On May 14, 12:39 pm, "ozonb" wrote:
"Fran" wrote in message

...
On May 14, 11:04 am, "ozonb" wrote:





"Fran" wrote in message

...

On May 13, 4:49 pm, "ozonb" wrote:
.
I can't wait!

Current CO2 Levels Are Way Too Low

Do you make the same claim about oxygen?

No.

But oxygen is a life-giving substance!!! What are you? Anti-oxygen?

Water is a life-giving substance as well, but too much can kill.

That argument is not available to those such as you who assert that
life-giving substances can't be pollutants, so I'm sounding the buzzer
on that one.

To paraphrase you: Water is a life-giving substance. It's not a
pollutant.

Maybe I should paraphrase Count Orsino:

"If water be the stuff of life, pour on, that surfeiting the soul may
sicken and so die ..."

Apologies to 'The Bard ...'

So what's your point?
My point is that our atmosphere is STARVED of CO2 not oxygen, so why do you mention the
latter?.

My point is that you are not being consistent.

You claim that because CO2 is

a) a life giving substance

AND

b) has been higher in the geological past than today

that

a) the Earth's atmosphere is "CO2-starved"

and therefore

b) We need more 'lifegiving CO2' in the atmosphere

You also specified a level of CO2 that you liked -- 1000-1200 ppmv (ie
more than four times the preindustrial level and three tiems today's
level) saying that it would lead to a lush green planet.

On YOUR logic, oxygen, which is also a 'life giving substance' for
most life on the planet and which has been as high as 35%
concentration in the past is in short supply, since we only have 21%
oxygen currently.

======================================

Huh?
Who said oxygen was in short supply?
Not me!

I agree that oxygen is life-giving and that too much could kill you, but I never said it
was in short supply as CO2 is!


You set the criteria for what was in short supply by inferring it from
historic levels for CO2

You seem to be flying off at a tangent here komrade!


I was merely extending your tangent.

Fran