Quantcast

«

»

Jun 17 2012

DeWeese: Trees Give Off Carbon Dioxide

If you wonder why the ignorance of the American people actually matters, here’s a good example. Tom DeWeese of the wingnut American Policy Center went on Crosstalk and claimed that global warming is a hoax because trees give off carbon dioxide. Seriously.

DeWeese: The bottom line is, CO2 is not a poison to human beings, CO2 is not affecting the atmosphere, there is absolutely no evidence, I can say this with absolute confidence, there is no evidence of man-made global warming causing problems. We are actually going through a cooling period right now, which is going to increase over the next few years, it’s cyclical, it happens. I used to have a weatherman in my hometown who started the weather by saying ‘whether it’s cold or whether it’s hot, we’ll always have weather, whether or not’ and that’s exactly what this is. Every time we have a dry season or we have strong hurricanes or we have a really hot summer or a mild winter, these idiots start this drumbeat again, ‘global warming, see here’s what it is.’ They tried to say that this year is the warmest on record, it’s not. They will just keep coming up with his stuff, it’s just craziness…

Trees give off carbon dioxide; all the plants around us give it off. The fact is some scientists have done some studies saying we’ve got a carbon dioxide shortage right now. That then causes plants to die, that causes environmental damage.

The reality is exactly the opposite, of course; plants absorb carbon dioxide and give off oxygen. That’s why deforestation matters, because it’s another human activity that increases the carbon dioxide load in the atmosphere.

60 comments

1 ping

Skip to comment form

  1. 1
    garnetstar

    Surely this is conscious deceit on his part? I’m still naively reluctant to allow that some are that stupid.

    And, CO2 is not a poison? DeWeese needs to lean down into a dry ice chest and take a deep breath. We’d all be better off.

  2. 2
    throwaway

    CO2 is not a poison to human beings

    *rub eyes*
    No fucking way! I guess we can stop wasting thousands of dollars on CO2 scrubbers for the space station and all subsequent manned space/aircraft.

  3. 3
    Artor

    Did this dumbass get challenged for telling such baldly counter-factual lies on Crosstalk, or was he allowed to get away with it?

  4. 4
    Modusoperandi

    The reality is exactly the opposite, of course; plants absorb carbon dioxide and give off oxygen.

    Yes, but at night they respirate CO2*. Ergo, any measurements of increasing atmospheric CO2 must be due to sunspots.

    * In smaller amounts compared to the intake of it during the day.

  5. 5
    throwaway

    DeWesse: The fact is some scientists have done some studies …
    BullshitMan: Stop right there, you lying criminal scum!
    *blasts DeWesse with his [citation needed] vision*
    DeWesse: Gah! It burnssss…!

  6. 6
    D. C. Sessions

    Cooling period?

    I mean, I’m used to the AE Newman brigade pointing out cold winters but that doesn’t work real well in June — and otherwise, the past year set another record high for world temperatures. IIRC we’re still hanging in with nine of the ten hottest years on record being in the past ten years.

    Aside: time to update that stat, by the way: how many of the hottest fifteen years have been in the past fifteen? IIRC it’s all of them.

  7. 7
    slc1

    Not even the blogs resident global warming denier, Mr. Lancelot, is dumb enough to make a claim like that.

  8. 8
  9. 9
    Brain Hertz

    The bottom line is, CO2 is not a poison to human beings

    Um, yeah. You know, this didn’t just happen in a movie:

    href=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5giXXW_UdaM

  10. 10
    Area Man

    The fact is some scientists have done some studies saying we’ve got a carbon dioxide shortage right now.

    Okay, that’s a new one to me. I thought I had heard all the dumb denialist arguments, but I had never heard anyone claim that we were suffering from a “shortage” of CO2.

  11. 11
    DaveL

    The bottom line is, CO2 is not a poison to human beings,

    This one really mystifies me. Nobody is claiming CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere are reaching levels that are toxic to humans. Do they really think that if that were the problem, we’d be holding conferences, comparing climate models, taking ice cores, and debating things like the effect of isostatic rebound on glacier measurements? Trust me. If scientists believed CO2 concentrations were in imminent danger of reaching toxic levels, they wouldn’t be talking about climate change and sea level rise. They’d be screaming “Holy fuck! Poison gas!”

