Rising CO2 may increase dangerous weather extremes, whatever happens to global temperatures

June 12, 2018, University of Bristol
Rising CO2 may increase dangerous weather extremes, whatever happens to global temperatures
Credit: University of Bristol

New research from the University of Oxford and collaborators at several other institutions, including the University of Bristol, provides compelling evidence that meeting the global warming target of 1.5°C may not be enough to limit the damage caused by extreme weather.

The paper, published today in Nature Climate Change, demonstrates that higher atmospheric CO2 concentrations directly increase and rainfall extremes, meaning there could be dangerous changes in these extremes even if the global mean temperature rise remains within 1.5°C. The research highlights the need for climate policy to complement temperature goals with explicit limits on CO2 concentrations.

Much of the focus of climate change mitigation has been on the goal of limiting warming to 1.5°C warming agreed at the 2015 United Nations climate summit in Paris. However, the atmospheric CO2 concentrations required to limit warming to 1.5oC depend on the climate response. Researchers from Oxford and other institutions participating in the HAPPI-MIP project (Half a degree Additional warming, Prognosis and Projected Impacts Model Intercomparison Project) simulated future climate under the range of CO2 concentrations that all might be consistent with 1.5°C of global .

In the models, CO2 levels at the higher end of this range were shown to directly increase Northern Hemisphere summer temperature, heat stress, and tropical precipitation extremes. This means that even if a low temperature response helps us to meet the temperature target, there may still be 'dangerous' changes in extremes – in other words, severe weather impacts beyond those currently expected at 1.5°C.

The research points up the need to set explicit CO2 goals to limit the adverse effects of high-impact weather extremes. It also supports existing findings that proposed geo-engineering solutions aimed at reducing impacts without reducing CO2 concentrations may not be effective at counteracting changes in extremes.

Hugh Baker, DPhil student at Oxford's Department of Physics and lead author of the research, said: "Future work is needed to confirm exactly why we see this direct CO2 effect, but current research points to a combination of circulation and cloud cover changes, and an increase in the amount of direct radiation on the Earth's surface due to simply having more CO2 in the atmosphere."

Oxford's Professor Myles Allen adds: "This puts paid to the Pollyanna argument that we should wait and see before reducing emissions in case the global temperature response to rising CO2 turns out to be lower than current models predict. Hugh's paper shows that the accumulation of CO2 in the atmosphere itself increases the risk of key damaging weather extremes, regardless of the global temperature response. It's not enough to get lucky."

Dr. Dann Mitchell, a co-author of the paper from the University of Bristol's School of Geographical Sciences, said: "Geo-engineering techniques that reduce the amount of sunlight hitting the Earth's surface are increasingly thought of as a way of achieving the Paris Goals because they decrease surface temperature. However, our results show that for extreme such as heatwaves, changing the global mean temperature is not enough, you need to reduce CO2 concentrations themselves."

Explore further: Climate change hits poorest hardest, new research shows

More information: Hugh S. Baker et al. Higher CO2 concentrations increase extreme event risk in a 1.5 °C world, Nature Climate Change (2018). DOI: 10.1038/s41558-018-0190-1

Related Stories

Climate change hits poorest hardest, new research shows

May 30, 2018

Australia will still be the lucky country when it comes to changes in local climate as a result of climate change if global average surface temperatures reach the 1.5°C or 2°C limit set by the Paris agreement. 

Recommended for you

2018-2022 expected to be abnormally hot years

August 14, 2018

This summer's worldwide heatwave makes 2018 a particularly hot year. And the next few years will be similar, according to a study led by Florian Sévellec, a CNRS researcher at the Laboratory for Ocean Physics and Remote ...

53 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

grandpa
1.4 / 5 (18) Jun 12, 2018
Why can't the global climate people admit that the whole system is too complex to make conclusions from any scientific study. The truth is that the ice ages of the last 3 million years have been more devastating than any global warming. The earth has been heading for ice-ball earth. Human activity has now changed that scenario.
rrwillsj
3.5 / 5 (11) Jun 12, 2018
Well gramps, the natural rainfall upon your head is tolerable. Then I turn a man made firehose, pumping sewage, upon you at full blast.

