Is Whole Foods Bad for the Planet?

Globaal Warming Scam. __ Let's totally forget politics or taxes, etc, on the GW issue for a few minusts. __ You wrote, "CO2 is not the culprit and that is my arguent". __ Try to stop and listen for a minute or two, because that is incorrect and why you are wriong, hers is why:

CO2 from ANY source is what gives the planet it's greenhouse effect, without that greenhouse effect, life would not be possible on the planet. Do you agree to that? You should, because that is a slam dunk fact of life, Earth is a bio-spher an eco-system. And Earth's eco-system is actually quite fragile.

When CO2 levels in the atmosphere are in the 300 to 320 ppm range the greenhouse effect is is in the (minus) side and that amount is about perfect for life on Earth. The planet neither gets too warm or too cold. When CO2 lievels are below the 300 ppm range, we begin to have an ice age, above 340 ppm range and the greenhouse effect moves to the (plus ) side and global warming begins. That's alright if it doesn't go too high and stays on the plus side.

That plus and nimus of the greenhouse effect has occurred many times during the evolution of Earth. There have been periods when there was very little ice and times when the planet was almost entirelly covered with ice. Those periods usually lasted for several million years. Neither of those events have occurred to that extreme since human's written recorded history, which only goes back some 5,000 years. __ Not counting the story of Noah's ark of course.

Now up to the industrial revolution days, in the early 1800s, CO2 levels had been pretty constant for thousands of years, sometimes in the plus side for a few years, but it was mostly in the higher minus side and all of that is revealed in the thousands of ice core samples taken and read by spectroanalysis. Palientologists know what the CO2 levels were for the past thousands or more years.

Since humans began burning a great deal of fosssil fuels, the CO2 levels have climbed pretty steadily and when they reached the 335-340 ppm range, global warming began, about 15 -20 years ago the rate of climb rose far more quickly. Many atmospheric scientists therorized that was not from natural CO2 emissions. In addition to burnng fossil fuels, man also had increased the amount of cattle raising by far more than that of previous years in our history. We also had destroyed many forests which are very important natural sequestors of CO2. Then add in the population explosion of humans in the past 200 years.

All of those things and more, __ such as waste treatment plants, which are a very high source of CO2 emissions, near the top of the list for human CO2 emissions, just behind animal husbandry. Mining coal is by far the worst for human caused methane emission, and of course methane is worse than CO2 for adding to the (plus) side of the greenhouse effect, 20+time s worse. There is no sensible argumen to say thath humans have not increased CO2 levels far above what had been produed by nature. Nature of course still produces CO2 and methane gas and that's fine and nothing we can control. We can control what we humans produce.

Now in just the past 220 years, CO2 levels have climed from the very good 300- 320 ppm range to 350 ppm, which is a dramatic rise in geological time, and in the past two years it have now risen to near 380 ppm. Wow! Stop the train!

Why? Because when global waming has become well established, methane begins to release from thawing ice, like what is occurring in the Arctic region of Earth now. That causes a dramatic change in the greenhouse effect and the feedbak cycle to global warming begins. Warmer planet, more ice melts, more methane releases and it get s warmer and warmer and more methane releases and before you know it, the GW feedback cycle is a runaway freight train and it will finally kill you, -__ unless somethng is done to stoP the train. I don't know what to do, I never drove a freight train. So there we are GW Scam.

All of wht I just repeated here, is available to all by just Googling or Binging, Greenhouse effect, or CO2, or methane, or Arctic methane, or read a good college editin science book about climatology. None of it is bull or myths, or hoaxes. ___ It's how it is.

It tales about a minute for any to Google or Bing any one of those subjects and choose which of the thousands of articles available to read. The college books may be a better choice. That's my argument GW Scam.