Justin Gudgeon said:

Your battle-cry to the People to rise up in a sort of crusade against global warming is a bit hysterical. People did exactly the same thing in medieval times about the appearance of comets, believing them to harbinger the end of the world. Your statements sound very similar. They are unscientific and emotional. The majority of scientists do NOT accept the theory of AGW because the majority of scientists understand the chemical equation:

C(fossil fuel) + O2(air) = CO2 + H2O + Heat (Hopefully you accept this equation)
You therefore must accept this chemical reaction occurring simultaneously:
CO2 + H2O + sunlight = C6-H12-O6(biomass) + O2. ( photoautotrophic growth)

Therefore, the only relevant question regarding AGW, is to ask which chemical reaction taking place is returning the greater volume of gas to the atmosphere. Is it combustion, respiration, decomposition (plus other inorganic redox reactions) which consumes oxygen and produces Carbon Dioxide, or photoautropic growth which consumes CO2 and produces Oxygen?

Air-breathing plants plus aquatic carbon-fixing phytoplankton produce about 150,000,000,000 tonnes of biomass every year. This is a huge mass but this includes everything that grows across the whole planet including the oceans. To complete this photoautropic activity, living matter has to sequester about 470 billion tons of CO2 annually from the atmosphere to produce this amount of biomass. Of this, about 10% of the CO2 (47 billion tonnes), is permanently lost to the atmosphere due to the creation of irreducible biomass and carboniferous deposition. Add to this the 4 billion tons of organic-based waste which is buried in landfill sites around the world, (representing approx 12 billion tons of CO2), gives a total loss to the atmosphere of 59 billion tons of CO2. Since the declared total amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere worldwide is 29 billion tons (US Energy Information Administration) leaves a 30 billion ton shortfall of CO2 in the atmosphere. Your AGW prognostications has to be wrong. Even at a very basic level, the imagined rise in CO2 for any industrialised country would be offset by the mere waste (80% carbon) that’s permanently captured when buried in landfill sites.

Anonymous said:

Justin, you sound very skeptical, you should visit this website: http://www.skepticalscience.com

Anonymous said:

Is it combustion, respiration, decomposition (plus other inorganic redox reactions) which consumes oxygen and produces Carbon Dioxide, or photoautropic growth which consumes CO2 and produces Oxygen?

Abacherli said:

rent a car [url="http://www.hellzyea.com/rent-a-car"]rent a car[/url] http://www.hellzyea.com/rent-a-car rent a car 78390