Nostr Web Client

First, the belief is extremely broadly and explicitly accepted that it is "bad" in a total senbse. It is literally trated as a pollutant.

Second, there is no evidence for the latter point. All major animal life breathed oxygen during the cambrian explosion and seemed to survive just fine (or rather thrived to an insane degree) at ~20x the CO2 levels as today. So I don't know where this notion is evidenced exactly

Chris 2w ago 💬 1

Guy. Love your work. Really.

But this topic is SO much more nuanced. Humans and their current habitat couldn’t survive in the same conditions in which the earth has spent 99 percent of it post-Cambrian explosion epochs. It’s called “hot bulb”. And it’s great for reptiles. Devastating for mammals.

Yes. The CO2 “emergency” is a politicised power play, hoax.

But no, we can’t jump to multiples of higher levels of higher CO2 (or oxygen! For that matter) and survive.

We have to move at evolutions scale to meet the organic changes. 🧬

I only answered because I love your work and you seem genuinely confused.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Guy Swann 2w ago

Wel I’m not really saying we could just make a leap to 8,000 ppm and nothing would happen. I’m just saying the idea that it’s a pollutant and destructive to the environment is an absurdity.

One doesn’t really have to take any wildly polar stance to make clear that ridiculous claim is, in fact, ridiculous.

So really I think we are in agreement.