« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

NPR Reports Plants and Oceans Saving Us From Global Warming

By: Tavern Keeper (Diary)  |  August 1st, 2012 at 11:13 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

SWEAR I am not making this up. Driving home today I caught a story on National Public Radio that I simultaneously couldn’t believe they aired and also thought was straight-up par for the course. The “science” they reported was, if it were not for the oceans and plants of the world, the planet would be warming much more rapidly than it is, and we would be in deep you-know-what.

I debated whether or not to stop this entry at the conclusion of the previous paragraph as an “nuff said.” (but it was TOO easy). Basically the point was – we better be glad the oceans and plants have our back because if not, we’re screwed. Apparently, the oceans (which cover like 70% of the Earth), and plants (which are pretty persistent even when you RoundUp then) really LOVE carbon emissions. So much so that they’ve dramatically increased the amount of CO2 they can absorb. And this basically explains why all the global warming, er, climate change, that we are supposed to have caused hasn’t happened.

I kid you not when I say the whole tone of the story was “you better be glad and start backing off, because the oceans and plants may get tired of this and stop absorbing so much to teach us a lesson. If the ocean and plants weren’t here,we’d be in a real pickle.”

Yeah. We’d have MAD global warming with all this industry if the Earth didn’t have oceans and plants…wait …

This reminds me of one of the first successful arguments I had with a liberal back in the 90′s when I was but a greenhorn:

ME: I think this global warming thing is just a crock.
LIBERAL: Seriously? You’re an intelligent person. I can’t believe you can’t see how global warming is happening.

ME: plants are good, right?
LIBERAL: yeah, better than factories spewing CO2 in the air.
ME: plants use Carbon Dioxide for food, right?

LIBERAL: yes
ME: so if we put more CO2 out there, won’t more plants grow?
LIBERAL: (pause)
ME: (fixed stare)
LIBERAL(longer pause)
ME: (continued fixed stare)
LIBERAL: so you’re saying that the problem might correct itself?
ME: I’m saying it’s not a problem.
LIBERAL: Hmmm (walks off).

All I’m saying is, we need to be nice to the oceans and plants, else they stop absorbing that CO2 stuff they really like.

Great job, NPR. Hopefully mass won’t get tired of causing gravity.

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • sulmak

    Limestone is basically CO2 that has be combined with calcium by algae and/or simple chemical processes in the sea over the continental shelf.

    Limestone exists in vast sheets across the world of incredible mass and is a testament to just how much CO2 the ocean can absorb.

    If it weren’t for that, catastrophic global warming might actually have some merit

    Not only does it increase in effectiveness due to warmer temperatures, but also as the sea levels rise since that increases the amount of water over continental shelf.

    In other words the amount of CO2 absorbed by the ocean increases at a greater than linear growth rate, at least cubic, for a linear increase in temperature, making the earth highly resistant to long term carbon forcing.

  • gflyer3364qt

    Well, Al Gore says global warming is real, so it must be…

  • Tavern Keeper

    Balances out itself, google “The Chilling Stars”. That theory makes more sense than anything I’ve heard.

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    I have come to accept that there may be some warming and that mankind has probably caused most of it. But the doomsday scenarios and such are still crap.

    Not only is the cycle resistant because of greater plant growth. But this is exactly what we need to feed the worlds people.

    Vast swaths of north America and Siberia can now have an increased growing season and higher crop yields.