Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?

  • 44 Replies
  • 2859 Views
*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 20514
  • To Us Everywhere Flat Earth
Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
« on: October 12, 2017, 07:01:04 AM »
I don't believe that. This is a belief and just let me control the "so called science".



Oxygen/carbondioxide: 20,946/0,034 = 616.

There is oxygen more than CO2 616 times.

in daylight, people and animals take oxygen and give carbon dioxide. but trees are take carbon dioxide and give oxygen. in night, all of living things take oxygen and give carbon dioxide. there is a balance between day and night, and the oxygen and carbon dioxide that trees receive and give must be equal. the amount of carbon dioxide must constantly increase because people and animals are constantly giving carbon dioxide during the day and night. This determination doesn't overlap to the reality. In fact, the oxygen is more than carbondioxyde 616 times but should have been less or at least equal.

oxygen and carbon balance by photosentesis is a lie. there is no evidence that plants make photosynthesis.  the fact is, It comes with carbon dioxide at night. daytime, comes with oxygen. even if there is not a single tree in an environment, for example, in a desert, the rate of oxygen increases in daylight. daylight isin't only a light, but both light and oxygen.

I'm opening this event to your debate before detailing and publishing it. I'll be glad if everybody say its free idea about it. Then the boots decide which ones are reliable for considered by me. Thanks in advance.


It is night. Night ends in:


*

Crutchwater

  • 2145
  • Stop Indoctrinating me!
Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
« Reply #1 on: October 12, 2017, 08:18:43 AM »
Great...

Now all the TREES are fake CGI?
I will always be Here To Laugh At You.

Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
« Reply #2 on: October 12, 2017, 09:15:04 AM »
I don't believe that. This is a belief and just let me control the "so called science".



Oxygen/carbondioxide: 20,946/0,034 = 616.

There is oxygen more than CO2 616 times.

Those figures look about right.

Quote
in daylight, people and animals take oxygen and give carbon dioxide. but trees [and other photosynthetic organisms] take carbon dioxide and give oxygen. in night, all of living things take oxygen and give carbon dioxide. there is a balance between day and night, and the oxygen and carbon dioxide that trees [etc.] receive and give must be equal.

If the conversion rate of O2 to CO2 from all sources equals the conversion rate of CO2 to O2 from all sources, then the ratio of O2 to CO2 will be constant. On average, this is approximately true, but varies locally through the year and, as you note, also varies between day and night.

Quote
the amount of carbon dioxide must constantly increase because people and animals are constantly giving carbon dioxide during the day and night. This determination doesn't overlap to the reality. In fact, the oxygen is more than carbondioxyde 616 times but should have been less or at least equal.

If the conversion rates are equal then the ratio will not change, but there's no requirement for the quantities to be equal. Why should there be?

Keep in mind that combustion of carbon-bearing material in an oxygen-rich atmosphere also converts C from the material and O2 from the atmosphere into CO2, which is released into the atmossphere. This is an area of concern since measurements show that the percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing in a long-term trend, and the increase is attributed by many scientists to burning large quantities of carbon-based fuels - mostly coal (essentially pure carbon) and hydrocarbons (petroleum and natural gas) - that had been sequestered inside the earth, removing that carbon from the system until they are extracted and burned.

Quote
oxygen and carbon balance by photosentesis is a lie. there is no evidence that plants make photosynthesis. 

Just saying it doesn't make it true. What you mean is that you don't know about, or don't want to believe, the evidence for photosynthesis.

Quote
the fact is, It comes with carbon dioxide at night. daytime, comes with oxygen. even if there is not a single tree in an environment, for example, in a desert, the rate of oxygen increases in daylight.

It isn't just trees. Most deserts have at least some photosynthetic organisms, and, for the same reason there are fewer plants, there are also fewer animals in deserts.

Quote
daylight isin't only a light, but both light and oxygen.

???

Quote
I'm opening this event to your debate before detailing and publishing it. 

Good idea!

Quote
Then the boots decide which ones are reliable for considered by me.

???

Quote
Thanks in advance.