  12. 12
    Childermass

    Modusoperandi @ 4:

    Yes, but at night they respirate CO2*. Ergo, any measurements of increasing atmospheric CO2 must be due to sunspots.

    * In smaller amounts compared to the intake of it during the day.

    Actually plants not only give off CO2 at night, they do so in the day as well. They even generate that CO2 in the same way we animals do so. But your larger point, is of course, correct: The amount of C02 generated by plants by glycolysis and the citric acid cycle is smaller than the amount consumed during photosynthesis.

  13. 13
    chrisj

    I particularly like the adjacent claims that “plants give off CO2″[1] and that this mysterious “CO2 shortage” is causing plants to die. If they give it off, then why a shortage of it affect them?

    [1] as observed above, this is correct. They just give off less than they consume.

  14. 14
    raven

    wikipedia:

    In higher concentrations 1% (10,000 ppm) will make some people feel drowsy.[77] Concentrations of 7% to 10% may cause suffocation, manifesting as dizziness, headache, visual and hearing dysfunction, and unconsciousness within a few minutes to an hour.[79]

    It’s not toxic at normal atmospheric concentrations, obviously.

    At high levels it is not only toxic, it will kill you and quickly.

    In Africa a few years ago, a crater lake released a lot of CO2 suddenly. We know this because everyone living around the lake died almost immediately.

  15. 15
    slc1

    The reality is exactly the opposite, of course; plants absorb carbon dioxide and give off oxygen

    In fact, without plant life on the earth, there would be no oxygen in the atmosphere as it reacts with metals like iron and would eventually be stored in compounds of oxygen with those metals. This is what happened on Mars, where the oxygen which apparently existed in the Martian atmosphere at one time is now locked up in oxides of iron.

    It is interesting to note that, in the search for extra-terrestrial life, one of the markers that scientists will be looking for is the present of oxygen in exo-planet atmospheres; oxygen in a planet’s atmosphere is a tell tale sign of photosynthesis.

  16. 16
    Childermass

    garnetstar @ 1:

    And, CO2 is not a poison? DeWeese needs to lean down into a dry ice chest and take a deep breath. We’d all be better off.

    The dry ice shipper at the grocery store can make someone want a fresh air fast. Trust me that it is not a pleasant experience.

    DaveL @ 11:

    If scientists believed CO2 concentrations were in imminent danger of reaching toxic levels, they wouldn’t be talking about climate change and sea level rise. They’d be screaming “Holy fuck! Poison gas!”

    And of course if CO2 was approaching toxic levels, all icecaps would have been long ago melted and we would be suffering from climate change that makes Al Gore’s worst case scenarios seem like a walk in the park in a pleasant day.

  17. 17
    Bronze Dog

    This is the kind of thing that tells me your average wingnut would be in for humiliating failure at the “Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?” gameshow if they were capable of humiliation.

    This is stuff I was taught in fourth and fifth grade.

  18. 18
    Nibi

    DaveL

    This one really mystifies me. Nobody is claiming CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere are reaching levels that are toxic to humans.

    I believe this meme is a consequence of the EPA classifying CO2 as a pollutant. Pollutant is conflated with toxicant and therefore the misimplication that scientists/environazis are claiming CO2 is poisonous. Strawman now constructed, it is torched with the usual brilliant denialist deduction: CO2 is not a poison => Global warming is a hoax!

  19. 19
    Brain Hertz

    If scientists believed CO2 concentrations were in imminent danger of reaching toxic levels, they wouldn’t be talking about climate change and sea level rise. They’d be screaming “Holy fuck! Poison gas!”

    Maybe they should try that. The fact is, we’re on target to hit 1,000ppm by the end of the century, which is already within an order of magnitude of starting to be toxic to humans.

    That should be, you know, a bit of a flag that we can’t just keep emitting CO2 forever. The question needs to be asked, often: “when should we stop? At what point do we say that this is an emergency?”. Just pointing out that “never” isn’t a viable answer might wake a few people up.

  20. 20
    Brain Hertz

    Just to follow up, whenever I hear anybody pull out the “CO2 concentrations are teeeny tiny! It’s only .04%! That can’t possibly affect anything!” I think the best response is to ask what concentration is the smallest amount they wouldn’t think was too tiny to affect anything. I don’t think many people realize just how little wiggle room there is between 400 ppm and “toxic to humans”

  21. 21
    naturalcynic

    @17

    This is stuff I was taught in fourth and fifth grade.

    Then you obviously went to the wrong school. You would learn better from your mommy in the kitchen teaching from the Jesus kurrikuluh.

    And we can thank gawd that there is only so much buried carbon to burn. Unless he makes some more before the kid comes back.

  22. 22
    Gvlgeologist, FCD

    I think one of my answers to this idiocy would be, “What are trees made of? CARBON!” (largely) Of course, as some posters have noted here, they give off carbon at times due to respiration (night and especially for deciduous trees, winter), but the simple fact that trees grow shows that there is a net intake of CO2.

    As far as CO2 being poisonous, I actually didn’t know about the actual toxic effects at high concentrations. On the other hand, part of the problem in the African lake was to the best of my knowledge, simple suffocation, which would happen with any non-toxic gas at sufficiently high concentration.

    There’s just so much wrong with this crackpot’s ideas – virtually every sentence is wrong. The problem is that it takes so much to show his idiocy. Was it Samuel Clemons who said something like, “A lie can run around the world before the truth can get its boots on”?

  23. 23
    Nibi

    Brain Hertz

    Just to follow up, whenever I hear anybody pull out the “CO2 concentrations are teeeny tiny! It’s only .04%! That can’t possibly affect anything!” I think the best response is to ask what concentration is the smallest amount they wouldn’t think was too tiny to affect anything. I don’t think many people realize just how little wiggle room there is between 400 ppm and “toxic to humans”

    My stock response is to illustrate the flaw in reasoning by counterexample. The implication is that a small quantity cannot have a significant influence on a complex system. In particular, atmospheric CO2 concentration is currently about 400ppm by volume (a bit more by mass, but same order of magnitude), more popularly expressed as 0.04%. Now 100 micrograms of LSD can produce an observable effect in a 100kg hairless ape. This is 1ppb, or 0.0000001%. This refutes the implication that a 0.04% change in the composition of a complex system cannot have a significant effect. More work is necessary – you have show that the particular component is inert with respect to the behavior of the system. With CO2 in the earth’s atmosphere, the opposite has shown to be the case. In particular, the interaction of CO2 with IR radiation has both sound theoretical and empirical evidence.

    Of course, none of this rolls of the tongue quite as nicely as a well packaged talking point :).

  24. 24
    Steve Morrison

    Was it Samuel Clemons who said something like, “A lie can run around the world before the truth can get its boots on”?

    Evidently not.

    Trees give off carbon dioxide; all the plants around us give it off. The fact is some scientists have done some studies saying we’ve got a carbon dioxide shortage right now. That then causes plants to die, that causes environmental damage.

    Ah, so that must be why 80% of all pollution is caused by trees!

  25. 25
    andrewlephong

    Trees give off carbon dioxide; all the plants around us give it off. The fact is some scientists have done some studies saying we’ve got a carbon dioxide shortage right now. That then causes plants to die, that causes environmental damage.

    Well, he’s technically correct about plants giving off CO2, (they use CO2 to make carbohydrates, but at some point they have to consume some of the carbs for ATP production, and that re-releases some CO2) but I think he’s correct for all the wrong reasons, as in he doesn’t really know what he’s talking about and is just rapid-firing nonsense in the hopes that some of it will hit. I mean seriously, carbon dioxide shortage?

  26. 26
    Michael Heath

    The ‘CO2 is not bad meme’ is of course a stupid assertion, but I’ve yet to find one smart rebuttal to the scientific consensus. All contrarian and denialist arguments I’ve encountered require avoidance of basic physics and our findings to date and therefore are based solely on fatally defective arguments. It’s not like they have ever developed an arguable position. [I monitor Anthony Watts site a couple of times a month to monitor them.]

    Plus even if the odds of catastrophe were in the 25% or so percent range rather than in the 90+ percent range, these contrarians/denialists’ motivation to avoid mitigation is still a failed policy argument, even at the most remedial level of discourse and quantitative thinking. For example, businesses smartly hedge their big asset plays with some sort of insurance, or even consumers when it comes for example to insuring properties they own where they don’t owe* any money. Even the insurance hedge argument is insufficient because it’s an expense with no pay-out unless a claim is made, whereas a prudent energy policy consistent with the threat of climate change provides enormous long-term returns on investment. So even conceding their doubt, their argument still fails to the point it’s idiotic, which makes it easier for Sarah Palin, Jim Inhofe, and Michelle Bachmann to be denialists.

    *[I distinguish owning one's property free and clear because lenders always require borrowers to insure fixed collateral such as real estate. Yet we still encounter home owners who owe nothing with home insurance, in spite of the fact few homeowners make ever file claims.]

  27. 27
    Gvlgeologist, FCD

    Was it Samuel Clemons who said something like, “A lie can run around the world before the truth can get its boots on”?

    Evidently not.

    Ah, thanks. Looked for it, couldn’t find it. Quite appropriate here, as are many of the other quotes in that link.

  28. 28
    laurentweppe

    Weeeeeell, coal used to be trees, and is one of the main fossil fuels, so…

    Yeah, I know, don’t try to make jokes about hydrocarbons when a charlatan is playing dumb.

  29. 29
    kantalope

    Well apparently there can be a carbon dioxide shortage…but not the kind you are thinking: CO2 shortage may flatten soft drink supplies http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-06/orica-closure-could-lead-to-soft-drink-shortage/3761750

    but the shortage seems to be localized to Australia…and the plant in dnager of dying was not a green plant but a sodapop plant.

  30. 30
    AJS

    Plants do give off CO2 — at night. Just not as much as they absorb in daylight.

    The carbon cycle is just basic secondary school chemistry, taught in depth at age 13 – 14, for crying out loud. There is no excuse for not knowing it.

  31. 31
    podkayne

    “scientists have done some studies saying we’ve got a carbon dioxide shortage right now”

    Yeah, just because you named your dog “Scientists” doesn’t make this gibberish legit.

  32. 32
    Balstrome

    All you folk are just like me, I have not bothered to contact this TV show and voice my disagreement with what was said on it, I have not bothered to generate public support to have the TV re-examine what was said. The best I can say for myself, is that I have, like you all, informed the like minded people who read this blog that I think just like them, and I consider my job in the matter to be adequately done. Besides I like in South Africa, and it’s an American TV show, I think.

  33. 33
    Balstrome

    eish, commenting at night is harsh on spelling.

    It’s “I live in South Africa, yes I also like South Africa”

  34. 34
    lancifer

    As this blog’s resident “climate change denier” I have to say this guy sounds like a goober.

    Although as modusopearndi, and others, pointed out plants do indeed emit CO2 while respiring.

    And it is true that current atmospheric CO2 levels are at geologically historical low levels that are near the lower tolerance of green plants.

    It is a mundane fact that greenhouses pump in CO2 at many times atmospheric concentration to promote plant growth.

    Still, saying things like,

    “…CO2 is not affecting the atmosphere, there is absolutely no evidence, I can say this with absolute confidence, there is no evidence of man-made global warming causing problems. We are actually going through a cooling period right now, which is going to increase over the next few years, it’s cyclical, it happens” is not supported by the evidence.

    Statements like these are indications that he is not interested in scientific inquiry but political posturing.

  35. 35
    Brain Hertz

    @Nibi: your LSD example is pretty good.

    The one I usually point to is carbon monoxide, since 400ppm happens to be the level at which carbon monoxide alarms are frequently set to go off.

  36. 36
    Greg Laden

    Right, as mentioned plant cells do in fact respirate. (which involves giving off CO2). But the overwhelming balance is that atmospheric CO2 is converted into carbohydrates and some into hydrocarbons over time.

    Science is hard. But that guy is an idiot.

  37. 37
    Randomfactor

    Cooling period?

    Which failed to show up as expected. When scientists started wondering WHY, they discovered how quickly global warming was happening.

    Of course, I was reading about CO2-induced AGW in an Isaac Asimov essay back in the late 1960s.

  38. 38
    jahigginbotham

    #18
    Can’t be much of a poison:
    Carbon dioxide is the most powerful cerebral vasodilator known. Inhaling large concentrations causes rapid circulatory insufficiency leading to coma and death. Asphyxiation is likely to occur before the effects of carbon dioxide overexposure. Chronic, harmful effects are not known from repeated inhalation of low concentrations. Low concentrations of carbon dioxide cause increased respiration and headache.

