Is Co2 really that bad.

All Porsche Macan Related Discussion
User avatar
Tim92gts
Posts: 624
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 6:01 pm
Location: Essex

Post by Tim92gts »

We've certainly got to the stage where temperature levels are severely restricting yields in UK.

Contrary to the Cornflake packet we need lots of light and cool in the run up to harvest, water helps too!
Tim
PP Turbo, LED PTV ACC Pano 20"Macans collected 6th September 2017
1992 928GTS
2003 996 Cab

Col Lamb
Posts: 9323
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2015 8:38 pm
Location: Lancashire

Post by Col Lamb »

Paul wrote: Sun Dec 30, 2018 11:24 am Not sure if anyone else actually read the article in full?

and, again, I'm not qualified, BUT I am confused by Col's firm convictions (above) and the contradictions (below)

Our best inference from various proxies back indicate that CO2 was higher for the first 4 billion years of Earth’s history than it has been since the Cambrian Period until today. I will focus on the past 540 million years since modern life forms evolved. It is glaringly obvious that temperature and CO2 are in an inverse correlation at least as often as they are in any semblance of correlation. Two clear examples of reverse correlation occurred 150 million years and 50 million years ago. At the end of the Jurassic temperature fell dramatically while CO2 spiked. During the Eocene Thermal Maximum, temperature was likely higher than any time in the past 550 million years while CO2 had been on a downward track for 100 million years. This evidence alone sufficient to warrant deep speculation of any claimed lock-step causal relationship between CO2 and temperature.

As to the article's author being a lobbyist, I wonder who benefits.......??
It is far from glaringly obvious.

During the period in question in the quote the Earth was in a far great state of flux and change than are the natural Earth processes of today or in fact those of the last few million years.

Since the ending of the dynosaur age with the asteroid impact off what is now Mexico the Earth eventually stabilised and has been cycling through less extreme development stages with peaks and troughs in weather and atmospheric conditions. There was a balance in the physical processes that occured in and on the planet.

We no longer have those same natural balances controlling the atmosphere and hence weather and as those with influence continually fail to agree on what is happening it is the impact man is having on the Earth that is of question and the fact that a scientist spouts rhetoric about this or that happening in the past is irrelevant.

For every argument, there is a counter argument, the scientists and politicians fail to effectively agree a way forward.

The state that the Earth will be in in the future has to be unknown as it has not been subjected to the impact of a single species before so any scientific argument of its state will be an unknown and unproven entity.
Col
Macan Turbo
Air, 20” wheels, ACC, Pano, SurCam, 14w, LEDs, PS+, Int Light Pack, Heated seats and Steering, spare wheel, SC, Privacy glass, PDK gear, SD mirrors, Met Black, rear airbags
johnd
Posts: 666
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2014 10:23 pm

Post by johnd »

Your favourite skeptic myth is debunked here:

https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php
Macan SD (Rhodium) www.porsche-code.com/PH4H6XU3 June 2016

Real mpg at Fuelly
Dandock
Posts: 4096
Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2015 7:29 pm

Post by Dandock »

And for an alternative perspective...

VG Petrol S http://www.porsche-code.com/PHIVCQU7           And a GT3 RS... by Lego! Not crash-tested! 😀
User avatar
VanB
Posts: 3730
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2016 6:58 pm

Post by VanB »

Personally I think that the exponential growth of the human race, which is the equivalent of a planetary virus, is the single biggest threat to the future of the planet. That is before factoring in the use of planetary resources made by humans
Current - 991.2 GTS C4 GT Silver
Previous: Macan GTS Night Blue
Previous: 981 Cayman S Agate
User avatar
Paul
Posts: 8603
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2014 6:19 pm
Location: Bristol
Contact:

Post by Paul »

^^^
Controversial, but an opinion I share wholeheartedly; modern medicine has a lot to answer for.....
1st Sapphire SD
2nd Sapphire GTS
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=4296
Current 992 S Cab
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=9845&p=196465#p196465
JBA
Posts: 286
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2017 6:19 pm

Post by JBA »

johnd wrote: Sun Dec 30, 2018 4:09 pm Your favourite skeptic myth is debunked here:

https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php
But to add to confusion and debunk the skeptic debunkers :
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018 ... mate-doom/
Macan GTS Mark 1 - bought new 2017 and sold 2024
Macan GTS Mark 3 - bought new 2024
JBA
Posts: 286
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2017 6:19 pm

Post by JBA »

And just when we thought the rights or wrongs of curbing man made CO2 emissions couldn't get any more confusing:
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018 ... able-data/
Macan GTS Mark 1 - bought new 2017 and sold 2024
Macan GTS Mark 3 - bought new 2024
User avatar
Tim92gts
Posts: 624
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 6:01 pm
Location: Essex

Post by Tim92gts »

The combination of Breitbart and Delingpole was never destined to provide any degree of impartial news.
Tim
PP Turbo, LED PTV ACC Pano 20"Macans collected 6th September 2017
1992 928GTS
2003 996 Cab
Deleted User 1874

Post by Deleted User 1874 »

Paul wrote: Sat Dec 29, 2018 8:34 pm Ineresting counter-argument!

The problem is, there are as many arguments for as there are against, and scientists (on both sides) can proove almost anything because the majority of us do not fully understand. Pop in a couple of political, hidden agendas and a few vetsed interests and the waters become even muddier!
I agree with this ^ But in this particular debate there appear to be a LOT more reputable peer reviewed scientists on the CO2 is negative side. This guy is obviously sitting at the extreme end of the pro fossil burning brigade and his Wiki page suggests he has some "history" with Greenpeace and the nuclear industry. At some point he appeared to make a full 180 degree turn in his views, which is a bit suspicious.

Also from his Wiki page. "Moore has earned his living since the early 1990s primarily by consulting for, and publicly speaking for, a wide variety of corporations and lobby groups". He appears to be more of a lobbyist mouthpiece than a working scientist and probably earns a lot more money in that capacity!

I'm certainly no expert, but I've long held the belief than mankind is currently inflicting a pretty severe ecological test on our planet that no other species has ever remotely approached. All in the last hundred years too, which is totally unprecedented outside of apocalyptic events such as meteor strikes and super volcano eruptions. I really can't see any sustainable future for our current consumption and environmental pollution, so reducing it in any way we can seems like the sensible approach.

Specifically regarding CO2, I don't see how artificially increasing global levels over a very short time scale can be viewed as a positive thing without some serious guarantees that it isn't harmful. Using the argument that natural CO2 levels fluctuate regardless is not much consolation when you look at the past history of our planet, where there are plenty of millennia that would not support our current lifestyles. Basically any sudden climate change is typically very bad news for the predominant species of the age.
Last edited by Deleted User 1874 on Mon Dec 31, 2018 12:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply