EPA: Greenhouse gases are harmful to humans

[Neezar]

Originally Posted by Buzzard

My initial reaction to your original post immediately caused to me to disregard your post because of your instant labeling of the scientists as crackpots, yet you offered nothing to refute any of their claims. When one immediately places a negative label onto someone without offering anything to refute those claims, I think of the OP as the crackpot because they have brought nothing to counter any claims. The use of these negative labels immediately makes me disregard anything you may have to say and to then thing of you as the crackpot because you have brought nothing to the table.

In summation, starting an argument with negative labeling and without bringing anything to back a claim proves nothing and actual hurts the credibility of the one making the post. If the wording in the OP was neutral and provided data to refute the claims of the quoted article, I would be more inclined to read it with more of an open mind rather than immediately going in a defensive mode and thinking that the crackpot was the one that made the original post.

I would like to see your source of evidence for this statement.












You sound like you have a degree in internet fighting. lol

[Tyburn]

Originally Posted by Buzzard

Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
Sulphur Dioxide (SO2)
Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)

Which of the above 3 greenhouse gasses do you consider to be safe at any level?

What non-crackpost source can you use as proof to show that the above 3 gasses are safe for humans at all levels as well as the particulate matter that is emitted by these power plants?

Do you think that there should be any regulations in place in regards to what pollutants and the quantities emitted by power plants and such?

I remember about 5-6 years back traveling to Pensacola FL to visit a friend and drove through Alabama and Florida in the dark when I got there. When I left to drive home, I drove through those areas again in the daylight and was surprised by what I saw. I drove by what I believe was a paper plant and couldn't believe my eyes. The steam that was emitted seemed to cover the entire area along with small particulate matter and an awful smell. Perhaps some of what was covering the ground was frost, but it wasn't only frost I don't believe. I could never live in an area like that.

Carbon Dioxide isnt that dangerous...your breathing it out into the atmosphere right now. Too much and you might suffocate I suppose...but we're along wayy from that

Sulphur Dioxide, smells really bad, might make you get a headache or sick...but again...your only likely to encounter it in that capacity near some kinda active volcanic vent.

Nitrogen...well most of the atmosphere is nitrogen...Nitrates are good for the soil...what...so you might get high if you get a wiff...dont pretend thats a bad thing


Now is it damaging to the natural world? define damaging? The earth isnt as fragile as we make out. Any Damage done can be readdressed by the Earths homeostatic mechanisms. They are...people act like this has never happened before or like Global Warming is the end of the world...no..its a cycle thats happened before, happens naturally, and all we are doing is speeding it up. It will change the world...but its passing...on a planetary scale...the planet will simply act differently and bring back the status quo...people say the ice caps melting is bad...why...they have melted more or less completely before...its not an irreversable process...it might be along time...but they will come back, they will reform...Global Warming leads to Global Cooling...no...really

[Neezar]

The Dave has spoken.

[Tyburn]

Originally Posted by Neezar

The Dave has spoken.

Yes, we have

[NateR]

Originally Posted by Tyburn

Carbon Dioxide isnt that dangerous...your breathing it out into the atmosphere right now. Too much and you might suffocate I suppose...but we're along wayy from that

Don't forget that plants require CO2 for photosynthesis and we need the O2 that plants produce to breathe.

Humans inhale O2 and exhale CO2, plants "inhale" CO2 and "exhale" O2. Pretty convenient how that works out isn't it? Almost like some really intelligent guy designed it.

[Tyburn]

Originally Posted by NateR

Don't forget that plants require CO2 for photosynthesis and we need the O2 that plants produce to breathe.

Humans inhale O2 and exhale CO2, plants "inhale" CO2 and "exhale" O2. Pretty convenient how that works out isn't it? Almost like some really intelligent guy designed it.

GODs not dumb, its a designed system...not only that...get this. The MORE carbon dioxide in the air, the faster and taller trees in the forrests grow, they did studies on the forrest in madagasgar...or some bizzare place like that...its actually got an expansion clause in this little rule..

...now Deforrestation IS an issue...you can see how you DO need the plants to enforce this recycling element...but thats not really a global warming issue...more a conservation issue

[Neezar]

Does anyone find it ironic that most people who went to this copenhagen climate conference went by jet? Therefore, their getting there put out more damage than most families will put out in a whole year. Yep, they seem very concerned to me.

[Tyburn]

Originally Posted by Neezar

Does anyone find it ironic that most people who went to this copenhagen climate conference went by jet? Therefore, their getting there put out more damage than most families will put out in a whole year. Yep, they seem very concerned to me.

I saw a statistic that said the carbon footprint of that conference was about the same as a small country for a whole year...I forget which country exactly.

ohh the irony

Originally Posted by NateR

Don't forget that plants require CO2 for photosynthesis and we need the O2 that plants produce to breathe.

Humans inhale O2 and exhale CO2, plants "inhale" CO2 and "exhale" O2. Pretty convenient how that works out isn't it? Almost like some really intelligent guy designed it.

Which bring ups a good point...


Cutting down the entire amazon and nearly everything green we can make a buck off of is a bad idea and business model.


SOMEONE HAS TO SPEAK FOR THE TREES!

[NateR]

Originally Posted by Crisco

Which bring ups a good point...


Cutting down the entire amazon and nearly everything green we can make a buck off of is a bad idea and business model.


SOMEONE HAS TO SPEAK FOR THE TREES!

I guess I can agree with that, we don't want this to happen to us:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTFP9QQzEL4