Climate Change / Global Warming Discussion

[JRP3]

What if the earth is a closed-loop system?
High level lifeforms increase, solar energy capture increases, vegetation increases, feeds the increased population.

Facts: Increased CO2 makes plants grow too fast, they become weaker and more susceptible to disease and weather extremes and are less nutritious. Proven by research and experiment. They haven't had time to evolve to the rapidly changing conditions. Crops die we die.

 

[JRP3]

Remember when ‘the science’ said eggs are bad for you?

Egg consumption linked to higher risk of heart disease and death | National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)
"An NHLBI-funded study found that the higher the consumption of dietary cholesterol or eggs, the higher the incidence of cardiovascular disease, which includes heart disease and stroke, and death from any cause among U.S. adults."

Health Concerns With Eggs
"The fat and cholesterol found in eggs can harm heart health and lead to prostate cancer, colorectal cancer, and diabetes."

 

[mspohr]

Egg consumption linked to higher risk of heart disease and death | National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)
"An NHLBI-funded study found that the higher the consumption of dietary cholesterol or eggs, the higher the incidence of cardiovascular disease, which includes heart disease and stroke, and death from any cause among U.S. adults."

Health Concerns With Eggs
"The fat and cholesterol found in eggs can harm heart health and lead to prostate cancer, colorectal cancer, and diabetes."

High-protein diet study has bad news for heart patients
A new study out of the Washington University School of Medicine has found that while following a high-protein diet may have excellent benefits when it comes to weight loss, there’s also a major potential downside: an increased risk of heart attacks. The issue revolves around arterial plaque, particularly the unstable kind that can block off arteries.

 

[wjax]

Facts: Increased CO2 makes plants grow too fast, they become weaker and more susceptible to disease and weather extremes and are less nutritious. Proven by research and experiment. They haven't had time to evolve to the rapidly changing conditions. Crops die we die.

So greenhouse operators pump CO2 into their buildings so that their plants will become weaker and die sooner? I think not. This is typical of the kind of junk science that gets tossed around in eco-alarmist threads like this, unfortunately.

 

[CrayZ1]

The average temps on Earth changed 2-6°C in just a few decades. Recently? Geologically yes, that would be 12,000 years ago.

 

[mspohr]

So greenhouse operators pump CO2 into their buildings so that their plants will become weaker and die sooner? I think not.

Short term gain for the greedy.

 

[CrayZ1]

1800 ppm for wheat is the best. Obviously not cost effective, but the majority of plants increase mass at elevated levels. So far, there has been none tested that declined in mass.

So at the DNA level, our plant life was engineered for higher CO2 levels. CO2 level increases should make vegans happy.

Note: The most eco-friendly high density fuel is algae biodiesel. It even operates jet fighters according to the DoD. However, it is scorned much like nuclear energy by those who lack pragmatism.

 

[Swampgator]

Hooray! The most intellectually dishonest argument that can be made. Make a list of the correct scientific achievements through history and line them up side by side. Then let’s talk about whether wild guesses are more accurate than science.

Cherry picking a few bad examples merely emphasizes how weak your argument is, and points out an inability to defend your position on the science.

No. I posted that to show the lunacy of claims from climate alarmists that the "science is settled". And that anyone who disagrees is a "denier."
Just having a little fun at your expense

 

[JRP3]

So greenhouse operators pump CO2 into their buildings so that their plants will become weaker and die sooner? I think not. This is typical of the kind of junk science that gets tossed around in eco-alarmist threads like this, unfortunately.

Your conclusion is typical of the kind of junk, no science, that gets tossed around by people who don't do any research. People trying to profit from faster growing plants in a green house don't care at all that the plants are less nutritious, or more susceptible to weather fluctuations and disease because they are protected from both in the green house.

"Rising global CO2 increases yield and decreases water use by crops, and this is often presented as one positive of atmospheric change," Long says. But the Nature study's "significant" finding suggests that higher-CO2 environments will mean less nutritional crops, so that "increased quantity is at the expense of quality."

CO2 enrichment experiments at Long's university have also shown that rising CO2 levels lower crops' resistance to pests. By exposing the plants to levels of CO2 similar to those used in the Harvard-led study, says Long, crop damage from three major crop pests doubled.

High CO2 Makes Crops Less Nutritious

 

[Swampgator]

Egg consumption linked to higher risk of heart disease and death | National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)
"An NHLBI-funded study found that the higher the consumption of dietary cholesterol or eggs, the higher the incidence of cardiovascular disease, which includes heart disease and stroke, and death from any cause among U.S. adults."

Health Concerns With Eggs
"The fat and cholesterol found in eggs can harm heart health and lead to prostate cancer, colorectal cancer, and diabetes."

Diet-fat-cholesterol hypothesis has been disproved. Many times.
I do hope you live a long, statin rich life though
I just finished a big breakfast of 6 eggs and some bacon.

No, go back to your avocado toast and beyond meat burger JRP3.

 

[mspohr]

1800 ppm for wheat is the best. Obviously not cost effective, but the majority of plants increase mass at elevated levels. So far, there has been none tested that declined in mass.

So at the DNA level, our plant life was engineered for higher CO2 levels. CO2 level increases should make vegans happy.

Note: The most eco-friendly high density fuel is algae biodiesel. It even operates jet fighters according to the DoD. However, it is scorned much like nuclear energy by those who lack pragmatism.

anecdote is not science

 

[JRP3]

1800 ppm for wheat is the best. Obviously not cost effective, but the majority of plants increase mass at elevated levels. So far, there has been none tested that declined in mass.

Mass is far from the only important parameter. Larger, less nutritious, weaker plants that die easily benefit no one.

Note: The most eco-friendly high density fuel is algae biodiesel. It even operates jet fighters according to the DoD. However, it is scorned much like nuclear energy by those who lack pragmatism.

It's scorned because there is no evidence that it can scale. Bio fuels have proven problematic in jets, less range and gelling at low temperatures. Nuclear is scorned because it's not cost effective.

 

[Swampgator]

Egg consumption linked to higher risk of heart disease and death | National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)
"An NHLBI-funded study found that the higher the consumption of dietary cholesterol or eggs, the higher the incidence of cardiovascular disease, which includes heart disease and stroke, and death from any cause among U.S. adults."

Health Concerns With Eggs
"The fat and cholesterol found in eggs can harm heart health and lead to prostate cancer, colorectal cancer, and diabetes."

This is too funny. First link does not work. Second is to a position blog post by a vegan activist group.

Do try harder.

 

[JRP3]

Diet-fat-cholesterol hypothesis has been disproved. Many times.

By the egg industry

You also conveniently ignore the data on cancer and diabetes.

 

[JRP3]

This is too funny. First link does not work. Second is to a position blog post by a vegan activist group.

Do try harder.

So that proves you first replied before even clicking my links, which by the way both work perfectly fine for me. From the first:

An NHLBI-funded study found that the higher the consumption of dietary cholesterol or eggs, the higher the incidence of cardiovascular disease, which includes heart disease and stroke, and death from any cause among U.S. adults.

The findings are sobering news for Americans who have been freely eating eggs, the most cholesterol-rich food in a typical U.S. diet, since the 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines dropped the limitations on cholesterol and egg consumption.

The study, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association external link , reports that 300 mg of dietary cholesterol per day is linked to 17 percent higher risk of cardiovascular disease and 18 percent higher risk of death. An average adult typically eats about 300 milligrams per day of cholesterol and three or four eggs per week.

The second link was an article that linked a number of different studies which covered the topics. Talk about "do try harder", at least read the sources before you comment.

 

[CrayZ1]

anecdote is not science

The 8 scientists with 70 references who wrote the 2018 peer reviewed paper might disagree with you, but you know how flaky scientists can be.

 

[CrayZ1]

Mass is far from the only important parameter. Larger, less nutritious, weaker plants that die easily benefit no one.


It's scorned because there is no evidence that it can scale. Bio fuels have proven problematic in jets, less range and gelling at low temperatures. Nuclear is scorned because it's not cost effective.

There was no evidence in 2000 that EVs could be scaled either.

So the DoD is approved it without testing. I think they would disagree with you. But by your logic, we would still be in piston planes because jet fuel jells.

Cost-effective is not a term that a neo-Greenie should ever utter. Those in California know this. Although lately they have been fighting EV and solar adoption in practice while marketing themselves as the opposite.

 

[ohmman]

Do try harder.

Says the guy who has never put up any honest defense in this thread. When called out, it's "just having fun."

This thread is filled with solid evidence, you just have to pick through the people who don't understand science and disagree with climate change to find it.

 

[Swampgator]

First link did not work.

Second is garbage written by (again) a vegan activist group that claims to be a physicians committee when only 5% of it's members are physicians.. Here, try some higher quality evidence.

https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/91/3/535/4597110

https://www.bmj.com/content/351/bmj.h3978

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/1108492

Association of dietary, circulating, and supplement fatty acids with coronary risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis. - PubMed - NCBI

So that proves you first replied before even clicking my links, which by the way both work perfectly fine for me. From the first:



The second link was an article that linked a number of different studies which covered the topics. Talk about "do try harder", at least read the sources before you comment.

 

[SageBrush]

Egg consumption linked to higher risk of heart disease and death | National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)
"An NHLBI-funded study found that the higher the consumption of dietary cholesterol or eggs, the higher the incidence of cardiovascular disease, which includes heart disease and stroke, and death from any cause among U.S. adults."

Health Concerns With Eggs
"The fat and cholesterol found in eggs can harm heart health and lead to prostate cancer, colorectal cancer, and diabetes."

The "Dietary Cholesterol is healthy" nonsense was debunked before it hit the guidelines and it has already been redacted. The pharmacist has just not caught up yet.