On Nov 16, 1:09 pm, OMS-II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > CO2 is naturally occuring in the environment and atmosphere. With no > CO2, no photosynthesis can occur in plants, and life as we know it > would cease to be. Plants are still the only way to convert the sun's > energy into food to sustain the planet. No.....CO2, in and of itself, > is not a pollutant. But you can have too much of a good thing. If you > continue to elevate the CO2 levels, while simultaneously clearcutting > the rain forests, you take away the Earth's main mechanism for > buffering any significant elevations in CO2. Correct?
Yep. But how much is too much? When does it become "harmful", in your mind? > The CO2 levels in and of themselves are not as big a threat as the > deforestation, in my humble opinion. But you can't do both > indefinitely and not expect to have any adverse effects. The Earth, > left to her own devices, is wonderfully equipped to heal herself....as > is the human body. But the defenses can be overwhelmed....correct? > On Nov 16, 4:02 pm, Gaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Supposedly... But I think you, and those like you, vastly overestimate man's contribution. And then you also have to consider what man is best able to "adapt" to. If we are in fact helping warm the Planet, as opposed to letting it get cooler, we are much more able to survive increasing temperatures, as a species, than we are decreasing one's, correct? --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
