[Note: This is a work in progress. I am not satisfied with it. It needs "refining" (this is the beginning of the process of putting something together that I don't usually share). I hope it gives you some food for thought and perhaps some of you young people a gentle prod in the right direction. Get with it. It's your future. Wake up. Feel free to jump ahead of me. You can do it].
These are ailments and problems that seem to have increased dramatically since emissions were changed (made richer in the amount of carbon dioxide, CO2, they contain), and since we were forced to make our structures more airtight (live with increased levels of CO2). These correlations with increased local (not global) CO2 levels should carry more weight than the reputed correlation with increased global average temperature, but in any case, if some self-described "scientists" can claim a correlation as proof, then I, using common sense, should be able to do the same.
Below is my reasoning and analysis, but first, I think it instructive to note that those who gave us all the CO2 seem to be the same ones who argue "global warming" as fact and also seem to be the same ones who claim that we must protect the habit of every creature. They claim that the slightest change in any condition of a certain specie's domain is a threat to that animal's existence. The spotted owl, snail darter, some kind of rat, and some others come to mind. They worry about the river temperature for salmon, etc.. Their worries are legion, however we didn't deserve the same level of concern from them when they subjected us to more local CO2. (Yes, I am aware of the phoney concerns about what rising water levels and droughts will do via "global warming." It is just "eyewash," a distraction for the gullible).
Obviously, they felt entitled to drastically change our environment, the make up of our local air, with no such compunction. The only logical conclusion is that they despise mankind. If you think that they must have forgot that doing so would impact the creatures also, you don't understand them. Their stances on protecting the various species are just tools to attack humans, misanthropy. Think of all the recent horror stories about bacteria, fungi, and algae killing frogs, bees, fish, songbirds, etc.. Yet, they refuse to mention carbon dioxide as a contributor or cause. They don't give a hoot about the creatures. If the creatures disappear, so will we, and that's exactly what they want. Don't be deceived by what they constantly tell you. Look around. Think.
You will hear that CO2 can't cause problems because we exhale it, and it is necessary for life - - - not ours, but trees, plants, and some less desirable things. Physiologically, CO2 is one of the waste products of our bodies. We don't like keeping the others around in our living space. Why should CO2 be different? We can survive when necessary, we are told, by drinking a small amount of our own urine. Drink too much and you die. I think this is a useful way to look at CO2. Our bodies aren't supposed to breathe a lot of it in. What happens between a little and too much? I believe some of us are getting too much.
(to be completed. In the meantime, go to my Letter to Forks and find the complaint made about the classrooms. Wasn't one of the problems the inability to concentrate? I may have come across that somewhere else investigating the same problem).
(to be completed)
(to be completed), but see obesity below. If you slow metabolism, do you decrease brain activity also? We seem to have a lot of people concerned with anti-oxidants who have also seem to have lost the talent for analytical thought.
(to be completed). Climb in a closet and close the door. If you new someone was outside to keep you from opening the door, how would you feel? How about after the CO2 level has had time to increase? Ever been anxious in a crowded room?
(to be completed)
Yes, they did decrease the leg room in airliners after they started decreasing the amount of fresh air in them. Think "plausible denial." What if some people who didn't sit much and did a lot of walking on the airplane also suffered? That could be embarassing. Make everyone remain in their seats then. How could you justify that? The threat of terrorists.
I believe part of the above. I get to have some fun once in a while. I do believe the less oxygen and more CO2 part.
(to be completed)
While reading a book about the construction of the Brooklyn Bridge, I felt that I had detected a cause and effect relation between CO2 and fibromyalgia. The name of the book and its author are somewhere among my notes, but I can't lay my hands on that information at the moment. I also found a good website for the bridge, but that too is not now available (the site maybe, but my note on what it was are missing, temporarily?). I did look on the web again and there seem to be many good sites. I encourage you to do a search of carbon dioxide and/or CO2 along with the exact phrase "caisson disease". Some of what you see should refer to the Brooklyn Bridge. The story of the bridge is a worthwhile one to read. Truly amazing. The caissons were air tight pressurized chambers under water where the earth and rock were prepared for the foundations of the bridge supports.
Caisson disease is also referred to as "decompression sickness," which is also called "the bends." What seems the distinction, however, is that caisson disease is so frequently associated with CO2. Indeed, the construction of the bridge was faced with a high CO2 level inside the caissons. The bends do not seem to be connected to CO2, only with nitrogen bubbles in the blood because of rapid decompression. The bridge construction apparently also had this problem.
