You, on the other hand, seem to assume you ARE the ultimate expert on the subject.
No.. as an analyst, I merely able to see holes in the logic being presented. And I've done a bit of research on oceanic phytoplankton levels and become convinced that, regardless of whether CO2 causes GW, there has been a marked decrease over the past 30 years, which would mean that CO2 sequestration by phytoplankton would be reduced by a comparable amount.
But more importantly, it results in a decrease in oceanic marine life since phytoplankton is the base of the marine food chain. And that's a damn good reason we've seen diminishing stocks of fish in our oceans, over-fishing combined with lack of proper grazing.
What you fail to understand is that, with regard to GW, scientists have prostituted themselves out to the political patronage. If you want funding, you'd better toe the line being espoused by the politicians and/or corporations.
This is evidenced by the insane focus upon CO2 when it comes to GW, despite the REALITY that Methane is a far greater GG threat.
Hawk |
