CO2 levels at the highest level in Earth's history

by Andy Mon May 13, 2019 9:46 pm

First topic message reminder :

And yet there are still some dumb fuckers like Skunk Stenchbandit and Monkey brain who deny it.

https://mol.im/a/7024057

by The Devil, You Know Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:28 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:
The Devil, You Know wrote:
if you dont like oil companies get rid of all your electrical appliances, the internet, your cars, stop working in offices and go and live in a mud hut off the land.

Certainly you should throw that ipad away, made in china, a massive polluter.

Here we go again ... just because it's not currently possible to live a totally carbon-free lifestyle in today's world, if you say we should reduce pollution and CO2 emissions, you're somehow a hypocrite.

it's the greens desire that we live in a pre industrial world, well apart from them of course. Despite what we hear, the majority of energy is derived from oil, gas, nuclear and coal. Yes the uk went a while 2 weeks without input from coal fired stations recently, they dont switch the stations off while they do that though. And it certainly wasn't all generated by wind and solar in that time. IF you want low carbon energy invest in nuclear.

by Ben Reilly Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:32 pm

The Devil, You Know wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:
The Devil, You Know wrote:
if you dont like oil companies get rid of all your electrical appliances, the internet, your cars, stop working in offices and go and live in a mud hut off the land.

Certainly you should throw that ipad away, made in china, a massive polluter.

Here we go again ... just because it's not currently possible to live a totally carbon-free lifestyle in today's world, if you say we should reduce pollution and CO2 emissions, you're somehow a hypocrite.
it's the greens desire that we live in a pre industrial world, well apart form them of course. Despite what we hear, the majority of energy is derived from oil, gas, nuclear and coal. Yes the uk went a while 2 weeks without input from coal fired stations recently, they dont switch the stations off while they do that though. And it certainly wasn't all generated by wind and solar in that time. IF you want low carbon energy invest in nuclear.

Common, bullshit criticism of the green movement. Sweden, one of the most liberal countries in the world, is certainly advanced and high-tech -- and manages to generate tons of energy from other countries' trash.

Texas is one of the world's leaders in wind energy -- it's estimated it could conceivably power the whole of the U.S. if its potential were fully tapped.

Clean energy is not a pipe dream, and we don't need to keep chasing increasingly elusive fossil fuel reserves to keep living like modern-day people.

I do agree with you on nuclear energy, though -- that could and should pick up much of the burden as solar, wind, etc. are ramped up.

by eddie Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:56 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:
eddie wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:
eddie wrote:I’m not sure anyone should make a profit out of climate change.
It sounds shady to me.

Better to make a profit from fighting it than to make a profit from causing it.

Still sounds shady to me.

If, motivated by my hatred of violence against women, I started a company that sells self-defense products for women, and made money from it, would that be shady?

I’d say you found a good business idea and made yourself rich out of it.
Just like Al Gore did.

by Ben Reilly Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:00 pm

eddie wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:
eddie wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:
eddie wrote:I’m not sure anyone should make a profit out of climate change.
It sounds shady to me.

Better to make a profit from fighting it than to make a profit from causing it.

Still sounds shady to me.

If, motivated by my hatred of violence against women, I started a company that sells self-defense products for women, and made money from it, would that be shady?

I’d say you found a good business idea and made yourself rich out of it.
Just like Al Gore did.

Exactly. Lots of companies do good in the world and make money doing it, and I don't see why that should be seen as a bad thing. If anything, it's a great thing.

by eddie Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:16 pm

I know I’d have far more respect and belief for anyone who was stinking rich to be doing something great for the greater good of people and not for profit.
Big fat profit, at that.

He’s not breaking even...he’s making a profit.
It’s profit-making all wrapped up in “goodness”.

That’s shady.

by Ben Reilly Thu Jun 13, 2019 12:17 am

eddie wrote:I know I’d have far more respect and belief for anyone who was stinking rich to be doing something great for the greater good of people and not for profit.
Big fat profit, at that.

He’s not breaking even...he’s making a profit.
It’s profit-making all wrapped up in “goodness”.

That’s shady.

Well, he said he gives it all to a non-profit environmentalist group. I imagine that could easily be checked.

I still think if he's investing in a green company, he deserves whatever he earns out of it. Nobody seems to get singled out when they make big profits off companies that are destructive, at least not the way they howl about Al Gore.

Nobody seems to think there's anything wrong with people who will make money from Brexit promoting Brexit, for example. There's no reason that someone investing in, and earning money from, something that will help humanity, should feel ashamed.

To me, it's the same thing as saying that companies that make really healthy food shouldn't earn profits from it.

by 'Wolfie Thu Jun 13, 2019 1:11 am

Those "Big Oil and Mining" companies have been following in the footsteps of the Tobacco companies before them...

Flooding the media with disinformation; buying their way onto the boards of big television and newspaper corporations; buying virtual 'control' of major political parties in the USA, Britain, Russia, Brazil, India, Australia, Canada, South Africa, Venezuela..

And they find a ready supply of clueless fuckwits out there to peddle their propaganda and 'disinformation' for free -- as seen in many of the parroted posts and false claims DYK, Smelly' and Tommy on here.

Former politician Al Gore makes a few $$million$$ out of a couple of movies and books, and in the process spreads awareness of increasing problems, while helping environmental groups raise $$hundreds of millions$$ for their education and fighting funds.

And all the while DYKbrain just keeps on spreading his corporatist lies while claiming they're gospel -- and the only sources he finds are far-right-wing gutter press stories peddling corporate lies as "news" when they should have been identified as the paid advertising that they are..

Tobacco was one of the leading "avoidable" causes of death and illness across the 19th and 20th centuries; the mining and oil companies made $$trillions$$ of dollars while fucking over millions of lives, doing untold environmental damage, even overturning the governance of whole countries in the process; and today the plastics and agribusiness/big pharma' companies are doing the same..

And all that we see from the denialists and corporatists are their attacks against the protesters, activists and victims, with regular 'greenwashing' efforts in support of their corporatist masters..

by Guest Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:11 pm

Vintage wrote:Volcanoes emissions of CO2 have been measured and even dormant ones emit CO2 all the time, its now estimated that at least a quarter of a billion tons of the gas comes from volcanoes, the previous estimate was 300 tons.

Actually the above proves further the extenct of human causes on climate change.
Not only is the above wrong and at no point did any climate scientist claim 300 tonnes. I guess you must have got this from the beano, but latest studies have shown on one dormant Volcano. In Iceland, that CO2 levels are between treble and several times higher. Its just one Volcano and based on this and other volcanos also dormant. With taking into consideration many other factors. It could be the case that Volcanoes are spewing between half a billion and 2 billion CO2 into the atmosphere.

What is really insignificant about your point. Is ignoring the fact that in 2015, 40 billion tonnes of Co2 was pumped into the air by humans. Year on year this is happenning and you saw fit to make such an irrelevant point on actually knowing the data? To the point that Tommy, thought you made a gotcha moment?

I would say what is embarressing here, is the pair of you being ignorant of the levels of CO2 that humans are creating

by Vintage Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:30 pm

Actually I didn't get it from the Beano you arrogant person. If something reported are you afraid you might be found wanting perhaps. I know you claim you do but you don't know everything. You must be incredibly needy to have to bull yourself up by 'talking' to people as you do.
The estimate was from 33 of the known 500 volcanoes, a drop in the ocean as we don't know just how many volcanoes there are, so in fact we don't know how much CO2 and other greenhouse gases are being released, it could be much more considering how many we probably haven't discovered yet.
I could well be wrong in my information, I freely acknowledge that but I'm not so arrogant as to use terms that you do to people I disagree with.

by Andy Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:31 pm

Welcome back Didge. Hope you feeling good.

by Guest Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:35 pm

Andy wrote:Welcome back Didge. Hope you feeling good.

Thanks Andy, I am very good mate, just disappointed that some people cannot compare half a billion tonnes to 40 billion tonnes and what effect this may have on our climate.

by Guest Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:42 pm

Vintage wrote:Actually I didn't get it from the Beano you arrogant person. If something reported are you afraid you might be found wanting perhaps. I know you claim you do but you don't know everything. You must be incredibly needy to have to bull yourself up by 'talking' to people as you do.
The estimate was from 33 of the known 500 volcanoes, a drop in the ocean as we don't know just how many volcanoes there are, so in fact we don't know how much CO2 and other greenhouse gases are being released, it could be much more considering how many we probably haven't discovered yet.
I could well be wrong in my information, I freely acknowledge that but I'm not so arrogant as to use terms that you do to people I disagree with.

So where di you get the claim climate scientist stated that only 300 tonnes was ommitted by volcanoes?
Hence did any such data come from any study or peer reviewed paper?

No

Did you actually get this from some bullshit unscientific site?

Yes

No climate scientist in the modern era has ever claimed, that all the world volcanoes spew out only 300 tonnes

The point on your ignorance is on comparability. Being the fact you thought, a quarter of a billion tonnes was significant. Ignoring the level humans produce. That was the utterly ignorant part and even more when Tommy thought your post dispelled climate change evidence. The fact you never challenged him, based off your views, shows a massive ignorance on your part. You may not like this, but I dont like people spouting crap, as you did. Never presenting the full pictuire. That means you were either ignoirant of the facts or utterly dishonest. So which was it?

by Guest Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:57 pm

Oh and honesty at least I produced a far higher estimate of volcanoes on CO2, with my higher esitmate of 2 billion tonnes. You see Vintage I do read the science on this and we can only go off this higher estimate based on one volcano in Iceland, that has higher co2. The point is, even taking this into account and applying the same maths, its still no where near what humans pollute the atmosphere with.

Hence do you not see how poor your point was, to then Tommy thinking it was even significant? Hence there is nothi9ng worse when someone leads with a false point. 300 tonnes, then claims a quarter of a billion. Even too low in my estimate. Ignoring that humans pump out 40 billion tonnes. So why did you leave out this information?

by Tommy Monk Fri Jun 14, 2019 12:29 am

CO2 is a natural gas, and a natural part of our planets atmosphere...!

And it is still around 0.04% of our atmosphere... which is about the same as it has been for hundreds/thousands/millions of years...!!!

Plants love CO2!!!

"...Carbon dioxide is essential to the process of photosynthesis. Most plants grown indoors require a minimum CO2 concentration of 330..."

"...CO2 concentration in ambient air ranges from 300-500 parts per million (ppm), with a global atmospheric average of about 400 ppm. If you aregrowing in a greenhouse or indoors, the CO2 levelswill be reduced as theplants use it up during photosynthesis..."

by Guest Fri Jun 14, 2019 1:06 am

Tommy Monk wrote:

CO2 is a natural gas, and a natural part of our planets atmosphere...!

And it is still around 0.04% of our atmosphere... which is about the same as it has been for hundreds/thousands/millions of years...!!!

Plants love CO2!!!

"...Carbon dioxide is essential to the process of photosynthesis. Most plants grown indoors require a minimum CO2 concentration of 330..."

"...CO2 concentration in ambient air ranges from 300-500 parts per million (ppm), with a global atmospheric average of about 400 ppm. If you aregrowing in a greenhouse or indoors, the CO2 levelswill be reduced as theplants use it up during photosynthesis..."

Just stop being an ignorant twat for once in your life andf learn some basic science, please.

You are a fucking embarressment

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/greenhouse-gases/

https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

by 'Wolfie Fri Jun 14, 2019 2:16 am

Vintage wrote:
Actually I didn't get it from the Beano you arrogant person. If something reported are you afraid you might be found wanting perhaps. I know you claim you do but you don't know everything. You must be incredibly needy to have to bull yourself up by 'talking' to people as you do.
The estimate was from 33 of the known 500 volcanoes, a drop in the ocean as we don't know just how many volcanoes there are, so in fact we don't know how much CO2 and other greenhouse gases are being released, it could be much more considering how many we probably haven't discovered yet.
I could well be wrong in my information, I freely acknowledge that but I'm not so arrogant as to use terms that you do to people I disagree with.

Not only are you an arrogant and ignorant twat, vintage...

But you keep on proving yourself to be one of the most stupid and undereducated dolts on here..

Your total ignorance about anything scientific manifests itself whenever you give us any of your ludicrous opinions on this subject.

by Tommy Monk Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:41 pm

phildidge wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

CO2 is a natural gas, and a natural part of our planets atmosphere...!

And it is still around 0.04% of our atmosphere... which is about the same as it has been for hundreds/thousands/millions of years...!!!

Plants love CO2!!!

"...Carbon dioxide is essential to the process of photosynthesis. Most plants grown indoors require a minimum CO2 concentration of 330..."

"...CO2 concentration in ambient air ranges from 300-500 parts per million (ppm), with a global atmospheric average of about 400 ppm. If you aregrowing in a greenhouse or indoors, the CO2 levelswill be reduced as theplants use it up during photosynthesis..."

Just stop being an ignorant twat for once in your life andf learn some basic science, please.

You are a fucking embarressment

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/greenhouse-gases/

https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

Can you please point out what bit/s of my post that you think is wrong...!!!???

Laughing

by Guest Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:43 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

Great post vintage!!!

The real inconvenient truth...!

Wrong here, as I proved vintage was wrong

by Guest Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:43 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:Somebody put a thread up a couple weeks ago that CO2 levels had been measured somewhere that were the highest ever recorded...

You know where this 'measuring station' was...?

On top of a volcano in Hawaii...!!!

And it was that idiot Andy... and it was this thread!!!

Wrong here again

by Guest Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:47 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
phildidge wrote:

Just stop being an ignorant twat for once in your life andf learn some basic science, please.

You are a fucking embarressment

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/greenhouse-gases/

https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

Can you please point out what bit/s of my post that you think is wrong...!!!???

How about how more people have asthma based on pollution from how mucyh CO2 we are chucking ionto the atmospherer?

You went off vintage on this and then I correct this and then you post views supporting this and then ask me to challenging the post above?

I dont need to, you thought you had a gotcha moment, thinking Vintage looked smart. I have respect for Vintage and can accept she was dupped with lies, but you have no excuse mate. You simple are that stupid.

Laughing

by Tommy Monk Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:47 pm

phildidge wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

CO2 is a natural gas, and a natural part of our planets atmosphere...!

And it is still around 0.04% of our atmosphere... which is about the same as it has been for hundreds/thousands/millions of years...!!!

Plants love CO2!!!

"...Carbon dioxide is essential to the process of photosynthesis. Most plants grown indoors require a minimum CO2 concentration of 330..."

"...CO2 concentration in ambient air ranges from 300-500 parts per million (ppm), with a global atmospheric average of about 400 ppm. If you aregrowing in a greenhouse or indoors, the CO2 levelswill be reduced as theplants use it up during photosynthesis..."

Just stop being an ignorant twat for once in your life andf learn some basic science, please.

You are a fucking embarressment

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/greenhouse-gases/

https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

I was talking about this post quoted above...

But if you are going to drag my other posts up now and say they are wrong too, then maybe you could highlight the bit/s you think are wrong, and why...!!!???

by eddie Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:50 pm

Tommy, I want to put something to you:

If someone sprays an aerosol in a room, like a whole can, don’t you think you’d cough your guts up? Would it not irritate your lungs?

The answer is yes.

So how can all these aerosols, for example, NOT affect the atmosphere and therefore the weather?

by Ben Reilly Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:53 pm

Tommy, everybody you're arguing with already knows that CO2 is natural and that plants need it to survive, for fuck's sake.

I even know that the Earth would be uninhabitable without enough CO2; did you?

CO2 levels are on the rise because we're putting it into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels. That is making the planet heat up very quickly. We therefore need to switch to sources of energy that don't put CO2 into the air, and there are plenty of them.

Notice I didn't say anything about going without electricity or cars. We don't have to do any of that. We simply need the companies that provide our electricity and petrol to change their ways, which they have more than enough money to do.

by Guest Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:53 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
phildidge wrote:

Just stop being an ignorant twat for once in your life andf learn some basic science, please.

You are a fucking embarressment

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/greenhouse-gases/

https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

I was talking about this post quoted above...

But if you are going to drag my other posts up now and say they are wrong too, then maybe you could highlight the bit/s you think are wrong, and why...!!!???

So you admit you were wrong in the other posts then?

Yes or no?

That is what I am going off on, and you congratulated her on her wrong and poor views

by eddie Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:56 pm

eddie wrote:Tommy, I want to put something to you:

If someone sprays an aerosol in a room, like a whole can, don’t you think you’d cough your guts up? Would it not irritate your lungs?

The answer is yes.

So how can all these aerosols, for example, NOT affect the atmosphere and therefore the weather?

For Tommy.

by Tommy Monk Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:34 pm

If someone let's off a CO2 fire extinguisher in the room... it wouldn't make you cough... and the room wouldn't get warmer...

However... if you had a TV on in a room, and a light on, and maybe a games console and/or a laptop/PC... the room would definitely be much warmer than it had of been if you did not have these heat emitting electrical devices on...

Maybe your question should be asking where all the heat from all the heat emitting electrical devices goes, and heat from all the fuel burning engines/electric motors goes, and all the heat from all the water we warm up (to bath/shower in etc) goes...?

Surely if a couple of things being on can warm a room up a bit... in what way do you think all of this collective heat might be affecting the atmosphere...?

by eddie Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:39 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

If someone let's off a CO2 fire extinguisher in the room... it wouldn't make you cough... and the room wouldn't get warmer...

However... if you had a TV on in a room, and a light on, and maybe a games console and/or a laptop/PC... the room would definitely be much warmer than it had of been if you did not have these heat emitting electrical devices on...

Maybe your question should be asking where all the heat from all the heat emitting electrical devices goes, and heat from all the fuel burning engines/electric motors goes, and all the heat from all the water we warm up (to bath/shower in etc) goes...?

Surely if a couple of things being on can warm a room up a bit... in what way do you think all of this collective heat might be affecting the atmosphere...?

That isn’t what I asked.
This is:

eddie wrote:
Tommy, I want to put something to you:

If someone sprays an aerosol in a room, like a whole can, don’t you think you’d cough your guts up? Would it not irritate your lungs?

The answer is yes.

So how can all these aerosols, for example, NOT affect the atmosphere and therefore the weather?

by Guest Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:41 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

If someone let's off a CO2 fire extinguisher in the room... it wouldn't make you cough... and the room wouldn't get warmer...

However... if you had a TV on in a room, and a light on, and maybe a games console and/or a laptop/PC... the room would definitely be much warmer than it had of been if you did not have these heat emitting electrical devices on...

Maybe your question should be asking where all the heat from all the heat emitting electrical devices goes, and heat from all the fuel burning engines/electric motors goes, and all the heat from all the water we warm up (to bath/shower in etc) goes...?

Surely if a couple of things being on can warm a room up a bit... in what way do you think all of this collective heat might be affecting the atmosphere...?

And Tommy wonders why I trhink he is thick

Explain to me, how the number of people has arisen that suffer asthma?

How they suffer on high CO2 days?

by Tommy Monk Sat Jun 15, 2019 12:18 am

Eddie... i would suggest that the part of the aerosol that would cause me to cough, would not be the pressurised gas... but the other shit in the can, that the gas is in there to enable the shit to be sprayed out...!

Only the gas would completely disperse and diffuse into the wider atmosphere... while i would think that the other particles would eventually fall to ground as they would be heavier than air, and gravity would prevail over them all...

So... as it is not the gas that makes the cough, but the shit that the gas is spraying out that causes the cough... and as the shit ends up falling to ground anyway, not staying up in the air... then I think your question is a little bit silly...

Try reading my previous post a little more... and think about it...!

One more thing... didge... I think you need to wind your neck in a little... and try looking up some of the things that are known to trigger asthma attacks...!

lol!

by Guest Sat Jun 15, 2019 5:36 am

Tommy Monk wrote:

One more thing... didge... I think you need to wind your neck in a little... and try looking up some of the things that are known to trigger asthma attacks...!

How dimwitted can you get. When we are n ot going on about the other triggers known to effect asthma sufferers. But CO2, doh. Yes I am effected by dust mite, cat hair etc, but this is about how pollution has caused an increase in many asthman sufferers, you simple minded buffoon. So the problem here, is trying to educate someone dim witted such as yourself on said issues, mainly as you have the intellect of a toddler and also, you have been brainwashed.

https://www.asthma.org.uk/advice/triggers/pollution/

by Tommy Monk Sat Jun 15, 2019 2:09 pm

phildidge wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

One more thing... didge... I think you need to wind your neck in a little... and try looking up some of the things that are known to trigger asthma attacks...!

How dimwitted can you get. When we are n ot going on about the other triggers known to effect asthma sufferers. But CO2, doh. Yes I am effected by dust mite, cat hair etc, but this is about how pollution has caused an increase in many asthman sufferers, you simple minded buffoon. So the problem here, is trying to educate someone dim witted such as yourself on said issues, mainly as you have the intellect of a toddler and also, you have been brainwashed.

https://www.asthma.org.uk/advice/triggers/pollution/

Nothing to do with co2 you bellend!!!

Maybe you can show us all the bit in your link that says what you claim about CO2...!?

lol!

by Guest Sat Jun 15, 2019 2:14 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:Nothing to do with co2 you bellend!!!

Really, you think the rise of asthma has nothing to do with CO2 and you call me a bellend

The best thing you can do is actually go back to school , you fucking idiot

by Tommy Monk Sat Jun 15, 2019 2:15 pm

Nothing to do with co2 you bellend!!!

Maybe you can show us all the bit in your link that says what you claim about CO2...!?

by Guest Sat Jun 15, 2019 2:16 pm

Just to show why people need to understand why Tommy is a completa and utter wank stain.

https://www.webmd.com/asthma/news/20040429/high-carbon-dioxide-levels-may-up-asthma-rate

by Guest Sat Jun 15, 2019 2:18 pm

Trends in the incidence of childhood asthma worldwide have paralleled the sharp increase in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, over at least the last two decades. The prevalence of asthma in the United States has quadrupled over the last 20 years in part due to climate-related factors. In a report released by Harvard Medical School and the Center for Health and the Global Environment, it was noted that there was an increase in asthma incidence of 160% from 1980–1994 among preschool children. This observation was linked to the global rise in CO2 emissions, which in turn affects respiratory exposure to a variety of atmospheric pollens, mold, and fungi.1,2 While asthma is associated with genetic predisposition, the changing environment and air pollution are major contributory factors in the pathogenesis of the disease, and may help explain the rapid change in the incidence of asthma over the last few decades.3 Even though the actual amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is minute, greenhouse gases are very effective in forming a blanket that prevents heat from escaping the earth’s atmosphere.4

Dr Charles Keeling’s research laboratory at Mauna Loa on the Big Island of Hawaii records the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, adjusted annually for seasonal variations. Analysis of ancient air bubbles trapped by glaciers reveals that the amount of CO2 consistently varied between 200 to 300 parts per million (ppm) for over 80,000 years.4

Since 1960, for the first time in the known history of the earth, CO2 emissions exceeded 300 ppm. In 1980, the levels approached 350 ppm, and have been increasing relatively rapidly ever since, according to the Keeling curve. In turn, global temperatures fluctuate in a pattern that is closely associated with the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.4

Fossil fuels and deforestation: the major anthropogenic sources of CO2
Carbon dioxide emissions derive primarily from burning fossil fuel. Approximately 75% of all CO2 emissions during the last 20 years resulted from the burning of fossil fuels and the rest from deforestation.5 CO2 is described as the most important greenhouse gas by some authors and has high inertia, and long residence in the atmosphere.5 Two of the largest sources of CO2 emissions have been China and Brazil. China, from 1990–2009, tripled the use of fossil fuel used in its economic development from approximately 10 to 30 tons burned per year.4 The use of solid biomass fuel as an energy source is especially prevalent in rural and non-Westernized societies. The use of wood and coal fuel releases a number of respiratory toxins, including CO2, which may provoke

bronchospasm.2,3https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3196488/

Hence why everyone should laugh at that racist pice of shit tommy for the idiot he is. As Tommy is not only a danger to society with his views, he is a complete twat and fucking ignorant

by Tommy Monk Sat Jun 15, 2019 2:22 pm

Don't talk shite... it will be due to the increase in other things that ARE triggers to asthma... like exhaust fumes and pollen etc...

Not co2 you bell end!!!

by Guest Sat Jun 15, 2019 2:23 pm

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/research/newsalert/pdf/292na5_en.pdf

https://waojournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40413-017-0142-7

Furthing proving Tommy is an ignorant twat

by Tommy Monk Sat Jun 15, 2019 2:25 pm

Oh... and that was a different link than the one I asked about...

And now you post 2 other different links...

by Guest Sat Jun 15, 2019 2:28 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:Oh... and that was a different link than the one I asked about...

And now you post 2 other different links...

Which proves you are an idiot, where i know my illness better than you and what effects my condition, It gets worse with higher levels of Co2 you idiot. That is just basic common sense and why cities where there is highjer levels are more promlematic to asthma suffers, you funking dim witted fuckwit

How about you actuallt study the science on this, you utter fucking retard

by Tommy Monk Sat Jun 15, 2019 2:36 pm

From a historical perspective, an atmospheric CO2 concentration of 400 ppm is actually almost scraping the bottom of the barrel. Over the Earth’s history, atmospheric CO2 concentrations have ranged from 180 ppm to 7000 ppm, see Figure 1 below. On that scale we are in fact today barely above the Earth’s record lows.

That 400 ppm is actually dangerously low is a fact the alarmists keep avoiding and suppressing. Below 150 ppm, plant-life dies off on a massive scale. The Earth actually came very close to that point many times over the last 2 million years during the ice ages. At the bottom of the last ice age just 20,000 years ago, life on the planet literally teetered on the brink when CO2 fell to a level of just 180 ppm. Do we really want to live on the brink of extinction.

by Tommy Monk Sat Jun 15, 2019 2:37 pm

Didge you bellend... asthma is triggered by particles of pollutants... not the natural gas CO2...

In big towns and cities there are more vehicles and more exhaust fumes and PM10s PM5s etc... more diesel fumes and nitrogen dioxides... hence higher asthma risks...

by Guest Sat Jun 15, 2019 2:40 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

Didge you blend... asthma is triggered by particles of pollutants... not the natural gas CO2...

,

I just proved you are a lying twat and you still persist in being a lying twat

Fuck off

by Tommy Monk Sat Jun 15, 2019 2:54 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:Didge you bellend... asthma is triggered by particles of pollutants... not the natural gas CO2...

In big towns and cities there are more vehicles and more exhaust fumes and PM10s PM5s etc... more diesel fumes and nitrogen dioxides... hence higher asthma risks...

by Guest Sat Jun 15, 2019 2:57 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:Didge you bellend... asthma is triggered by particles of pollutants... not the natural gas CO2...

In big towns and cities there are more vehicles and more exhaust fumes and PM10s PM5s etc... more diesel fumes and nitrogen dioxides... hence higher asthma risks...

Wow again Dr Tommy trying to explain to me things he is ignorant on. So explain to me, why in summer with higher levels of CO2, my asthma is worse. I am not allergic to pollen you retard?

by Tommy Monk Sat Jun 15, 2019 4:20 pm

You don't have to be allergic to pollen for it to be a trigger of asthma attack...

by Guest Sat Jun 15, 2019 4:21 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:You don't have to be allergic to pollen for it to be a trigger of asthma attack...

Missing the point yet again by the forum clown. Nobody is denying there is other triggers for asthma.

Now read back and answer the previous question I posed to you, fuckwit?

by nicko Sat Jun 15, 2019 4:43 pm

For fuck sake why do you and a certain other poster keep insulting people, I for one am sick of it . It shows a certain frustration in life, stop it, it brings you down and your better than that !

by Guest Sat Jun 15, 2019 5:32 pm

nicko wrote:For fuck sake why do you and a certain other poster keep insulting people, I for one am sick of it . It shows a certain frustration in life, stop it, it brings you down and your better than that !

Does that not make you the same by the above?

Opps?

You constantly bitch and slag me off, so you are not fooling anyone

by Tommy Monk Sat Jun 15, 2019 5:38 pm

phildidge wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

Wow again Dr Tommy trying to explain to me things he is ignorant on. So explain to me, why in summer with higher levels of CO2, my asthma is worse. I am not allergic to pollen you retard?

Didge... you really need to check the facts about things before you post stupid claims about them... it would help you to not make yourself look so stupid all the time!!!

"...There's more carbon dioxide in the winter and a bit less in the summer. That's the collective breathing of all the plants in the Northern Hemisphere. "Plants are accumulating carbon in the spring and summer when they're active, and they're releasing carbon back to the air in the fall and winter,"..."

lol!

Now... I will wait for an apology from didge...

Laughing

by Raggamuffin Sat Jun 15, 2019 5:42 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
phildidge wrote:

Wow again Dr Tommy trying to explain to me things he is ignorant on. So explain to me, why in summer with higher levels of CO2, my asthma is worse. I am not allergic to pollen you retard?

Didge... you really need to check the facts about things before you post stupid claims about them... it would help you to not make yourself look so stupid all the time!!!

"...There's more carbon dioxide in the winter and a bit less in the summer. That's the collective breathing of all the plants in the Northern Hemisphere. "Plants are accumulating carbon in the spring and summer when they're active, and they're releasing carbon back to the air in the fall and winter,"..."

Now... I will wait for an apology from didge...

Oooh yes, I just read that myself.

by Sponsored content