Life Cycle of a Planet

Freedom of speech, Is a very important part of the American Constitution, but it can not mean freedom to lie when trying to get what you want! I would love somewhere on the internet that could only post-truth and facts and not opinions. Would I be able to post my paper, about the lifecycle of a planet! NO, there are way too many ideas that, while I am confident all of them, can and will be verified in time! As of now and sometime into the future, they are more than several new ideas that will need others to check and recheck there veracity! Some of what I have stated may take a generation or more to prove, I am speaking about the ability of the planet's ground cover and cloud cover, to regulate the temperature extremes of the planet! To my way of thinking that is the only explanation of why the planet did not overheat when carbon dioxide was above 50% of the atmosphere along with much more methane gas which is much more of a greenhouse gas then carbon dioxide is. Even taking into c...

I think both! The coronavirus outbreak has done both to the whole planet, in many ways it has shown us that everyone can accomplish much together, with simple decisions. Do we see how quickly we can agree on a direction to go when we are pressed? Global warming and climate change are very important, just as important as dealing with the coronavirus just not as time-sensitive! But in my view, the prevention of the extinction of most life on the planet has to be my greatest goal, even if it will take several lifetimes to accomplish all that needs to be done. Mankind is a stubborn species, examples are rebuilding in the same place time and time again after flooding, earthquakes, tsunamis. Or fighting wars after wars, for personal beliefs, hatred, nationality, or religion. We have quite a weird learning curve. I was looking up why there is so much oil and natural gas in Saudi Arabia and the answers I was getting off of the internet, from people with college degrees, were as far out there (...

What do you see, do you see a planet with full plant life, or do you see a planet with deserts all over! No plant life at either the arctic or Antarctica, with minimum plant life in many areas of the planet, why? Because if there was abundant plant life over the whole planet it would have to be all, from the cam family of plants! This also means that the carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere would be so low that the whole planet would then be forever ice, the sun's energy would be too low to keep the planet warm enough to prevent that! Mankind is so positive that the planet can go on forever, are there no facts that will persuade them otherwise? Life on this planet will not end, if my plan to repair it is not taken up at this time. As long as we do not kill ourselves off, sooner or later someone with the right accreditations, will take up the right way to repair the planet. It will be harder later on, especially if we have taken 400 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide out of the atmosphe...

When I first started my most unusual blog, explaining what life on the planet is facing in the long run.  Meaning within around 1000 years, basically, most of the carbon-based life on this planet will be extinct, without the intervention of a thinking and acting species, and as of now, that is only mankind! The coronavirus, that is sweeping around the planet right now, while serious is manageable, the economical fallout may be worst than the disease. This is a wake-up call on many fronts, the first one being the timeframe on how long it takes for symptoms to show up, from the viruses point of view that helps spread itself around much better then if they showed up quickly then there would be fewer people infected, plus the fact that many people will show no signs at all helps the spread the virus. Medical scientists feel that this will give those people immunity to the virus for at least a few years, however as with many viruses, they can learn to hide in the human body, only to bec...

Since I am claiming to have the only true and best solution to global warming and climate change, from Donald Trump, saying all we have to do is plant a trillion trees! To Bill Gates telling us to use concrete that is produced without adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. To inventors who say that sucking carbon dioxide straight out of the atmosphere and burying it deep underground. To having companies that produce carbon dioxide to pay so much a ton, so that we can use that money to create a way of getting rid of it in the atmosphere. To building dikes around all low laying cities, countries and islands. To everyone reducing their carbon footprint by driving electric cars, reducing meat consumption, putting solar and wind turbines on their houses. So if you have been one or more of the 3000 views of my papers and posts, First off, over a 7 month period that does not seem like much, and second do you feel that what I have been writing about, is something scientists and the rest of t...

