New evidence suggests that the correlation between atmospheric carbon and warming may not be as clear as previously believed
Global warming is an extremely sensitive topic. Some ardently believe that man is pushing our planet towards global ruin, while others believe that proponents of anthropogenic warming theory are pushing the global economy towards financial ruin. Surprisingly, though, the evidence is not as black or white as either group would like you to believe.
A recent study looking at atmospheric carbon when combined with a recent summary of global atmospheric temperatures over the past 30 years sharply illustrates this uncertainty.
Why do I have a feeling Al Gore won’t be happy about this part:
With the international community puzzling over expensive climate change legislation, it is important to consider carefully what landmarks by which to gauge “success” amid the uncertainty of cyclic variation. Furthermore, critics and proponents aside, the wisest approach seems to be to avoid schemes that throw money into the wind, such as carbon trading or carbon sequestration.
The Copenhagen talks are going nowhere.
#75, Lyin’ Mike,
Here is a very good explanation for what happens when CO2 is absorbed in water.
Atmospheric acid does not occur until the base, such as sulfer, comes in contact and absorbs moisture. This then falls as Acid Rain. CO2 reacts the same way.
#76, The point you miss is the oceans are absorbing only half the CO2 produced. The remainder is still in our atmosphere where it is acting to retain the planet’s heat. While ocean absortion may reduce the amount of CO2 entering the atmosphere, it doesn’t eliminate it.
Re: MScott # 73
“Perhaps. However, there is indication that they had no idea they were looking at climate numbers. So, perhaps you missed the point that they could not possibly be biased.”
Perhaps you are easily decided and you are way too trusting with the media. Gee, how many people have died from H1N1 so far as compared with regular influenza? But the majority of medical experts were in agreement and predicted…
“Funny. I thought we were concerned with surface temperatures, being a surface bound species.”
Funny, what makes you think that satellite data doesn’t represent surface temperature? Satellites not only read surface temperature, they read vastly more area, giving a vastly more accurate mean temperature, instead of a relatively few selected pinpoints that are often affected by local man-made environments.
“That graph is not very detailed around the present. There is also no source and no indication of what the present date is. Did you make it yourself? Please post the article from which you got the graph. A little context would help.”
For someone who is so dedicated in pushing the “man-made” global warming agenda, I am shocked that you haven’t seen this chart MScott. It’s everywhere, and used by pro and con opinions alike. Some sources and biased applications…
http://tiny.cc/Givrh
http://tiny.cc/7mCsN
http://tiny.cc/7fvOL
“Lastly, do you dispute that CO2 is what keeps our planet at a balmy 15C rather than a frigid -18C? CO2 is the blanket that keeps our planet at a comfortable temperature. How could increasing it from 280 to 385 ppm not be having an effect? It simply makes no sense.”
Take a look at the first chart above, which I point out is on your side. look at the CO2 spike. It’s enormous (if in fact it’s true).
look at the effect it’s had on the graph. You would have to zoom in on a magnitude of 100,000,000 times to notice an effect! To think that humans could cause more than that is pure hubris.
As for the acidification of our oceans, CO2 is the culprit, and man is contributing for sure… but buy how much? The earth’s climate is changing… as it is constantly, and forever will.
Are pockets of methane being released because of these changes? Permafrost thawing on the ocean floor are loosening the cap on large pockets of methane stored deeper down.
http://tiny.cc/RwAKp
We are back to the cause of the thawing of course, and I don’t believe man is the cause…. maybe a helping nudge, but not the cause.
If you want to talk about air pollution and the air we breathe, or water pollution, overpopulation, food source manipulation… that’s a whole new scenario. We are affecting our necessities of life. We should all move away from the f#kn shore grow some food, develop clean transportation and stop being such gluttons and wasteful assholes! Unfortunately, the focus is off that problem, and way too many resources and money are being thrown at a red herring.
You can believe man can change the course of earths climate on the scale of Chart 1 above, for the sake of a few shore huggers… or you can try and change the minds of 6 billion people to reject selfishness and all chip in for the greater good of mankind.
History will take it’s course because we are who we are. Artificially trying to control the masses through scare tactics and intimidation (the IPCC) is folly, not to mention hurtful, demeaning, insulting and disgustingly wasteful on many levels.
#79 both of your points are valid.
As an add on look at the first point. Why did CO2 go up earlier, if the total increase was less than what is absorbed by sinks in recent years? It suggests that the amount of carbon sink is also a feedback of higher carbon. The biosphere responds to higher levels of carbon by producing more trees or bigger ones, etc.
I like that protest banner, “Rich Countries Pay Your Climate Debt.” Hmmm, does this include China? Good luck ever getting them to compensate for their ramp up of industrialization, and increased pollution. Forcing the US, UK, and France to pay up, will just move even more jobs to China. Only the small businesses and the lower income citizens will pay this climate tax. And undeveloped counties will only become developed enough, to handle the jobs that moved there from the already developed countries, that are saddled with the tax (and the undeveloped aren’t paying).
I think it is safe to say that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. How good a green house gas is another question and it is by no means clear that the slow and very irregular warming trend of the past 300 years is being caused by CO2. In fact it is impossible to even tell if CO2 is having a measurable impact.
I still have a book stashed somewhere predicting we were entering a new Ice Age. Some of the leaders of that scare are leaders in this scare. To many of them are making money off their claims.
Weather changes, climate changes. The modals all have holes in them you could drive a super tanker through.
I just saw that chart in one of the hacked e-mails
Thats because the ocean is absorbing it all, but there’s a tipping point.
Not to worry though, there will be a mass human die-off which will correct things for the next 1000 years or so.