Help! need sources to refute this Limbaugh sycophant...

[MnFats]

...I am locked in battle with a right-wing whack job who assures me:

A. There are more trees in America today than when the country was founded;
B. Trees are the source of most greenhouse gases, rendering the amount produced by humans irrelevant; and
C. A "Penn State study" showed that the nation has "over-abundant trees" and we're better off chopping a bunch of them down.

the first two i think are straight from Rush Limbaugh but the third is a mystery to me....

any ideas where this loom picked up this B.S.?

[NorCalDem]

1. Item B

I'm not an expert (Chemical engineering graduate student, so pretty close), but I was always taught that plants PRODUCED oxygen FROM carbon dioxide ("Greenhouse gas") in the process known as photosynthesis. Your friend is a retard, he might know about photosynthesis if the republican agenda weren't to have creation taught in bio, instead of real "science".

[dissent1977]

7. When did oxygen become a greenhouse gas?

In Rush Limbaugh's world apparantly oxygen is bad, and we should all breath pollutants instead.

[Roland99]

13. I had to do a double-take on that one!!

:rofl:

[jimshoes]

15. Unless the oxygen

molecule is connected to the codone molecule as in Oxycodone (Percocet) or oxycontin (time released)

[SheepyMcSheepster]

2. i have often wondered about rush's tree claims

anyone know where thie information comes form, a quick google has found me nothing?
:shrug:

[rhino47]

12. The trees cause pollution claim is from Old Mother Raygun himself nt

[cornermouse]

3. You talk to a dittohead?

:spray: Why? Are you masochistic?

[ET Awful]

4. Tell him to provide his proof.

Then ask him why the area that is now Boston used to be a forest (the part of it that didn't used to be under water). The same goes for New York City, that was all forest prior to the formation of the colonies. We could discuss the clear cutting of soft-wood forests in the northwest as well.

The guy is spewing unsubstantiated crap. The burden to provide proof is on the person spewing the bullshit, not on the person he's spewing it on.

[gratuitous]

5. Yep, the short answer is always -- prove it!

The doofus had the temerity to actually cite a "Penn State study"? Where is it? Where was it published? Was it peer reviewed? Is it part of the accepted scientific literature on global climate change, or is it some hack job hooey that no self-respecting scientist in the field would sign on to?

[cornermouse]

6. Trees turn carbon dioxide into oxygen.

Everything considered, I prefer to keep as many trees planted as possible.

[kevinam]

8. Item B, and kinda shocking.

Okay, I am not going to get into a disagreement with the scientist, he/she is a much closer expert than I am, but there might be some truth to the statement. According to http://www.ghgonline.org./co2sinkplants.htm

"Plants utilize carbon dioxide during photosynthesis, but also produce it during respiration. The net effect is an uptake of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere equivalent to around 60 billion tonnes of carbon each year."

I never knew it, but I guess plants do produce SOME carbon dioxide, but they use up a good bit more. The statement that it negates the amount human's produce seems fairly ridiculous.

Kevin.

[muriel_volestrangler]

23. The net effect is the only relevant statistic

If you want a metaphor, saying that trees produce carbon dioxide is like saying babies produce water. Obviously there's some water in urine, but there's more in the milk, food etc. that a baby drinks and eats. End result: the baby grows - there's more water in an adult than a baby. Just like there's more carbon in a fully grown tree than a seed.

[stevedeshazer]

9. Your friend is right on Item A, damned right there are more trees.

No way on B and C.

American trees 150 years ago:



American trees now:

[tabasco]

10. No, that's not why he's right on that point.

You see, the country was 13 colonies in 1776.

Add the rest of the country added since then and Limpballs is probably right! Alaska alone would probably make that statement correct.

But he is deluding and deceiving the feeble-minded with dumbass claims like this. Look around you and ask yourself if you see more trees being cut or planted.

They won't be happy until the Nation is a devastated wasteland.

[stevedeshazer]

16. So my point has no merit?

[tabasco]

19. IMO, little merit.

Most of the areas cut are not reforested.

[elvisbear]

11. Here's some info that may help you...

http://www.globalforestwatch.org/english/about/faqs.htm

[Beaverhausen]

20. Great link

lots of good info there.

[Inland]

14. Not more trees when founded....

but there ARE more trees then, say, the 1880-1900s, by which time we had turned the most of the eastern US into farms and clear cut Wisconsin and Michigan to the mud.

One might think that policies of national forests, environmentally sound forestry, and government tree planting binges had something to do with it.

Even so, the trees are not the valuable species and size we logged out.

And a lot of the trees are ornamental on a lawn or privacy strips, ie, along roads or at the edge of office parks. Not the biggest whoop for an environment.

[pretzel4gore]

17. bushes are trees?

no way hos'e!.....there are alot more BUSHES in america today, but mr bush, he aint no tree! (i saw a tv commercial from an oil comp. saying that there are 'more trees' in north america now etc, but they're talking scrub trees {and apparently in pre colonial times, the injuns controlled their biosphere through routine fires; smokey the bear, of course stopped that!}) tell you friend Republicanism and Rush Limbah-humbug are DESTROYING his mental acuity, stunting his ability to reason and think by inculcating plain stupidity! Damn that Rush! How dare he confound simple minded dupes?

[pnorman]

18. Here's a choice collection of Limbagian bloviations

on "environmental WHACKOS":

http://www.rushonline.com/visitors/globalwarming.htm

and here's the antidote: http://www.environmentaldefense.org/documents/2432_WayThingsReallyAre.pdf

That bit about comparing America at it's founding (13 eastern seaboard States), to 20th century America (49 States PLUS Alaska & Hawaii) is quintessential Limbag.

PS: If the ACLU is unable to help "oxycontin Rush", he may end up doing the Perp Walk. And that "squeal like a pig" scene from the Deliverance movie, will be a nightly feature at the slammer.

pnorman

[chalky]

21. Polluting Trees: The gospel according to St. Ronnie....

"The American Petroleum Institute filed suit against the EPA charged that the agency was suppressing a scientific study for fear it might be misinterpreted ... The suppressed study reveals that 80 percent of air pollution comes not from chimneys and auto exhaust pipes, but from plants and trees."
Presidential candidate Ronald Reagan, in 1979

[MnFats]

22. testing, testing

just a test.