Co2 is so insignificant! how can it ever harm us?

Question

Ok before ignoring what i am typing HERE read it because it'll give you a bit more information for you to see my point.

Ok Co2 we all agree is a MINOR green house gass! and i've heard the co2 levels of all the gasses in our atmosphere is somewhat 0.035% or 0.054%(that's the one i think it's at). WOAH! OMFG IT"S THE BIGGEST NUMBER EVA!!!!! 0.054% if that was a percentage of my body i bet that's less then a hair on my balls! how could that ever harm us if it's a MINOR green house gass? Why don't many people consider this? they talk about increases by 20% when they never look at the numbers!

Ok to cap it off for la lazy readers 0.054% of the earth's atmosphere is Co2 and it's a minor green house gass. 0.054% X Minor effect = Not very significan't wtf are you going on about!

Answer 1

CO2 can't but CO could if GW were real; people on here don't seem to know the difference.

Answer 2

Because many left winger want co2 to cause catastrophic warming so society can implement their "it can't hurt" policies.

Co2 alone without any other processes will only cause minor warming.  That is not in dispute and has been established by both sides.

In order to get catastrophic warming a new theory had to be established.  This theory says that this minor warming will set off a chain reaction of events that will amplify initial minor warming,  that eventually will lead to the demise of the planet.

If that sounds far fetched, it is.  That is why few people will be truthful and answer this question.  They will just give you examples of other things were something minor, will have serious consequences.

Answer 3

Very good! And:

1) 1 microliter of mercury is less than 0.00001% of my body mass, it can not possibly harm me.

2) Food accounts for less than 1% of the US gross national product, it is not important.

3) Microorganisms are so much smaller than me they can not possibly cause diseases.

You get the idea.  CO2 is not "insignificant."  Double the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, and you get 4 degrees celcius warmer temperature give or take a few degrees.  We are talking major dispruptions to environment and ultimately the environment is what allows us to live.

Answer 4

Hows this?   One final snowflake sets off an avalanche.   The snowflake is VERY MINOR in itself, but it does set off a massively destructive event.

Answer 5

Well why are the AGW people targeting Co2, as the bad guy is the real question to be answered here. Because it is the only gaseous substance in the universe that can be shown to have been produced in the human or animal body as a normal part of its life activities. Every living creature on the face of the earth is in some way dependent on Co2. Some animals and insects produce Co2 in their breathing process, they take in the general air mix including Oxygen and a lot of other gasses as well. They breathe out all of that mix they took in except when the oxygen atoms are exhaled they are linked to a carbon atom producing Co2.

Then trees and other plants take in the Co2 and eat the carbon atom as part of their food and exhale back into the atmosphere the oxygen atoms. This is nature’s way. So what is the core problem we face, it is that because third world nations have been clear cutting tropical rain forests and not replanting them the number of plants that can reduce Co2 to bio-mass and free oxygen is being reduced every year while human and animal populations are growing. Natures way of dealing with this is to expand the workable acreage to grow plants on to accommodate the larger animal population.

The AGW promoter’s concept is to force a reduction in population to compensate for the loss of large plants such as tropical trees. So what do we do now plant a couple hundred thousand trees or kill a couple of billion humans and animals, this is the real hidden question posed as global warming by the promoters of AGW.

Answer 6

Even the smallest bit can have a large effect. Imagine an object,        say a sheet of stiff paper, balancing on a fulcrum of some type. Each side has 5 oz of weight on it. Now, drop a feather on to either side. That side will start weighing down, even though it had only a very small amount of weight added to it.

Answer 7

Here we go again...

Michael - using the word MINOR over and over again will not change the science.

I think we can agree that 0.0000000001% is a very, very minor amount - even less than the .035% for CO2 in the atmosphere. Yet, if you had that percent of botulism in you, you would be dead.

0.001% is also very small but that is the percentage of muslims that can be classified as terrorists - a very, very small MINORITY yet various governments around the world take this MINOR threat very seriously.

A 10km wide asteroid (0.00000000003% of Earth's mass - very, very MINOR indeed) wiped out 90% of life on this planet.

Coincidentally, the weight of a bullet is about 0.035% of the weight of a human - the same as that MINOR amount of CO2. Yet, like the CO2, the impact that this MINOR weight can have is serious - it can kill you!

