NemeshisuEM t1_iudix7l wrote
Reply to comment by jeoeker531 in Ozone Hole Continues Shrinking in 2022, NASA and NOAA Scientists Say | Annual Antarctic ozone hole over the South Pole was slightly smaller than last year and generally continued the overall shrinking trend of recent years. by yourSAS
So how many new-growth trees equal to 1 old-growth one? Or are you going to tell me a 1' wide tree does the same work as a 10' wide one?
jeoeker531 t1_iudj5nh wrote
Why are we looking at what one individual tree does when we have data for all the trees? For millions of trees?
NemeshisuEM t1_iudjymh wrote
Because you stated "there are more trees now in the US than 100 years ago."
Commercial tree farming does not compare to an old-growth forest in numerous ways, so to compare apples to apples, we would need to know how the oxygen production of the two compare.
Got a link to a study doing that?
jeoeker531 t1_iudm7qy wrote
How much does the comparison of oxygen production matter when the vast majority of oxygen production isn’t been due to trees?
NemeshisuEM t1_iudo1gb wrote
Perhaps you should read up on this before asserting there is no problem.
jeoeker531 t1_iudp4oh wrote
Where did I say there wasn’t a problem? Can you find that for me?
jeoeker531 t1_iudjcnm wrote
The point is that trees are renewable resources and that even that 1’ wide tree will grow into the 10’ tree
NemeshisuEM t1_iudkfza wrote
But tree farms do not wait until the tree is mature to harvest it. That's like counting male calves as full head of cattle when in reality they get culled at a young age. Using that analogy, it seems disingenuous to compare a 50lb calf with a 2000lb steer. Yeah, each one has a head but one is not like the other.
jeoeker531 t1_iudm3x8 wrote
Didn’t know you were the tree farm professor. You’re talking out your ass
NemeshisuEM t1_iudnmqt wrote
Says the guy that just asserted that we can just replant the forests without a clue as to what that entails.
jeoeker531 t1_iudp2hd wrote
I didn’t go into anything specific or any details, I simply said that trees are renewable resources. Which is objectively true
NemeshisuEM t1_iudpmpu wrote
Yeah, it is technically true but your comment came off as dismissive of a problem by oversimplifying it.
happygloaming t1_iue9b78 wrote
Reading this entire thread I now know we're all going to die.
jeoeker531 t1_iuhlo9i wrote
We were always going to die… everyone dies
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments