Yet another couple of problems with CO2

RNG

Former Staff
Jan 2015
14,121
9,880
Left coast
Scientists have discovered a double whammy of negatives from the rapid increase in CO2 in our atmosphere and therefore our oceans.

As so many deniers tout, the higher CO2 causes plants to grow more rapidly. but this means they have less time to absorb and metabolise minerals and so are becoming less nutritious.

For a different reason, the lower pH, phytoplankton are becoming less nutritional and they are the base of the entire ocean food chain. With their nutritional loss, all the way up to the fish we eat have less nutrients.

And not a mention of global warming.

Rising carbon dioxide levels are turning rice and fish into junk food | CBC Radio
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
Oct 2014
33,166
6,071
C-A-N-A-D-A-Eh
Are you friggin kidding me?

Plants can't absorb what is absent from the ground.

To say this connects to co2 is beyond absurd. It is bordering on stupid.

You'd be better looking at farming practices than industry.
 

RNG

Former Staff
Jan 2015
14,121
9,880
Left coast
Are you friggin kidding me?

Plants can't absorb what is absent from the ground.

To say this connects to co2 is beyond absurd. It is bordering on stupid.

You'd be better looking at farming practices than industry.
Read anything except Breitbart in the past 20 years?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
Oct 2014
33,166
6,071
C-A-N-A-D-A-Eh
No need given the factless entries you post.
Lmao,.. To you snopes presents facts. (Well, sometimes they do by accident)

Anyway...

Plants draw minerals from the earth. With monoculture farming, it draws minerals out without any actual replacement of the minerals.

Plants will grow more with more co2 all else being equal.

So, both parts are true, but it's asinine to say that the latter is causing the former. They are separate issues.
 

Ian Jeffrey

Council Hall
Mar 2013
79,913
50,429
Vulcan, down the street from Darth Vader
To you snopes presents facts. (Well, sometimes they do by accident)
Snopes is far more factual than all the right-wing rags thrown around here put together, which rags find facts to be anathema.

However, snopes was not cited here. Scientific American was, which is a scientific journal rather than a political one.
 
Dec 2014
18,600
6,944
The Milky Way
Have you thought up a more pertinent rebuttal in the past 20 years?

LOL On whatever boards he posts it is the same. He thinks he is the master of all commentary while pushing for censorship of any who disagree with him or the leftist agenda. He hasn't had an original thought since 1960. I have him on ignore on multiple boards.
 
Last edited:
Dec 2014
18,600
6,944
The Milky Way
Snopes is far more factual than all the right-wing rags thrown around here put together, which rags find facts to be anathema.

However, snopes was not cited here. Scientific American was, which is a scientific journal rather than a political one.


Snopes is a farce.