31 sats \ 12 replies \ @ek 29 Jun 2023 \ parent \ on: Should we do something about CO2? meta
Are you a plant?
"the relationship between the organism and the environment is transactional—the environment grows the organism, and the organism creates the environment. The organism turns the sun into light, but it requires an environment containing a sun in order to exist. It’s all one process. It isn’t that organisms came into this world by accident or chance—this world is the sort of environment that grows organisms. And it has been that way from the beginning. From the very first moment of the big bang—if that’s the way the whole thing started—organisms like you and me were involved."
- Quote by Alan Watts
reply
Thanks. That makes more sense.
But I think people who just say "more CO2 => more plants" are making it very easy for themselves.
reply
What about the people that say "More CO2 => More problems"
It seems that CO2 levels are up 100% over the last couple hundred years. I will let you be the judge of wether or not that has caused any problems. If you have concerns with wether or not CO2 will be up another 100% over the next couple hundred years, maybe it will. But its a slow process and there will be time for most people and most species to adapt if needed. But also it will not be possible for CO2 levels in the atmosphere to double every 200 years. Because the earth is pretty much a closed system. Sometimes the carbon is stored underground, sometimes its stored in the atmosphere, its a cycle.
Can even talk about how central banking and all this debt that is in the world has released epic amounts of CO2 that wouldnt have been possible otherwise. I mean, it leads to increased consumption, demand, etc. we are borrowing from the future to spend in the presents. Therefore human CO2 emissions are likely significantly increased, and will decrease in the future as the economy switches from consuming and spending to just paying off debt one way or the other.
Btw. does anyone want to discuss if the earth is growing or not?
reply
deleted by author
reply
Look up prehistoric co2 levels and mega fauna. The co2 cycle is natural and no amount of crying is going to stop it. The argument is over how much anti-human energy restriction green-freaks are able to damage humanity with in the process
reply
The co2 cycle is natural
So if we dig up coal or oil and burn it, that does not increase co2 levels? Or do you consider this to be a natural increase?
reply
Yes it does and it is natural. We are part of the earth
reply
Ok, I agree that we are part of the earth and thus also nature.
But at which point does something become not natural? Is a car burning fuel natural?
reply
That’s how I believe bro
reply
That’s how I believe bro
Okay, that's fine for me. I just want to understand your position.
But I realized this discussion about "natural or not natural" is not the point. When people say that the speed and extent at which our climate changes is "not natural", they actually want to say that human activity contributes the most to the current climate change.
Would you say human activity does not contribute the most to the current climate change?
reply
Did you ever do the class at school where you lay out a scale model of the solar system? Where the sun is basket ball and earth is a chik pea at the other side of the gymnasium. Obviously the sun, a giant chaos furnace contributes most.
reply
No we didn't but I was made aware of the proportions in other ways.
Obviously the sun, a giant chaos furnace contributes most.
Interesting take, I'll have to think about that, thanks!