'What Percent Of Our Atmosphere Is CO2?': Doug LaMalfa Stumps Entire Panel With Climate Questions!

[peter]

5 hours ago, Grumpy Owl said:

 

Photosynthesis only occurs during daylight.

I know that I was being sarcastic ,since the temps get well over 40 deg c in many parts of Australia ,there should be no plant life at all,unless photosynthesis can occur at night when the temps are cooler, if the bullshit graph is to be believed

Edited May 24 by peter

[oz93666]

4 hours ago, peter said:

 temps get well over 40 deg c in many parts of Australia ,there should be no plant life at all,

Plant life maywell be able to survive above 40 C they just won't grow at that time of the day when it's over 40C ... so in the mornings and evenings when it's cooler they grow , over 40C they're just hanging on trying not to dry out 

 

 

 

 

4 hours ago, peter said:

 if the bullshit graph is to be believed

The graph shows the optimum temp for photosythesis and when it stops due to extreem high or low temp ... Obviously if there's no light , or no CO2 in the atmosphere no photosythesis will occour at any temperature  .. the graph shows that at about  8C it will proceed half as fast and plants will grow half as quickly ,

all other factors being equal ..

 

This is reliable information , hard science , a search will get you similar graphs by other researchers.

[peter]

deleated

Edited May 24 by peter

[peter]

1 hour ago, oz93666 said:

Plant life maywell be able to survive above 40 C they just won't grow at that time of the day when it's over 40C ... so in the mornings and evenings when it's cooler they grow , over 40C they're just hanging on trying not to dry out 

 

 

 

 

The graph shows the optimum temp for photosythesis and when it stops due to extreem high or low temp ... Obviously if there's no light , or no CO2 in the atmosphere no photosythesis will occour at any temperature  .. the graph shows that at about  8C it will proceed half as fast and plants will grow half as quickly ,

all other factors being equal ..

 

This is reliable information , hard science , a search will get you similar graphs by other researchers.

Fair enough, so that must mean that in summertime in Australia particularly in the interior ,plants must produce enough chlorophyll to survive for a couple of hours in the morning and maybe one in the afternoon because temps can be mid 40's to mid 50's during the day for months on end

Edited May 24 by peter

[SimonTV]

On 5/24/2023 at 2:05 AM, oz93666 said:

CO2 is produced when carbon products are completly burnt (oxidised ) .... CO is produced when only partially oxidised , ... and C (soot or black smoke  ) when not at all oxidised ....

That's not quiet accurate Simon .....

 

The gasses from burning wood (and car)  are overwhelmingly CO2 around 13% ... CO is produced in very low levels around 0.1% (1,000ppm) and that's just as well CO is extreemly dangerouse , low levels will kill you dead 

 

Gas products from wood burning (the 8% O2 is what is left from the original 20% in air ....N2 is the other 80% not shown in the table )

 

 

 

What is the source for this table. Those are some high temperatures, is that a specialist furnace with high oxygen intake? 

 

The way I was taught in school some many years ago was that O2 can not exist as a single molecule, during combustion oxygen is used up. This is why we end up with CO rather than CO2. Princeton professor Williams Happer claims that CO2 is about 30% of the by product of combustion. Interestingly by mistake one year after a lot of forest fires NASA released a chemical analysis of the air and found extremely high concentrations of CO over any other gas. This is because most combustion is incomplete and leans towards giving off CO over CO2. CO2 is naturally occurring gas in the air like N2. So these can be mistaken for being by products of combustion when it is just the air moving through the furnace. 

[SimonTV]

sorry for double post it was doing that stupid thing where it doesn't load the page after posting. 

Edited May 25 by SimonTV

[SimonTV]

On 5/23/2023 at 1:34 AM, oz93666 said:

 

You've correctly drawn attention to ithe mportant part .. transparent Bollox .

 

Significant  Increase !??? It's an Insignificant increase hardly noticable on the graph ! 

 

Bottom line is CO2 has been massivly higher and all the time life has flourished , which shows global temperatures are relativly unafected by CO2 because all vegitation  is very intollerant of high temperatures ...

 

Photosythesis stops dead at 40C 

 

 

 

The green house gases theory was based on a greenhouse like 50-70 years ago. They pumped in more CO2 and claimed it impacted temperatures and then extrapolated that the atmosphere must work in the same way. More recent studies on adding CO2 to green houses, do not find such great impacts on temperatures. 