How many times, did it take for mankind to finally say that the world was round and it went around the sun? How many times was penicillin invented and then lost? Knowledge is not set in stone, once it is found, for everyone to benefit from that knowledge. Many times it is lost because someone will lose money, power, standing, or even fame if the new knowledge is brought forth. You may think that it can no longer happen with the level of schooling that most of the world now enjoys, and with the internet so that people can pass knowledge to everyone, but you would be very wrong! What people believe to be true, and what is true, can be completely wrong. Look at the divide in almost every aspect of life, religion, sex, who can vote, are there differences in race, or age, can we really tell how old a rock is, there is not one subject that everyone will agree upon, this even includes that the world really is round and it goes around the sun every 365.24 years. Most children in America learn ...

Well, every time that the planet has gone through a glaciation phase only the addition of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was what ended it! Even now we should have been back into another one starting around 2000 years ago, or around the time of Christ, if past events are to be followed. But around this time mankind started farming, and clearing forests, both of these two events can change how much carbon dioxide is released back into the atmosphere in large amounts, therefore delaying the next ice age, to the point that we are at now, where for the first time, there is enough carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to replant much of the planets arid and semi-arid areas of the planet to restart the temperature regulation that up until 2.5 million years ago was well enough established to maintain a stable climate! But everyone seems to think that the planet could never run low on carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, but the evidence shows otherwise, 65,000,000,000 to 100,000,000 gigatonnes of l...

Moving All of the great rivers of the planet, for use in replanting arid and semi-arid areas, would end up being a fantastic tourist attraction, think how many people love to go through the Panama Canel, or see how they build dam's and skyscrapers (well there will not be any skyscrapers) but lots of dam's, railroads, "towns", the list of attractions could be endless. Honey bees, homemade everything, fresh fish and veggies, for dinners, etc, etc. And everything would be on film, documented, for the world to see! Every politician would want their picture taken, at one of the many places, that would be repairing the planet, as if that politician was personally responsible for what was happening! And all of this work was not costing anything after the start-up costs, which could be very little if, the big companies could be kept away. Even cruise ships could head down to the Antarctic, and see how the ice coming off of the Continent was being replaced far inland as freshw...

Every ski resort knows that they can not depend on nature for snow. It is all about the money, no snow, no skiers paying big bucks, so what do they do? They make snow in the winter when nature does not, and not just a little snow either, and they have to make their snow at night so that they do not interfere with their paying customers. That means that they need access to lots of water, how do they do that? Each situation is different, but since any water that they use during the winter season can be recaptured when the snow melts in the spring, plus whatever nature did bring. This is the same that we have to do with Glacier replenishment, yes they are in even colder areas than most ski-resorts, but we really do not need to make snow, we just have to pump tons and tons of water high enough so that ice can be made as it is sprayed out into the air. Yes, this means collecting the meltwater that is produced during the warm season and replacing it during the colder times of the year, And b...

The basic idea of my plan is to allow the planet's temperature regulation system to be rebuilt, by decreasing the sizes of arid and semi-arid areas of the planet as quickly as we can. This can not be done only by planting trees that can take many years to grow, and not provide the water back into the atmosphere in a timely fashion. Cover crops can be made to cover land much quicker than anything else as long as adequate water is available and it can be protected by the winds that can blow away crop seeds, or even the birds that can eat them. There are many methods that can control both, I love hydro-seeding, it locks the seeds into a mulch type bed that can also provide spot fertilizer for quick growth and protection from hot sun and winds and birds. And once enough land is put under, cover crops, then those crops can supply the mulch for the next set of lands to hydro seeded, which means that some of the first few years of production will mainly be used as a starter mulch instead ...

Alfalfa is such a good cover crop for several reasons, first, it is a legume, which means that it can in association with certain bacteria, use the nitrogen in the atmosphere to produce a high protein crop that can be feed to many different land animals, and to many species of fish that mankind likes to eat. Second, it can be harvested from 3 times a year to as many as 11 times a year depending on where it is grown and how much water it receives, plus it is a perennial meaning that it will last up to twenty years before it needs to be replanted! ( Normally their needs to be another crop planted for a year or two to let the soil rebuild itself before replanting with alfalfa.) Alfalfa when dry can last many years in storage while keeping most of its protein in its leaves. Another plus is, its root system helps in maintaining the soils underneath from movement and loss due to dry windy conditions. Alfalfa was first cultivated around Iran and still can survive in dry hot climates. Being a ...

