Anonymous at Thu, 20 Jun 2024 04:45:56 UTC No. 16243622

>>16243607
This is one of the proofs of man made climate change. The rate oxygen is going down is nearly identical to the rate at which CO2 is going up which proves it's not coming from volcanoes or ocean outgassing, it's coming from combustion.

We have plenty of oxygen in the atmosphere, we will burn the planet with CO2 far sooner than we'll run out so it's not considered a problem. It's only implication is the reality of man-made climate change.

Anonymous at Thu, 20 Jun 2024 04:49:47 UTC No. 16243626

>>16243622
I'm having a hard time breathing just looking at that graph. So it's not something we need to be worried about? When will the oxygen get to a point where we start losing IQ points?

Anonymous at Thu, 20 Jun 2024 04:51:54 UTC No. 16243628

>>16243626
Nah, we'll have much greater problems long before it becomes an issue in itself.

Scripps keeps track of oxygen levels if you're interested in up to date reports
https://scrippso2.ucsd.edu/

Anonymous at Thu, 20 Jun 2024 04:54:50 UTC No. 16243629

>>16243626
Oh, I just realized that's where your graph came from so you're probably already aware of Scripps.

They also monitor C-13 levels in the atmosphere, another indicator of man-made climate change.
https://scrippsco2.ucsd.edu/graphics_gallery/isotopic_data/global_stations_isotopic_c13_trends.html

Anonymous at Thu, 20 Jun 2024 05:10:24 UTC No. 16243647

>>16243607
reduced global iq

Anonymous at Thu, 20 Jun 2024 05:11:05 UTC No. 16243648

>>16243626
The unit there, permeg is equivalent to parts per million
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Per_meg

It is the ratio of O2 to N2 in the atmosphere. Atmospheric N2 is 80% of earth's atmosphere, the molecule is triple-bonded, as such, they have very long lifetime on the order of million year. They are essentially noble gas, except the only natural process that can split N2 is lightning (high energy chemistry), which provide bio-available nitrogen for nitrification and denitrification process.

On the other hand, O2 which is 20% of the atmosphere has atmospheric lifetime on the order of only ~1000 years. O2 is exhaled during plant photosynthesis, and also consumed during combustion.

What you can see on the graph are two features. First is the decline of relative abundance of O2 relative to N2 (in parts per million) due to fossil fuel combustion and deforestation. This in effect tracks the cumulative effect of anthropogenic peturbation. Superimposed on the trend is the seasonal cycle. Because there are more land (and thus plants) in the northern hemisphere, effectively more O2 is being produced on Earth during NH summer.

O2/N2 ratio is a neat novelty measurement one can do to track large scale anthropogenic peturbation, but the rate of change has negligible impact on human health.

As you can see on the figure, all of human activity on earth cumulatively decreased O2 by 1000 permeg, 1 permil, or 0.001 percent. Dangerous level of O2 according to OSHA is 15-19 percent - so it takes another 1000 years of business as usual combustion and deforestation to decrease Oxygen on earth by 1%, and another 5000 years to make it dangerous.

Anonymous at Thu, 20 Jun 2024 05:27:00 UTC No. 16243663

>not enough O2 makes you dizzy
>1000 ppm CO2 or more makes you dizzy
this will be great

Anonymous at Thu, 20 Jun 2024 05:50:31 UTC No. 16243676

>>16243663
Freshwater fish can adapt to saltwater if they're in a tank and the salt level is gradually increased.

Anonymous at Thu, 20 Jun 2024 06:25:48 UTC No. 16243709

>>16243663
>>1000 ppm CO2 or more makes you dizzy
Fake and gay
Buy a CO2 monitor. Your home/bedroom is often above 1000ppm and you don't notice a thing

Anonymous at Thu, 20 Jun 2024 08:25:23 UTC No. 16243796

>>16243622
How does confirming a rise in a naturally occurring and highly variable ppm greenhouse gas confirm anything about our role in climate change? Is our role in reducing oxygen output with e.g. deforestation not having an impact? Even doubling CO2 concentration would do fucking nothing due to its weak greenhouse effect and it also having no effect on our health below a few thousand ppm. I find it likely we have some role in the warming, but it isn't because of CO2. Also I find it ridiculous that despite our considerable knowledge gaps regarding global climate systems we put tons of faith in the models we run and treat their results as fact.

Anonymous at Thu, 20 Jun 2024 15:20:46 UTC No. 16244189

>>16243796
None of your post is correct. I would recommend reading the vast amounts of literature on the subject of climate change before trying to post again.

Start here:
https://www.ipcc.ch/

Anonymous at Thu, 20 Jun 2024 17:45:21 UTC No. 16244327

>>16244189
Hide the decline!

Get new material. This isn't a comedy show.