Posted on 02/03/2013 5:03:35 PM PST by Jack Hydrazine
Climate change itself is already in the process of definitively rebutting climate alarmists who think human use of fossil fuels is causing ultimately catastrophic global warming. That is because natural climate cycles have already turned from warming to cooling, global temperatures have already been declining for more than 10 years, and global temperatures will continue to decline for another two decades or more.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
Sounds like the Gore Effect keeps effecting!
Yes, temperature leads CO2 by about 800 or so years.
Algorezeera. Lol.
Such as the increase in temperature was from the last increase in CO2 or some silly bs like that.
Or the bad economy is still Bush’s fault and will still be Bush’s fault for the next 20 years.
I don't think you want that. If we had not been around, the oceans would have released 5-10 ppm of CO2 from the rise in temperature from the Little Ice Age (about 1C). Instead we have had over 110 ppm rise and still rising. To absorb 5-10 ppm they would have to drop 1C (which would be very bad). For the oceans to absorb 50-100 would require them to drop at least 10C from current temperatures. Very very bad.
It is clear in the long term...
And in the short term...
Looking at your chart the change in CO2 per degree change in temperature is about 10 to 1 (10 ppm for 1C change). But we have had over 100 ppm change (we’re now above 390). So the temperature can no longer be “dragging” CO2 behind it (that would require over 10C temperature rise). But rather CO2 is just going up because we are releasing it. It doesn’t have much effect on temperature because temperature reaches a peak based on convection and outgoing radiation (modulated by weather which is mostly solar controlled).
See my previous post. An increase of global temperature causes about 10ppm rise in CO2, maybe a bit more. That’s what would have happened as we warmed from the Little Ice Age to now. Instead there has been over 110 ppm rise in CO2 and still rising 2-3 ppm per year. Temperature is not pulling CO2 up anymore, CO2 is rising because we are releasing it.
What is the percentage of the human contribution to CO2 and natural CO2?
I think the article I linked to gets into that a little bit. Another point it makes is that the longer a warming period results in a slower cooling period afterward. One speculation is that the higher CO2 level slows the cooling period. But the author is honest enough to say that it’s not clear that that is the case and other factors need to be explored. In any case he says “I have not found a single situation where a significant raise of CO2 is accompanied by significant temperature rise- WHEN NOT PRECEDED BY TEMPERATURE RISE.”
Okay. Makes sense. Generally.
In all of the discussions, I haven’t heard anyone ask — “how accurate is the data, how accurate are the models, what assumptions did you make and approximations did you make, and therefore how accurate are the results?” With what kind of accuracy can you predict global temperatures tomorrow, a week from today, an month from now and a year from now.
Science is never precise and exact. Only estimates and approximations... probabilities. Especially, with excessively complex systems as the climate. We are being told that AGW is a done deal; it is an absolute, indisputable, without question.
Please provide the source of your data or speculation.
I am still waiting for Al Gore to hold a press conference with answers to the recent antartic like weather the US experienced last week.
Okay, another question. Sorry.
The below graph only shows CO2 concentration. Not cause and effect.
Suppose the cause is not increased production of CO2 but whatever mechanism or process that consumes it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.