The left is eating itself.
-
Oh thoughts, you keep teasing me.
CO2 is actually beneficial to greenery. Lol. CO2 is like, oxygen to trees, and the more CO2, the more trees. There is more CO2, so there is more vegetation now by 14+%. But the left wants us to think that we need CO2 to go to zero. Humans exhale CO2 so that means you'd have to kill us all to get to zero, and when you did get to zero, there would be no CO2... meaning nothing left for trees to breath. God damn. I am so tired of this ignorance.
-
@manhandler Isn't that smart of John Kerry and Greta to act like they're fighting and we all cared when we just recognized what they were doing. "CO2 is bad!" CO2 is oxygen to trees. I'm not sure why that's a common sense thing that we're missing in society.
-
@manhandler said in The left is eating itself.:
Oh thoughts, you keep teasing me.
CO2 is actually beneficial to greenery. Lol. CO2 is like, oxygen to trees, and the more CO2, the more trees. There is more CO2, so there is more vegetation now by 14+%. But the left wants us to think that we need CO2 to go to zero. Humans exhale CO2 so that means you'd have to kill us all to get to zero, and when you did get to zero, there would be no CO2... meaning nothing left for trees to breath. God damn. I am so tired of this ignorance.
You know the science about Greenhouse Gasses about as well as a gnat understands how and why it can fly. (And that's being generous - to the gnat!)
CO2 is not dangerous (and is - indeed - necessary for most life) in low-altitude atmosphere - but it is incredibly dangerous to the OZONE in the upper atmosphere - and it is the OZONE in the upper atmosphere that protects ALL LIFE on the surface from harmful radiation from the Sun.
Lose the Ozone layer, and the only life on this planet will be in caves and under water... and NONE of that life will be bipedal!
To follow YOUR banal logic, water is good... water is life... melting the ice caps and raising sealevels by - why not 5 feet! - would be a great thing!
I tell you what: water is good for you - necessary for life... I suggest you drink 3 gallons of water a day for a week. (Actually - I want to be clear: that's sarcasm! If you really did that, you would literally drown!)
-
@manhandler said in The left is eating itself.:
CO2 is actually beneficial to greenery.
Yes, vegetation absorbs CO2, which it converts (along with water and sunlight) into hydrocarbon plant material, and expels oxygen. Animals (such as humans) take in O2, which they convert (along with water) into their own bodily mass, and expel CO2. This has been in balance for millions of years. But over the last century, so much CO2 has been put into the atmosphere that plants can't absorb it. The excess CO2 in the atmosphere absorbs sunlight, leading to climate change. I know this sounds complicated--do a web search on "carbon cycle" and perhaps you'll find pages that explain it more clearly.
There is more CO2, so there is more vegetation now by 14+%.
Do you have a source for this? Deforestation is rampant all over the globe.
While one might think that increasing CO2 would help plants, one can't say "if some is good, more is better." See https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2011/02/12/how-plants-could-impact-global-warming/ for a discussion.
-
@bi4smooth said in The left is eating itself.:
I tell you what: water is good for you - necessary for life... I suggest you drink 3 gallons of water a day for a week. (Actually - I want to be clear: that's sarcasm! If you really did that, you would literally drown!)
Incorrect. You don't drown from drinking. Instead, you'd succumb to hyponatremia, which is the condition when there's too little sodium in the bloodstream, thus damaging your cells.
-
@bi4smooth I don't think you're getting it... The basic statement by John Kerry that we need to get CO2 to zero... Why are you ignoring what he said as even you are admitting that it's stupid? You need to hold him accountable. You just admitted that he lied. Don't change the subject from what he said, your representative, blatantly lying, and you're trying to ignore that.
-
@eobox91103 Well that's like saying if there's extra oxygen that can't be absorbed, and it's in abundance, extra oxygen is something that we should be super scared of. So because there's extra carbon dioxide (the 69 of oxygen), then we should be super worried and vote by mail and wear a mask and like what the hell is wrong with you? You are not free. Lucifer was the freest of all the angels. Do you think he would have been so pathetic as you wearing that stupid face covering, breathing in the very CO2 your side claims is poisoning the planet? CO2 is bad, so let's also wear a mask to breath it in. Funny how this is all coming from one side of the aisle. All the things are connected to a singular point. The democratic party. CO2, masks, election fraud, vaccines. Out of control frenzy.