We all know to take something like an aspirin if we have a fever or stiffness, Or if we suffer from asthma, to take a rescue inhaler, or to place a nitroglycerin tablet under our tongue if we suffer from some types of heart problems. These only treat the symptoms, of an underlying problem, some just get rid of the pain, so the body's own immune system can fight off the infection and cure itself! Others give the body an extra kick to help do what the body can not do on its own! But these treatments do not stop the cause of the problem, but they do relieve the symptoms. Many people have given ways of stopping Global Warming, that only address the symptoms, an example is to plant 1 trillion trees, sounds like a good solution right, let's say that we do plant them, and we can keep them alive, bringing water to them, keeping animals such as deer from eating them, Preventing an ever warmer climate from burning them down, until they have removed enough carbon dioxide from the atmosphe...

Right now how the world deals with the coronavirus, is only below feeding ourselves, and protecting our family from the elements. That is about as high as anything can get. And yet very few of us that are not in the first lines of defense, can do much except try and reduce the chances for ourselves being infected. Hopefully, this is a once in a lifetime occurrence, but I have no reason to know that one way or another. If there was no coronavirus, what then are the responsibilities of the common individual? First food and shelter, then clothing and income, then a means of getting around. Most would then do family and friends, and work, this is when the lines of needs would start to change from one to another, social causes, such as volunteering work both political and neighborhood charity's, then world-wide causes, such as pollution, hunger, clean water to drink, sex trafficking, children labor! The list while not endless could be very long, but not for the majority of people. Most ...

The nice thing about being able to build a "town" from the ground up is you can design it to be as efficient as it can be, will everything be thought out correctly no, but with so many "towns" being built, it will allow better and better construction of each one. The infrastructure is the most important part of any start of a community. Transportation, clean water, power, and housing, and some form of government. While those are the basic's, there is a need for much more, sociality, entertainment, schooling, medical, and something that binds a community together, many times that is a common past or family. But using refugees with many different backgrounds and faiths will need something very big to hold them together, even a common language would help but unlikely, so the common goal will need to be the reason. Finding a place to call your own, not working for others, but for yourself, and your family these things are so important for the vast majority of people...

That without mankind's help the life on this planet as we know it, is doomed! Not today, not tomorrow, but in just a few thousand years. Or we can solve the problem, and do well by ourselves also. The planet has no memory, life simply tries to survive, the coronavirus is just a good example of that, it has evolved to be spread around, it does not design itself to kill its host, that defeats its own purpose of survival! Very seldom does a disease wipe out a species, normally only a changing environment, or a better-adapted species does that. Or a species like mankind that makes it too hard to survive. I know very few cattle farmers or ranchers who think that wolfs, coyotes, mountain lions, or bears have any reason to be where they are trying to raise livestock at! Or farmers growing corn, who think that deer should be allowed to eat their crops. Anybody ever read "The Yearling" life is always a balancing act, that fails as often as it succeeds! Did you hear why the blonde ...

When someone enters into the study of any endeavor. Be it building, science, welding, plumbing, it really does not matter what the endeavor is, everyone is taught the same. These are the fundamentals of how we learn, we are taught an orderly progression of how to do things, first A then B down the line. The teaching of science takes this way of learning to the extreme because only if something can be consistently repeated over and over, and verified can you call it known! And whatever you are trying new it always has to be compared to the way it was always done before and at the same time. What this means is that when you are trying to study past events, many of your study controls are not available, so science needs to use proxies! Proxies can be many different things that replaces being there, examples can be tree rings, but are they showing droughts, the cold, lack of sunlight, too much heat, or perfect growing conditions ( in my 63 years I have never seen a perfect growing season)....

