I think it is pretty clear we are seeing a warming trend
I'd like to know the political or financial motivations of all these experts, and who funded their research.
can we by cutting back on emission of Greenhouse gases help slow or stop the warming?
Dave Saxton wrote:..by an expert:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZ0R1MC ... e=youtu.be
What is needed to demonstrate ''global warming'' - whether natural or man made - is a clear plain English explanation of the process, which can then be subject to scientific testing.
Essentially all man made co2 is removed by natural sinks because it is so small an amount
One of the points put forth by Judith Curry was that the evidence suggests that climate is not nearly as sensitive to co2 as previously believed,
n October 2014, Curry wrote an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal  where she argued that human-caused warming near the end of the 21st century should be less than the 2-degrees-Celsius “danger” level for all but the IPCC’s most extreme emission scenario, which is far later than the IPCC prediction of a 2-degrees-Celsius warming before 2040.
Carbon dioxide concentrations have varied widely over the Earth's 4.7 billion year history. Carbon dioxide is believed to have existed during Earth's first atmosphere which dates back to shortly after Earth's formation. Earth's second atmosphere emerged after many of the lighter gasses like hydrogen escaped to space or were bound up in molecules and is thought to have consisted largely of nitrogen, carbon dioxide and inert gases produced by outgassing from volcanism, supplemented by gases produced during the late heavy bombardment of Earth by huge asteroids. Cyanobacteria converted some of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to oxygen which eventually led to the oxygen catastrophe that ended Earth's second atmosphere and brought about the Earth's third atmosphere (the modern atmosphere) 2.4 billion years before the present. Carbon dioxide concentrations had dropped from 7,000 parts per million during the Cambrian period about 500 million years ago to as low as 180 parts per million during the Quaternary glaciation of the last two million years.
Garyt wrote: it's at over 400ppm from perhaps 280ppm a hundred or so years ago.
This is an incorrect assumption. A certain amount of C02 is produced and removed naturally. Man obly produces a small volume, but the issue is that this effects the delicate natural balance. You may have a balanced scale with 1000 grams on each side, but if you keep on putting small amounts of a gram on one side it is a matter of time before the balance is thrown off.
might add Curry does NOT think that man made CO2 does not have an impact on climate change, she just thinks it's less of an impact than others believe.
That is incorrect data. The observatory in Hawaii still has it as less than 400ppm this year.
Did you watch Salby's presentation? If so, you should know what complete nonsense your assumptions are here in that light.
Garyt wrote:Here's a pretty simple test you can do yourself if you want - shows how C02 works to increase temperature.
http://www.rsc.org/Education/Teachers/R ... n/home.htm
C02 Is indeed at it's highest point in probably 20 million years. I don't think that is debatable, it's at over 400ppm from perhaps 280ppm a hundred or so years ago.
There we have that C02 is increasing, and it does work as a "greenhouse gas". The only questions really is
1) How much does it effect the temperature of the planet, and
2) Is the increase man made.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests