The Danger and Regulation of Methane

Methane exists in the environment naturally (in trace amounts... nowhere near even 1%, let alone 5-15%). It is not possible to accurately measure Earth's atmospheric methane concentration. Trace amounts of methane in Earth's atmosphere is natural and is nothing to fear monger about.

Doing something [that is completely unnecessary] is worse than doing nothing.

The Church of Global Warming is lying to you, denying all sorts of science in the name of their religion.

 

Bingo. The rest is all correct too, but the bolded nails the politics behind it.

Could also get into pushing the plebs towards EVs and solar panels (enrichening elitist politicians), the wanting to shove the plebs into "15 minute cities" (6uild 6ack 6etter anyone??), the wanting to force the plebs off of red meat consumption ("eat the bugs"), and etc... would make for a very long post haha

 

Here, the BBC is just making **** up to tell a scary tale.

So cattle haven't been around for thousands of years prior?? Are cattle extra farty and burpy nowadays?

It doesn't. There is no such thing as "climate change". It is an undefined buzzword that the Church of Global Warming uses to fear monger about the weather and about life essential gases that naturally exist in the atmosphere.

The concept of "climate change" on its face doesn't make any sense. Climate is not a measure and has no measure. Climate is a subjective characterization, having no values (e.g. hot & arid, cold & wet) There is nothing that CAN "change".

Meh. Every gas is "potentially dangerous". So?

Who?

Doing something [that is completely unnecessary] is worse than doing nothing.

 

Yup. SCIENCE has to be involved. The relevant laws of science themselves must be the subject matter.

Yes! Post the laws of science themselves (the mathematical formulas).

False Authority Fallacy. The authoritative source in this case is the relevant laws of science themselves (and their set in stone mathematical formulas), not any 'holy link'.

There is no "livestock methane problem". Livestock have been around for thousands of years (could argue MUCH MUCH longer if you wish, but the point remains). Are you saying that livestock are much "fartier" and "burpier" nowadays?

 

No, it's a direct refutation of the "do something" argument.

"Doing something" doesn't always yield good results.

 

Atmospheric methane is measured in parts per billion unlike CO2 which is done in parts per billion (currently ~2000ppb). Gonna take a loooooooonnnnnngggg time to reach the levels you're worried about.

 

The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.

e(t) <= e(t+1)

where 'e' is 'entropy', or available work (expressed as a concentration of energy), and 't' is time. This law defines heat (the flow of thermal energy) and gives it a direction (hot to cold).

You cannot heat a warmer surface via a colder gas (such as methane).

 

Continued fear mongering over methane. EVERY GAS can be "toxic". Even oxygen...

False Authority Fallacy. Holy links are not science.

Contact your representative(s).

 

Methane. Yawn.
New Year’s Resolution – Methane Response
Guest Blogger
When I hear anyone say that methane is more potent than carbon dioxide because the radiative forcing produced is greater, I resolve to say that is only true in the laboratory on a molecular basis. In the atmosphere where it counts methane is not nearly as potent. . . . .