Ryan letter references bad science

Skeptical, I analyzed Matt Ryan’s Letter of July 13 to see if his argument includes science since he invokes a scientist’s name.

Matt’s knowledge appears limited to plants needing CO2, synthesizing O2 for oxygen-breathing life. The scientific relationship ends there.

Matt never discusses that plants “fix” atmospheric CO2 into plant matter and he never acknowledges that “fixed” carbon is decreasing as the world continues consuming forests at an unsustainable rate. Matt cannot find a quack scientist arguing the amount of forest area in the world is decreasing, nor important.

Next, looking at our planetary neighbors, I am sure everyone knows that Mercury is roughly half the distance of Venus from the Sun, and Venus has the hottest surface in our system: one hundred degrees more than Mercury at 864 degrees. Earth is only 30 percent farther from the sun than Venus.

Being such a hottie, what is Venus’ssecret? Venus hides everything under a 96 percent CO2 atmosphere. So maybe this is where we get the term greenhouse gas? Even if you could cool Venus down, insufficient sunlight reaches the surface to grow vertical plants to start to fix carbon.

Lastly, Matt invokes geologist Ian Plimer, saying that volcanic eruptions and forest fires emit more CO2 than humanity. The Guardian newspaper evealed that our own government, the USGS, disputed Plimer’s charge, stating that humanity’s CO2 generation is 130 times more than a major eruption. Likewise, Plimer’s comment about forest fires is stated out of context. Peer-reviewed articles have stated that a fire may generate as much CO2 in a local area as the humanity in a local area generates in one year.

Douglas Terry