| Divide and Conquer 05:53 - Jun 5 with 8247 views | RonaldStump |
Is Covid 19 a side track to the real agenda at play here?
The great reset?
Anybody with a brain knows there is something not right with everything going on this crazy world at the moment.
Simple question and hoping for some constructive answers instead of the usual conspiracy theory comebacks?
Gracias [Post edited 5 Jun 2021 5:58]
|  |
| |  |
| Divide and Conquer on 23:16 - Jun 9 with 503 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Divide and Conquer on 21:12 - Jun 9 by Catullus |
The link you posted is just a link to buying a book, all it says besides is this,
U.S. Navy personnel who work on submarines are in an enclosed and isolated environment for days or weeks at a time when at sea. Unlike a typical work environment, they are potentially exposed to air contaminants 24 hours a day. To protect workers from potential adverse health effects due to those conditions, the U.S. Navy has established exposure guidance levels for a number of contaminants. The Navy asked a subcommittee of the National Research Council (NRC) to review, and develop when necessary, exposure guidance levels for 10 contaminants.
Overall, the subcommittee found the values proposed by the Navy to be suitable for protecting human health. For a few chemicals, the committee proposed levels that were lower than those proposed by the Navy. In conducting its evaluation, the subcommittee found that there is little exposure data available on the submarine environment and echoed a previous recommendation from an earlier NRC report to conduct monitoring that would provide a complete analysis of submarine air and data on exposure of personnel to contaminants.
Not very helpful.
We exhale between 35-50000ppm, what does that prove, that we expel it because keeping it in the body would be bad for us? It then gets dispersed in the atmosphere. The amount we expel is going to be much higher in ppm because we have extracted other parts of the air for our bodies use. |
It does not get expelled in to the atmosphere if you have your head under the bed clothes as many children are apt to do.
I have no idea what you were reading. From the link I posted.
"CO2 is a simple asphyxiant and lethal asphyxiations have been reported at concentrations as low as 110,000 ppm (Hamilton and Hardy 1974). Loss of consciousness can occur within a minute of exposure at 300,000 ppm and within 5-10 minutes (min) of exposure at 100,000 ppm (HSDB 2004). The effects of concentrations of CO2 between 7,000 and 300,000 ppm in humans and animals are discussed below and include
tremor, headaches, chest pain, respiratory and cardiovascular effects, and visual and other central nervous system (CNS) effects."
And
"White et al. (1952) studied humans exposed to CO2 at 60,000 ppm for 16 min and reported that 19 of 24 subjects exhibited slight or moderate dyspnea and 5 of 24 exhibited severe dyspneic sensations. At 40,000-50,000 ppm for 17-32 min, 16 subjects reported dyspnea (Schneider and Truesdale 1922). In contrast, no dyspnea was reported in five subjects exposed at 32,000 ppm or at 25,000-28,000 ppm for several hours (Brown 1930)." | | | |
| Divide and Conquer on 07:31 - Jun 10 with 454 views | Scotia |
| Divide and Conquer on 18:29 - Jun 9 by A_Fans_Dad |
Sorry, the wayback machine does not hold your link correctly, so it only goes to the wayback home page and gives an error when entered in the search. |
http://web.archive.org/web/20080228154509/ http://energycommerce.house.gov/reparchives/108/Hearings/07192006hearing1987/Weg
Perhaps that will work?
Edit: - It doesn't for some reason, I'm sure you can find it on google.
I'll copy and paste the direct quote:-
"We were not asked to assess the
reality of global warming and indeed this is not an area of our
expertise. We do not assume any position with respect to global
warming except to note in our report that the instrumented record of
global average temperature has risen since 1850 according to the
MBH 99 chart by about 1.2º centigrade. In the NAS panel Report
chaired by Dr. North, .6º centigrade is mentioned in several places."
As I've said his "taking apart of the hockey stick" has been dismissed many times since it was written. More recent evidence just makes the uptick in temperature even more clear and related to anthropogenic climate change.
Perhaps he should stick to what he knows best? Which based on analysis of his report appears to be plagiarism. [Post edited 10 Jun 2021 7:36]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
