 | Forum Threads |  |
| Random Photo | |
| Member Poll | |
|
| Comments |
on December 08 2009 12:52:24
So no reason to save on CO2
Open the windows, turn up the heat.
Lets us save some bird and flower.
hmmmm |
on December 10 2009 16:39:33
Am I missing something or is this what Norlander has been arguing for years?
A paper is quoted to support the claim that CO2 emissions are bad for the environment, yet this is stated in the paper:
"Defining what is dangerous anthropogenic interference
with the climate system and, consequently, the limits to be
set for policy purposes are complex tasks that can only be
partially based on science, as such definitions inherently
involve normative judegments. "
"There is little consensus as to
what constitutes anthropogenic interference with the climate
system and, thereby, on how to operationalize Article 2 (high
agreement, much evidence)."
So basically, how much greenhouse effect is desirable has not been decided. Just because an argument comes from greedy oil barons doesn't automatically mean it is invalid. |
on December 10 2009 17:04:11
The greenhouse effect is what makes earth inhabitable, and CO2 is what plants (and therefore indirectly all of us) live of. It's where the carbon (C) in us carbon based-life forms comes from.
That being said, too much is still a bad thing. |
|
|
| Post Comment | |
Please Login to Post a Comment.
|
|
|
| Login | |
Forgotten your password? Request a new one here.
|
| | 
| Last Seen Users | |
| Obituaries | |
You must login to post a message.
|
| |
|
WTF
