Plants absorb oxygen and CO2!

[fabio.gel]

Hello

I stumbled upon this site:

http://www.fehler-der-wissenschaft.de/

On this page you will read, among other things, that the scientifically recognized statements on photosynthesis are false.

[Did67]

Sorry, the "fools" .... think .... !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It has long been established that a plant cell, like an animal cell, breathes! It produces its energy by "oxidizing" sugars and transforming them into CO² and H²O. And that day and night. The organic factory is running. It "takes" O² and rejects CO² ... By thus oxidizing carbohydrates, the cellular factory supplies itself with energy.

But by the "miracle" of photosynthesis, these same chlorophyllian plants, under the influence of light, will transform, in chloroplasts, CO² and H²O into ... carbohydrates. So the phenomenon is exactly the opposite (at the level of the balance sheet; the chemical reactions are not at all the same!). Energy (solar) + CO² + H²O gives carbohydrates (which are nothing other than "solar energy bar").

In a growing plant, the second phenomenon takes precedence over the first. Carbohydrates and by extension all the organic molecules that result from them (such as cellulose, lignin from wood, etc.) accumulate: we have therefore "captured" more CO² than we have released, since the organioques molecules have accumulated ... (and that their "skeleton" is a chain of C drawn from CO² which has been "exploded" into C and O², the latter being rejected as waste!)

Then humans and animals will eat this, destroy the molecules, release CO² after having absorbed O². So by "exploding" in turn the organic molecules (carbohydrates or molecules which have been derived from them)

It will burn the wood and do the same: r recover the heat (which was therefore solar energy at the start) and reject CO² after absorbing O² (the boiler).

It will let wood, plants, and ditto, the fungi and bacteria do the same: reject CO² ...

In the end, when the biomass has disappeared, there are in the air exactly the same number of CO2 molecules that were initially absorbed by photosynthesis.

In a world in balance, all these flows are balanced ....

Conclusion:

- the Amazonian forest (in equilibrium; I am not talking about its destruction) is not the "lung" of the planet; it absorbs as much O² as it rejects (or as much CO² ...)

- when we clear, in fact, the results become negative; by destroying biomass, we release CO² which will no longer be absorbed ... (we replace an enormous "biomass" - a forest - with a much smaller biomass - eg soybeans!)

And all this has been taught to me in the 1960 years, on the basis of scientific knowledge having between a sicele and a few tens of years (the complete cycle of photosynthesis known as the Krebs cycle dates from the 1955 years).

I am dismayed that we can, in 2013, be so ignorant and do sensationalism with things so false (I am talking about the site cited in reference)! Finally, also "misunderstood" ...

[Did67]

Small complement: the respiration vegetal was discovered in 1771 !!!!

http://www.aquadesign.be/actu/article-2607.php

That is to say that the site quoted is on page! Two and a half centuries behind.

The internet is sometimes crying!

[moinsdewatt]

Hello

I stumbled upon this site:

http://www.fehler-der-wissenschaft.de/

On this page you will read, among other things, that the scientifically recognized statements on photosynthesis are false.

What 's this dumb site?


Of course plants absorb CO2 during the day and they reject it at night.
It 's been a long time since it' s been established.

The annual net balance for a plant or tree in growth It is an absorption of CO2.

[Did67]

Moral of the story :

A) on the internet, one can pass for interesting by writing any debility!

B) corollary: to take what is written on the Internet with a lot of tweezers (when one knows a domain, this kind of debility is obvious, but one day we risk being trapped in an area where we do not know great Thing!)