You're welcome!
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
« Reply #3 on: October 12, 2017, 01:15:44 PM »
I don't believe that. This is a belief and just let me control the "so called science".
Reality doesn't care what you believe.


there is a balance between day and night, and the oxygen and carbon dioxide that trees receive and give must be equal.
Why?
All evidence is to the contrary.
The trees will use the carbon dioxide they take in during the day as a carbon source to grow.
If they were giving out as much as they take in they would be unable to grow.
The fact that they grow indicates they take in more during the day than they put out at night.

This determination doesn't overlap to the reality.
Yes, your horribly flawed conclusion doesn't match reality.

even if there is not a single tree in an environment, for example, in a desert, the rate of oxygen increases in daylight.
Got any evidence for this?
Including the distance to the nearest trees.

*

rabinoz

  • 24765
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
« Reply #4 on: October 12, 2017, 08:07:44 PM »
I don't believe that. This is a belief and just let me control the "so called science".

Oxygen/carbondioxide: 20,946/0,034 = 616.
There is oxygen more than CO2 616 times.

in daylight, people and animals take oxygen and give carbon dioxide. but trees are take carbon dioxide and give oxygen.
Agreed.
Quote from: İntikam
in night, all of living things take oxygen and give carbon dioxide.
Agreed.
Quote from: İntikam
there is a balance between day and night, and the oxygen and carbon dioxide that trees receive and give must be equal.
Not true. "all of living things take oxygen and give carbon dioxide" all the time for "respiration but
during the day trees, using photosynthesis, can convert
              2 x CO2 into  C + O2 + CO2 or effectively
              CO2 into  C + O2.
The carbon (the C) combines with water from the soil to produce starches, which for the building blocks of the tree structure and
the oxygen is released into the atmosphere.

Trees can, therefore, be net generators of atmospheric oxygen and plants are the ultimate source of almost all our free oxygen.

So there is no reason "the oxygen and carbon dioxide that trees receive and give must be equal" making the rest of your post irrelevant.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 20514
  • To Us Everywhere Flat Earth
Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
« Reply #5 on: October 12, 2017, 10:50:26 PM »
You are the only one no need to Boots here.

Great...

Now all the TREES are fake CGI?

Plants need oxygen like how we need. We don't make photosentesis with oxygen. we breathe because it makes our system work. it does not increase the mass. like how oxygen doesn't increase the mass of animals, the carbondioxide or oxygen doesn't increase the mass of trees. If a tree is left without oxygen, it will strangle like an aniclose the room. measure the gas inside. put the plants in. Prove photosynthesis. no. no such thing. but if they get oxygen, the mass does not increase. minerals and water are required. There is no laboratuary experiment prove the photosentesis. It is actually basic. what was science based on?


It is night. Night ends in:


Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
« Reply #6 on: October 12, 2017, 11:03:58 PM »
Yes.

Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
« Reply #7 on: October 12, 2017, 11:08:12 PM »
I remember doing this experiment age 12...

And what the hell does this have to do with flat earth anyways?

http://www.biologydiscussion.com/experiments/photosynthesis-experiments/experiments-on-photosynthesis-for-high-school/56430

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 20514
  • To Us Everywhere Flat Earth
Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
« Reply #8 on: October 12, 2017, 11:11:49 PM »
I remember doing this experiment age 12...

And what the hell does this have to do with flat earth anyways?

http://www.biologydiscussion.com/experiments/photosynthesis-experiments/experiments-on-photosynthesis-for-high-school/56430

That experiment doesn't prove the photosentesis. Because the closed tube doesn't have carbondioxide but doesn'T have oxygen too. How can be sure it need carbondioxide or any other thing in the air. Did you make that experiment? Look this "so called experiment" doesn't prove anything related to photosentesis, but breathe!

If you can't find any relation between flat earth theory you don't have to answer.


It is night. Night ends in:


*

rabinoz

  • 24765
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
« Reply #9 on: October 12, 2017, 11:37:23 PM »
    You are the only one no need to Boots here.

    Great...

    Now all the TREES are fake CGI?

    Plants need oxygen like how we need. We don't make photosynthesis with oxygen. We breathe because it makes our system work. it does not increase the mass. like how oxygen doesn't increase the mass of animals,
    True.

