About Us

marcodbeast[_3_]

Peter Muehlbauer wrote:
Fran wrote:

On May 13, 1:59 pm, Catoni wrote:
Fran- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Fran... you might want to check your math... Unless my math skills
have fallen off very sharply as I age, (inevitable, over time I
suppose), then 2000
is 526.3... % of 380 . Lets say 526 %to make it simple shall we? We
really don't need use decimal points in this case.

You said: "but it has been almost 600 % higher then ...

To make this clear, if my wage is $100 per week and my friend's wage
is $200 per week then my friend's wage is 200% *OF* my wage (ie my
wage * 2) but only 100% HIGHER than my wage .... (the difference
between our two wages expressed as a proportion of my wage)

Thus

the difference between the higher figure and the lower figure
(2000-388) is 1612 ppmv. 1612ppmv expressed as a proportion of
388ppmv is 415.46391% (truncation to six places) That is also the
amount it is higher than current.

Or .. if we wish to say that atmospheric CO2 is now 385ppmv, then...
it would come to about 519.5%

To be honest, my original rough guess of 600% was indeed wrong as
well. Both of us need a math refresher course I guess.

Double checking.... It looks to me as if I am correct now. Can you
see
where I might be mistaken Fran?

see above

I can't remember what it is you teach Fran,,,but it's not math I
take it..

It's not, but I'm right anyway.

My point is that in the last 500 million years... CO2 has been
much
much higher then now...

If my point was that the Sumerians invented cuneiform script, how
would this enlighten anyone on the significance of current and future
CO2 levels to current and future humans?

During the height of the reign of the dinosaurs, as much as 500%
and more, then it is now.

Yes, and then they died.

And what was the reason in your opinion?

If you take the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere for that time
period, then right now, we are pretty well close to the bottom of
the chart..

You keep saying this but why is this relevant now?

Rapid plant development perhaps?

Relatively very little CO2 in the atmosphere... I suppose
that's why they call it a "trace"gas... because there is only a
trace of it... Thank goodness too, or we would have no
photosynthesis..

You should put this to someone who thinks it feasible and desirable
to remove all trace of Co2 in the atmosphere. I don't know how we
could do that and don't see any reason for trying.

There is no way, not with all the money or technology on this planet.

All those phantasmagoria of carbon sequestration is an absolute hoax.
For each ton of CO2 you sequestrate, another ton of CO2 is outgassing
from oceans or land to keep the partial pressure in balance.

Um, no.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Highest CO2 Level in More Than 800,000 Years!	No Name	sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology)	0	July 15th 10 01:59 AM
Highest CO2 Level in More Than 800,000 Years NOT!	[email protected]	sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology)	0	May 16th 10 07:30 PM
Highest CO2 Level in More Than 800,000 Years!	Trawley Trash	sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology)	3	May 12th 10 11:40 AM
CO2 Level at Least 800,000-Year High!	Roger Coppock	sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology)	26	June 13th 09 06:49 PM
100,000 homes destroyed, at least 115 dead, 1,800 injured as typhoon pounds eastern China	Psalm 110	sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology)	5	August 15th 04 07:40 PM

Menu

About Us