@Interesting

Quote:

1) Its a "natural" part of human life

CO² level in human blood is up to about 10%, equivalent to 100000 ppm. There is no place above Earth surface with such very high level. This is why CO² level in atmosphere is not harmful until 3-5% (30000-50000 ppm) when the CO² then begins to compete with O² for transport on haemoglobin. CO² is a fundamental a 'brick' of life, as is O² and H²O. Treating it like a pollutant is no better that treating human like virus by eco-fascists.

A trivial quote of this great man learnt in pharmacology course: Quote:

"All things are poison and nothing is without poison, only the dose permits something not to be poisonous."

- Paracelsus

Bye,
TMTisFree

_________________
The engineering approach to our non-problems: "build a better washer".
The scientific approach to our non-problems: "find a new energy source".
The environmentalist approach to our non-problems: "stop washing your shirts".

@Plaz

Quote:

However are you trying to prop up your oun claims by referencing horridly flawed references? Maybe I miss interpet your example? Such shoddy material helps neither side

Not as all I drew no conclusions from the article that it in anyway supported pro-global warming. What I did draw out is a good example of poor arguements.. Which yes I agree shoddy material helps neither side.

@TMTisFree

Quote:

If you were properly reading what I precisely wrote, we would not be playing this ping-pong game.

So the thermal temp of Dark Matter has been measured?

Quote:

What do you not understand in "I did not write dark matter: 1/ is an object"?

What do you not understand about making a logical arguement?

I stated all objects radiate. You proposed dark matter as disproving that statement. The subject is 'objects'. You are correct that you did not explictedly state dark matter was an object. If dark matter is really an example disproving that statement then dark matter (both inferred and implied) is an object. Therefore you made an implicit statement that dark matter is an object. Your logic contradicted yourself. Either Dark Matter is or is not an object... Is Dark Matter an object?

Quote:

not directly because it emits no light, no IR, no EM, no radiation of any kind

I believe they are scanning for Gamma Radiation being released are they they not?

Quote:

As dark matter makes up about 85% of the known Universe,

This statement is not true! Dark matter makes up a large minority of the universe. Dark Energy makes more than 70% of the universe. GIYF

Last edited by BrianK on 25-Jul-2009 at 01:45 PM.

@TMTisFree

Quote:

CO² level in human blood is up to about 10%, equivalent to 100000 ppm. There is no place above Earth surface with such very high level. This is why CO² level in atmosphere is not harmful until 3-5% (30000-50000 ppm) when the CO² then begins to compete with O² for transport on haemoglobin. CO² is a fundamental a 'brick' of life, as is O² and H²O. Treating it like a pollutant is no better that treating human like virus by eco-fascists.

One of the best, short paragraphs you have written on the subject.

Only wish the US EPA would understand this, and not "NOW" treat CO2 as a toxin.

_________________
"The system no longer works " -- Young Anakin Skywalker

@TMTisFree

Of course, saying CO2 isn't harmful until 3-5% is a bit of an understatement, since you're breathing quite heavy well before that. 0.2% is enough to give a splitting headache.

Ever come out of a stuffy room only to find that it's not you that's having a bad day, it's the air inside? That's the feeling of ~0.1% CO2. Not something I would want to experience on a daily basis

I know not all people experience this, but I am extremely sensitive to CO2. Maybe connected to my asthma? Dunno, never considered that before.

But that's still rather far above the levels in the atmosphere. Just thought I would lower your "we can do fine until 3-5% CO2 in atmosphere" to something a bit more reasonable. I personally would NOT be fine if we had 0.1%.

Of course, that's still a lot more than the 0.04% we normally have

Last edited by olegil on 25-Jul-2009 at 09:20 PM.

_________________
This weeks pet peeve:
Using "voltage" instead of "potential", which leads to inventing new words like "amperage" instead of "current" (I, measured in A) or possible "charge" (amperehours, Ah or Coulomb, C). Sometimes I don't even know what people mean.

@olegil

Actually, something is weird here. You quoted 3-5%, as does the wikipedia article on the matter. But this suggests 5000 ppm:

http://dhs.wisconsin.gov/eh/chemfs/fs/CarbonDioxide.htm

This one says long term exposure above 3000 is harmful, and short term above 50000 (5%):
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/co2-comfort-level-d_1024.html

Actually, that last one seems to be the best one. So no, we're not going to be fine up to 5%. We're gonna be dead or evolved long before that.

In fact, if the outside air goes up to about 600ppm I would expect a LOT of people to get problems going to work. As that will start pushing our air circulation systems to the max.

_________________
This weeks pet peeve:
Using "voltage" instead of "potential", which leads to inventing new words like "amperage" instead of "current" (I, measured in A) or possible "charge" (amperehours, Ah or Coulomb, C). Sometimes I don't even know what people mean.

@BrianK

Quote:

So the thermal temp of Dark Matter has been measured?

Dunno. I did/do not find any paper on that.