    Quote from: İntikam
    the carbon dioxide or oxygen doesn't increase the mass of trees.
    Not true. Trees have two quite different processes going
    • Respiration, much as in animals, where O2 is taken in and CO2 is given out and
    • photosynthesis, in which 2 x CO2 molecules + sunlight  are converted to CO2 + C + O2
                        or effectively CO2 + sunlight are converted to carbon + O2
    .
    The carbon is used to build the structure of the tree.
    [/list]

    Quote from: İntikam
    If a tree is left without oxygen, it will strangle like an aniclose the room. measure the gas inside. put the plants in. Prove photosynthesis. no. no such thing.
    Yes, but trees need CO2 AND sunlight[/b][/i][/li][/list] to produce oxygen.

    Quote from: İntikam
    but if they get oxygen, the mass does not increase. minerals and water are required. There is no laboratuary experiment prove the photosynthesis. It is actually basic.
    That is totally untrue. Of course you must have light (sunlight) the get photosynthesis.

    Quote from: İntikam
    what was science based on?
    Science is based on evidence gained from experiments - not dragged out of thin air!

    Have a look at:
    Designing an experiment to test the rate of photosynthesis, John S Olson
    Photosynthesis Lab Experiments, By Antonia Lawrence; Updated April 25, 2017
    Photosynthesis Experiment: Making Science Fun, BY APRIL KLAZEMA
    Using Aquatic Plants to Demonstrate Photosynthesis, Candace Berkeley

    İntikam, if you ignore this and continue with your false claims, we will all know that you are a proven deceiver.
    « Last Edit: October 13, 2017, 12:49:54 AM by rabinoz »

    Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
    « Reply #10 on: October 13, 2017, 12:45:34 AM »
    it does not increase the mass. like how oxygen doesn't increase the mass of animals
    That's right. It reduces our mass, by "burning" the sugar.
    You breathe in oxygen, you breath out carbon dioxide. What do you think is going to happen?

    the carbondioxide or oxygen doesn't increase the mass of trees.
    The carbon dioxide does increase the mass of a tree. If you put a tree in a carbon dioxide free environment, it cannot grow.

    Prove photosynthesis.
    It has been proven beyond any reasonable doubt.
    One example was by placing a mouse and plant in a bell jar. (compared with just a mouse)
    The mouse lived with the plant, as the plant produced oxygen for the mouse to use for respiration. (they even did it with a human, but not the control).
    Without the plants, they don't get oxygen and they die.

    The other key bit of proof is that plants need light to grow.

    There is no laboratuary experiment prove the photosentesis.
    You ignoring them doesn't mean they don't exist.

    Here is a nice simple experiment for you:
    Get an oxygen sensor and carbon dioxide sensor.
    Place them in a sealed (airtight) container with a plant.
    See what happens when there is no light given to the plant.
    See what happens (as an extra control) when you illuminate various regions of the container, without illuminating the plant.
    Then see what happens when you illuminate the plant (sunlight works best but other growing lights work as well, as should generic incandescent light globes).
    In all cases ensure the plant has plenty of water (but not so much that you kill it with it) as well as decent soil with nutrients.
    (as an added test, add extra carbon dioxide to the container first so it doesn't run out)
    If you do this, guess what the results will be?

    The case of the non-illuminated plants, the oxygen will be consumed and CO2 will be produced.
    In the case of the illuminated plant, the opposite will happen (assuming it has enough light, and there is enough CO2).

    That experiment doesn't prove the photosentesis.
    Yes it does.

    Because the closed tube doesn't have carbondioxide but doesn'T have oxygen too.
    No. It has oxygen. The potassium hydroxide absorbs the CO2 to form potassium carbonate. It doesn't absorb the oxygen.

    If you like you can do a more complicated experiment, by flowing air through a tube filled with potassium hydroxide (at a slow rate to ensure all the CO2 is gone), or by feeding it with an oxygen/nitrogen mix which has no CO2.
    You can also try a simple control of not putting in the potassium hydroxide and see what happens.
    Or you can show it needs the light by having a leaf covered up but still exposed to the air.

    Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
    « Reply #11 on: October 13, 2017, 03:59:17 AM »
    Clearly something else is using up all the oxygen where Intikam lives and starving his brain of it's O2 requirements

    *

    wise

    • Professor
    • Flat Earth Scientist
    • 20514
    • To Us Everywhere Flat Earth
    Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
    « Reply #12 on: October 13, 2017, 04:04:29 AM »
    you are not even worth to ignore.