-
@manhandler said in The left is eating itself.:
@eobox91103 Well that's like saying if there's extra oxygen that can't be absorbed, and it's in abundance, extra oxygen is something that we should be super scared of. So because there's extra carbon dioxide (the 69 of oxygen), then we should be super worried and vote by mail and wear a mask and like what the hell is wrong with you? You are not free. Lucifer was the freest of all the angels. Do you think he would have been so pathetic as you wearing that stupid face covering, breathing in the very CO2 your side claims is poisoning the planet? CO2 is bad, so let's also wear a mask to breath it in. Funny how this is all coming from one side of the aisle. All the things are connected to a singular point. The democratic party. CO2, masks, election fraud, vaccines. Out of control frenzy.
You truly are an example of how a little (very little) knowledge is a dangerous thing.
You would DIE without CO2 and Nitrogen in the air... the Oxygen in the atmosphere is needed to "feed" our cells, but the CO2 and Nitrogen are equally important - in their proper proportions!
Breathing in a slightly higher CO2 concentration because of a mask is:
- a myth - if the mask was truly capturing the CO2, it would be inflating!
- even to the TINY extent that it can raise the CO2 that you inhale, it is not dangerous - not even to people with sever respiratory illnesses!
You silly, misguided TOOLS of the Russians (and/or Chinese) miss the point of the masks - it's not to CATCH the virus! It's to block the water (spit) droplets that the virus lives in... not to even capture them, just block them - so they don't travel so far away from you!
Think of it this way... load up a paint sprayer and get some screening (like you would put on a screen door:
- hold the screen up against your house and stand back about 3-5 feet and spray the screen... your house gets paint all over it... albeit LESS paint than it would without the screen having been there, but there's paint all over that part of the house. But this is the protection YOU get FOR YOURSELF by wearing a mask (when others do not)... and it's a little, but not much.
- now, hold the screen a few inches in front of the spray nozzle and spray towards the house again... you'll see that the ground gets LOTS of paint, the house a little - probably VERY little. Because the screen slowed down the paint so much it didn't reach the house. This is the protection YOU get FOR YOURSELF when SOMEONE ELSE wears a mask... and it's not perfect, but it's substantial.
- Finally, hold screens up in both places... you should get the idea by now...
In countries that don't have adequate supplies of vaccine yet, this is their BEST DEFENSE.
Here in the US, at least for vaccinated people, your paint gun has no paint! LOL
But the whole idea that the wearing of a mask was somehow a massive intrusion on your personal life/space/comfort is ABSURD and FARCICAL! A woman's bra is more uncomfortable than a facemask! Some kinds of men's underwear too!
-
@bi4smooth First, you started with a huge fallacy right from the beginning. I watched a carbon dioxide detector go off with a guy in a face mask, and then continue to rise with the addition of masks. That was Owen Shroyer. The more masks he wore, the more the CO2 went off. So yes, you ARE breathing that right back in.
-
@manhandler said in The left is eating itself.:
@bi4smooth First, you started with a huge fallacy right from the beginning. I watched a carbon dioxide detector go off with a guy in a face mask, and then continue to rise with the addition of masks. That was Owen Shroyer. The more masks he wore, the more the CO2 went off. So yes, you ARE breathing that right back in.
You're so delusional... if these people told you that pure water was harmful to you, you'd start drinking your own piss!
Of course, the REAL crime here is all of the MILLIONS of people dropping dead every day from CO2 poisoning from wearing masks! Clearly the danger is there! Right there with the corpses of the people dying from wearing the masks!
Can't see the forest for the trees....
-
@bi4smooth They used masks in the Spanish flu, and most of those mask-wearers got bacterial infections. It didn't work. That's another thing. Is it racist to call it the Wuhan flu? Well, what about the Spanish flu? Why isn't that racist? Why isn't Ebola racist? Ebola got it's name from Africa the same way Wuhan did. But only that one is racist because we don't know what we're talking about.
-
@manhandler said in The left is eating itself.:
@bi4smooth They used masks in the Spanish flu, and most of those mask-wearers got bacterial infections. It didn't work. That's another thing. Is it racist to call it the Wuhan flu? Well, what about the Spanish flu? Why isn't that racist? Why isn't Ebola racist? Ebola got it's name from Africa the same way Wuhan did. But only that one is racist because we don't know what we're talking about.
Read your history, foolish boy... they called it the "Spanish Flu" in 1918 because Spain was neutral in WW1 - no other reason. It didn't start there - no one ever seriously claimed it did! But as a matter of War and Diplomacy, they called it the Spanish Flu...
That said, since the 1940's scientists (in preparation for embarrassing Donald Trump, who had just been born, at this juncture in history) switched to simply calling it the 1918 Flu... kinda like they call this one COVID-19 (and none of those silly anti-Asian names Trump wanted to call it).
Of course, we want to call it COVID-19 today, instead of the Wuhan Flu because we want to have the opportunity to embarrass young Johnny Wu, who is just 4 years old today in China, but will grow up to become the dictator of more than 1/2 the entire world in 2076!
-
@bi4smooth And.. we've escaped the discussion that half the CDC and NIH have refused the vax. The vax has been banned in many nations for blood clots and other neurodegenerative problems. Why won't HALF the CDC and NIH take the VAX? Those guys telling us that it's safe and effective?
-
@manhandler said in The left is eating itself.:
@bi4smooth And.. we've escaped the discussion that half the CDC and NIH have refused the vax. The vax has been banned in many nations for blood clots and other neurodegenerative problems. Why won't HALF the CDC and NIH take the VAX? Those guys telling us that it's safe and effective?
I have to admit, I'm not a big fan of the older-tech vaccines... their efficacy rates are 50/50-ish, when compared to the mRNA based vaccines (whose efficacy is over 95%).
Saying you're pro-Vaccine for COVID-19 is like saying you're pro-car... there are so many to choose from (3 in the US, 2 in India, 1 each in Russia and China, and a half-dozen or so more made in other countries)... but only 2 use the mRNA technology: Moderna & Pfizer.
I'm thankful that I got the Pfizer in Jan/Feb - thanks to a Federal program (inherited from the Trump Administration!)
-
@bi4smooth Well, I think you don't have much time left... You're part of the borg now.
-
@manhandler said in The left is eating itself.:
@bi4smooth Well, I think you don't have much time left... You're part of the borg now.
LOL - I have that microscopic chip in me now! It'll control my mind and thoughts and feelings forever more!
Nevermind they still can't control a car with a computer the size of a oversize carry-on bag!
The time may come when they can implant something in you to control you... but that time isn't today, and it's not even close to being today.
There will be self-flying cars that will take you anywhere you want to go - for free - by then! LOL
-
@bi4smooth Yes and you're the guinea pig, for a thing that already had deadly effects on 100% of the ferrets and other animals they tried a coronavirus vaccine on in 2012 and 2005. Meaning they already tried Coronavirus vaccines in the past and decided it was too dangerous, because 100% of the animals died, many right away, but most withing two years tops. 100%
-
@manhandler said in The left is eating itself.:
@bi4smooth Yes and you're the guinea pig, for a thing that already had deadly effects on 100% of the ferrets and other animals they tried a coronavirus vaccine on in 2012 and 2005. Meaning they already tried Coronavirus vaccines in the past and decided it was too dangerous, because 100% of the animals died, many right away, but most withing two years tops. 100%
Those are interesting statistics... because the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine is the FIRST of its kind! The research is new! It's based on research that's trying to make an HIV vaccine, and they just thought it might work for COVID-19... and since it's mRNA based, the safety was pretty much assured. (The "side effects" like blood clots, etc. have mostly been from the Johnson vaccine - which is NOT an mRNA vaccine).
So... either you're talking about different vaccines from the 20-teens, or you're talking out of your ass... I'd hazard a guess, but... nah... I'm sure you already know...
-
@bi4smooth Uh, no. You don't seem to know anything about it. It has actually been studied, coronavirus vaccines, and it was decided in 2012 by a Fauci funded program in Galveston, TX Level 4 lab that it was too dangerous to pursue a Coronavirus vaccine.
-
@manhandler said in The left is eating itself.:
@bi4smooth Uh, no. You don't seem to know anything about it. It has actually been studied, coronavirus vaccines, and it was decided in 2012 by a Fauci funded program in Galveston, TX Level 4 lab that it was too dangerous to pursue a Coronavirus vaccine.
You're an idiot - plain and simple. You simply cannot read and understand the English Language.
They may very well have been researching coronavirus vaccines in 2012... but what we have today? This ain't that!
The entire company Moderna is a play on the name of the NEW technology... this COVID-19 vaccine is the FIRST they've EVER produced for human consumption! EVER! (Moderna... Modified RNA... Mod-RNA) - and they have a partnership with Pfizer, so both companies were able to produce their own versions of this mRNA vaccine separately, but using the same NEW technology.
The mRNA vaccine doesn't use dead virus, or DNA implanted into other viruses like the "old" vaccines do...
This is new shit... and it's worked AN ORDER OF MAGNITUDE better than they even HOPED it would!
The success of the Moderna and Pfizer mRNA vaccines is a positive sign for many other uses of this technology - including vaccines for HIV, HepC, an "unified" Flu vaccine, many forms of cancer... the list is truly endless! This is to modern vaccines what Salk's Polio vaccine technology was to the 1950's medical immunology field!