Washington Roebling became the Chief Engineer in charge of the bridge construction after his father died as a result of an accident while working on the bridge. Washington was a dedicated man like his father and spent longer hours on the bridge and in the caissons than his men. Although not injured and never suffering from the bends as far as I recall, he became so incapacitated that his wife, Emily, took over for him and completed the bridge (think about that, feminists, it was in the 1800's). Washington's symptoms seem to fit well with those of people suffering from fibromyalgia and not the bends. He was in so much pain that he could not even go out of his home.
(to be completed). Let me begin by discussing welding, particularly MIG (metal, inert gas) or TIG (tungsten, inert gas) welding. I am slightly familiar with the former. When vehicles were built with 'mild steel,' oxyacetylene welding was the type to use repairing damage. In order to make lighter and stronger steel (beginning in th 1970s to meet fuel mileage requirements and safety regulations), it was mixed with carbon. The oxyacetylene welder would oxidize the carbon, making the steel brittle and weak. To prevent this, a way was found to surround the weld with an inert gas, which would push the oxygen in the air away from the weld, so little or no (ideally) oxidation could occur. Carbon dioxide, CO2, was a popular and inexpensive inert gas, and perhaps the most widely used. Being heavier than air, it pushed the air containing oxygen away and stayed near the weld - - - it had 'hang time.'
Now, does this make CO2 and "anti-oxidant?" Think about all the marketing stuff you hear about "anti-oxidants." Seems wierd to me, or worse. What do you know about metabolism? We are carbon based life forms, just like the algae. We need carbon. And, we need oxygen. We cannot turn the carbon into energy without it. If we don't turn it into energy, metabolize it, we are going to get fatter if we continue to eat.
I recently saw a report from the CDC that claimed childhood obesity began a drastic upswing in the 1980s and just recently began to level off. While I distrust the CDC on most things, this one makes sense to me. The 1980s were when the change in vehicle emissions to favor more CO2 really began to kick in. Concurrently, we began to make our buildings - - - including homes, day cares, and schools more airtight. Lately, there has been a decrease in fuel consumption due to the increased cost.
Ask yourself if increased CO2 would make kids more tired. Would it make it harder for them to exercise? If they did exercise, would less energy be burned?
Yes, I know we exhale CO2. But, our bodies don't expect to inhale such elevated levels continually. Think of eel grass when the tide goes out. What happens when the tide comes back? What happens in your airway when you exhale? Inhale? What do those little hairs in there do? Where are the ducts that secrete mucous? What does CO2 do to mucous?
You have probably heard about the asterisk next to some players names in the sports records books. I think we need a double asterisk to denote that the taking of performance enhancers gives those who take them an advantage over their team mates and the opposing team members in the same stadium and probably their contemporaries elsewhere, depending upon the air quality in the other locations, who do not indulge, but it is not clear whether an advantage is gained over players of the past who enjoyed air with less CO2 in it. Maybe drugs actually provide a level playing field with the past. Consider what athletes will be dealing with this summer in China. So much for this line of thought.
Now, let's go back to those lethargic kids with the increasing girths, and their parents. Going on twenty years ago, I made some calculations for Puget Sound based on the number of gallons of motor vehicle fuel used in Washington state and the percentage of emissions blamed on vehicles. It led me to believe that there was the equivalent of sixty to one hundred Mount Saint Helens volcanoe equivalents at work in the Puget Sound area. The exhaust from these volcanoe equivalents is released at ground level (close to sea level) and not almost two miles up as for Mount Saint Helens. (Nor is it ejected upward with tremendous force several more miles, i.e., out of our breathing space). I was predicting most of the problems you see on this page because I noted that Puget Sound was basically a bowl or basin and new CO2 was heavier than air. That means Seattle would be one of the most affected places in the country. Does it mean that I could predict the success of Starbucks? Caffeine to compensate for mass lack of energy? Energy in a cup? I'll let you draw your own concluseions.
But, I do know that schools are full of CO2 these days. Is it just coincidence that the school authorities want to start school later in the day because the kids have no energy, and letting them sleep in might help? Look at the popularity of the "energy" drinks.
(to be completed)
(to be completed)
(to be completed)
Copyright © 2009 Donald L. Beeman. All rights reserved.