You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Climategate, a critical manifesto on proposed CO2 reductions
The greenhouse effect due to CO2 is a physical effect which is easy to quantify.
Would you please quantify it for us then. I am a retired engineer with a Master's Degree that specialized in Thermal Sciences and I can't make it work. I would love to see someone put the science together that actually shows CO2 has a negative impact. For instance here is one of my post: Greenhouse Effect - Energy Trapped by the Atmosphere
I haven't done the math myself but apparently the greenhouse effect caused by the current human CO2 emissions (25 Gt/year) will cause less than one degree temperature rise in the next 100 year. My point however is that in the unrealistic scenario of no human CO2 emissions the global warming will probably continue because the current state of warming and acidification of the oceans will still cause a net increase of the CO2 in our atmosphere.
Look at a longer time frame. The increase in CO2 is a result of the increase in temperature, not the other way around. I'm just trying to help, take a look here House Resolution 109 and Climate Change.
I agree with you that some of the proposed measures to reduce the CO2 emissions are ridiculous. I think the greenhouse effect is real but global warming cannot be explained by the current CO2 emissions. The problem is that we have no good explanation for the current sudden increase in temperature. You show that similar increases in temperature have occurred in the past 500000 years but you don't explain why. They could have been caused by meteorites, huge volcanic eruptions or increased solar activity. We don't experience that at the moment so most likely it is caused by human activities.
Wow! You can actually look at the graph showing the increase in carbon dioxide has been occurring over the last 7000 years and the graph showing the lag in carbon dioxide concentration behind temperature and make that conclusion. Simply because there is no explanation of why glacial and inter-glacial periods occur, it must be because of human activities. Unbelievable....
The current global average CO2 level is well above 400 ppm. Your graph stops at 300 ppm. Why does your graph not show the unprecedented increase from 300 ppm to 400 ppm that took place within the last century?
Again, you're completely ignoring the main points of information demonstrated in this data. The data goes back 500,000 years and your concerned that the last 100 years isn't included.
For clarification, this is not my graph and not my data. For me to take credit for it would be plagiarism.
It seems that we disagree on the influence of human activities on global warming. These human activities mainly occurred in the past 100 years and not in the previous 500.000 years. In the past 100 years the CO2 levels went up from 300 ppm to above 400 ppm.
You are correct, we do disagree. Yes CO2 levels have increased but CO2 levels don't drive the temperature change. It's been shown to be a result of the temperature change and not the driver of it.