Reply to comment
Good thing??
February 18, 2008 by Anonymous, 1 year 37 weeks ago
Comment id: 27597
Reply
About us
Science Blog was started in August 2002. It lives, breathes and eats press releases from research organizations around the globe. Most of what you read here are press releases from the outfits named in the stories themselves. Got a news story you think belongs here? Let's talk. The other half of the equation is blog posts from readers like you. So if you have an interest in science, please register and join others like you in an ongoing, vibrant dialog about what makes the world tick. Meantime, please take a minute to read our Privacy Policy and Site Disclaimer.Recommended
Andrew Sullivan Dan Sullivan Doug Arellanes Emmanuelle Richard Faith Sullivan Fred Bortz Heather Havrilesky Henry Copeland Kate Sullivan Ken Layne lagreenbean.com LAist.com Maggie Sullivan Matt Welch NewYorkology Opinion L.A. Ron Kaye Slashdot Steve Elzer & Family TheNewsroom.org Thor Garcia Tony Pierce Wonkette OlderThanks CNET for naming Science Blog one of your Blog 100!
So lower oxygen levels may just have at least one good outcome. We all know that mother nature adapts and does so frailly well. Is it possible that the plant and maybe animal life that live in these areas will adapt to this lower oxygen climate? And if they do "change there ways" (ie: animals develop way of living on less oxygen) can we learn from them? It maybe a long shot but it could be a possibility. Am I they only one who thought this??
And also if oxygen levels are going down does that mean that C02 levels are going up? And if they are wont plant life thrive?