Musings from the Merse
Saturday, May 02, 2009
Et CO2 Brute?
The two local papers : the Berwickshire News (rural) and the Berwick Advertiser (Urban)cover many the same news stories apart from the odd Berwick specific item of no interest to the country cousins and the Berwickshire reports of eg Community Councils are not carried in the Advertiser-as of no interest to anyone really, apart from the Secretary of the council concerned (Hutton and Paxton always excepted).
The letter columns are different. Berwickshire carries fewer loony contributions than the Advertiser with the notable exception of the effusions from the self styled, self appointed and self certified Acting Regent of Scotland who, it must be said, is keeping his head down recently or may have defected to England; hopefully. The Advertiser has a coterie of regulars who are now focused on man's contribution to global warming-debunkers, deniers and Dodos-most of whom not only dismiss the weight of scientific evidence as to the part played by CO2 emissions but also deny the existence of climate change at all. Their opponents are equally abrasive: for example from Thursday's column:
WHERE'S THE LOGIC?
SIR,-The logic of Mr Ross’s letter of April 23 eludes me. On man-made climate change, he appears to agree with Prof Carter (also April 23) that it isn’t happening.
He writes: “Our own eyes tell us sea levels have not risen. What is more, if they haven’t risen at the mouth of the Tweed, they haven’t risen in any of the island nations who are out with their begging bowls at every opportunity.”
The flat earthers also believe in the evidence of their eyes, as did the medieval church in their denial that the earth revolved around the sun.
But did this make them right?
A KNIGHT
Berwick I don't know if A Knight is the urban opposite number to our own bloggee A Peasant but I am sure he will not have the last word. No doubt Mr Gudgeon of Norham will have another go on these lines
Pure superstition
Sir,-The idea of man-made global warming is a good example of modern-day superstition.
The dictionary says superstition is an irrational fear or hope in magic.
Physicists generally don’t waste their time with delusions or irrational thinking which is why they don’t get involved in the global warming debate.
“Do the Maths” is all they would say on the matter.
For the benefit of Mr Ross, Professor Bob Carter and Robert Leetham, here is the short formula which a physicist would use to dismisses the idea of anthropomorphic global warming:
Plants are the only source of oxygen the world needs for combustion, respiration and decomposition.
Without the level of oxygen dropping, then levels of CO2 can’t be rising. It’s basic chemistry.
Plants provide virtually all the world’s free oxygen. There is no other major source of oxygen. Since we know the level of oxygen in the atmosphere isn’t falling, plants (using photosynthesis) must be generating enough oxygen to supply everything that breaths, as well as every car, every engine, every power-station, every blast furnace and heating system on the planet.
Plants produce so much oxygen that even colossal forest fires don’t affect oxygen levels.
Since virtually all the oxygen in the atmosphere is sequestered from H2O+CO2 and the CO2 only comes from the oxidation of organic carbon, the two gasses have to rise or fall in strict proportion.
To believe humans are responsible for an increase in CO2 is therefore pure superstition.
JUSTIN GUDGEON
Norham West Mains
I don't want to add (fossil) fuel to this debate but having to put a third pullover on on a sunny day in May makes me wonder about global warming-except of course climate change can work both ways:
Like getting colder?
The two local papers : the Berwickshire News (rural) and the Berwick Advertiser (Urban)cover many the same news stories apart from the odd Berwick specific item of no interest to the country cousins and the Berwickshire reports of eg Community Councils are not carried in the Advertiser-as of no interest to anyone really, apart from the Secretary of the council concerned (Hutton and Paxton always excepted).
The letter columns are different. Berwickshire carries fewer loony contributions than the Advertiser with the notable exception of the effusions from the self styled, self appointed and self certified Acting Regent of Scotland who, it must be said, is keeping his head down recently or may have defected to England; hopefully. The Advertiser has a coterie of regulars who are now focused on man's contribution to global warming-debunkers, deniers and Dodos-most of whom not only dismiss the weight of scientific evidence as to the part played by CO2 emissions but also deny the existence of climate change at all. Their opponents are equally abrasive: for example from Thursday's column:
WHERE'S THE LOGIC?
SIR,-The logic of Mr Ross’s letter of April 23 eludes me. On man-made climate change, he appears to agree with Prof Carter (also April 23) that it isn’t happening.
He writes: “Our own eyes tell us sea levels have not risen. What is more, if they haven’t risen at the mouth of the Tweed, they haven’t risen in any of the island nations who are out with their begging bowls at every opportunity.”
The flat earthers also believe in the evidence of their eyes, as did the medieval church in their denial that the earth revolved around the sun.
But did this make them right?
A KNIGHT
Berwick I don't know if A Knight is the urban opposite number to our own bloggee A Peasant but I am sure he will not have the last word. No doubt Mr Gudgeon of Norham will have another go on these lines
Pure superstition
Sir,-The idea of man-made global warming is a good example of modern-day superstition.
The dictionary says superstition is an irrational fear or hope in magic.
Physicists generally don’t waste their time with delusions or irrational thinking which is why they don’t get involved in the global warming debate.
“Do the Maths” is all they would say on the matter.
For the benefit of Mr Ross, Professor Bob Carter and Robert Leetham, here is the short formula which a physicist would use to dismisses the idea of anthropomorphic global warming:
Plants are the only source of oxygen the world needs for combustion, respiration and decomposition.
Without the level of oxygen dropping, then levels of CO2 can’t be rising. It’s basic chemistry.
Plants provide virtually all the world’s free oxygen. There is no other major source of oxygen. Since we know the level of oxygen in the atmosphere isn’t falling, plants (using photosynthesis) must be generating enough oxygen to supply everything that breaths, as well as every car, every engine, every power-station, every blast furnace and heating system on the planet.
Plants produce so much oxygen that even colossal forest fires don’t affect oxygen levels.
Since virtually all the oxygen in the atmosphere is sequestered from H2O+CO2 and the CO2 only comes from the oxidation of organic carbon, the two gasses have to rise or fall in strict proportion.
To believe humans are responsible for an increase in CO2 is therefore pure superstition.
JUSTIN GUDGEON
Norham West Mains
I don't want to add (fossil) fuel to this debate but having to put a third pullover on on a sunny day in May makes me wonder about global warming-except of course climate change can work both ways:
Like getting colder?
Labels: Berwick Advertiser, Berwickshire, Climate change, CO2, Global Warming
Comments:
Post a Comment
