The changes in Co2 are compared to measure the differences between naturally occurring Co2 against Co2 from human emissions.
What proportion of climate change is caused by humans? Can you give me a figure... 5% of climate change? 95% of climate change? Perhaps only 5% of climate change is caused by humans, I'd be interested to hear why others think it's higher...
As we can see in the diagram below (taken from the ARIC Atmosphere, Climate & Environment Information Programme website a DEFRA endorsed teaching resource for Key Stage 4 and A-Level students in the UK) the sources of carbon dioxide show that 95% of CO2 occurs naturally. There is nothing we can do about it.
Only roughly 5% is produced as a result of man’s activity. We know that for every 1,000,000 (one million) parts of atmosphere, around 385 are CO2 and this figure has increased as a result of CO2 being released from the oceans as they get warmer. The rest is made up of other gases and vapours. So based on the diagram below, anthropogenic (man made) CO2 emissions add up to just 19 parts per million parts of atmosphere.
Are we really to believe that the world faces catastrophe as a result of man being responsible for the existence of 0.0019% of a naturally occuring gas in the atmosphere, but that we can stave off disaster if we reduce that contribution to 0.0007%? Why are politicians not asking themselves questions like this before rushing to regulate and tax our behaviour? Could it be because this helps them to further another agenda?
Carbon dioxide makes up less than 2% of the greenhouse gases in our atmosphere. Many studies put out by the "-ist" crowd ignore water vapor, as if it's not a greenhouse gas, but it is and this dishonesty is the first clue that their entire argument is based on lies.
The next step in our logical deconstruction of the global warming myth is to see the sources of this tiny amount of carbon dioxide.
As you can see, the vast majority of CO2 emissions have nothing to do with mankind. Carbon dioxide was here in the Cretaceous period, it was here during the Ice Age, and it will be here in relatively similar amounts even if the "-ist" crowd got the world's carbon footprint down to ZERO. Mankind contributes only 3% of the globe's CO2 and Mother Nature herself puts in the remaining 97%.
The rise in temperature has been measured against the changes in Co2.
The changes in Co2 are compared to measure the differences between naturally occurring Co2 against Co2 from human emissions.
Both of these key elements are now undisputed and also why you don't hear from sceptics anymore.
For specific peer-reviewed material take a look at google scholar.
Shadow is correct. There is no argument about it.
1. Human released C02 is known. The total amount of C02 is known
2. Temperature rises due to C02 are unknown.
3. Correlation does not mean causation.
There is no scientific evidence to link the earths temperature to human activity so it can be scientifically said humans are causing the earth to be warmer.
We currently have no idea if people are simply fitting the C02 idea to their own temperature constructions where C02 may have a a trivial role in climate.
All we seem to know is that the Earth cooled in the last 1000 years and now has returned to similar temperatures existing 1000 years ago, but even that relies on a large amount of assumption and guesswork.
As I've pointed out before, water vapor is in transitional phase. At the air pressure in the troposphere, water vapor will liquify and turn to ice. Very little will remain in the atmosphere and hence create almost no global warming.
CO2 which does not liquify or freeze at relevant temperatures is what warms the atmosphere enough for significant amounts of water vapor to remain in the atmosphere.
The minimum amount of water vapor at average temperature at sea level is 4000 ppmbv. Remove all the CO2 and the average temperature falls by 33C to -19C and the water vapor is down to 200 ppmbv at sea level. Take the temperature to what you'll get at altitude and over the poles at -55C and the water vapor will fall to 5 ppmbv.
Water vapor only is in the air because something else has put it there, eventually it falls to the surface. It's called precipitation.
You guys don't know much, nor can you analyze information.
The next trick of our glorious banks will be to charge us a fee for using net bank!!! You are no longer customer, you are property!!!
As I've pointed out before, water vapor is in transitional phase. At the air pressure in the troposphere, water vapor will liquify and turn to ice. Very little will remain in the atmosphere and hence create almost no global warming.
CO2 which does not liquify or freeze at relevant temperatures is what warms the atmosphere enough for significant amounts of water vapor to remain in the atmosphere.
The minimum amount of water vapor at average temperature at sea level is 4000 ppmbv. Remove all the CO2 and the average temperature falls by 33C to -19C and the water vapor is down to 200 ppmbv at sea level. Take the temperature to what you'll get at altitude and over the poles at -55C and the water vapor will fall to 5 ppmbv.
Water vapor only is in the air because something else has put it there, eventually it falls to the surface. It's called precipitation.
You guys don't know much, nor can you analyze information.
The gas of water is always present. There is no absolute cut off point. The gas of water cannot be said to be only a transitional phase and cannot be said to be something that is difficult to describe as a gas.