Quote:

Is Dark Matter an object?

Irrelevant question. And you still have not defined what is an 'object'.

Quote:

I believe they are scanning for Gamma Radiation being released are they they not?

Yes, as a way of indirect tracking.

Quote:

This statement is not true! Dark matter makes up a large minority of the universe. Dark Energy makes more than 70% of the universe.

I have seen numbers ranging from 20% to 90% because some include effectively dark energy with dark matter (as opposed to usual matter).

Edit: a typo.

Bye,
TMTisFree

Last edited by TMTisFree on 25-Jul-2009 at 11:44 PM.

_________________
The engineering approach to our non-problems: "build a better washer".
The scientific approach to our non-problems: "find a new energy source".
The environmentalist approach to our non-problems: "stop washing your shirts".

@olegil

Quote:

0.2% is enough to give a splitting headache.

Depends upon the person, the place where he lives, his physical condition, etc.

Quote:

That's the feeling of ~0.1% CO2. Not something I would want to experience on a daily basis

Level above 1000 ppm is quite common in offices.

Quote:

Of course, that's still a lot more than the 0.04% we normally have

That was the point.

Bye,
TMTisFree

_________________
The engineering approach to our non-problems: "build a better washer".
The scientific approach to our non-problems: "find a new energy source".
The environmentalist approach to our non-problems: "stop washing your shirts".

@olegil

Quote:

Actually, something is weird here. You quoted 3-5%, as does the wikipedia article on the matter.

This is really old stuff (I looked for it in my Toxicology and Physiology courses' documentations).

Quote:

But this suggests 5000 ppm:

Clearly they miscalculate somewhere: 1,000,000 ppm of a gas = 100 % concentration, so 10,000 ppm of a gas = 1% level.

Quote:

In fact, if the outside air goes up to about 600ppm I would expect a LOT of people to get problems going to work. As that will start pushing our air circulation systems to the max.

As I said above, 1000 ppm CO² is common in offices and closed buildings (thus at work). Note that in most studies, it is the concomitant reduction in O² concentration that has been pointed as responsible of problems. Anyway you can always open windows, heh?

Bye,
TMTisFree

_________________
The engineering approach to our non-problems: "build a better washer".
The scientific approach to our non-problems: "find a new energy source".
The environmentalist approach to our non-problems: "stop washing your shirts".

@Interesting

Quote:

One of the best, short paragraphs you have written on the subject.

Thanks .

Bye,
TMTisFree

_________________
The engineering approach to our non-problems: "build a better washer".
The scientific approach to our non-problems: "find a new energy source".
The environmentalist approach to our non-problems: "stop washing your shirts".

@TMTisFree

You first stated Quote:

(note that the 'temperature' of dark matter one can find in literature is really the velocity of matter and has nothing to do with 'thermal' temperature)?

and now you state Quote:

Dunno. I did/do not find any paper on that.

A change in presentation here. You appear to be moving the goal post. Which is correct your first claim, no thermal temp measured, or your second claim, you couldn't find one?


Quote:

Irrelevant question. And you still have not defined what is an 'object'.

Irrelevant claim -- post #193 I gave a definition.

You wanted to use Dark Matter to prove that the claim of 'All Objects radiate' is wrong. You better know if your example is a case of the subject, eg being an object. If we accept your later claim, you never said Dark Matter was an object, is accurate then your answer is no Dark Matter is not a counter example. Because as you claimed Dark Matter was not an "object" and therefore not an example of the subject of my statement.

Quote:

I have seen numbers ranging from 20% to 90% because some include effectively dark energy with dark matter (as opposed to usual matter).

It sounds to me that we are in agreement that Dark Matter + Dark Energy is thought to be around 90% of the universe. If they actually are well that's in the bucket for scientists to work on. We may find out neither fully complies to the theory and the actuality is something different.

Data to those wondering how much science is out there to address the question of Climate Change...

Taken from Seed Magainze, June 2009, Issue #22. In 2008 there were 50,000 papers published concerning Climate Change.

@TMTisFree

Quote:

CO² level in human blood is up to about 10%, equivalent to 100000 ppm. There is no place above Earth surface with such very high level. This is why CO² level in atmosphere is not harmful until 3-5% (30000-50000 ppm) when the CO² then begins to compete with O² for transport on haemoglobin. CO² is a fundamental a 'brick' of life, as is O² and H²O. Treating it like a pollutant is no better that treating human like virus by eco-fascists.

A rhetorical question i.e. why does the body expel the CO²?

PS; We installed solar panels on our house for energy security and it has nothing to do with the carbon foot print.

Last edited by Hammer on 26-Jul-2009 at 09:12 AM.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3a/Emu68)

@BrianK

Quote:

Not as all I drew no conclusions from the article that it in anyway supported pro-global warming. What I did draw out is a good example of poor arguements.. Which yes I agree shoddy material helps neither side

And that it was. Humorous in a most painful way.....