Adding un-natural to natural does not bode well for you selfishly-trying to avoid drowning.

I call your reaction selfish because I am being paid by the Carbon Lobby and ICE industry to drown you in sewage. Have you no compassion for my need to earn a living?
antigoracle
1.3 / 5 (13) Jun 12, 2018
Well gramps, the natural rainfall upon your head is tolerable. Then I turn a man made firehose, pumping sewage, upon you at full blast.

Adding un-natural to natural does not bode well for you selfishly-trying to avoid drowning.

I call your reaction selfish because I am being paid by the Carbon Lobby and ICE industry to drown you in sewage. Have you no compassion for my need to earn a living?

The ignorant Chicken Little JACKASS brays. But then, I insult the 4 legged jackass, since they bray with a sense of purpose i.e. some intelligence is involved, unlike the 2 legged Chicken Little jackass.
johnhew
1.8 / 5 (16) Jun 12, 2018
'CO2 is evil no matter whatever happens to anything anywhere'
Man, this is no fun, the globalists ain't even trying no more
jonesdave
4.4 / 5 (14) Jun 12, 2018
.......ain't even trying no more


"Aren't even trying anymore." FTFY.
I know science isn't big on the agenda of the petroleum lackeys, but at least make an effort with the language.
snoosebaum
1.4 / 5 (10) Jun 12, 2018
Oh , now its '' whatever '' happens to global temps '' , lol they mean,, whatever happens [ ice age] man is to blame and carbon tax to collect.
PTTG
4.4 / 5 (13) Jun 12, 2018
>Article: Sourced, reasonable conclusions.
>Comments: Ignorant trolls.

And yet the ignorant trolls won the election, so as pointless as it seems...
aksdad
2 / 5 (19) Jun 12, 2018
New research...provides compelling evidence that meeting the global warming target of 1.5°C may not be enough to limit the damage caused by extreme weather.

Compelling evidence is what you get from observing and measuring the natural world and identifying causal mechanisms. This research observes computer-generated climate models that don't accurately replicate the natural world, then infers conclusions about the real world from it.

climate models ≠ real world

The 2013 IPCC AR5 report demonstrated how badly the climate models forecast future global warming. See here:

https://www.ipcc....S-14.jpg

Those models were hand-tuned to replicate temperatures in the 80's and 90's but by 2000 they were already significantly overstating temperatures, and they've only gotten worse over time.

It's disappointing to see science perverted to serve politics.
aksdad
1.8 / 5 (16) Jun 12, 2018
Meanwhile, observations of the real world show no trend of increasing extreme weather.

On precipitation extremes, from IPCC AR5 (2013), ch.2, p.213:

Regional trends in precipitation extremes since the middle of the 20th
century are varied (Table 2.13). In most continents confidence in trends
is not higher than medium

On floods, from IPCC AR5, ch.2, p.214:

there continues to be a lack of evidence and thus low confidence
regarding the sign of trend in the magnitude and/or frequency
of floods on a global scale

On droughts, from IPCC AR5, ch.2, p.215:

the current assessment concludes that there is not enough
evidence at present to suggest more than low confidence in a global-scale
observed trend in drought or dryness (lack of rainfall) since the
middle of the 20th century

IPCC AR5 has similar statements on severe local weather, tropical storms (hurricanes/typhoons) and extratropical storms. No measurable trend.
aksdad
1.8 / 5 (15) Jun 12, 2018
No measurable trend for tornadoes:

https://www.ncdc....y/trends

Graph of Atlantic Basin storms (hurricanes, etc.):

https://www.nhc.n...ount.jpg

Global hurricane frequency:

http://models.wea...freq.png

Global tropical cyclone energy:

http://models.wea..._ace.png

In other words, the measured trends in extreme weather refute the conclusions of this research paper, which was based entirely on computer models.
jonesdave
3.8 / 5 (17) Jun 12, 2018
It's disappointing to see science perverted to serve politics.


