I have A question about global warming/climate change...?

Greenhouse gasses are known to increase the temperature of the environment. They act as reflectors that reflect back the energy of the sun back into our environment. There has been a correlation between greenhouse gasses and our earth's temperature. Ever since the industrial revolution, where gas emissions have increases, our global temperature average has increased.

Yes, trees can convert CO2 into O2. They are an essential part of this process. However, they can only convert so much. Also, with expansion of civilization, many forests are cut down. This results in less output. The less CO2 that is converted, the more is left.

Many variables plays a part in our global temperature. CO2 is not the only player in this game. Other elements include the Sun and radiation from the universe. Another player may be our magnetic field. There are also correlation between sun spots and global temperature too. The lack of sun spots typically indicates colder temperatures.

But with that said, greenhouse gasses do contribute to our global temperature. Scientists believe that in 100 years, the temperature will increase 3 - 5 degrees. It isn't the temperature that will be devistation for humans, it will be the ripple effect. Melting ice caps can distrupt our ocean currents. Warmer water will cause stronger hurricanes. It is silly to totally blind ourself to this. Sadly, many are doing such a thing because the issue is highly political.

Some solutions may include - planting more trees. Sadly, young trees are not as effective as older forests. We could make transportation that emmits less CO2 or convert our power plants to something that doesn't expell much greenhouse gasses - solar, wind, and nuclear. There is much we can and need to do! Nothing to become hysterical about!

Deforestation is occurring at an alarming rate and oceans (which absorb far more C02 than all the worlds forests) are being polluted. So if we place importance in climate change and CO2 emissions as a serious issue, that justifies both preserving forests and oceans (by reducing pollution and deforestation) AND reducing emissions of CO2. Suppose we could completely eliminate ALL manmade CO2 emissions, there would still be enough in the atmosphere for all the trees and oceans to thrive.

most of the large forests are self-contained ecosystems. they don't provide much oxygen to the world. most of it comes from algae and oxygen-producing microbes.

likewise, the carbon dioxide they absorb does not generally come from outside the forest. it comes from animals within and from dying plants (which release carbon dioxide).

thus, outside sources of carbon dioxide, such as from cars etc, never get absorbed by plants on a large scale. on a small scale yes, the more urban trees, the better. but we're not talking about a small scale.

Yes that is the way that GOD set it up. What we give off is what the plants need and the plants produce what we need.There are 2 things that live hare ,that is plant and animal. Plants can not produce O2 if they do not have CO2.

There is another cycle of life that springs from photosynthesis. The plant keeps the C in its leaves . When the leaves die the C will break down into oil & gas. Oil is a sustainable fuel.

The whole "cut back on carbon emissions" is a bunch of bunk. CO2 is such a minor gas in the greenhouse layer and our contribution is calculated at less than 0.03%.

So we have no effect on the greenhouse layer.

Also, at least in the US we have more trees than we did 200 years ago. So go ahead and plant trees if it makes you feel better, but it won't affect the climate.

Education is the key.

well, there has to be a balance...trees don't take in carbon dioxide all the time. and while they're doing this, they respire like us alongside.

and the amount of all the carbon in the atmosphere, is much much higher than all the plants can use

Co2 emissions are good for plants...end of debate, they could handle, and would flourish with 3 times the present levels...Global warming is a political movement, not an environmental one.. more evidense points towards global cooling, IN fact Very prestigious experts in Mexico, Sweden, and Russia claim we are heading towrds a new ice age.

Thoug it might cause other severe problems if the rain forests were to completely die, the forests do not produce the lions share of our breathable air, the ocean does...

With the deforestation that is occuring, there are not as many trees as there used to be, and we are making more carbon than we used to. We are losing acres of rain forest to logging and clearing every day. Yes, planting more trees would help. Lots, and lots more trees.

Let me preface with I don't agree with a lot of the inane dribble that comes out of the 'eco-friendly' idealogoy, as it's mostly driven by fear tactics.

That said, the idea is that we're producing SO MUCH carbon that it's overloading the tree's and they can't keep up. There HAVE been substantial losses of forests while the constant increase of carbon emissions means that what tree's and plant life are left, we may be overloading.

Personally, I don't buy it, I don't think we can ruin the ecosystem that much, that quickly. But to each their own.

I believe we are in a lot more danger than just the issue of global warming.

It is stated that at least 90% of all animal life on this planet is now extinct. Just a bit of trivia to throw in the mix! :D