If the entire world was covered in ice, then ice at -19C at the equator when exposed to the huge warming influence of the sun will turn to gas at an enormous rate and this gas will move as a rapid wind to the colder polar regions, where since it is cooler the water vapour will tend to precipitate as ice more rapidly than it falls at the warmer equator. Therefore land at the equator would not be covered in snow and ice, it would be much warmer and the air would hold far more water. The oceans near the equatorial continents would not be long frozen and the result is the earth would rapidly return to being a warmer climate.
Even at near absolute zero if the vast solar power of the equatorial sun is falling on the ice the ice would turn to gas at a very rapid rate.
I know very little about climate change but the pie chart above was my understanding - is there any evidence the water vapor is chemically different?
What they don't care to tell you is that pie chart of theirs is only at sea level in the tropics which has high amounts of water vapor. The amounts of water vapor fall precipitately away from the tropics and at altitude. At 15k up on average at the troposphere/stratosphere border there is only 5 ppmbv water vapor. Where as in the tropics at sea level you can get 40,000 ppmbv. Over the vast area of the atmosphere, CO2 is the key gas.
Water vapor is the most powerful greenhouse gas “Water vapour is the most important greenhouse gas. This is part of the difficulty with the public and the media in understanding that 95% of greenhouse gases are water vapour. The public understand it, in that if you get a fall evening or spring evening and the sky is clear the heat will escape and the temperature will drop and you get frost. If there is a cloud cover, the heat is trapped by water vapour as a greenhouse gas and the temperature stays quite warm. If you go to In Salah in southern Algeria, they recorded at one point a daytime or noon high of 52 degrees Celsius – by midnight that night it was -3.6 degree Celsius. […] That was caused because there is no, or very little, water vapour in the atmosphere and it is a demonstration of water vapour as the most important greenhouse gas.” (Tim Ball)
What the science says... Select a level... Basic Intermediate Increased CO2 makes more water vapor, a greenhouse gas which amplifies warming
When skeptics use this argument, they are trying to imply that an increase in CO2 isn't a major problem. If CO2 isn't as powerful as water vapor, which there's already a lot of, adding a little more CO2 couldn't be that bad, right? What this argument misses is the fact that water vapor creates what scientists call a 'positive feedback loop' in the atmosphere — making any temperature changes larger than they would be otherwise.
How does this work? The amount of water vapor in the atmosphere exists in direct relation to the temperature. If you increase the temperature, more water evaporates and becomes vapor, and vice versa. So when something else causes a temperature increase (such as extra CO2 from fossil fuels), more water evaporates. Then, since water vapor is a greenhouse gas, this additional water vapor causes the temperature to go up even further—a positive feedback.
How much does water vapor amplify CO2 warming? Studies show that water vapor feedback roughly doubles the amount of warming caused by CO2. So if there is a 1°C change caused by CO2, the water vapor will cause the temperature to go up another 1°C. When other feedback loops are included, the total warming from a potential 1°C change caused by CO2 is, in reality, as much as 3°C.
The other factor to consider is that water is evaporated from the land and sea and falls as rain or snow all the time. Thus the amount held in the atmosphere as water vapour varies greatly in just hours and days as result of the prevailing weather in any location. So even though water vapour is the greatest greenhouse gas, it is relatively short-lived. On the other hand, CO2 is removed from the air by natural geological-scale processes and these take a long time to work. Consequently CO2 stays in our atmosphere for years and even centuries. A small additional amount has a much more long-term effect.
So skeptics are right in saying that water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas. What they don't mention is that the water vapor feedback loop actually makes temperature changes caused by CO2 even bigger.
The next trick of our glorious banks will be to charge us a fee for using net bank!!! You are no longer customer, you are property!!!
What they don't care to tell you is that pie chart of theirs is only at sea level in the tropics which has high amounts of water vapor. The amounts of water vapor fall precipitately away from the tropics and at altitude. At 15k up on average at the troposphere/stratosphere border there is only 5 ppmbv water vapor.
99% of the atmosphere is under 32km. about 98% would be under 16K
2% of 380 is 7.6ppm
C02 is weight for weight, according to John Tyndall a 'feeble absorber' compared to water.
Did they tell you that?
Count du Monet
30 Oct 2012, 06:29 PM
With no CO2 the average temperature would be more around -9C at the equator. Not much ice will melt at - 9C. That which does will freeze again.
Ice sublimates so that the gas is directly produced without involving a liquid phase.
Ice at near absolute zero that is heated by the sun is going to create a massive amount of gas, which is why a comet is so visible.
Even at atmospheric pressure, direct solar heating of the earth without any clouds is going to cause ice to rapidly be removed, where there is always present on the earth a water transport system taking warmer water away from the equator via the atmosphere.