What politics? This was a scientific finding, that finally made its way into the thick skulls of many politicians. The people who discovered this trend are not frigging politicians. It is some politicians, backed by oil money, that are perverting the science for their own selfish ends. Christ you people are sad.
johnhew
1.5 / 5 (17) Jun 12, 2018
>jonesdave, racism has no place here, presuming to tell others how they should express themselves is intolerant, and using your presumption of superiority to try to force your globalist agenda is bullying, please apologize and learn from these missteps
gkam
3.7 / 5 (9) Jun 12, 2018
Daddy johnhew, you have no jurisdiction here.
howhot3
4.4 / 5 (7) Jun 12, 2018
You know what @gkam; What's a degree or two to the climate denier goon squad. If you listen to morons like them, we would all have coal fired furnaces and a broad shovel the lift it out of the coal bin to the furnace door. And thats every freaking time it gets cold. At least that seems to be the type of conservatism these twits want. The climate denier clowns are not scientists nor do the believe in the scientific principle.

In the mean time, 1.5C is looking pretty optimistic to me. Given all of the very real feedbacks that are happening and the exponential rate of increase in CO2 levels, and the linger time of CO2 in the atmosphere, we could easily see pretty devastating weather events across the globe by 2050.

Golf in the summer time may be a life threatening hobby. Imagine your insurance rates if you live in a "bad" weather zone like Huston or Dallas or Charleston. It follows exactly what I predicted here 5 years ago, rain, big storms = global warming.


MR166
1.4 / 5 (9) Jun 12, 2018
As the solar minimum progresses and the earth enters a cooling cycle we will see more papers that try to link every day weather extremes to CO2. Today's climate scientists are similar to the rainmakers of the past. Both earn a living by preying on the desperate and the ignorant. They are enabled by the politicians and the corporations that own the politicians.

This so called science is spiraling downward to the point of being humorous. It would be even funnier if it did not cost the taxpayers trillions when people are struggling to feed and house their kids.

MR166
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 12, 2018
To show the falsehood of CO2 induced warming here is a little fact. From 1970 to 1976 the surface of the moon warmed from 1.6C to 3.5C. Of course NASA stopped the measurements. Lack of funding,,,,,,yea right!!!!

https://wattsupwi...he-moon/

There is a LOT that is unknown about climate. How can any of these predictions be justified?

PTTG
4.3 / 5 (12) Jun 12, 2018
MR166: You are a liar.
Mimath224
4.4 / 5 (7) Jun 12, 2018
It's disappointing to see science perverted to serve politics.


What politics? This was a scientific finding, that finally made its way into the thick skulls of many politicians. The people who discovered this trend are not frigging politicians. It is some politicians, backed by oil money, that are perverting the science for their own selfish ends. Christ you people are sad.

Right, and right again about politicians. And there are some pretty high ranking politicians who continue to deny (I'm sure you know who I'm referring to, Ha!) I have said it before, the world isn't run by scientists, it's run by politicians. Where I live there is a lot of corruption and environmental issues are no exception to this. Sad, but that's the reality. I often wonder if some scientists think they are up against a brick wall and just get fed up with it all.
RealityCheck
1.9 / 5 (8) Jun 12, 2018
@gkam.

Hi, long time no 'see'. I trust you and yours are well.

Anyhow, as you know, I have long pointed out (for the likes of Climate Change Deniers etc) the 'de-stabilization transition period' between previously 'settled' patterns and 'the new norm' patterns; and once warming reaches/triggers 'tipping point' consequences to previously sequestered carbon/methane in clathrates/hydrates buried all over the global land/ocean substrate layers.

In that light, I find it frustrating and disappointing that patently 'publish or perish' hacks are allowed to concoct/publish unnecessary and already obvious 'simulations/conclusions' as if they were saying something that wasn't already well-covered in published climate science already.

