If you have 0.04% alcohol in your blood you have a little buzz.
0.10% and you're drunk
0.30% and you're dead
Another good comparison is ink in water:
Poilievre has called for a non-confidence vote
- Thread starter Phil C. McNasty
- Start date
0.10% and you're drunk
0.30% and you're dead
Another good comparison is ink in water:
so the world feels a little tipsy
maybe that's why humans were invented
to make the world a little drunk
give it a break, the world has been at it for over 3 billion years
if anybody it's the world that needs a little rest and maybe a double Scotch
that's an odd statement
coniferous evergreen trees are cellulose which requires requires lots of CO2
its 400 parts per million and the air is constantly mixed via convection and jet streams
On average, jet streams move at about 110 miles per hour. But dramatic temperature differences between the warm and cool air masses can cause jet streams to move at much higher speeds — 250 miles per hour or faster.
on a planetary scale it is reasonably well mixed
the seasonal fluctuations in co2 levels @ Maun Lau are due to decomposition of vegetation in the northern winter ( more land mass in the north, therefore more plants to consume the plant food, you know ... C02
and yet it is 400 parts per million
does that not make you wonder if there is something else going on?
something the propaganda leaves out of its story ?
Mother nature cycles through a whole lot more CO2 than what man produces
absorption has a logarithmic relationship to concentration. the amount becomes so small it cant be measured, but still there
what is the logarithm of 0 ?
You cant get there from here.
methane is measured in parts per billion
you are not closer to controlling the amount of methane that gets into the atmosphere
natural decomposition also creates methane and lots of it
you do understand that you need to heat (and pressure) the clay to make it able to absorb organic molecules and the clay cartridges have a capacity that requires another burn off to regenerate absorption?
Absorption by clay has been well studied. this not revolutionary
To be balanced: Testing of new materials / structures can produce incremental advancements though
there is also the scale issue
useful for scrubbing small volumes at a known processing source, but your not going to scrub the atmosphere
methane has always been in the atmosphere
its a primary building block for all living matter and it get regenerated when things decompose
the cycle of life.
oh boy
Leave poor Bossy alone
Last edited:
It's strategically sound.
The Cons are in the driver's seat right now, and as you say it sets up a win-win for them.
Trudeau can back down - that's a win since the Cons can run on "beating" him here and also still run on the issue saying Trudeau is just lying in wait to spring it on people later.
Trudeau can go forward - that's a win in that the Cons think they can run on that heavily.
It also puts Singh in a bind if Trudeau doesn't back down.
Does Singh withdraw support so soon after getting some concessions from Trudeau?
Where does his base fall on the carbon tax issue? Would it make sense to withdraw support but frame it as over something else?
I think most projections right now say that an election right now leaves the NDP is basically the same position concerning number of seats, but with no power since it would be a Con majority.
But it has to be crossing Singh's mind that if the Liberals completely collapse in light of election pressure, some people might flee to the NDP to block the Cons and the NDP might end up in a good spot.
I don't know if anyone really thinks we would see a post-Mulroney PC-level collapse down to a handful of seats for the Libs, but if that happened, the NDP would want to capitalize.
Say whatever you want about him, but PP is a life-long politician and he knows how the game works. This move makes sense.
Sure, but just because the planet survived while dinosaurs were wiped out doesn't mean you want to bring on intentionally and super quickly.
It'll work for older voters but not for the youth.
Alcohol in your body and ink in the water are dumb comparisons because alcohol is not part of your body's natural state and ink isn't a part of water's natural state either. CO2 has always been a part of the earth's natural state.If you have 0.04% alcohol in your blood you have a little buzz.
0.10% and you're drunk
0.30% and you're dead
Another good comparison is ink in water:
JuanG argued that trace elements can't effect change.
That is clearly not true, that's the point.
CO2 has been in the atmosphere for a long time but global temperatures have risen and fallen with it throughout the ages as well.
So why do you want to change the climate intentionally and so quickly?
Dear lord. Somebody brought out the etch and sketch again.JuanG argued that trace elements can't effect change.
That is clearly not true, that's the point.
CO2 has been in the atmosphere for a long time but global temperatures have risen and fallen with it throughout the ages as well.
So why do you want to change the climate intentionally and so quickly?
Wiki.
The question of why you want to repeat any of those peaks and valleys of CO2/temperature changes remains.
Why, does Douggie Boy want to offer Trudeau his cannabis that he stocked under his bed during his street vending days?
alcohol in your body is a chemical effect. small amounts can have a significant chemical effect
absorption of electromagnetic radiation is a physical effect. small amounts can not have a significant effect
this has been explained to frankfurter many times
chemical effects determine chemical structure
chemical structure determine physical properties
physical properties determine physical effects
therefore as taught in grade 10 science class, do not try to compare chemical effects to physical effects
this has been explained to frankfurter many times
however since he dropped out of school before grade 10 ...........
Adding more CO2 to the atmosphere is a chemical process, as is adding ink to water.
Both result in physical effects in regard to light and heat absorption.
Pee Pee was busy fundraising while his cronies in Parliament were getting their asses spanked at this "No Confidence" motion:
Poilievre-led attempt to bring down Trudeau minority over carbon tax fails
Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre's attempt to pass a vote of non-confidence and bring down Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's Liberal minority government over the carbon tax failed Thursday.
You know what never changes? People whining about taxes. I drive a fairly large car and I pay the tax without whining. I also buy food but the rising prices are due to gouging and corporate greed much more so than due to carbon taxes. Conservative PM Mulroney brought in the GST.... did you whine then?
Did paying the tax lead you to drive a smaller car or just drive less
to help fight climate change?
Many people disliked the GST when it was introduced.
But they also understood it was a necessity.
The GST for all practical intents and purposes was a name change. If you drive a large car, and don’t think about rising prices for everything. I’ll step out on a limb and suggest you’re gross income, and disposable income, are such that you don’t really think or stress about a lot.
Farts aside, I'll make this short and sweet.
Juan is assuming that CO2 concentrations are the same from the Stratosphere to the Biosphere, wrongo. CO2 is heavier than oxygen, a necessity to drive photosynthesis. The really scary part is that human generated CO2 is making the oceans more acidic. Deniers can deny, acidic oceans are catastrophic for humanity.
Is a carbon tax necessary? 40 countries, several States and cities have carbon policies in place. The State of Mexico (City) has had a carbon tax in places for several years already. PeePee can't be an environmental Luddite, it's not business as usual.
Juan is assuming that CO2 concentrations are the same from the Stratosphere to the Biosphere, wrongo. CO2 is heavier than oxygen, a necessity to drive photosynthesis. The really scary part is that human generated CO2 is making the oceans more acidic. Deniers can deny, acidic oceans are catastrophic for humanity.
Is a carbon tax necessary? 40 countries, several States and cities have carbon policies in place. The State of Mexico (City) has had a carbon tax in places for several years already. PeePee can't be an environmental Luddite, it's not business as usual.
Last edited:
