Bloomberg Carbon Clock

No doubt a realtime feed from Mauna Loa. Was that page up in July? If so, it would be going down.

Carbon dioxide is now "pollution". Next they will call it "poison."

It's logical that we should set our CO2 goal to zero PPM. Who wants pollution? Think of the children!

--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   precision measurement  

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com 
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

Do not exhale...

Probably not. Most things are poisonous in large enough doses - ignorance comes to mind.

If John Larkin could do joined up logic, he'd be aware that with zero CO2 in the atmosphere, plants wouldn't grow - s he reminds us from time to time - and the air would be uncomfortably chilly.

Part of the prescription for an ice age is an atmospheric CO2 level of 180ppm.

But talking about rational logic and John Larkin in the same post is an exercise in futility.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

CO2 is plant food.

Plants reduce CO2, vegans eat plants. Vegans are evil.

-- Paul Hovnanian mailto: snipped-for-privacy@Hovnanian.com

------------------------------------------------------------------ Time is the best teacher; Unfortunately it kills all its students.

Agreed >:-} ...Jim Thompson

-- | James E.Thompson | mens | | Analog Innovations | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at

| 1962 | I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

I can't understand how people just don't understand that?

Doesn't that put us in a better position? The old saying is, you don't eat what is better you eat what they want you to. Bill's been conditioned far too long to understand that.

Jamie

Trivia: Ever wonder what the CO2 concentration is in a greenhouse? I did some digging and found that greenhouses run at CO2 concentration to 1000 ppm and higher: Soon, we won't need any greenhouses. Of course, the small amount of CO2 currently in such greenhouses probably will not have any effect on climate change.

--
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com 
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com 
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com 
Skype: JeffLiebermann     AE6KS    831-336-2558

What Paul Hovnanian has failed to notice is that non-vegans eat animals who have eaten even more plants, so non-vegans are even more evil.

Whereas Jamie has been conditioned to the point where where he consumes wha t the health food industry wants him to - including unpasteurised milk.

Since he can't do joined up logic, he fails to notice that he's a demonstra bly better example of the condition he decries than I am.

The fact that he ascribes my unwillingness to agree to his silly ideas to " conditioning" rather than seeing it as the consequence of a long campaign t o get me to think for myself, initiated by my parents and sustained by inde pendent reading ever since, is evidence of the kind of wishful non-thinking he goes in for.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

A totally black screen is "interesting"????

YES!! Do _not_ allow them to breathe; keep the CO2 at zero!!!

1000ppm is an OSHA standard.

But, wow theres a 50% increase in photosynthesis for 350-1000 ppm of CO2.

Means I'l be cutting the lawn and the hedges more often ;(

Cheers

But if we (carnivores) didn't eat those animals, they'd keep eating the plants.

And they'd keep farting as well (a wores greenhouse gas than CO2).

--
Paul Hovnanian     mailto:Paul@Hovnanian.com 
------------------------------------------------------------------ 
Ask not for whom the  tolls.

The concentration is given with 11 digits !

Realistically the CO2 measurements are more like 3 significant digits.

In addition, there is a large annual variation with a slowly increasing trend.

Even if that "clock" is trying to extrapolate that trend, I still do not understand, how they would get 11 significant digits.

Typical alarmist propaganda which causes scare when the 11th digit increases :-)

Like this?

--sp

--
Best regards,  
Spehro Pefhany 
Amazon link for AoE 3rd Edition:            http://tinyurl.com/ntrpwu8 
Microchip link for 2015 Masters in Phoenix: http://tinyurl.com/l7g2k48

The proposition that the herds of cattle and flocks of chickens we raise to turn into non-vegan dinners would still be there if there wasn't a market for non-vegan dinners is a trifle dumb, even for Paul Hovnanian.

Of course if you must eat meat, eat kangaroo - they don't belch very much methane at all.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Only if your lawns and hedges are as well watered and as well fed (with nitrates and phosphates) as plants in greenhouses.

Plants exposed to higher CO2 levels have fewer stomata, so they can get the same amount of CO2 (which is always available) while losing less water (which isn't).

Check the geological record ... fossilised leaves tell the story.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Come on Bill, I know you are smart enough to recognize irony.

The EPA used faulty logic to define CO2 as pollution.

Mr Larkin is pointing out the fallacy, if CO2 were really __pollution__ the goal should be 0 PPM.

and of course at 0 PPM we would all freeze.

Ergo CO2 is NOT pollution but rather as we all know is a natural and necessary part of the atmosphere.

Using the logic of the EPA ___EVERYTHING__ is pollution.

Tell me, by what logic is CO2 classified as pollution and water vapor is not?

Mark

not?

I used to have respect for the EPA, they did good work in the 70's and 80's and cleaned up real pollution problems.

But when they pushed the __legal__ system to have CO2 defined as pollution despite the fact that there is no scientific reasoning that could classify CO2 as pollution and not every other part of air, then I realized that the EPA has become a power hungry government bureaucracy.

Mark

Let's start the militant ZERO! movement. We accept nothing but a totally pollution-free atmosphere.