I have to say that it is the above sort of 'hack bandwagon' exercise/article that gives ammunition to deniers; giving them opportunity for cheap shots and 'tarring with the same brush' all the good science already done. Pity.
Uncle Ira
5 / 5 (13) Jun 12, 2018
@ Hewie-Skippy. How you are Cher? I am good thanks for asking.

>jonesdave, racism has no place here, presuming to tell others how they should express themselves is intolerant, and using your presumption of superiority to try to force your globalist agenda is bullying, please apologize and learn from these missteps


Cher did you bump your head on the way in? (Maybe it's that silly looking pointy cap, it's for decoration, not for protecting your head.) Jones-Skippy did not say anything racist. I read the whole thing he wrote and there is nothing in it about race.

So why you don't apologize to him for telling that GREAT BIG LIE. Then try sitting over there in corner (with your silly looking pointy cap on your head) and shut up.
novaman
5 / 5 (8) Jun 13, 2018
lol
HeloMenelo
4.6 / 5 (9) Jun 13, 2018
Well gramps, the natural rainfall upon your head is tolerable. Then I turn a man made firehose, pumping sewage, upon you at full blast.

Adding un-natural to natural does not bode well for you selfishly-trying to avoid drowning.

I call your reaction selfish because I am being paid by the Carbon Lobby and ICE industry to drown you in sewage. Have you no compassion for my need to earn a living?

The ignorant Chicken Little JACKASS brays. But then, I insult the 4 legged jackass, since they bray with a sense of purpose i.e. some intelligence is involved, unlike the 2 legged Chicken Little jackass.


Omg Omg antisciencegorilla and his spree of thumping sockpuppets swinging the branches at full force today.. Does the loud chatter full of empty dumb never cease to amuse you and your baboons, o looki we've spotted you in the park, thumping about.. Yet Again...!
https://phys.org/...eme.html
barakn
4.4 / 5 (7) Jun 13, 2018
To show the falsehood of CO2 induced warming here is a little fact. From 1970 to 1976 the surface of the moon warmed from 1.6C to 3.5C. Of course NASA stopped the measurements. Lack of funding,,,,,,yea right!!!!

https://wattsupwi...he-moon/
You must not have read this: https://phys.org/...oon.html . It shows that the measured warming was due to the disturbance of lunar soil by the astronauts themselves. The disturbed areas are darker than they were before, leading to increased solar heating. Glad to set you straight!
leetennant
5 / 5 (4) Jun 13, 2018
At this stage, Russia is the bogeyman it was previously slandered as being. Its sponsorship of the trolls flooding this and other science sites is verging on criminal.

Anyone with a passing familiarity with the science knows that air temperatures are merely one expression of increasing CO2 levels, albeit one that the average punter can understand. We already knew the impacts of increasing CO2 would be far beyond the temperature increase itself. Just look at ocean acidification and the slowing of the ocean currents as two examples. The latter in particular has huge weather implications.
MR166
1 / 5 (4) Jun 13, 2018
" The disturbed areas are darker than they were before, leading to increased solar heating. Glad to set you straight!"

So it continued to warm for 6 years after the occurrence because of a color difference eh? One would think that the surface temperature change due to color change would have stabilized in a few weeks not 6 years.
leetennant
5 / 5 (6) Jun 13, 2018
One would think.


Based on your extensive experience of lunar physics? Seriously, this is the rhetorical equivalent of someone in a pub hearing about the Big Bang for the first time and going, "That just doesn't seem right to me. Pass me another beer!"
MR166
1 / 5 (5) Jun 13, 2018
6 years, possibly more they stopped taking readings (why?), of temperature increase due to a surface color change implies a very high thermal conductivity in the underlying soil. With no surface water that is highly unlikely.
antigoracle
1.4 / 5 (9) Jun 13, 2018
The AGW Cult will increase dangerous bullshit extremes, whatever happens to global temperatures.
howhot3
5 / 5 (6) Jun 13, 2018
Wow, @antigoracle, the Denier Goon Squad (alias "Church of DGS) has really brain washed you but good. I guess it wasn't that hard.

