes.

 

[Superfluous Man]

Scientists and NASA must be FIRED from their jobs

True.

But that's unrelated to the OP.

 

[Superfluous Man]

The quibble I have with the OP is, is it really true that this finding is "in direct contradiction to the scare stories about carbon dioxide being relentlessly pushed by the climate change alarmists"?

Sure they have been saying that rising CO2 levels were harmful. But I don't think they've ever denied that they would be a boon for plant life. Have they?

 

[ATruepatriot]

The quibble I have with the OP is, is it really true that this finding is "in direct contradiction to the scare stories about carbon dioxide being relentlessly pushed by the climate change alarmists"?

Sure they have been saying that rising CO2 levels were harmful. But I don't think they've ever denied that they would be a boon for plant life. Have they?

The "green" narrative is a huge polar opposite misnomer in this case then. Because Co2 is definitely not "anti-green" as they are selling it to be.

 

[Superfluous Man]

The "green" narrative is a huge polar opposite misnomer in this case then. Because Co2 is definitely not "anti-green" as they are selling it to be.

Source for them selling CO2 as bad for plant life?

 

[ATruepatriot]

Source for them selling CO2 as bad for plant life?

Are you kidding me? Are you somewhere under a rock? lol

Just google "green" and see what you get. Probably 5 million articles about the green movement being about anti-CO2. 1+1=2...

 

[Superfluous Man]

Are you kidding me? Are you somewhere under a rock? lol

Just google "green" and see what you get. Probably 5 million articles about the green movement being about anti-CO2. 1+1=2...

Like I said already, yes, they do claim that rising CO2 levels are overall bad.

But within that larger claim, they also generally agree that rising CO2 levels, in and of themselves, are a boon to plant life. They just also claim that the benefits plants get from higher CO2 levels are made up for by other detrimental effects those same CO2 levels have.

No, I'm not kidding you and haven't been under a rock. And when I do a Google search for "climate scientists CO2 plant life" the top hits all confirm my understanding of their claims.

So, if you do have a source for your claim that climate scientists tend to say that CO2 is bad for plant life (which, if you just think about that for a second, it should be obvious that none would claim that), then by all means share it. The fact that you can't provide a source for that makes me think you don't have any.