The effect of adding man-made CO2 is predicted in the theory of greenhouse gases. This theory was first proposed by Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius in 1896, based on earlier work by Fourier and Tyndall. Many scientist have refined the theory in the last century. Nearly all have reached the same conclusion: if we increase the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, the Earth will warm up. What they don’t agree on is by how much. This issue is called ‘climate sensitivity’, the amount the temperatures will increase if CO2 is doubled from pre-industrial levels. Climate models have predicted the least temperature rise would be on average 1.65°C (2.97°F) , but upper estimates vary a lot, averaging 5.2°C (9.36°F). Current best estimates are for a rise of around 3°C (5.4°F), with a likely maximum of 4.5°C (8.1°F). What Goes Down… The greenhouse effect works like this: Energy arrives from the sun in the form of visible light and ultraviolet radiation. The Earth then emits some of this energy as infrared radiation. Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere 'capture' some of this heat, then re-emit it in all directions - including back to the Earth's surface. Through this process, CO2 and other greenhouse gases keep the Earth’s surface 33°Celsius (59.4°F) warmer than it would be without them. We have added 42% more CO2, and temperatures have gone up. There should be some evidence that links CO2 to the temperature rise. So far, the average global temperature has gone up by about 0.8 degrees C (1.4°F): "According to an ongoing temperature analysis conducted by scientists at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS)…the average global temperature on Earth has increased by about 0.8°Celsius (1.4°Fahrenheit) since 1880. Two-thirds of the warming has occurred since 1975, at a rate of roughly 0.15-0.20°C per decade." The temperatures are going up, just like the theory predicted. But where’s the connection with CO2, or other greenhouse gases like methane, ozone or nitrous oxide? The connection can be found in the spectrum of greenhouse radiation. Using high-resolution FTIR spectroscopy, we can measure the exact wavelengths of long-wave (infrared) radiation reaching the ground. Figure 1: Spectrum of the greenhouse radiation measured at the surface. Greenhouse effect from water vapour is filtered out, showing the contributions of other greenhouse gases (Evans 2006). Sure enough, we can see that CO2 is adding considerable warming, along with ozone (O3) and methane (CH4). This is called surface radiative forcing, and the measurements are part of the empirical evidence that CO2 is causing the warming. ...Must Go Up How long has CO2 been contributing to increased warming? According to NASA, “Two-thirds of the warming has occurred since 1975”. Is there a reliable way to identify CO2’s influence on temperatures over that period? There is: we can measure the wavelengths of long-wave radiation leaving the Earth (upward radiation). Satellites have recorded the Earth's outbound radiation. We can examine the spectrum of upward long-wave radiation in 1970 and 1997 to see if there are changes. Figure 2: Change in spectrum from 1970 to 1996 due to trace gases. 'Brightness temperature' indicates equivalent blackbody temperature (Harries 2001). This time, we see that during the period when temperatures increased the most, emissions of upward radiation have decreased through radiative trapping at exactly the same wavenumbers as they increased for downward radiation. The same greenhouse gases are identified: CO2, methane, ozone etc. The Empirical Evidence As temperatures started to rise, scientists became more and more interested in the cause. Many theories were proposed. All save one have fallen by the wayside, discarded for lack of evidence. One theory alone has stood the test of time, strengthened by experiments. We know CO2 absorbs and re-emits longwave radiation (Tyndall). The theory of greenhouse gases predicts that if we increase the proportion of greenhouse gases, more warming will occur (Arrhenius). Scientists have measured the influence of CO2 on both incoming solar energy and outgoing long-wave radiation. Less longwave radiation is escaping to space at the specific wavelengths of greenhouse gases. Increased longwave radiation is measured at the surface of the Earth at the same wavelengths. These data provide empirical evidence for the predicted effect of CO2.
I'll repeat this one for the sake of jerm and piehole who for some reason still don't get it. Is there a reliable way to identify CO2’s influence on temperatures over that period? There is: we can measure the wavelengths of long-wave radiation leaving the Earth (upward radiation). Satellites have recorded the Earth's outbound radiation. We can examine the spectrum of upward long-wave radiation in 1970 and 1997 to see if there are changes. Figure 2: Change in spectrum from 1970 to 1996 due to trace gases. 'Brightness temperature' indicates equivalent blackbody temperature (Harries 2001). This time, we see that during the period when temperatures increased the most, emissions of upward radiation have decreased through radiative trapping at exactly the same wavenumbers as they increased for downward radiation. The same greenhouse gases are identified: CO2, methane, ozone etc.