So the moon increased 1.9C simply from disturbed lunar soil? So it has an actually delta +1.9C going from lighter color soil, to dark soil kicked up from foot prints? That is a very powerful demonstration of the albedo effect. So with the polar ice caps melting like ice cubes under a running hot water faucet, they should be contributing massively to the reduced albedo of polar ice caps, which will expose more heat absorbing dark material, which heats up even more exposing even more dark land (or water in the north). A polar warming feedback triggered by man made global warming. *So is the word from the church of AGW*.
leetennant
5 / 5 (6) Jun 13, 2018
6 years, possibly more they stopped taking readings (why?), of temperature increase due to a surface color change implies a very high thermal conductivity in the underlying soil. With no surface water that is highly unlikely.


So instead of establishing the exact basis of lunar physics and climate that would or would not lead to this statement being true, you instead double down on the "Just doesn't seem right to me" rhetoric. Explain to me, showing detailed knowledge of lunar (not Earth) climate and weather systems, why this explanation is wrong.
antigoracle
1.4 / 5 (11) Jun 13, 2018
In the mean time, 1.5C is looking pretty optimistic to me. Given all of the very real feedbacks that are happening and the exponential rate of increase in CO2 levels, and the linger time of CO2 in the atmosphere, we could easily see pretty devastating weather events across the globe by 2050.

Golf in the summer time may be a life threatening hobby. Imagine your insurance rates if you live in a "bad" weather zone like Huston or Dallas or Charleston. It follows exactly what I predicted here 5 years ago, rain, big storms = global warming.

Hey..hey....it's howShat, back in his 3rd incarnation and now 3 times as stupid. So, 1.5C is looking pretty optimistic to you. Well, tell us Mr Seer-man, if humankind stopped all fossil fuel burning, what will the global temperature go to?
snoosebaum
1 / 5 (7) Jun 13, 2018
''Its sponsorship of the trolls flooding this and other science sites is verging on criminal. ''

yes i'm a russian bot ! get your tee shirt @ Mark Dice !
rrwillsj
2.6 / 5 (5) Jun 13, 2018
Yeah, the denier shills are crappy subhuman beings. Getting paid by the bloated egos of the carbon lobby kleptocraps and ICE industry plutocraps has that effect on the gullible.

The satisfaction I take away from their ignorant deceptions and mendacious agitprop? Is that their intense double-think has resulted in convincing themselves, that their puppetmasters will actually share their bunkers once the surface of this planet is uninhabitable.

Daydreaming of becoming Morlocks and feasting on the bones of the innocent. In actual fact? These grovelling sadsack deniers will be found hanging from meathooks in the coolers within their masters shelters. For that fine dining experience!
jonesdave
4 / 5 (8) Jun 13, 2018
Want to find people with a sub-human IQ? Always head for a global warming thread. Eh, snoosetoss? antisnorkle? True, yes? Gets them out of the woodwork like nobody's business! Combined IQ of a brain damaged trilobite. Bless 'em.
HeloMenelo
4.3 / 5 (11) Jun 14, 2018
The AGW Cult will increase dangerous bullshit extremes, whatever happens to global temperatures.

Again swinging by with another jab at monkey barking and chest thumping... love the way you put the science on the table to back that noisy barking.... o wait... you still need to actually learn the meaning of science... ? ;)
HeloMenelo
4.6 / 5 (9) Jun 14, 2018
[qetty devastating weather events across the globe by 2050.

Golf in the summer time may be a life threatening hobby. Imagine your insurance rates if you live in a "bad" weather zone like Huston or Dallas or Charleston. It follows exactly what I predicted here 5 years ago, rain, big storms = global warming.

