Global Warming

[RichardCranium]

The carbon cycle is a lot more complicated than a school project.

We did it in O levels, but not as a project.

CO2 dissolves in the sea.

Molluscs use the dissolved CO2 to make shells.

Molluscs die and form thick sea beds of chalk.

Tectonic plates move and the sea bed gets shoved under the adjoining plate.

As the chalky stuff hits the mantle, some gets squirted out of volcanoes as CO2 in huge quantities.

--- BUT, then photosynthesis and green plants came along and the atmosphere was very suddenly swept of its CO2 (causing a massive genetic destruction) and the rules changed:

Green plants suck the CO2 out of the air to make their bodies.

Green plants die and form thick layers of peat.

This keeps being squashed by more peat or even stuff that becomes rock and the dead plants become gas and oil and coal.

Tectonic plates move and the sea bed gets shoved under the adjoining plate.

As the carbon rich peat / gas / oil / coal hits the mantle, some gets squirted out of volcanoes as CO2 in immensely huge quantities.

--- ALSO

Carbon dioxide is also released produced by forest fires but this is fairly irrelevant and is "carbon neutral". It was plants and it becomes plants.

--- ALSO

Critters breathing out produces CO2. This is from food that was plant matter or animals that ate plant matter and will become plants again and so it "carbon neutral".




What has changed all this is that we are taking all the peat, coal, oil and gas we can find and shoving it into the atmosphere as quickly as we can. Personally, I think this is stupid because I do not believe we should destroy one-use-only fossil fuels for use as heating or transport fuel. It should be used to make things. Simply burning it is wasteful madness, regardless of the environmental impact.

[TimberWolf]

Why? I don't know. No one does.

Jeez, I haven't even got to asking trickier questions that will test your level of understanding of Newton and Einstein yet. Not that I expected any different.

[EternalOptimist]

Not bad if done from memory. Inverse square.

Of course done from memory.

Some people (SG) dont realise that whilst you can google for facts or opinion, you cannot google understanding


that takes work

[TimberWolf]

Of course done from memory.

Some people (SG) dont realise that whilst you can google for facts or opinion, you cannot google understanding


that takes work

SG will just have to find someone in the office that can answer these basic questions for him. Unless he's at home and has to ask his mum.

[shaunbhoy]

Some people (SG) dont realise that whilst you can google for facts or opinion, you cannot google understanding


that takes work, and a darned sight more grey matter than HE possesses

FTFY

[TimberWolf]

Hence forth climate change is to be renamed climate "approximation".

-- youknowwho

[sasguru]

Jeez, I haven't even got to asking trickier questions that will test your level of understanding of Newton and Einstein yet. Not that I expected any different.

Do you know why?
Do tell, you'll be the first person in the world who does

[TimberWolf]

We did it in O levels, but not as a project.

CO2 dissolves in the sea.

Molluscs use the dissolved CO2 to make shells.

Molluscs die and form thick sea beds of chalk.

Tectonic plates move and the sea bed gets shoved under the adjoining plate.

As the chalky stuff hits the mantle, some gets squirted out of volcanoes as CO2 in huge quantities.

--- BUT, then photosynthesis and green plants came along and the atmosphere was very suddenly swept of its CO2 (causing a massive genetic destruction) and the rules changed:

Green plants suck the CO2 out of the air to make their bodies.

Green plants die and form thick layers of peat.

This keeps being squashed by more peat or even stuff that becomes rock and the dead plants become gas and oil and coal.

Tectonic plates move and the sea bed gets shoved under the adjoining plate.

As the carbon rich peat / gas / oil / coal hits the mantle, some gets squirted out of volcanoes as CO2 in immensely huge quantities.

--- ALSO

Carbon dioxide is also released produced by forest fires but this is fairly irrelevant and is "carbon neutral". It was plants and it becomes plants.

--- ALSO

Critters breathing out produces CO2. This is from food that was plant matter or animals that ate plant matter and will become plants again and so it "carbon neutral".




What has changed all this is that we are taking all the peat, coal, oil and gas we can find and shoving it into the atmosphere as quickly as we can. Personally, I think this is stupid because I do not believe we should destroy one-use-only fossil fuels for use as heating or transport fuel. It should be used to make things. Simply burning it is wasteful madness, regardless of the environmental impact.

Subduction wasn't known about with regard to CO2 until quite recently? I believe the current situation is that they don't know where carbon dioxide goes.

[RichardCranium]

Subduction wasn't known about with regard to CO2 until quite recently?

Well, I know about it over 30 years ago. It was in the curriculum.

I believe the current situation is that they don't know where carbon dioxide goes.

See above: mollusc shells and forest floors.

[TimberWolf]

See above: mollusc shells and forest floors.

There are various theories, including one that the oceans are absorbing a lot.