threebikesmcginty
Corn Fed Hick...
- Location
- ...on the slake
Congratulations!
What happened to global warming then?
- Thread starter Brandane
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Congratulations!
Archie_tect
De Skieven Architek... aka Penfold + Horace
- Location
- Northumberland
It's not possible to fully model or understand what impact the Industrial Age is having [except to know it isn't helpful] because of all the other interventions that are happening every minute of every day. Presumably in the evolution of planetary change a rising CO2 atmospheric percentage would have been scrubbed by increased plant growth which in itself would have affected the oxygen supply causing catalytic problems.
The deforestation of the temperate and tropical regions affects CO2 absorbtion and leads to systemic soil erosion and the expansion of deserts... couple that with the rise in the population and the cocktail is having as fundamental an effect as the ongoing burning of fossil fuels. Having said that the planting of massive new fast-growing evergreen forests for timber management absorbs far more CO2 than established mature forest or grassland. The eco-balance is not solely the result of atmospheric change, and it's wrong to only concentrate upon it.
The deforestation of the temperate and tropical regions affects CO2 absorbtion and leads to systemic soil erosion and the expansion of deserts... couple that with the rise in the population and the cocktail is having as fundamental an effect as the ongoing burning of fossil fuels. Having said that the planting of massive new fast-growing evergreen forests for timber management absorbs far more CO2 than established mature forest or grassland. The eco-balance is not solely the result of atmospheric change, and it's wrong to only concentrate upon it.
jonesy
Guru
Of course there are, ffs, that's how science works! But what isn't in doubt is that CO2 is an important greenhouse gas, and that its concentration is increasing; and consensus of expert scientific opinion is that models predicting climate change explain historic trends far better than those that don't. If you are going to imply that the experts aren't really expert,then you'd better demonstrate greater expertise yourself. If you are going to say the experts are wrong, then you'd better explain what their errors are, with reference to the research itself, which means coming up with a better theory of how the atmosphere works. I'm not asking for much.
You're understanding is way off the mark. H2O is certainly a powerful greenhouse gas but an increase of it in the atmosphere does not necessarily mean an increase in atmospheric temperature because in the form of clouds it has another property and that is to increase the Earth's albedo which has a cooling effect (more radiation is reflected back into space). Also the atmosphere is not totally saturated.
With C02 it is more straight forward, any increase in its level leads to warming which is why it is the component of greatest interest.
threebikesmcginty
Corn Fed Hick...
- Location
- ...on the slake
I'm doing my bit - I've recyled my bicycles into this more modest form of locomotion...
Mad Doug Biker
Just a damaged guy.
- Location
- Craggy Island
Don't joke, people would probably happily do that
U
User482
Guest
No. Like Jonesy, I did a number of courses in climate science and atmospheric chemistry, as part of an environmental science degree. I've also worked in environmental management for over 10 years. I don't claim to be an expert, but I'm familiar enough with the literature to spot BS. Happily, a work colleague has a PhD in atmospheric chemistry so I'm able to refer to her expertise as necessary.
Two concepts: climate sensitivity to CO2 concentration AND feedback mechanisms (amplitude and direction). Current understanding of both is very sketchy, which is why the computer models cannot a) agree amongst themselves and b) far more importantly, fail to predict against historical data.
Climate science is in it's infancy, although that does not make it unimportant.
Climate science is in it's infancy, although that does not make it unimportant.
Flying_Monkey
Recyclist
- Location
- Odawa
What a depressingly stupid thread.
And iLB, on water vapour and feedbacks, you might want to read this.
And iLB, on water vapour and feedbacks, you might want to read this.
Flying_Monkey
Recyclist
- Location
- Odawa
It's fairly pointless to even try to discuss it on here, unless we all want to write essays to provide evidence for what we want to say. Otherwise it devolves to petty arguments quite rapidly, especially if people are being deliberately stupid, or obnoxiously posting largely irrelevant or unhelpful diagrams. Naming no names.