Because I do not understand! I could understand doing that to protect yourself from lawsuits, but with the energy companies being in the financial spot of taking advantage of using green energy for future energy production. There is no reason for them to not get on the bandwagon and want to go forward with green energy and reduce their exposure to "dirty" energy. And simply do what the tobacco companies have done, sell-off their oil shares to their own subsidiaries, and make more monies by using both sides of the issue, with both research and development grants, they would be sitting in the catbird seat. So what purpose would it serve to do and say else? History has shown us that being on the wrong side of the issue can compound the problems going forward. The civil war was fought for many reasons but the only one that is remembered, and not even correctly so, was slavery. President Lincoln was trying to save the union at whatever cost it took, a country divided could not lon...

For how much carbon is available for life, Google how much carbon dioxide is in the atmosphere, how much is stored in animal and plant life, how much is stored in the soils, and how much is stored in the oceans of the planet! For how much carbon is sequestrated on average each year, and how much is returned to the atmosphere by volcanoes and outer outgassing each year google that. For how much water is available for replanting the planet google how much water enters the oceans each year from all of the rivers of the planet! For how many refugees looking to relocate due to wars, famine, and ethic cleaning google that, for how much of the planet is considered arid google that, but take out the antarctic desert and the arctic desert because we will not be able to replant those due to their cold climate, then google semi-arid areas. Then google how much carbon dioxide does C3 plants need to survive and what percent of the plants on the planet does that cover, then check out C4 plants and c...

So as we limit our contact, with others so as to not stop the disease, but slow it down enough, not to overwhelm the medical community. Many of us will find ourselves, with more time on our hands than normal. For some, this will make little change. But for most, such a change will make us look at our lives in a new way! If nature can have such a profound effect on how we need to live our lives, at least in the short run, why do we think that in some other way the planet will never be the cause of loss of life on a much larger scale than from a simple virus? There have been large extinctions of life on this planet since life has been on this planet! The constant change in the lifeforms that this planet can support, shows us how little we really know about this planet we call home. The complexity of how life has come about could never have been determined, by someone looking on from elsewhere! Meaning that for us to look at life on this planet as a straight line going forth, would be as ...

We have all of the waters of the rivers of the great planet, needed to restart replanting of the arid and semi-arid areas of the planet. We have the technical know-how, to both stop and collect the waters anywhere we need to along its travels down to the sea. We have the necessary workforce available for moving this water to where it can be bested used, whether that would be for glacier replenishment, redirecting it to prevent flooding or droughts, most important of all for the replanting of arid and semi-arid areas of the planet to create a ground cover. (while many people will feel that planting trees would keep carbon locked away from the atmosphere the longest, ground cover is much more important for temperature regulation, plus it grows faster than trees do!) We have a very large part of the planet's population, crying out for the world leaders, to do something! And we have a workable plan that no matter what you believe is the solution to global warming, will do what needs to...

 Going into Walmart, Costco, almost any store that sells soap, water, wipes, masks, or any drug, empty! And there is no one telling people that they can only get some of each, so that there will be enough for all! Not even telling them that panic is bad for the world. But we are simply reacting to our base fears, Much of this is because we are dealing with not enough information! China, started by not asking for help, and with everyone having access to the internet, little or no information gave people looking for the worst something to speculate on! We have become a people of extremes! WallStreet, No-fly zones, everybody wanting to be tested, when there is not enough, even for those with symptoms! What we are lacking is knowledge, maybe this will turn out as bad as some think it will or, maybe no worst than the yearly flu. Right now, all we can do is hope that knowledge will increase and be passed on, nothing is as bad as an active mind can make it! Or an overly excited news perso...

Brilliant, But I can not find where he himself ever said that what is now know as "the Milankovitch Oscillations" ever caused the ice age that we are in. All that I have read is where he felt that they influenced higher and lower temperatures on the planet! But over the years, that when you talk to people about what caused the ice age that we are still in, his name comes up as the why, and how! This is one of those excepted "facts" that are in reality, not "a fact" at all. But it becomes a stumbling block and, problem, when trying to get the correct cause for why we are in an ice age out there. Back in the 70s, a quite extensive study was done that showed that Milankovitch Oscillations did not cause the ice age, but in their words "paced" the ice age! I like that word "PACED" simple, elegant, and correct (as far as it goes.) For carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere, below 180 parts per million, will always cause the start of the stag...

