Comments by "J Smith" (@jsmithmultimediatech) on "Greta Thunberg has ‘nothing to say’ on how to fix climate change" video.

@vincentl.9469 Yeah they have proven why Co2, it retains its heat part of being why its calleda double side compound, under ultraviolet light it essentially vibrates causing heat (why when leaving a fizzy drink in the warm causes it to heat up) just takes a long time if ever to lose that. Is what plants need to survive is their equivalent to our oxygen. Reason why its not so much a dirty word (going back whatever time ago was this massive erruption of a volcano that caused essentially 10x the CO2 emissions as they are now) the knock on effect of whats happening if CO2 emissions grow as such, is its ideal for plant growth balancing it out.
2
@vincentl.9469 Oh no (I dont now about the half life of CO2 however) but I'd be amazed if its more than well 100 years lol, before it starts decaying (half life being the time when an element at least starts decaying). Just reading about it as its quite interesting is about what 20-200 years, the residence time in the atmosphere's about 20-50 years depending on where you look, but the adjustment phase is much much longer (more like centuries). Thing with CO2 is it needs a heat source why the co-founder of Greenpeace who's against their way of doing things, as well as other organisations as well. Really is the sun overall or any heat source. Is why a say fizzy drinks can or container can be in someone's bag completely locked off to the sun heats up if its exposed to heat. Its the particles inside the compound that is CO2 vibrate when being exposed to UV light, which causes it to heat up.
1
@vincentl.9469 You might find thisreally interesting (himself whom I am talking about being a cofounder of Greenpeace) https://youtu.be/E5K5i5Wv7jQ he's quite funny lol. Well with the adjustment phase can be critised of course, as its not me who's said that lol, is whats believed I'd say up to but... I really dont know.
1
@vincentl.9469 That really doesnt suprise me lol, its not around the earth its within the earths atmosphere and yeah is about just over 50% more dense than dry oxygen. I haven no idea about it being outside of the earths atmosphere at all but its not what I'd say would be of any concern its within thats supposedly a problem. I mean are things in space its just its far too sparse, you do of course get gases in space but as I said its far too sparse for it to be called an atmosphere.
1
Just thinking about things by (with a bit of luck) in about 30 years should improve I'd hazard guess. This bs about it going before then, yeah they've said that before😆😆😆😆
1