Carbon dioxide and plants
The June 27, 2014, “Cringe-worthy” writer said: “... scientists have shown many plants are becoming less nutritious in a carbon rich environment.” (please note that the proper term is carbon dioxide - CO2, not carbon; plants don’t consume the black elemental carbon.) He did not quote a source, so I will, from the June 28, 2014, issue of Science News: “Crop’s iron, zinc and protein may fall 5 to 10 percent by 2050.”
The cited zinc and iron drop was for wheat, rice, peas and soybeans. The protein drop was for wheat and rice. The study also noted that corn and sorghum nutrients did not drop under the same 546 to 586 ppm carbon dioxide atmosphere during 143 worldwide experiments from 1998 to 2010.
Researcher H.J. Weigel implied that it is too early to tell whether increased CO2 will alter plants enough to effect worldwide health, because the experiment caused an abrupt increase in CO2, not a gradual increase which plants may be able to adapt to over time.
I think this makes sense since it seems all living things have been designed with a toolbox of just enough hardware and software embedded within their DNA to be able to adapt to internal and external environmental pressures.
The June 27 writer says, “…we should listen a little more closely to our health and climate experts - those who work on this topic every day.” The problem with that statement is that not all scientists are honest. We need look no farther than the proponents/teachers of macro-evolution; a completely indefensible theory that is still being taught in some places. Intelligent Design is the only defensible theory for the origin of life.