Edited May 25 by SimonTV

[SimonTV]

Also the greenhouse effect is counter affected by the dimming effect of contrails/chemtrails of planes. As the plane pollution leaves clouds in its wake, these prevent the suns rays from penetrating to the earths surface. The greenhouse effect is based on the idea that the sun rays enter the atmosphere reach ground level and then sort of bounce back and forth due to high concentrations of green house gases in the atmosphere which prevent the heat from "dissipating" . To me the green house effect theory sounds like a complete ridiculous joke. 

Edited May 25 by SimonTV

[oz93666]

15 minutes ago, SimonTV said:

 

 

What is the source for this table. Those are some high temperatures, is that a specialist furnace with high oxygen intake? 

I can't remember what I put in search to get that chart , I think the chart is for a normal woodburning stove with plain air intake ...

Just done another search "composition % gas from wood burning" .. got this 

 

 

I think it all depends on how well stove is designed .... for an open air brush fire black smoke will indicate incoplete combustion and a lot more CO 

16 minutes ago, SimonTV said:

Interestingly by mistake one year after a lot of forest fires NASA released a chemical analysis of the air and found extremely high concentrations of CO over any other gas.  

I don't think CO levels could have been too high this is extreemly toxic knocking out hymoglobin which takes 30 days to be replaced by the body , so it's acumulative ,

from search (10ppm =0.001%)

 

Is 10 ppm high carbon monoxide?

What CO Level is Dangerous? Prolonged exposure to carbon monoxide levels of 10ppm (parts per million) or above is shown to have adverse effects on the body and brain. Threshold at which prolonged exposure can have adverse effects on the body and brain.

[SimonTV]

6 hours ago, oz93666 said:

I can't remember what I put in search to get that chart , I think the chart is for a normal woodburning stove with plain air intake ...

Just done another search "composition % gas from wood burning" .. got this 

 

 

I think it all depends on how well stove is designed .... for an open air brush fire black smoke will indicate incoplete combustion and a lot more CO 

I don't think CO levels could have been too high this is extreemly toxic knocking out hymoglobin which takes 30 days to be replaced by the body , so it's acumulative ,

from search (10ppm =0.001%)

 

Is 10 ppm high carbon monoxide?

What CO Level is Dangerous? Prolonged exposure to carbon monoxide levels of 10ppm (parts per million) or above is shown to have adverse effects on the body and brain. Threshold at which prolonged exposure can have adverse effects on the body and brain.

 

Yea I think the amount of CO2 vs CO depends on how well the fire is burning. 

 

The NASA point, https://www.nasa.gov/feature/jpl/nasa-monitors-carbon-monoxide-from-california-wildfires/ 

 

They do satellite colour maps of the CO and show after forest fires it is a high rates in the atmosphere. *shrug*

[SimonTV]

The main point with CO2 is that it is not a pollutant so having it as a by product of combustion is better than actual pollutants and toxic gas like CO. The idea that it directly causes temperatures to rise is also not proven, at best there are some loose historical correlations. 

[oz93666]

9 hours ago, SimonTV said:

The NASA point, https://www.nasa.gov/feature/jpl/nasa-monitors-carbon-monoxide-from-california-wildfires/ 

 

They do satellite colour maps of the CO and show after forest fires it is a high rates in the atmosphere. *shrug*

 

I've had a look at that link Simon , it's from NASA "Global Climate Change" as we would expect deceptive science promoting the scare of global warming.

The vidio looks vary alarming , a computer graphic of great clouds of CO from these fires , panic ....

But when you read the small print ...

Quote 

 "The red and orange areas indicate regions with extremely high carbon monoxide concentrations of greater than 350 parts per billion by volume (ppbv). The more normal, background concentrations of carbon monoxide show up as yellow and green, with amounts between 30 and 50 ppbv." 

 

They're measuring concentrations in parts  per Billion ... not parts per Million , which is 0.0001% by volume  ... but parts per Billion 0.0000001 % by volume 

 

But most readers wouldn't notice that , they will just come away with the idea we must stop these fires ... the fires are because of "global warming" , so we are told ... So lets lobby goverments to ban airtravel , just like France has just started doing.