Junk Science Alive and Well at OTBL
It's always entertaining to see what's happening at St. Croix County's local Right Wingnut propaganda blog OTBL, and today was no exception. There was an really misinformative article lambasting global warming on the OTBL Junk Science Beat.
The article begins with a "pie" chart listing the component gases in our atmosphere.
Here's a little remedial charting info Flash.
THIS IS AT PIE CHART
But I digress.
Dr. Flash references the "pie chart" with the following:
"Interesting, is it not?
What I would like to know, is where are all the enviromentalist whack jobs when it comes to Nitrogen, Oxygen and Argon? I mean, really, 99.93% of the air we breathe is composed of just those three gases yet all we seem to hear about is the concentration of a trace gas (carbon dioxide) which accounts for LESS THAN 1/2 of 1 percent!"
So, critically thinking junk scientists like "Flash" want you to believe that because a gas makes up only a small portion of our atmosphere that it is not worth being concerned about.
That brought to my mind another insignificant gas that often has a deadly outcome when breathed. Carbon Monoxide.
With a little research I discovered the follow:
From Carbon Monoxide Poisoning.com
"At what level does carbon monoxide become toxic?
For healthy adults, CO becomes toxic when it reaches a level higher than 50 ppm (parts per million) with continuous exposure over an eight hour period.. When the level of CO becomes higher than that, a person will suffer from symptoms of exposure. Mild exposure over a few hours (a CO level between 70 ppm and 100 ppm) include flu-like symptoms such as headaches, sore eyes and a runny nose. Medium exposure (a CO level between 150 ppm to 300 ppm) will produce dizziness, drowsiness and vomiting. Extreme exposure (a CO level of 400 ppm and higher) will result in unconsciousness, brain damage and death."
400 parts per million turns out to be 0.04% the air that you breath that is considered lethal dose of Carbon monoxide.
I guess you can draw your own conclusions. Myself, I think .04% one gas might be something to be concerned about, (granted this is not CO2) but then again, I never studied Junk Science like Flash.
5 comments:
Myself, I'm more worried about all the Argon in the atmosphere. Who knows what that stuff can do to us, and there is over 3 times more of it than CO2!
Is there any evidence that there's been an increase in Argon gas? The same portion of argon in the atmosphere has probably been breathed by humans for several millennia. Why aren't you worried about Nitrogen then? Ever hear of nitrogen narcosis? There more of that than Oxygen.
The OTBL argument is junk science at it's best.
ISW,
Well no, human's aren't increasing Argon -- any more than they are increasing CO2 enough to impact global temperatures.
Lets not forget that the midieval warming period (900-1300 A.D.) was warmer than current temperatures, and there were no human-generated gases to blame that on.
Consider this theory: the purveyors of human-caused global warming theory are much more interested in hobbling the US and other western economies than they are with climate concerns.
Evidence? Well, if they really were interested in curtailing CO2 or other, harmful emissions, they would have demanded that the Kyoto accords include India, China, and other highly polluting economies.
China currently dumps more crap into the atmosphere than the US, but you don't see International ANSWER breaking out the giant puppets and rioting over there. No, not only is that not on their agenda, but those ANSWER folks know that, unlike protests in liberal western democracies, civil disobedience in China will get you killed.
Anon:"Well no, human's aren't increasing Argon -- any more than they are increasing CO2 enough to impact global temperatures."
The International Conference on Climate change held in Paris this spring with most of the world's leading expert scientists on the subject has pretty much debunked this theory of your.
Other than Steve Malloy who is financed by Exxon and the "Competitive Enterprise Institute" few if any reputable scientists are giving this argument credence. See article of "The Denial Industry"
http://tinyurl.com/2ozbrc
Also:http://tinyurl.com/35lcnu
For an earlier post on this blog.
As for China, I agree. They among the world's worst polluters as is India and other Asian countries. They have industries where they recover gold from our discarded computer parts in open acid pits. Interesting fact. Many of our "free market" recycling companies recycle these parts by shipping them to China.
The Chinese are no friends to us, expect they make cheap crap for us with slave labor. But now that the Bush administration has financed most of the deficit they've created with borrowing from China, we will Cow Tow to them.
ISW,
Thanks for the acknowledgement that China is the world's premier contributor to greenhouse gas emissions that are alledgedly spelling doom for our planet. And for letting us all know (as if there is any question, of course) that the Bush Administration is complicit in this environmental crime.
But again, my question stands: if the international community was really interested in curtailing greenhouse gas emissions to save the planet, why did they exempt India and China? Why did they target only western ecomomies?
Post a Comment