![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
What makes it "official," Thomas? Do you have a URL?
I look for such announcements he http://cdiac.ornl.gov/new/new.html |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thomas (a "Mass" of excrement called "Tom)--
Humans can survive 800 ppm CO2 easily--in fact most rush hour traffic has that much C02 I've read. We're "F'd" if we listen to folks like you and Dodger Crappock, and stop the growth engine called America. Roger--what you got against intellectuals? You want me to be like Dan, an ignorant follower of you? RL Roger Coppock wrote: What makes it "official," Thomas? Do you have a URL? I look for such announcements he http://cdiac.ornl.gov/new/new.html |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I'd guess from this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4803460.stm "Roger Coppock" wrote in message oups.com... What makes it "official," Thomas? Do you have a URL? I look for such announcements he http://cdiac.ornl.gov/new/new.html |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"raylopez99" wrote in message
oups.com... Thomas (a "Mass" of excrement called "Tom)-- Humans can survive 800 ppm CO2 easily--in fact most rush hour traffic has that much C02 I've read. It's not CO2 with regards to respiration that's the problem, loopy liar troll. It's the warming associated with it. We're "F'd" if we listen to folks like you and Dodger Crappock, and stop the growth engine called America. Roger--what you got against intellectuals? You want me to be like Dan, an ignorant follower of you? RL Poor loopy, you've lost all touch with reality. Roger Coppock wrote: What makes it "official," Thomas? Do you have a URL? I look for such announcements he http://cdiac.ornl.gov/new/new.html |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Humans can survive 800 ppm CO2 easily--in fact most rush hour traffic
has that much C02 I've read." Even for you, Ray, that is a very shallow statement. Hint: "What make us 'human?' Can that survive 800 ppm CO2 easily? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"BBC News has learned the latest data shows CO2
levels now stand at 381 parts per million (ppm) - 100ppm above the pre-industrial average." The phrase "BBC News has learned" makes it very UNoffical. Let's leave the rumors to the fossil fools, please. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Roger Coppock wrote:
"BBC News has learned the latest data shows CO2 levels now stand at 381 parts per million (ppm) - 100ppm above the pre-industrial average." The phrase "BBC News has learned" makes it very UNoffical. Let's leave the rumors to the fossil fools, please. I just watched a great presentation. They got it direct. Mauna Loa is so ... year before last. http://www.cmdl.noaa.gov/ccgg/iadv/ http://cosmic.lifeform.org |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Roger Coppock wrote:
"Humans can survive 800 ppm CO2 easily--in fact most rush hour traffic has that much C02 I've read." Even for you, Ray, that is a very shallow statement. Hint: "What make us 'human?' Can that survive 800 ppm CO2 easily? I see your point--nobody wants to go outside only wearing a moonsuit. But I was simply saying that humans can survive 800 ppm C02. It is uncomfortable but survivable. Kind of like breathing fumes in a crowded freeway. As for toxicity, here is what OSHA says: "OSHA has indicated that the lowest oxygen concentration for shift-long exposure is 19.5%, corresponding to a carbon dioxide concentration well above 60 000 ppm (6%). Carbon dioxide concentration, not oxygen concentration, is limiting in such circumstances." Not that I am advocating we go to the limit, but from 381 to 60k is a ways to still go. RL |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "raylopez99" wrote in message oups.com... Roger Coppock wrote: "Humans can survive 800 ppm CO2 easily--in fact most rush hour traffic has that much C02 I've read." Even for you, Ray, that is a very shallow statement. Hint: "What make us 'human?' Can that survive 800 ppm CO2 easily? I see your point--nobody wants to go outside only wearing a moonsuit. But I was simply saying that humans can survive 800 ppm C02. It is uncomfortable but survivable. Kind of like breathing fumes in a crowded freeway. As for toxicity, here is what OSHA says: "OSHA has indicated that the lowest oxygen concentration for shift-long exposure is 19.5%, corresponding to a carbon dioxide concentration well above 60 000 ppm (6%). Carbon dioxide concentration, not oxygen concentration, is limiting in such circumstances." Not that I am advocating we go to the limit, but from 381 to 60k is a ways to still go. RL The earth would likely cook long before it ever got to those concentrations (60K), so what is your point? George |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Scientist warns that public knowledge of space engineering fixes for global warming may be undesirable, But never mentions the benefits of H2-PV | H2-PV | Policy | 0 | March 6th 06 12:04 PM |
Oxygen and Carbon Discovered in Exoplanet Atmosphere 'Blow Off' | Ron | Misc | 3 | February 16th 04 09:27 PM |
Hydrogen Sulfide, Not Carbon Dioxide, May Have Caused Largest Mass Extinction | Ron Baalke | Science | 0 | November 11th 03 09:15 AM |
Hydrogen Sulfide, Not Carbon Dioxide, May Have Caused Largest Mass Extinction | Ron Baalke | Astronomy Misc | 0 | November 3rd 03 06:14 PM |
What to do with Carbon Dioxide? | hanson | Astronomy Misc | 0 | July 10th 03 02:01 AM |