    NFPA HAZARD CODES
    Health: 1 Flammability: 0 Reactivity: 0
    MSDS: G-8 Revised: 6/7/96
    HMIS HAZARD CODES
    Health: 1 Flammability: 0
    RATINGS SYSTEM
    0 = No Hazard 1 = Slight Hazard 2 = Moderate Hazard 3 = Serious Hazard 4 = Severe Hazard

    http://apps.risd.edu/envirohealth_msds/CO2.pdf

  39. 39
    sunsangnim

    Such amazing stupidity. Even if you accept some of the absurd statements about a CO2 storage and plants giving off CO2, it doesn’t make any logical sense. Why would a CO2 shortage cause plants to die unless they’re absorbing CO2? This guy’s argument makes about as much sense as the Chewbacca defense.

    BTW Ed, I noticed Right Wing Watch has a link to Dispatches in their blogroll, but it’s the old SB site. You might want to have them point to FTB.

  40. 40
    Randomfactor

    This guy’s argument makes about as much sense as the Chewbacca defense.

    Which works just fine, when the people you’re trying to bamboozle aren’t too bright. Or get their information from right-wing sources exclusively, which amounts to the same thing.

  41. 41
    gwangung

    CO2 is not a poison to human beings

    Neither is water.

    But if I shove your face in that bucket of water and hold it under for a couple minutes, I don’t think it’ll do you any good.

  42. 42
    ohioobserver

    I think you give this SOB too much credit for being merely stupid. I don’t think he is.

    He (like most other climate change deniers) surely knows the basic facts. He knows that the evidence is real.

    He says this shit because HE’S A LIAR. Let’s call it what it is.

    Why would he lie? Because he and many of his friends stand to lose a lot of money if global warming is taken seriously by the majority of the public.

    If we have to distinguish between abysmal stupidity and malicious greed, I vote for malicious greed every time.

  43. 43
    Winterwind

    Socialists want us to believe that CO2 is bad. But Scientists have proven that humans are carbon-based lifeforms!! Carbon is the element of life. God gave carbon FOUR valence electrons to represent the FOUR EVANGELISTS. So doesn’t that mean that more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is a good thing?? But communists want to lower CO2 levels so they can kill people. They hate life, which is why they force women to abort their babies, and set up government healthcare death panels to kill good Christians!!

    Also, truth is so precious that she must be surrounded by a bodyguard of lies.

  44. 44
    dingojack

    D. C. Sessions (#6) – “I mean, I’m used to the AE Newman brigade pointing out cold winters but that doesn’t work real well in June…”

    Speak for your own hemisphere. ;) – Brrrrr.

    Dingo

  45. 45
    Eric O

    The fact is some scientists have done some studies saying we’ve got a carbon dioxide shortage right now.

    I wonder if this is a deliberate lie or if he’s repeating a claim that he heard elsewhere. I only ask because I’ve heard a lot of denialist claims, and this one is completely new to me.

  46. 46
    StevoR : Free West Papua, free Tibet, let the Chagossians return!

    @9. Brain Hertz :

    “The bottom line is, CO2 is not a poison to human beings.” Um, yeah. You know, this didn’t just happen in a movie.

    I wa sgoing tomention Apollo 13′s (later) problem but youbeta me to it! Cheers for that link.

  47. 47
    dingojack

    Dear Mr DeWeese:

    2 sucrose + 6 oxygen 6 water vapour + 6 carbon dioxide

    Photosynthesis pushes the reaction toward the left. This occurs in plants, algae and some bacteria, but only when there is enough light of the right frequencies, that is during the day. This allows them to store energy as high-energy sugars (not just sucrose as shown) and it produces (as a by-product) oxygen.
    Respiration pushes the reaction toward the right. This occurs in all organisms at all times of the day and night allowing them to use the energy stored in high-energy sugars to grow, reproduce, move and so on. As a by-product repiration creates carbon dioxide and water vapour.

    Photosynthesis and respiration are almost in equilibrium.

    This means that, without humans digging up hundreds of millions of years worth of stored carbon (in the form of fossil fuels) and burning them over the last 250 years (thus releasing the stored carbon into the air as carbon dioxide), the levels of oxygen and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would fluctuate very little and then over a very long time frame.

    In the next lesson we will cover the Krebs Cycle.

    @@
    Dingo
    —–
    Any bets that this wiener was home-schooled?

  48. 48
    StevoR : Free West Papua, free Tibet, let the Chagossians return!

    @ ^ Argh. Forget to preview – sorry about the typos.

    @6. D. C. Sessions :

    Cooling period? I mean, I’m used to the AE Newman brigade pointing out cold winters but that doesn’t work real well in June — and otherwise, the past year set another record high for world temperatures. IIRC we’re still hanging in with nine of the ten hottest years on record being in the past ten years.

    Aside: time to update that stat, by the way: how many of the hottest fifteen years have been in the past fifteen? IIRC it’s all of them.

    Cheers for that last stat – good point and wonder how many out of tehtop twenty or thirty hottest yeras are recent?

    Plus conversely when the last “top ten” *coldest* yera wa sand how many recent years fall into that category tolook at the other angle on it.

    Does anyone know of a site that has these things or ideally an updated listing of every year on record from hottest to coldest to peruse?

    @10. Area Man :

    Okay, that’s a new one to me. I thought I had heard all the dumb denialist arguments, but I had never heard anyone claim that we were suffering from a “shortage” of CO2.

    I have and its been debunked very nicely here a few years ago -see for instance :

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uE6at2IEUOU&list=PL029130BFDC78FA33&index=41&feature=plpp_video

    Republican congrescritter John Shimkus saying there’s a even “theological (lolwut?) debate that we’re a carbon starved planet” back in 2010.

    @23. Nibi : Great analogy with LSD, I’ve used a similar one in debates before on this comparing how little cyanide or arsenic or snake venom it takes to kill you but that’s even better. Might have to yoik that ‘un and use it myself.

  49. 49
    StevoR : Free West Papua, free Tibet, let the Chagossians return!

    @43. Winterwind : Whew. You had me going for a while there!

    @48. First line was referring to my comment 46, natch. Also, yeah, I do suck at typ(o)ing. Sorry.

    @45.Eric O :

    I wonder if this is a deliberate lie or if he’s repeating a claim that he heard elsewhere. I only ask because I’ve heard a lot of denialist claims, and this one is completely new to me.

    Not new – just one in a long list of republicans making stupid and five sec wikicheck falsifiable claims on Carbon dioxide and Global Overheating.

    Such as :

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPA-8A4zf2c

    John Boehner republican congresscritter and now House speaker (Right?) thinking we’re worried co2 is a carcinogen.

    Mind you, here in Oz we’ve had Tony Abbott, opposition leader catholic fundamentalist and Climate change denier claiming Co2 is “weightless” .. (Eyeroll.)

  50. 50
    StevoR : Free West Papua, free Tibet, let the Chagossians return!

    Then there’s Michelle bachman ersthile republican nominee wanna be in the race to be POTUS speaking here :

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02EpAMm8rfo&list=PL029130BFDC78FA33&index=31&feature=plpp_video

    “Carbon dioxide is a natural by product of nature.”

    Even in the movies people get it wrong on C02 – Prometheus had a 3% trace of Co2 in the atmosphere of LV-223 being lethal – just one of the many bad science flaws there.

  51. 51
    puppygod

    Even in the movies people get it wrong on C02 – Prometheus had a 3% trace of Co2 in the atmosphere of LV-223 being lethal – just one of the many bad science flaws there.

    I have not seen the movie, so I can’t say one way or the other, but 3% _might_ be lethal – what really count is not percentage, but partial pressure. So it all depends on what the other gases were in the mixture and what was the pressure of the mix. Percentages are useful if we are talking about 1 atm and proportions close to what we find in the Earth atmosphere. Spaceships can have whatever atmosphere engineers like them to have (my personal favourite is 100% argon and robotic crew).

  52. 52
    democommie

    Oh, yeah! Well why don’ all you AGW veritasilists answer me this?

    How come the UN won’t release the information for the process to convert CO2 to diamonds and oxygen? Huh, whyn’t they do that?

    It’s pretty basic fizix and kemestree. You take all of the CO2 that the trees produce and put it in a RILLY big tank and then compress it, like, a brazillion times and voyla! you got diamonds and oxygen!!*

    * You can do the same thing with unicorn farts but it takes longer, ‘cuz they ain’t as much unicorniessess as they used to be.

  53. 53
    Donovan

    Any so-called “warming” you might see in records, measurements, and data not pulled from my ass is just the warmth of a global hug from Jesus.

    Proof that AGW is a hoax AND God is real. And somewhere in there, that also proves butt sex is bad and wimenz must do as I say.

  54. 54
    Tualha

    Too much carbon dioxide is causing humans to become shorter than the historical average.

    Do you doubt this is possible?

  55. 55
    birgerjohansson

    “(my personal favourite is 100% argon and robotic crew).”

    And my personal favourite planets are those in cold Brown Dwarf systems. Superconductive materials at ambient temperatures. The AIs that replace the human race will love it.
    — — — — — — — — — —
    “Carbon dioxide is a natural by product of nature.”

    BTW, radon is a natural by-product of natural decay of long-lived isotopes. We should pump excess Rd into the halls where Republicans hold their conferences to make the ambience more *natural*.
    — — — — — — — — —
    “How come the UN won’t release the information for the process to convert CO2 to diamonds and oxygen?”
    Let’s not forget that the heebs refuse to share the secret formula for eternal life with us.
    — — — — — — —
    My favourite is the claim that since CO2 is heavier than N2 and O2 it should form a thin layer just above the ground, so claims of finding CO2 in the upper atmosphere must be false.

  56. 56
    birgerjohansson

    More about DeWeese and his conspiracy theories:
    .
    “The Agenda 21 plan DeWeese rails on about was developed in 1992 at a UN meeting in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, and signed by 178 world leaders including then-President George H.W. Bush. It amounts to a set of “smart growth” principles, a plan to deal with overpopulation, pollution, poverty and resource depletion. It is wholly voluntary — neither a treaty nor a legally binding agreement.

    —-Snip)—-

    The effect of the fear-mongering fairy tale offered up by DeWeese and other conspiracy theorists has been almost unbelievable. Not only have some counties passed resolutions opposing Agenda 21 (along with the Tennessee House of Representatives), but the Republican National Committee (RNC) in January passed one as well, decrying Agenda 21’s “destructive strategies for ‘sustainable development.’” The RNC recommended that the resolution be adopted as part of the Republican platform at its August 2012 convention.”
    .
    So you see, president George H. W. Bush is part of the world conspiracy to destroy american freedom.
    .

  57. 57
    eric

    Re: the cooling period (@6 and @37): we are, technically speaking, in an interglacial period of an ice age. The last glacial period ended something like 11,000 years ago, but there’s no reason not to expect more before the current ice age ends. So if humans don’t have a major impact, we might reasonably expct the earth to cool down in the future. But that would be in a few tens of thousands to hundred thousand years or so – glacial periods are slow and gradual.

    Then again, an interglacial probably looks exactly like the end of an ice age, so I don’t know if we could tell the differences and maybe this is actually the end of the current ice age.

    In any event, yeah, we are technically in a cool period. Warm, non-ice-age periods of the earth are geologcally identified as when there are no ice caps at all.

  58. 58
    Enkidum

    So you see, president George H. W. Bush is part of the world conspiracy to destroy american freedom.

    Well, actually, there’s quite a bit of truth to that, but not in the way the wingnuts would like.

  59. 59
    caseloweraz

    Whether it’s cold or whether it’s hot,
    Listening to DeWeese will make your brain rot.

  60. 60
    caseloweraz

    Tualha wrote: “Too much carbon dioxide is causing humans to become shorter than the historical average.

    Do you doubt this is possible?”

    Not at all. Climate contrarians have gotten a lot shorter lately. If I were to question one, he would be quite short with me, likely explaining, “Shut up!”

  1. 61
    Global Warming Denialist: Trees Give Off Carbon Dioxide - Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Conservatives, Liberals, Third Parties, Left-Wing, Right-Wing, Congress, President - City-Data Forum

    [...] Warming Denialist: Trees Give Off Carbon Dioxide DeWeese: Trees Give Off Carbon Dioxide | Dispatches from the Culture Wars Tom DeWeese of the American Policy Center claimed that Global Warming is a hoax because there is a [...]

Leave a Reply

Switch to our mobile site