Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Dan Evans
I notice that Christy's comment is not in quotes. I wonder what he really said and in what context.

The statement immediately following the paraphrase appears to be a direct quote from Christy.

"It is scientifically inconceivable that after changing forests into cities, turning millions of acres into farmland, putting massive quantities of soot and dust into the atmosphere and sending quantities of greenhouse gases into the air, that the natural course of climate change hasn't been increased in the past century."

I think that's a reasonable statement.

116 posted on 12/24/2003 8:43:10 AM PST by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies ]


To: cogitator; Dan Evans

"It is scientifically inconceivable that after changing forests into cities, turning millions of acres into farmland, putting massive quantities of soot and dust into the atmosphere and sending quantities of greenhouse gases into the air, that the natural course of climate change hasn't been increased in the past century."

Of couse quantifying that change and determining its direction and degree of it's effect in comparison with natural events is another thing altogether.

 

 

CO2 + Solar Temperature Anomaly Reconstruction, oC
CO2 contribution to temperature (blue area)
Solar contribution to temperature anomaly (red area)

Bottomline, more than 70% of the variation in Earth's global temperature is Solar related.

From the analysis, total changes in CO2 concentration (natural + anthropogenic) can only be used to account for a linear 0.0266oC/decade (0.266oC for the next 100years).

Temperature change due to CO2 is a log function of concentration of CO2. Iit can be maintained in a linear rise only so long as the sources of that CO2(whether natural or anthropogenic) can increase at an exponential rate.

124 posted on 12/24/2003 9:46:42 AM PST by ancient_geezer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies ]

To: cogitator

The statement immediately following the paraphrase appears to be a direct quote from Christy.

Yeah that's the impression you would get until you look real close but it doesn't sound like something a good scientist would say. The statement doesn't quantify anything at all and it uses relative terms like "massive" when the truth is that our CO2 emissions are microscopic relative to nature.

I'd wager that the statement was made by the interviewer and Christy was forced to agree. I'd pay a thousand dollars for a recording of that phone conversation.

127 posted on 12/24/2003 10:20:39 AM PST by Dan Evans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson