That is all the have.
There have been many times on this site where a question like this has been asked, "If you could change the world, what one thing would you do?"
I answered all of them, "Stop the lying."
I received massive amounts of thumbs down. Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! The greenies not only love the lie, but they live by the lie and apparently hate the truth.
I would say it would probably be good for plant growth but I don't like stating things as fact when there are so many variables. James is right. They lie because they have to lie to push the cause. The cause (increased centralized control of everything) would not be furthered if they were truthful and suggested it might get a tiny bit warmer but we aren't really sure and our models haven't really performed very well and well... our predictions almost never come true.
Bacheous suggests there will be droughts and flooding (you would think they would go with one) but of course that is the line that they are told to believe. He is also told to believe that plants will become less nutritious if they close their stomata a little sooner and require less water. In spite of the silliness of that notion, I remember the study that suggested it. It just makes me wonder why alarmists are so quick to believe nonsense as long as it is good for the cause.
Plants also need sunlight. And water. They need particular acidity of soils. They need nutrients in those soils. They need organisms like worms to churn the soil up. They need microorganisms in the soil.
Yes. Plants love CO2. But only if you also provide for their other needs. Trying growing a water lily in a drought, or a cactus in a swamp and you'll see that CO2 isn't the only thing plants need!
So, the point is, what happens if CO2 levels rise but soil dries out? What happens if changing precipitation patterns leave soil waterlogged? What happens when some plants in a region thrive quicker and faster than others? You could destroy an entire ecosystem that way. Things are a little more complicated than 'plants love CO2'.
How is that a lie?
Other things to consider:
Rapid plant growth from added CO2 make plants less nutritious. The growth does not necessarily add to food production. Indeed, more CO2 is good for an individual plant, but not so good for the human who wants to eat the plant.
Climate change is affecting water supply and weather in ways that do not help food production. Drought and flooding both diminish agriculture productivity and climate change is making both more common.
Climate change is changing where plants grow best. Adaptation will mitigate some of this, changing what crops we can grow in this county. But changing crops is very expensive, raises prices, and further drives away family farmers who do not have the required deep pockets.
Check out the changes in growing zones between 1990 and 2006
https://www.arborday.org/media/mapchange...
Climate change is in part caused by deforestation. Human activity is reducing the total plant life on the planet. It is silly to claim that ripping out forests are good for forests.
Of all this, the most important is water.
on 12 21 12 atmospheric CO2 hit 400 ppm . this is passed the point of no return . the earth will go into an irreversible , permanent greenhouse effect . we turn into venus - 800 degrees F at noon . it will happen pretty fast . by 2023 , after 5 years of worldwide crop failures , food will be made from people . by the 2030s the seas will boil off into space and humanity turns to dust . the money the oil and coal industry pays you to be a denier won't help , the secret government bunkers won't help , you deniers die too .
see you on the other side .
I am no expert on plants, but if they got the same amount of sunshine, and precipitation, and the temperature didn't change, then they would probably love 600 ppm of CO2.
But believing that you can change CO2 without changing those other things is stupid, so to claim that, you either have to be stupid or a liar. Actually, many deniers have proven you can be both.
EDIT: Here's a very ignorant statement in another answer:
"Bacheous suggests there will be droughts and flooding (you would think they would go with one)..."
For someone to imagine that different places in the world might not have entirely different effects from global warming is absurdly myopic. Here's the difference between scientists and deniers: scientists "go with" the truth, while deniers "go with" anything that supports their denial.
And you need water for life. However, dropping you in the middle of the Pacific Ocean would not be beneficial to your life, despite all the water around you.
There are other factors to be considered. such as the changes in climate and the effect of CO2 on animals.
If the public is not continually threatened by the Alarmists, then Taxpayer funding of $$Billions per year will dry up.
It's all about the money! I guarantee that if all public funding for catastrophic, Manmade, global warming "research" were to stop.......so would the so-called 'global warming cause!
You have a statement "600 ppm of Co2 would be beneficial for plant growth." which in itself is true CO2 does benefit plants, but CO2 is also a greenhouse gas which warms the planet, this is not a lie as much as deniers try to pretend it is.
A warmer planet will melt ice and cause sea level to rise that is also not a lie it is a basic fact of physics, sea level is rising and ice is melting.
http://climate.nasa.gov/key_indicators#l...
http://climate.nasa.gov/key_indicators#s...
Denier try to make this about the 'claims of alarmists' when it is in fact the claim of scientists, and deniers fear that people will take scientists seriously so they 'deniers' lie.
They do it so much that some even believe their own lies
like "the hockeystick has been disproved"
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11...
or "we are cooling" "it's the Sun" "it's volcanoes" "it's greens" "it's Al Gore" "It's scientists" "It's communists" etc etc etc etc
This is of course why you find no scientific links or content in denier posts, they have none.
Because they don't understand basic science and are duped by fossil fuel industry launched anti-science myths, and kook websites that get all alarmed about anything that might involve wealthy people paying slightly higher taxes, or involve the United Nations in even the most remote sense, or mean paying more to have an SUV.
U.S. National Academy of Sciences, 2010:
http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record...
“Climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for a broad range of human and natural systems.”
http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpine...
“Choices made now about carbon dioxide emissions reductions will affect climate change impacts experienced not just over the next few decades but also in coming centuries and millennia…Because CO2 in the atmosphere is long lived, it can effectively lock the Earth and future generations into a range of impacts, some of which could become very severe.”
http://www.physics.fsu.edu/awards/NAS/
“The Academy membership is composed of approximately 2,100 members and 380 foreign associates, of whom nearly 200 have won Nobel Prizes. Members and foreign associates of the Academy are elected in recognition of their distinguished and continuing achievements in original research; election to the Academy is considered one of the highest honors that can be accorded a scientist or engineer.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_...
http://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/...
http://www.aip.org/history/climate/timel...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warm...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stern_Revie...
http://nas-sites.org/climate-change/qand...
http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument...
600 ppm of Co2 would be beneficial for plant growth.
Yes plants grow bigger and faster with more CO2 they also need less water, more plant growth means more roots, more soil organisms, more soil, less evaporation, less droughts.
It's a pity you're wrong, or are you lying as denialists always do? Of course you are
Plants also require water and some do mot grrminate past high temperatures. You are are liying by ommission.
Look over there>>> co2 is also good in coke
AGW cultists lie because their true agenda would be rejected by the public outright.
