5 ms·
I don't think you are reading the studies you are sharing. >Global expansion of C4 biomass is recorded in the diets of mammals from Asia, Africa, North America
by 24gttghh 9y ago
I don't think you are reading the studies you are sharing.
>Global expansion of C4 biomass is recorded in the diets of mammals from Asia, Africa, North America, and South America during the interval from about 8 to 5 Ma.
That's a 3 million year period, ending 5ma. You say CO2 starvation is down to 150ppm, but atmospheric CO2 levels have fluctuated between 180-200 (ice ages) to 300ppm (warm periods) for the past half million years or so.[1] Meanwhile C3 plants (those supposedly which suffered during your linked expansion of C4 biomass) are around 95% of plant biomass currently. Doesn't seem like plants on the whole are starving for CO2 at this time.
[1]https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/ https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/
- mkempe 9y ago> I don't think you are reading the studies you are sharing. I'm impressed by your method of argumentation.
- 24gttghh 9y agoWhat I mean to say is there is more to the data than any single paper, and with a bigger picture in mind there seems to be no shortage of CO2 for 95% of plants on earth(C3 carbon fixation, evolved earlier), and for the other 5% (C4 carbon fixation, evolved more recently) they can be fine in a much greater range of CO2 concentrations.
- mkempe 9y agoIt's pretty simple and there is ample scientific evidence and writing on the topic: at current CO2 levels, plants are starving. There is even satellite-based measurements of vegetation by NASA that demonstrate a global greening of the planet in tune with atmospheric CO2 increases over the recent decades. You are denying scientific facts.
- 24gttghh 9y agoK. Go gaslight someone else bud.