    It is night. Night ends in:


    *

    rabinoz

    • 24765
    • Real Earth Believer
    Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
    « Reply #13 on: October 13, 2017, 05:18:30 AM »
    you are not even worth to ignore.
    Stop this continual lying about simple factual material! We are totally sick of you dishonest deception.

    İntikam's response to facts!

    ??? ??? ??? I'm ignoring you! ??? ??? ???
    Silly ignorant idiot!


    Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
    « Reply #14 on: October 13, 2017, 07:02:18 AM »
    I'm opening this event to your debate before detailing and publishing it. I'll be glad if everybody say its free idea about it. Then the boots decide which ones are reliable for considered by me. Thanks in advance.



    Yeah, sure you'll be glad...  ::)

    I'm on the list, so you won't see this, but others will. Ha!
    "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

    Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
    « Reply #15 on: October 13, 2017, 08:14:13 AM »
    I don't know what's dafter, inty's photosynthesis conspiracy, or the fact that grown ups are debating with him.
    Quote from: mikeman7918
    a single photon can pass through two sluts

    Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
    if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

    Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
    « Reply #16 on: October 13, 2017, 08:39:23 AM »
    I don't know what's dafter, inty's photosynthesis conspiracy, or the fact that grown ups are debating with him.

    It's fun! It's not really debating, though; it's just pointing out where he's so obviously wrong when he says something completely wacky, but he keeps himself from being able to reply to the rebuttals.
    "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

    Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
    « Reply #17 on: October 13, 2017, 08:54:39 AM »
    I remember doing this experiment age 12...

    And what the hell does this have to do with flat earth anyways?

    http://www.biologydiscussion.com/experiments/photosynthesis-experiments/experiments-on-photosynthesis-for-high-school/56430

    That experiment doesn't prove the photosentesis. Because the closed tube doesn't have carbondioxide but doesn'T have oxygen too. How can be sure it need carbondioxide or any other thing in the air. Did you make that experiment? Look this "so called experiment" doesn't prove anything related to photosentesis, but breathe!

    If you can't find any relation between flat earth theory you don't have to answer.

    twit.

    *

    FalseProphet

    • 3696
    • Life is just a tale
    Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
    « Reply #18 on: October 13, 2017, 09:45:08 AM »
    Trees store much of the carbon they absorb from the air in their wood for a long time. That's why forests are carbon sinks. Eventually, when the wood rots the carbon goes back into the atmosphere. Except we make furniture out of it.

    *

    Sentinel

    • 570
    • Open your eyes...
    Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
    « Reply #19 on: October 13, 2017, 09:54:59 AM »
    One would eventually know for sure someone as dense and deluded as Intikam would deliver fully when he's out of the believers section for once, but oh boy. This takes the cake as the pinnacle of his recent ramblings by quite a margin...  :-\
    "No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible."

    Stanislaw Jerzy Lec

    *

    RocketSauce

    • 1441
    • I kill penguins for fun
    Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
    « Reply #20 on: October 13, 2017, 10:34:28 AM »
    Trees store much of the carbon they absorb from the air in their wood for a long time. That's why forests are carbon sinks. Eventually, when the wood rots the carbon goes back into the atmosphere. Except we make furniture out of it.

    Or when they Burn they release so much carbon...
    Quote from: Every FE'r

    Please don't mention Himawari 8
    Quote from: sceptimatic
    Impossible to have the same volume and different density.

    *fact*
    Extra Virgin Penguin Blood is a natural aphrodisiac

    *

    Crutchwater

    • 2145
    • Stop Indoctrinating me!
    Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
    « Reply #21 on: October 13, 2017, 10:58:51 AM »
    This is just as preposterous as the thread proclaiming nuclear power to be fake!

    Honestly, do you people sit up late at night thinking of this crap?
    I will always be Here To Laugh At You.

    *

    RocketSauce

    • 1441
    • I kill penguins for fun
    Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
    « Reply #22 on: October 13, 2017, 11:03:29 AM »
    Any worse than dino-deniers?
    Quote from: Every FE'r

    Please don't mention Himawari 8
    Quote from: sceptimatic
    Impossible to have the same volume and different density.