The number of people that it would take to replant the Sahara desert, would be around 300 million people with 20 acres per family, and if you start with about 30 million refugees in 50 years you could get that number up into a couple hundred million fairly easily, that time frame for getting to where carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and the increased temperature regulation, would really be in a fairly consistent balance. These numbers are for a fully working truck farm, supplying vegetables and fish. Around 20 acres, for a single-family, should supply enough income at set prices for a comfortable living. But in the beginning, because the numbers of workers would not be adequate for 20 acres each. Planting alfalfa as a cover crop. then 200 acres would work very well. as more families would join then these 200-acre sites would be divided down into the smaller truck farms with fish ponds. Just as in America with the homestead act, it would take perhaps 5 years to prove up before the land...

Have you ever seen how much waste there is from building something? And that is just the start of every day that building is being used, not a single day goes by, where materials, energy, waste products, water is all lost. A truly built building should last hundreds of years and return as much of what enters into it each day, as can be expected. And each product that goes into it should last, and not be changed because it was last years model. That is much of what needs to be taught, that just like a friend the longer you have one the more comfortable they are. The reason that I am bringing this up is that the "towns" that will have to be built every 5 to 10 miles in every direction like the spokes of a bikes wheel to facilitate the movement of water, and the replanting of the lands around it so that there will not need to be individual farm sites but everyone will live in the towns, and only need to travel the short 2 to 4 miles to their, 20-acre farm site, so if the towns w...

Guy's the important thing, is to get the word out there. Not just that Global Warming and Climate Change are real, but that there is only ONE CORRECT FIX and if done right will not make any millionaires from doing it right. But will create millions upon millions of hard-working middle-class communities around the planet, paying taxes, growing families with a real reason for getting up every day, because you know that what you are doing is making a real difference on the planet! And doing something that your children could be proud of. My own father was only a farmer and enjoyed being a farmer because he believed growing food and raising livestock improved the whole planet. But once he had his third child that ended up being of eleven children, that 160-acre farm would not be enough to feed, clothe, and educate them, so he worked on the railroad during the day, and farmed in the evenings and weekends. He was very proud that he could raise a family and produce food for others at the ...

      NO! Just as the sequestration of carbon over the lifetime of plant life on this planet, was not some scientific achievement. But the simple loss of available carbon by life and death, and burial by natural causes, over the last 3 billion years. The solution is simple but extremely labor-intensive, we need to undo part, of what nature has done! We need to rebuild part of the planet's temperature regulation ability, that has been lost! Had mankind not increased carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere to the point that it has, we could not do what needs to be accomplished, the replanting of as many of the arid and semi-arid areas of the planet as we can! I understand that no one has seen this seemingly unusual connection but for me, "to my knowledge" it seems to go against both sides of whether or not, global warming is happening.                                        ...

 Was me, using many studies done by others. I did not spend three summers down on the continent of Antarctica getting ice cores, it was not me that did any of the work that determined how much available carbon is still on the planet, and in what forms! It was not me adding up how much limestone is on the planet, and how much carbon is both sequestrated every year and how much is returned back into the carbon cycle on average every year! All of these and lots more were done and peer-reviewed by what most people consider good solid scientists doing their jobs well! All I did was read there finding, following where it lead me. One thing did make me really think about the chances of life, and both how narrow and fragile it can be and the next, how impossible to stop it when the right conditions are there! This was when I was studying about our neighboring planets, when one looks at Venus, Earth, and Mars, why only our planet has abundant life, I came to the following conclusions, somew...

