|
| I agree this is rather interesting. Like you said about picking sides I think that does play a larger part of our responses than we think. These situations are so complex and involved that there is proven science to support both sides so both sides can be accused of denying the science when in reality people are just choosing the scientific facts that support their argument.
For example, let’s take the increased co2 emissions from fossil fuels that Sand mentioned. Co2 is a known greenhouse gas so it stands up to scientific fact that an increase in co2, by itself, will cause global warming. It is also a proven scientific fact that increased soot emissions will cause global cooling. This effect was noticed during the initial push to reduce emissions when they focused on soot particles. They discovered that reducing soot emissions was actually causing global warming. It is also known that if one looks back in history we are very near the bottom end of co2 concentrations. For most of earths history, like when dinosaurs were alive,co2 levels were much higher.
Co2 is to plants what oxygen is to us. Generally, plants will grow better and more lush with higher co2 concentrations. This lush growth is absorbing the suns energy and locking it away through chemical reactions which helps to reduce the direct heating effect of the sun. These chemical reactions are absorbing the energy from the sun to power these chemical reactions.
This brings us back to the issue of fossil fuels. By using fossil fuels we are actually releasing the suns energy that was absorbed many years ago and locked up chemically. Now, besides the current energy the earth is receiving from the sun we are adding past energy back into the equation and also releasing the co2 that is a greenhouse gas but that will also spur healthier plant growth.
My point is proven science is on both sides of the equation and no one can conclusively say what the actual outcome will be. Like it or not that brings us back to the problem of picking sides and politics. Currently, politics are pushing the global warming side of the equation. That’s doesn’t mean it is right, it just means that is the side they picked. All of this basic science was known in the 70’s yet politics at the time choose the side of a future ice age.
BTW, I didn’t write all that to argue the global warming issue. I did it to point out how we all have biases and will choose to follow the science that we choose to believe in. This same issue is present with the covid issue as well. It won’t be until sometime in the future that we will know what scientific truths actually have a marginally greater influence on the final outcome. That is why these debates are good to have. It opens us up to different viewpoints.
Edited by havin’funfarming 3/27/2021 13:44
| |
|
|
So my friend's elderly mom, early 90s. . .