"Hey I found some acient cave drawings that proves man and beast were much flatter and less 3D than they are today."

Plaz

@TMTisFree

Quote:

Anyway you can always open windows, heh?

Not if it's the outside air that has 1000ppm

Also, buildings in Norway have pollen filters. In June, I can't open a window because this will lead to a higher concentration of pollen inside. I am actually dependant on the air supply inside being good enough that I can stay indoors for 8-9 hours without ill effects from both the air quality itself AND pollen.

After a long day at work I have such a splitting headache it's sometimes a wonder I can cycle home at all. Sometimes I have to cycle with my eyes closed most of the time, which isn't a really good idea

Yet I would rather have a headache for 2-3 hours in the afternoon than sore eyes and runny nose all day. So no, I can't always open a window.

_________________
This weeks pet peeve:
Using "voltage" instead of "potential", which leads to inventing new words like "amperage" instead of "current" (I, measured in A) or possible "charge" (amperehours, Ah or Coulomb, C). Sometimes I don't even know what people mean.

@BrianK

Quote:

A change in presentation here. You appear to be moving the goal post. Which is correct your first claim, no thermal temp measured, or your second claim, you couldn't find one?

Not at all. The first sentence states the 'temperature' used by cosmologists has nothing to do with thermal temperature. Nowhere I stated or not that thermal temperature has been measured or not. Additionally I did not find a paper stating otherwise.

Quote:

Irrelevant claim -- post #193 I gave a definition.

So if you consider my claim as irrelevant, you will be able to find yourself if dark matter falls or not in your definition. I am just interested as dark matter being at 0°K.

Quote:

Because as you claimed Dark Matter was not an "object"

Not true. Nowhere I claimed dark matter is or is not an object. It is sufficient, at least for me, that scientists have been able to track and map it according to theory thus confirming its existence.

Bye,
TMTisFree

_________________
The engineering approach to our non-problems: "build a better washer".
The scientific approach to our non-problems: "find a new energy source".
The environmentalist approach to our non-problems: "stop washing your shirts".

@Hammer

Quote:

A rhetorical question i.e. why does the body expel the CO²?

Because Krebs' cycle is working: otherwise, we should be dead. But I understand your concern. We do not expel all CO² btw because CO² is used to regulate other functions.

Bye,
TMTisFree

_________________
The engineering approach to our non-problems: "build a better washer".
The scientific approach to our non-problems: "find a new energy source".
The environmentalist approach to our non-problems: "stop washing your shirts".

@olegil

Quote:

Also, buildings in Norway have pollen filters. In June, I can't open a window because this will lead to a higher concentration of pollen inside. I am actually dependant on the air supply inside being good enough that I can stay indoors for 8-9 hours without ill effects from both the air quality itself AND pollen.

I understand. I suppose you have tried all available medicines or therapies.

Quote:

After a long day at work I have such a splitting headache it's sometimes a wonder I can cycle home at all. Sometimes I have to cycle with my eyes closed most of the time, which isn't a really good idea

There are things with pollen filter called car you know...

Bye,
TMTisFree

_________________
The engineering approach to our non-problems: "build a better washer".
The scientific approach to our non-problems: "find a new energy source".
The environmentalist approach to our non-problems: "stop washing your shirts".

@TMTisFree

Telling a guy who weighs 122kg while cycling tens of kilometers per day on average to stop cycling is a recipe for disaster. I have an extreme metabolism but also an extreme food intake, would blow up like a balloon if I stopped cycling.

I did 1204km in 9 days a few years back at 117kg, so am hoping I can loose a few kg in time the next 3 weeks. have some awesome cycling trips planned, like bologna-rimini-bologna (240km in 2 days, flat as a flat thing), Otta-Geiranger-Otta (300km in 2 days, 1000 meters straight up in 23km), Wien-Breclav-Kuty-Wien (175km in a day) and Wien-Bratislava-Hegyeshalom-Wien (170km in one day). The latter two are a saturday and sunday in september, so might make it a two day round trip instead, with hotel somewhere in Slovakia. But I've already booked 3 nights at a hotel in Wien just in case I can't bring the bike.


Anyway, this is wildly off topic. Just wanted to explain that I'm not a fanatical CO2-idiot, just mildly fanatical about cycling.

Oh and I'm working on a DIY project to build an electric MB190E. Have purchased a lot of components and am working on the motor controller. When I'm not cycling

_________________
This weeks pet peeve:
Using "voltage" instead of "potential", which leads to inventing new words like "amperage" instead of "current" (I, measured in A) or possible "charge" (amperehours, Ah or Coulomb, C). Sometimes I don't even know what people mean.

@Plaz

Quote:

"Hey I found some acient cave drawings that proves man and beast were much flatter and less 3D than they are today."

There was a cartoon where a kid asked his Dad why all the Black and White pictures. The Dad explained the world used to be Black and White only and is now color.