Thread: Internet use contributes to global warming.

Originally Posted by Kraftwerk

By this articles logic, every second you have with your electricity turned on is contributing to global warming. Even sitting around in the dark contributes to global warming because you haven't switched power companies yet...

But seriously, that article was kind of redundant. We already know that using power contributes to global warming, why point out the small things?

I posted it because not everybody connects all dots. Internet forums are cesspools for global warming alarmists, and the irony in that is a laugh riot.

You know, global warming is about how much carbon there is on the atmosphere (aka, one of the parts of the carbon cycle), not on the carbon cycle as a whole. Of course, one influences the other, but let's not make the mistake of assuming one is the other.

Breathing contributes to global warming, photosynthesis contributes to global cooling. If they balance each other out in the end is a different thing. It's like two forces and a resultant in kinematics.

Magazines and newspapers only show the opinions of stupid writers and pseudoscientists, people who never had real contact with science.

Breathing doesn't contribute to global warming. To say that breathing contributes to global warming is to say that breathing is the problem. But breathing isn't the problem. Chopping down forests is.

If we don't chop down forests and jungles and keep the ocean reefs alive, there is enough plant life to keep the carbon dioxide exchange between animals (including humans) and plants STABLE. And seeing as how these forests and reefs were already here, making all of our breathing balanced, BREATHING IS NOT THE PROBLEM.

The problem has to do with how we alter the environment, not our bodies. Our bodies are not a problem. Do you understand the subtle difference? When something contribues to global warming it is out of balance. Breathing isn't out of balance. Chopping down forests is.

Originally Posted by juroara

Breathing doesn't contribute to global warming. To say that breathing contributes to global warming is to say that breathing is the problem. But breathing isn't the problem. Chopping down forests is.

If we don't chop down forests and jungles and keep the ocean reefs alive, there is enough plant life to keep the carbon dioxide exchange between animals (including humans) and plants STABLE. And seeing as how these forests and reefs were already here, making all of our breathing balanced, BREATHING IS NOT THE PROBLEM.

The problem has to do with how we alter the environment, not our bodies. Our bodies are not a problem. Do you understand the subtle difference? When something contribues to global warming it is out of balance. Breathing isn't out of balance. Chopping down forests is.

Breathing does contribute to global warming. If the effect of breathing is neutralized by photosynthesis is another thing. Suppose there wasn't photosynthesis, and we all got food from a hypothetical magical source. Our breathing would contribute to global warming. Get the point?

There are two ways to solve the problem: reduce carbon dioxide emissions or increase carbon dioxide absorption. Both work.

I'm not arguing from a philosophical/reflective point of view like you are (and I agree with you in that matter). I'm arguing fro ma practical point of view. Breathing contributes to global warming -- it's a simple fact. Now, whether we should fight global warming by breathing less or by putting an end to polluting industries... that is what my initial argument was all about.

I've been wondering lately if we had a set time once a day where everyone holds their breath for about 10-20 seconds. Do you think this would slow or stop global warming? hehe I think it's an interesting option, imagine how much c02 we are breathing out all the time, all 6.5 billion of us.

Originally Posted by Kromoh

Magazines and newspapers only show the opinions of stupid writers and pseudoscientists, people who never had real contact with science.

What.

Breathing does contribute to global warming. If the effect of breathing is neutralized by photosynthesis is another thing. Suppose there wasn't photosynthesis, and we all got food from a hypothetical magical source. Our breathing would contribute to global warming. Get the point?

Just give it up Kromoh. The whole point is there isn't a magical source. By that logic eating food contributes to my morbid obesity. Except I don't have morbid obesity, because, due to a magical process, that food leaves my body.

I've been wondering lately if we had a set time once a day where everyone holds their breath for about 10-20 seconds. Do you think this would slow or stop global warming? hehe I think it's an interesting option, imagine how much c02 we are breathing out all the time, all 6.5 billion of us.

No tommo as we've just been discussing it makes no difference at all, because CO2 is constantly cycling out of the bodies of living things, into the atmosphere, and back into the bodies of living things. Breathing is simply returning CO2 to the atmosphere. If we didn't eat the food something else would.

Originally Posted by Xei

Just give it up Kromoh. The whole point is there isn't a magical source. By that logic eating food contributes to my morbid obesity.

Eating contributes to obesity, yes. Exercise prevents it. The result (aka, if you will be obese or not) depends on the final balance.

If we didn't eat the food something else would.

Doesn't mean that something else doesn't contribute to global warming.

Originally Posted by Xei

No tommo as we've just been discussing it makes no difference at all, because CO2 is constantly cycling out of the bodies of living things, into the atmosphere, and back into the bodies of living things. Breathing is simply returning CO2 to the atmosphere. If we didn't eat the food something else would.

Um. What?
The point is, it wouldn't be cycling out of all of our bodies for however long we held our breath. Which would stop a lot of c02 from being released.

Except it wouldn't.

Originally Posted by Xei

Except it wouldn't.

Nah, it would.