But for the last 3 months, I am getting around 25 hits a day. I know that is not a large number, but considering the subject matter, I think that it is a lot! But I can not keep thinking of everything that would have to be considered, I am self-employed, and simply do not have the time to spend so much of my time not working! I normally work around 12 hours a day 7 days a week keeping a house and food and saving for my family. Many minds are better than one, and I of all people understand what this paper could mean, just like everyone else who is not rich, certain priorities have to take point. Let's get this paper out to the population of the planet, get a following, then when there are enough people, informed of the true and only correct solution, bring it to the attention of those who are in power at this time! So I need others to do what a builder, can not do, connect with people that can push forward. Hey, I would like more feedback then what I have been receiving! Reach me by...

How do we wrap our minds around such a number? We simply break it down to a yearly loss of around 7 gigatonnes per year. Everything is manageable when you break it down to what can we get done today? Let tomorrow come, and then the next day and the next. That has been how I can build a very large house either by myself or with the help of others. Do not let the enormity of the task daunt you! 50,000,000 people behind you with the desire, Since they are not begin paid but some type of room and board, which is already being given, for a better life and a home to call their own in time! Could the world afford to do this without using Refugees? Yes, and many companies would be more than willing to give you a very large bid, that, of course, would double before they were done. But why, because of the politicians wanting kick-back from the companies doing the work. Claiming how it must be done by professionals! Just remember many of these refugees were the cream of the crop which dictators a...

I believe that, while it may not convince die yards, ( that really nothing could convince ) it would open many people in the scientific world, that something is going on that they have never even thought about. And while it may not prove to them that what I say is happening, is happening, many will regard the results as important enough to try and find an answer that will fit the facts! And that is when some will be convinced that I am right, and since my way of fixing Global Warming, but also fixes it cheaper by far than any other way that has been talked about. Plus It replaces Glaciers that many hundreds of millions of people rely on for downstream water. Plus it cleans up all of the rivers of the planet because that water will now be used for replanting the arid and semi-arid areas of the planet. Plus it keeps most of mankind's waste from entering the oceans. Plus it prevents red tides around the planet due to added nutrients that use up all of the oxygen in the water, causing ...

First off, what are we trying to prove or disprove? Whether or not the oceans of the planet can hold in a stable environment as much carbon as would be necessary to be able to sequestrate almost 17 million gigatonnes of carbon over a period of two point five million years. Right now there are only around 39,000 gigatonnes in all of the oceans of the planet, meaning that it has to hold at least 17,000,000 / 39,000 = 436 times as much as it now contains, while that may sound like a lot, it really is not! Can modern fish survive in that environment, how about the rest of life in the oceans, and if not, why not? Was, life in the oceans different 2.5 million years ago? How much carbon is the maximum amount that the waters of the world oceans hold, and at what temperatures? And how would that change the P.H. of the water? The list of all the questions looking for answers about the movement of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and between the waters of the oceans would be long and ever-changin...

I have to give a wide range even if mankind does not come to the rescue, for all I know is what scientists have found out. That since the start of the ice age that the planet is currently in, around two million five hundred thousand years ago, the planet sequestrated around twenty-five million gigatonnes of carbon, and actions of the planet have returned around seven million five hundred thousand gigatonnes of carbon. for a net loss of seventeen million five-hundred thousand gigatons of carbon. where did all of this carbon dioxide that was sequestrated come from? My best calculating show that only a very small part of it came from the carbon in the soils of the planet and plant and animal life, only about five hundred fifteen gigatonnes, the vast majority than had to come from the oceans of the planet, a whopping, sixteen million nine hundred eight-five thousand gigatonnes of different types of carbon, and carbon dioxide have had to been stored in some form in the oceans of the planet!...

is so different, then any side of the argument that has been stated concerning whether or not we have a problem with mankind's addition of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, and if so how to repair it! That most people either download my paper, every time that I post something new and then do not respond at all, or feel that I am against them, no matter what side that they are on. I have been called a few choice names that I will not repeat here, and they have all been from the need to fix the global warming side. (Or so they say they are?) One person has stated that if I do not have a degree major that dealt with "hard science" (their words) then I have no reason to be telling anyone, how to fix something that I could not possibly have any knowledge about! And went on to say that if it on a "blog site" and not a "peer review scientific journal" then I had to be a "quack"! It would not be looked at or given any consideration, otherwise! Take...

So if there has never been a need for a species guiding the resources of the planet until now, how do we use the past history of the planet to go forward? Why can we not simply return the planet's atmosphere to what it was prior to mankind's appearance? First off, even with mankind's know-how, it would be such an expensive undertaking that most of the planets middle-class would have to be taxed at such a high rate, it alone would take the economy into the largest recession or more likely depression, since the great one of 1929! Second off, in doing so create a worst problem then what there was. We have to find a middle ground that no matter what your take on global warming is the solution that I have proposed will satisfy everyone, Except those that believe that we do not need to fix, the refugee problem, the extreme weather problem, or the economy of the planets, need for greater access for food in the present or future, those people will not like my plan at all and are qu...

Back in the 70s, there was a commercial, that showed "mother nature" as a wise woman caring for her children, but did not like someone trying to fool her, and responded with extreme weather! When talking with people, this view does seem to be in the back of many people's minds, that if we would just leave nature alone, "she" will repair all of the damage that mankind has inflicted, on her planet! But in reality, there is no entity that is overseeing the planet, there is life on this planet because it has the necessary ingredients, for life to exist. For plants that are energy, (the sun) water, (as a solvent) and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere (as a building block that all life needs to construct life). For animal life, we need to add free oxygen in the atmosphere. Many times in the past of the planet, life itself caused its own extinction! The best-known one was perhaps, the great oxygen event, that caused an estimated 80% of all life on the planet to vanish, ...

Our biggest problem in replanting the arid areas of the planet will be the lack of freshwater, even using all of the great rivers of the planet for this, we will need to use saltwater from the oceans. So how to clean this water for use, is one option, another would be to create huge ocean water inland lake for growing seafood and as the lakes are keep replenished with more ocean water as it evaporates. The need to maintain the correct mixture, would mean that some of the salts would have to be taken out,  still much easier than making that amount of freshwater. Everytime that we, replant an area, or increase water storage on the planet, we are headed in the right direction for helping reduce temperature extremes and increasing the planet's ability for regulating temperature on the planet by increasing cloud cover. In California, in the USA there is a lake, the largest one in that state that was accidentally made by man in 1905, and they called it The Salton Sea. By the 1950s it was...

And yet where there was irrigation, nice crops. How do we collect water from streams 2000 miles before it reaches the oceans? We create dam's everywhere but we never dam the rivers themselves. Upon the high mesa's, even before the melting snows enter the smallest rivers, this is where we start. One thing to remember is what minerals are in the areas, to prevent them from contaminating the water, as was the case in many of the great dams constructed in Canada in the 60s and 70s where the blame for mercury in fish, was laid at the feet of commercial enterprises but was later proved to come from the soils that became saturated with the waters behind the dams and many heavy metals, such as mercury leached out of the soils, and into the new waters of the dams. ( yes there have to be regulations for any enterprise that can cause pollution but we need to understand what's really happening before condemning the nearest company ) The inter-relationship of this planet to mankind'...

I have posted this question online in several different places. How can scientists say that the planet is sequestrating around 10 gigatonnes of carbon a year, and the activity of the planet returns only around 3 gigatonnes a year, but the carbon cycle is in balance! Then they state that there is between 65,000,000,000 gigatonnes and 100,000,000,000 gigatonnes of limestone or other types of sedimentary rock sequestrated on the planet. All of this was once life made from carbon, no longer available to be used for a new life! They do not even talk about what has been either buried deep at the delta of every major river system on the planet or pushed even lower were two great plates of the planet met, forcing one plate up but the other plate down. Carbon can neither be created or destroyed, but it sure can be changed or buried so deep underground so as to be no longer available to be used for new life on the planet. So everyone that responds to the question show's me a picture of the c...