Meanwhile actual science shows that increased carbon dioxide has resulted in more plant life. Which is exactly what you’d expect given the basic biochemistry of how CO2 works in nature.
So this comic, showing a treeless wasteland resulting from climate change, is unscientific in its depiction of the effects.
The question is, can nature produce enough new plants to match the rate that we increasingly emit CO2 into the atmosphere? My money is on…no. At some point, a feedback loop will occur and render the soil infertile.
Meanwhile actual science shows that increased carbon dioxide has resulted in more plant life. Which is exactly what you’d expect given the basic biochemistry of how CO2 works in nature.
So this comic, showing a treeless wasteland resulting from climate change, is unscientific in its depiction of the effects.
The treeless waste land was the result of the global wars that will be fought over dwindling resources.
Which resources do you expect to dwindle as a result of climate change?
Water, oil, arable land, people due to declining birth rates, good quality air to name a few.
Irregular weather means irritate food. I’m a farmer and am already feeling that.
Raising sea levels means docks will be too low and important trade slows down. Countries that rely on food imports will feel the squeeze.
The question is, can nature produce enough new plants to match the rate that we increasingly emit CO2 into the atmosphere? My money is on…no. At some point, a feedback loop will occur and render the soil infertile.
“Enough” new plants for what? The new plants are a result of increased carbon dioxide levels. Carbon dioxide is basically an atmospheric fertilizer.
What do you mean by “enough” here?