Unlike today where summer melting returns a similar amount of water to the equator via the oceans, ice would not melt away from the equator and would therefore accumulate away from the equator and dissapear near the equator.
99% of the atmosphere is under 32km. about 98% would be under 16K
2% of 380 is 7.6ppm
Nope, at the tropopause the CO2 is the region of 390 ppmbv the same as at the surface. Because CO2 is way past it super-critical boiling point it is true highly active gas that spreads evenly throughout the atmosphere. If it was cold enough the CO2 would freeze as well. The tropopause averages -55C and has water vapor only at 5 to 8 ppmbv because it's too cold to hold much water vapor.
I can see you've haven't got the slightest clue.
Quote:
C02 is weight for weight, according to John Tyndall a 'feeble absorber' compared to water.
Did they tell you that?
If water vapor in the atmosphere was above it's boiling point instead of below it, that might be true. But at sea lever water boils at 100C, on top Mt Everest 8k up, the atmospheric pressure has fallen to a third and water boils at 65C
The next trick of our glorious banks will be to charge us a fee for using net bank!!! You are no longer customer, you are property!!!
Australian Property Forum is an economics and finance forum dedicated to discussion of Australian and global real estate markets and macroeconomics, including house prices, housing affordability, and the likelihood of a property crash. Is there an Australian housing bubble? Will house prices crash, boom or stagnate? Is the Australian property market a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme? Can house prices really rise forever? These are the questions we address on Australian Property Forum, the premier real estate site for property bears, bulls, investors, and speculators. Members may also discuss matters related to finance, modern monetary theory (MMT), debt deflation, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin Ethereum and Ripple, property investing, landlords, tenants, debt consolidation, reverse home equity loans, the housing shortage, negative gearing, capital gains tax, land tax and macro prudential regulation.
Forum Rules:
The main forum may be used to discuss property, politics, economics and finance, precious metals, crypto currency, debt management, generational divides, climate change, sustainability, alternative energy, environmental topics, human rights or social justice issues, and other topics on a case by case basis. Topics unsuitable for the main forum may be discussed in the lounge. You agree you won't use this forum to post material that is illegal, private, defamatory, pornographic, excessively abusive or profane, threatening, or invasive of another forum member's privacy. Don't post NSFW content. Racist or ethnic slurs and homophobic comments aren't tolerated. Accusing forum members of serious crimes is not permitted. Accusations, attacks, abuse or threats, litigious or otherwise, directed against the forum or forum administrators aren't tolerated and will result in immediate suspension of your account for a number of days depending on the severity of the attack. No spamming or advertising in the main forum. Spamming includes repeating the same message over and over again within a short period of time. Don't post ALL CAPS thread titles. The Advertising and Promotion Subforum may be used to promote your Australian property related business or service. Active members of the forum who contribute regularly to main forum discussions may also include a link to their product or service in their signature block. Members are limited to one actively posting account each. A secondary account may be used solely for the purpose of maintaining a blog as long as that account no longer posts in threads. Any member who believes another member has violated these rules may report the offending post using the report button.
Australian Property Forum complies with ASIC Regulatory Guide 162 regarding Internet Discussion Sites. Australian Property Forum is not a provider of financial advice. Australian Property Forum does not in any way endorse the views and opinions of its members, nor does it vouch for for the accuracy or authenticity of their posts. It is not permitted for any Australian Property Forum member to post in the role of a licensed financial advisor or to post as the representative of a financial advisor. It is not permitted for Australian Property Forum members to ask for or offer specific buy, sell or hold recommendations on particular stocks, as a response to a request of this nature may be considered the provision of financial advice.
Views expressed on this forum are not representative of the forum owners. The forum owners are not liable or responsible for comments posted. Information posted does not constitute financial or legal advice. The forum owners accept no liability for information posted, nor for consequences of actions taken on the basis of that information. By visiting or using this forum, members and guests agree to be bound by the Zetaboards Terms of Use.
This site may contain copyright material (i.e. attributed snippets from online news reports), the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such content is posted to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues. This constitutes 'fair use' of such copyright material as provided for in section 107 of US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed for research and educational purposes only. If you wish to use this material for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Such material is credited to the true owner or licensee. We will remove from the forum any such material upon the request of the owners of the copyright of said material, as we claim no credit for such material.
Privacy Policy: Australian Property Forum uses third party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our site. These third party advertising companies may collect and use information about your visits to Australian Property Forum as well as other web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here: Google Advertising Privacy FAQ
Australian Property Forum is hosted by Zetaboards. Please refer also to the Zetaboards Privacy Policy
