If an anthropogenic increase in atmospheric CO2 is going to cause the earth's temperature to go to infinity, why didn't it go to infinity during the Cambrian period, when atmospheric CO2 levels were twenty times higher than today?
Posted on 03/10/2008 10:02:26 AM PDT by SiVisPacemParaBellum
The task of cutting greenhouse gas emissions enough to avert a dangerous rise in global temperatures may be far more difficult than previous research suggested, say scientists who have just published studies indicating that it would require the world to cease carbon emissions altogether within a matter of decades.
Their findings, published in separate journals over the past few weeks, suggest that both industrialized and developing nations must wean themselves off fossil fuels by as early as mid-century in order to prevent warming that could change precipitation patterns and dry up sources of water worldwide. Using advanced computer models to factor in deep-sea warming and other aspects of the carbon cycle that naturally creates and removes carbon dioxide (CO2), the scientists, from countries including the United States, Canada and Germany, are delivering a simple message: The world must bring carbon emissions down to near zero to keep temperatures from rising further.
"The question is, what if we don't want the Earth to warm anymore?" asked Carnegie Institution senior scientist Ken Caldeira, co-author of a paper published last week in the journal Geophysical Research Letters. "The answer implies a much more radical change to our energy system than people are thinking about."
Emissions continue to rise... (see link for the entire article)
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
Our morning radio drive guy likes to state that Liberalism is standing on your head and telling the rest of the world it is upside down. These people have an uncanny knack of making non-problems into big problems (carbon dioxide emissions) while simultaneously refusing to recognize big problems (whacked out dictators developing nukes, Islamofacism, erosion of our economic base by a growing government sector which can never get enough).
If an anthropogenic increase in atmospheric CO2 is going to cause the earth's temperature to go to infinity, why didn't it go to infinity during the Cambrian period, when atmospheric CO2 levels were twenty times higher than today?
Stop breathing.
Without modern industrial society, billions would starve. If nothing but total shutdown of industrial society is going to prevent global warming, then there is absolutely no point in lowering emissions. Much, much better to engineer solutions to deal with rising sea levels, etc.
This story is actually an argument against trying to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
I guess this means that we will have to get rid of all the plants too, as dead plants give off major CO2.
They are like little spoiled kids. Nobody listens to them, so they have to scream louder and louder making their stories more and more ridiculous each and every time.
Mark this day on your calendar, because this is the day global warming hysteria officially jumped the shark.
I’ve said all along that the goal was to eliminate the burning of carbon in all its forms; since carbon represents 90% of the energy sources available and an equal amount usable for home heating, we must either freeze or starve to solve this “problem.”
". . . current plans to restrict anthropogenic CO2 emissions are a dangerous misallocation of intellectual capital and resources that should be dedicated to solving humanity's real and serious problems. . . . there is no convincing evidence that CO2 missions from modern industrial activity has in the past, is now, or will in the future cause catastrophic climate change. . . . attempts by governments to inflict taxes and costly regulations on industry and individual citizens with the aim of reducing emissions of CO2 will pointlessly curtail the prosperity of the West and progress of developing nations without affecting climate. . . . adaptation as needed is massively more cost-effective than any attempted mitigation and that a focus on such mitigation will divert the attention and resources of governments away from addressing the real problems of their peoples. . . human-caused climate change is not a global crisis."--------------------------------------------------------
". . a proved correlation between temperature changes and carbon dioxide is almost nonexistent. Turns out that the sun has been quite active in the last half-century or so, hence the slight rise in global temperatures. Other factors in temperature changes include changes in the Earth's axis, in ocean currents and in the salinity of the Arctic Ocean. Volcanoes can also have a dramatic short-term impact on temperatures. But carbon dioxide? No way."
"I have learned since the Ice Age is coming scare in the 1970's to always be a skeptic about research. In the case of global warming, I didn't accept media accounts. Instead I read dozens of the scientific papers. I have talked with numerous scientists. I have studied. I have thought about it. I know I am correct when I assure you there is no run away climate change. The impact of humans on climate is not catastrophic. Our planet is not in peril. It is all a scam, the result of bad science."
Well, they ARE the pretty people
Therefore, everyone must stop breathing.
I would ask the authors of this study to set the example and stop breathing first.
In the future the levels should rise by a 1/3. Probably within hours.
Surely you can’t be serious.
Because Shut up, that's why, you flat-earth Holocaust denier! /Rational debate, AGW style
Well, I guess this explains the abundance of shows such as "Life After People." They intend to kill us all. Obviously, events like the eugenics, genocide, and Holocaust of the twentieth century were not enough for the Socialists.
Some people never learn because they are stuck on stupid (or possibly, evil).
Three-way catalytic converters
A three-way catalytic converter has three simultaneous tasks:
Reduction of nitrogen oxides to nitrogen and oxygen: 2NOx → xO2 + N2
Oxidation of carbon monoxide to carbon dioxide: 2CO + O2 → 2CO2
Oxidation of unburnt hydrocarbons (HC) to carbon dioxide and water: 2CxHy + (2x+y/2)O2 → 2xCO2 + yH2O
Except for the energy used to supply Barbra Streisand’s house and John Kerry’s jet.
Well, they ARE the pretty people
hang on a minute..that would mean they’re the last two, meaning they’d be the adam and eve of the re-dawn of civilization..can anyone guess what we’d look like in a couple thousand years?? (HINT: that’s an invitation to photoshop their offspring, NOT that I’d suggest anyone do such a thing)..
Help us! Barack Obama. You’re our only hope!
It was only with the introduction of the 3-way cat that any headway was truly made against Nox.
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.