Hey..hey....it's howShat, back in his 3rd incarnation and now 3 times as stupid. So, 1.5C is looking pretty optimistic to you. Well, tell us Mr Seer-man, if humankind stopped all fossil fuel burning, what will the global temperature go to?


Antisciencegorilla crying his chest thumping anthem to his sockpuppets again, something about swinging the branches harder, barking louder and the rewards being more bananas.. reading science books and understanding decades of evidence to firmly back up Man Made Climate Change overworks the 2 cells in the skull meant for swinging branches... so around he goes again.
howhot3
5 / 5 (4) Jun 14, 2018
Want to find people with a sub-human IQ? Always head for a global warming thread.
Yeah, and look for the climate change deniers. It's great if we all agree, but lets do something like bitch out out politicians about idiots like Scott Pruitt (EPAs moron in charge) and get some action like putting the guy in handcuffs and purp walking him to prison for wasting tax pay dollars on his personal luxury romps.
howhot3
5 / 5 (2) Jun 14, 2018
@antigoracle says;
Hey..hey....it's howShat, back in his 3rd incarnation and now 3 times as stupid.


Yeap. You hit the nail on the head. I'm now 3 times as stupid as I used to be. I'm not going to comment any further... I'm not going to say anything about Al-Gore or stuff like that, not Mensa mind tricks or any of that kind of crap. Nope, I'm not going to do it...
antigoracle
2.1 / 5 (7) Jun 15, 2018
@antigoracle says;
Hey..hey....it's howShat, back in his 3rd incarnation and now 3 times as stupid.


Yeap. You hit the nail on the head. I'm now 3 times as stupid as I used to be. I'm not going to comment any further... I'm not going to say anything about Al-Gore or stuff like that, not Mensa mind tricks or any of that kind of crap. Nope, I'm not going to do it...
-- howShat da Turd
It's more like you hit the nail with your head. You claimed you know the science and can predict what's going to happen. So, stop dodging and answer the question --- If humankind stopped all fossil fuel burning, what will the global temperature go to?
howhot3
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 16, 2018
-- howShat da Turd
It's more like you hit the nail with your head. You claimed you know the science and can predict what's going to happen. So, stop dodging and answer the question --- If humankind stopped all fossil fuel burning, what will the global temperature go to?

My friend @antigoracle, the general weather and global average temps will remain where they are today. You should know that by now good friend. It really is the reason for the demands we make to stop fossil fuel combustion now. Thats about it.
antigoracle
1.5 / 5 (8) Jun 17, 2018
...... If humankind stopped all fossil fuel burning, what will the global temperature go to?

My friend @antigoracle, the general weather and global average temps will remain where they are today. You should know that by now good friend. It really is the reason for the demands we make to stop fossil fuel combustion now. Thats about it.
-- howhot3......aka... howShat da Turd
LMAO.
This from the Chicken Little Jackass who claims to know the "science".
So, you are stating that the end of fossil fuel use will not make a difference to the global temperature?
ZoeBell
Jun 17, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
ZoeBell
Jun 17, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
ZoeBell
Jun 17, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Pumastar
3.7 / 5 (6) Jun 18, 2018
...... If humankind stopped all fossil fuel burning, what will the global temperature go to?

My friend @antigoracle, the general weather and global average temps will remain where they are today. You should know that by now good friend. It really is the reason for the demands we make to stop fossil fuel combustion now. Thats about it.
-- howhot3......aka... howShat da Turd
LMAO.
This from the Chicken Little Jackass who claims to know the "science".
So, you are stating that the end of fossil fuel use will not make a difference to the global temperature?

Dumb just got dumber, still swinging ?
HeloMenelo
4.1 / 5 (9) Jun 18, 2018
@antigoracle says;
Hey..hey....it's howShat, back in his 3rd incarnation and now 3 times as stupid.