Yeah, magma is incapable of melting ice. There is massive geothermal activity under Antarctic. It may have the highest density of volcanoes in the world. If you are correct, simply post numbers that quantify how much ice is melting from volcanoes and how much is attributable to CO2.
Secret funding helped build vast network of climate denial thinktanks Anonymous billionaires donated $120m to more than 100 anti-climate groups working to discredit climate change science https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/feb/14/funding-climate-change-denial-thinktanks-network
Yeah, over 100 fucking volcanoes couldn't have anything to do with melting ice you dumb shit. POST THE DATA!!!!! They don't have the data. That is the answer. The data doesn't exist. They don't know how much is from volcanoes or from climate warming religion. But, retarded morons run around stating it is only from global warming religion. Quote from article below: “The big question is: how active are these volcanoes? That is something we need to determine as quickly as possible.” They don't even know the activity of the volcanoes. Therefore, only a total fucking moron with no brain would state that it is only from CO2 and not from volcanoes. How in the hell can you make that statement without any fucking data?!!!!! They just recently discovered 91 additional volcanoes. To say that the ice melt has nothing to do with volcanoes, is the dumbest fucking thing I have ever heard. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/12/scientists-discover-91-volcanos-antarctica Scientists discover 91 volcanoes below Antarctic ice sheet This is in addition to 47 already known about and eruption would melt more ice in region affected by climate change “We were amazed,” Bingham said. “We had not expected to find anything like that number. We have almost trebled the number of volcanoes known to exist in west Antarctica. [Emphasis mine] We also suspect there are even more on the bed of the sea that lies under the Ross ice shelf, so that I think it is very likely this region will turn out to be the densest region of volcanoes in the world, greater even than east Africa, where mounts Nyiragongo, Kilimanjaro, Longonot and all the other active volcanoes are concentrated.”
There is no ice on top of the below volcano due to global warming. That is less retarded than you statement. At least, scientist can measure the activity of the volcano.
An interesting chicken and egg observation on post-glacial rebound. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/12/scientists-discover-91-volcanos-antarctica "The discovery is particularly important because the activity of these volcanoes could have crucial implications for the rest of the planet. If one erupts, it could further destabilise some of the region’s ice sheets, which have already been affected by global warming. Meltwater outflows into the Antarctic ocean could trigger sea level rises. “We just don’t know about how active these volcanoes have been in the past,” Bingham said. However, he pointed to one alarming trend: “The most volcanism that is going in the world at present is in regions that have only recently lost their glacier covering – after the end of the last ice age. These places include Iceland and Alaska. “Theory suggests that this is occurring because, without ice sheets on top of them, there is a release of pressure on the regions’ volcanoes and they become more active.” And this could happen in west Antarctica, where significant warming in the region caused by climate change has begun to affect its ice sheets. If they are reduced significantly, this could release pressure on the volcanoes that lie below and lead to eruptions that could further destabilise the ice sheets and enhance sea level rises that are already affecting our oceans. “It is something we will have to watch closely,” Bingham said."
interesting observation... now lets check the best chart I found since the last ice age and see if the implied threat of man made temperature change is reasonable. this is the rise since the last age. Slarti is there any way you would claim this was due to man made co2? Seriously, when you take the time to explore the science and all the questions... you realize what a bunch of speculation posing as science the left is putting out. Is it possible man made co2 may be causing temperature rise outside of natural change. Yes... Is there a way to prove that given all this data and all the variables... Not so far. I would like to note that temperature in antartica rises... then co2 moves. This corresponds with that fact I have been showing you that co2 follows change in oceans temps. co2 lags temps. It makes sense as antartica warms and the oceans warm they release co2. Warmer air holds more water vapor (a very powerful greenhouse gas and co2 a greenhouse gas which acts as a thermostat per NASA)