Please, before you get so hung up on one word, understand the science behind it. If you did/could understand the science, you would realise that it quite easily explains "wtf are you going on about".

Sadly, however, you will more than likely disregard this, and all the other good answers here written by people who are simply trying to bring basic education to the dark corners of ignorance that abound on this planet.

Edit

You say "co2 is a weak and tiny amount" hence your argument is based on two things:

Small amounts and potency.

Small (as you elegantly put it as "a hair on my balls") is what I refuted by showing that small isn't necessarily safe or nothing to worry about - small amounts of potent things can have a big effect. You have agreed with this point (e.g. "botulism is potent"). Thus the fact that CO2 only constitutes 0.038% of the atmosphere is, in itself, irrelevant.

The issue, then, comes down to potency.

CO2 is a potent force in AGW: You're the only one saying CO2 isn't significant! So now the whole rant boils down to one person's opinion (yours) that CO2 is not a potent force in planetary warming when all the evidence, from Venus, lab experiments, IPCC report, etc, etc. says the opposite.

Fact is, the role of atmospheric CO2 as a significant component of planetary warming has been known since the nineteenth century.

Perhaps you could enlighten us with how you have been able to refute 150 years of science? Where are the studies, the empirical evidence, the proofs?

My guess is that you are hung up on the word "minor" again (as in 'minor greenhouse gas').

A .303 bullet is a 'minor' weapon compared to an artillery shell. This doesn't mean it is harmless.

CO2 is minor compared to CFCs. This doesn't mean it is harmless.

"Minor" is not synonymous with "harmless".

So, it has been shown that:

Small/tiny/little amounts ('minor' percentages) of a substance are not necessarily an indication of the impact that substance may have.

If the substance is potent, then even a small amoutn can be significant.

CO2 has been known to be potent in planetary warming for 150 years.

Thus small amounts of CO2 have a significant impact upon the Earth's climate.

Doubling the amount of atmospheric CO2 will have a correspondingly significant impact upon the Earth's climate.

That, my friend, is wtf we are talking about - simple logic based on facts.

Answer 8

Think of it this way, it is a snowball effect.  A small increase in CO2 increases the temperature ever so slightly which melts just a little bit more snow.  This in turns increases the absorptivity of the earth which increases the temperature even more which melts more ice...and so on.

So minor changes to a system can dramatically effect the system.

Answer 9

If you removed all the CO2 and water vapor from our atmosphere, that would change only about 1% of it.  But the global average temperature would drop 32C and we'd all be dead.

There is likely some level of arsenic in your public drinking water (EPA allows 10 ppb or 0.000001%). Would you be concerned if there were a 0.00001% increase? You should be.

It's very wrong to assume that small percentage changes (based on the entire volume of a substance) in minor components will only cause minor changes.  Take a Chemistry course in High School or College, depending on where you are in life and you'll quickly see what's wrong with your intuitive approach.

Answer 10

yes a small percentage, but there also has been a small change in the percentage of temperture (1/3 of a degree or something)

Just because it small doesnt mean its insignificant

Answer 11

CO2 doesn't retain as much heat as water vapor does. And there's a higher percentage of water vapor in the atmosphere, I believe.

At the same time, minor changes in nature and climate have drastic effects on the organisms that have learned to live in them a certain way. CO2's effect is negligible, in light of things, but a significant increase like a doubling (which isn't going to happen) would have some considerable effects.

Answer 12

i completely agree with you!!! finally someone that looks into the FACTS before making a decision about media hyped global warming.  if any green house gas was going to cause a problem it would be the biggest one...aka water vapor.   here, i found this great movie that was made in england and was shown on BBC channel 4.  i think you would find it to be interesting.  if you want, you can email me and tell me what you think!

Answer 13

If someone is going to try and use arithmetic to try and disprove AGW it would be nice if they could at least get the numbers right The amount of co2 in the atmosphere is 0.0383% of the total atmosphere. Trying to us this figure is meaningless as over 98% of the atmosphere is not warming gases, the remaining less than 2% includes water vapor. Without this tiny percentage of the atmosphere the temperature of the earth would be more like -30c

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_...