Yeap. You hit the nail on the head. I'm now 3 times as stupid as I used to be. I'm not going to comment any further... I'm not going to say anything about Al-Gore or stuff like that, not Mensa mind tricks or any of that kind of crap. Nope, I'm not going to do it...
-- howShat da Turd
It's more like you hit the nail with your head. You claimed you know the science and can predict what's going to happen. So, stop dodging and answer the question --- If humankind stopped all fossil fuel burning, what will the global temperature go to?

Stop asking dumb questions and start reading science books instead of chest thumping. The benefits to the earth is unsurmountable if fossil fuels will be stopped.
howhot3
3.7 / 5 (3) Jun 18, 2018
Well, I'm glad I got a LMAO from you @antigoracle. Scientist are easy people to get along with. We are easy to share a pitcher of beer with. You just may not like what we have to say though about special interests, or made up science, lies, and distortions of facts. So with that, let me correct a few of your conclusions.

If fossil fuel use stop today right now across the world, you expect global warming to also stop at it current level. You would then expect over the next 1500 years for the climate to settle back to where it was in pre-80s. Those effects would be like less frequent storms, more snow at the polar icecaps, and a gradual lowering of sea level. Now @antigoracle, I know you object to having nice things happen, but that is what would happen. It would be several generations before climate would be restored to what it was just 3 decades ago. Sad isn't it?
howhot3
5 / 5 (3) Jun 18, 2018
Let me see if I can explain the obvious and not so obvious about what the article is describing. The article claims that if we managed to hold global temps to delta +1.5 degrees C, that the additional CO2 levels will still be effecting and enhancing the severity of storm events. We have in the past few years added satellites that measure CO2 levels in fine resolution, and it shows how the Earth is breathing. Follow this link, play around, bur do select CO2 level. What you will see is a dynamic that is very biologically driven.

https://earth.nul...2.29,597

What you see are vast dark areas show lower CO2 levels due the forests and plants taking in CO2. While major cities like New York, LA produce huge plumes of co2. From this you can see how CO2 could be impacting the chemistry of the weather.
leetennant
5 / 5 (3) Jun 19, 2018
Are you really asking them to read, howhot3? That's a little too much, don't you think? They didn't even bother to read this article.
Mimath224
not rated yet Jun 19, 2018
@howhot3 Yes, it doesn't take a genius to work things out really. That trees and plants take in CO2 is not anywhere near new science and the massive deforestation that has happened had to have some impact. Only part of of the problem, I know, but adding it all up...well. Then pollution takes it toll on trees too. I can remember years ago in the UK where The London Plane (Platanus) was being suggested for city planting as it was apparently less affected. Don't know if any city took notice of that advice or whether it was successful if they did.
antigoracle
1 / 5 (6) Jun 19, 2018
Scientist are easy people to get along with. We are easy to share a pitcher of beer with....HEE....HAWW..HEE...HAWWW. Sad isn't it?
-- howhot3 (aka..howShat da Turd)
LMAO...The Chicken Little Jackass, who claims to know the "science" and can predict the future, brays yet again. This time, he claims he can read, yet fails to realize he's far from comprehending. The Jackass is blind to the fact that his last 2 posts contradicts each other. Sad isn't it?
greenearth
5 / 5 (3) Jul 09, 2018
Scientist are easy people to get along with. We are easy to share a pitcher of beer with....HEE....HAWW..HEE...HAWWW.? blaaa bleeee bloooo


antisciencegorilla what a dumb idiot
Captain Stumpy
1 / 5 (2) Jul 22, 2018
presuming to tell others how they should express themselves is intolerant, and using your presumption of superiority to try to force your globalist agenda is bullying, please apologize and learn from these missteps
@hew-ing a swath of self-righteous hypocrisy
you mean like this?
Do you want to continue to comment on physorg Ira? If so start you can start by saying something positive or worthwhile that conveys real information. If not then find somewhere else...
you even claimed
but the next time anyone on this forum disrespects another, I will see to it that it is the last comment they make here, myself included
yet here you are back to telling everyone how they should express themselves.

it's not like the internet forgets

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.