    *fact*
    Extra Virgin Penguin Blood is a natural aphrodisiac

    *

    Crutchwater

    • 2145
    • Stop Indoctrinating me!
    Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
    « Reply #23 on: October 13, 2017, 11:04:58 AM »
    Any worse than dino-deniers?

    I forgot about the "fossils made in china" thing...

    This place is pure entertainment!
    I will always be Here To Laugh At You.

    Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
    « Reply #24 on: October 13, 2017, 11:34:38 AM »
    I don't believe that. This is a belief and just let me control the "so called science".

    ...

    as I grew up on a family farm I know a little bit about plants.
    and I know for fact that plants absorb carbon dioxide, simply because I saw experiments where that was confirmed.
    Plant that got exposed to higher level of CO2 grew better that Plants at lower level of CO2.

    ?

    Realdeal

    • 82
    • Undecided
    Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
    « Reply #25 on: October 13, 2017, 12:21:22 PM »
    Is this Intikam person for real?  If so, why must you contribute to the reasons people make fun of anyone who tried to propose an alternative theory of the shape of the Earth.  Proposing crazy stuff like this only hurts any chances that someone like me will get any respect when questioning the validity of the RE model. 
    If you are just another REer pretending to be a FE proponent, please stop, no one who is trying to actually figure this stuff out needs your idiotic ramblings. 
    Perhaps you are mentally unstable, if so please find another hobby.  You seem to make yourself a target to the REers, they come in taking your bait to point out the idiotic things you have claimed, then you put them on an ignore list to piss them off.  You are not helping FE models, you are destroying any notion of credibility someone suggesting an FE theory may have had. 

    Yeah yeah, the REers here will say that you have to be mentally unstable to consider FE, that is simply not true.  Yes FEers need to find ways to answer for observations made that appear to not agree with anything other than RE, but they have to make sense.  This spout anything you want just to get people to argue with you so you can then fill up an ignore list is rather childish don't ya think?  I figure this is your goal though, make yourself seem as outlandishly off the rails as possible to discredit anyone who questions things.  Not a conspiracy type thing here, but more of an idiot who thinks its fun to do so. 
    Perhaps, use a greater level of introspective approach to examining your previous posts while keeping forum guidelines in mind.  I feel this would be helpful

    *

    Crutchwater

    • 2145
    • Stop Indoctrinating me!
    Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
    « Reply #26 on: October 13, 2017, 12:48:08 PM »
    Debating for fun is one thing...

    Actually believing in this flat Earth bullshit is, in fact, a sign of mental illness.

    There is simply no evidence to back up such a centuries long, planet wide conspiracy.

    The shape of the Earth is not a debatable subject. It is a measurable, testable, well proven fact.
    I will always be Here To Laugh At You.

    Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
    « Reply #27 on: October 13, 2017, 01:04:17 PM »
    I don't know what's dafter, inty's photosynthesis conspiracy, or the fact that grown ups are debating with him.

    It's fun! It's not really debating, though; it's just pointing out where he's so obviously wrong when he says something completely wacky, but he keeps himself from being able to reply to the rebuttals.
    Fair enough.  I am sort of curious as to where he thinks plants actually get there carbon from....
    Quote from: mikeman7918
    a single photon can pass through two sluts

    Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
    if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

    ?

    Twerp

    • Gutter Sniper
    • Flat Earth Almost Believer
    • 6522
    Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
    « Reply #28 on: October 13, 2017, 10:37:22 PM »
    Trees store much of the carbon they absorb from the air in their wood for a long time. That's why forests are carbon sinks. Eventually, when the wood rots the carbon goes back into the atmosphere. Except we make furniture out of it.

    ?

    Twerp

    • Gutter Sniper
    • Flat Earth Almost Believer
    • 6522
    Re: Are trees really absorb carbon dioxide?
    « Reply #29 on: October 13, 2017, 10:38:41 PM »
    I don't believe that. This is a belief and just let me control the "so called science".

    ...

    as I grew up on a family farm I know a little bit about plants.
    and I know for fact that plants absorb carbon dioxide, simply because I saw experiments where that was confirmed.
    Plant that got exposed to higher level of CO2 grew better that Plants at lower level of CO2.