The Great Global Warming Swindle

So in your delusional crazy world CO2 is NOT a greenhouse gas?

 

CO2 didn't initiate warming from past ice ages but it did amplify the warming. In fact, about 90% of the global warming followed the CO2 increase.

Earth’s climate has varied widely over its history, from ice ages characterised by large ice sheets covering many land areas, to warm periods with no ice at the poles. Several factors have affected past climate change, including solar variability, volcanic activity and changes in the composition of the atmosphere. Data from Antarctic ice cores reveals an interesting story for the past 400,000 years. During this period, CO2 and temperatures are closely correlated, which means they rise and fall together. However, based on Antarctic ice core data, changes in CO2 follow changes in temperatures by about 600 to 1000 years, as illustrated in Figure 1 below. This has led some to conclude that CO2 simply cannot be responsible for current global warming.


This statement does not tell the whole story. The initial changes in temperature during this period are explained by changes in the Earth’s orbit around the sun, which affects the amount of seasonal sunlight reaching the Earth’s surface. In the case of warming, the lag between temperature and CO2 is explained as follows: as ocean temperatures rise, oceans release CO2 into the atmosphere. In turn, this release amplifies the warming trend, leading to yet more CO2 being released. In other words, increasing CO2 levels become both the cause and effect of further warming. This positive feedback is necessary to trigger the shifts between glacials and interglacials as the effect of orbital changes is too weak to cause such variation. Additional positive feedbacks which play an important role in this process include other greenhouse gases, and changes in ice sheet cover and vegetation patterns.

 

In jem's opinion:
Fire lags lightning. Therefore Man cannot cause heat.

 

And actually, there is not as much lag between temps and CO2 as previously thought.

“The idea that there was a lag of CO2 behind temperature is something climate change skeptics pick on,” says Edward Brook of Oregon State University’s College of Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences. “They say, ‘How could CO2 levels affect global temperature when you are telling me the temperature changed first?’”

Frédéric Parrenin of the Laboratory of Glaciology and Geophysical Environment in France and a team of researchers may have found an answer to the question. His team compiled an extensive record of Antarctic temperatures and CO2 data from existing data and five ice cores drilled in the Antarctic interior over the last 30 years. Their results, published February 28 in Science, show CO2 lagged temperature by less than 200 years, drastically decreasing the amount of uncertainty in previous estimates.

The wide margin of error in the EPICA core data is due to the way air gets trapped in layers of ice. Snowpack becomes progressively denser from the surface down to around 100 meters, where it forms solid ice. Scientists use air trapped in the ice to determine the CO2 levels of past climates, whereas they use the ice itself to determine temperature. But because air diffuses rapidly through the ice pack, those air bubbles are younger than the ice surrounding them. This means that in places with little snowfall—like the Dome C ice core—the age difference between gas and ice can be thousands of years.

Parrenin’s team addresses these concerns with a new method that establishes the different ages of the gas and ice. They measured the concentration of an isotope, nitrogen 15, which is greater the deeper the snowpack is. Once they were able to determine snowpack depth from the nitrogen 15 data, a simple model can determine the offset in depth between gas and ice and the amount of time the difference represents. The researchers then compared results from multiple locations to reduce the margin of error.


http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=ice-core-data-help-solve

 

Maybe he just doesn't understand what a greenhouse gas is.

 

You said he did, some time back.

 

One would assume you must know something about science from that statement, but we all know you are just blowing smoke up your ass.

You just make statements without knowing shit about what you are saying. You don't know anything about CO2 or O2 or any other gas molecule. You're just a blabbering fool, Rectum.

 

I thought he did. But the stupidity he displays leads me to believe he must not.

 

And yet he displays logic and knowledge far beyond your feeble, deranged bleetings. So what does that make you?

 

Speaking of blabbering fools.... If you had a clue how CO2 worked as a greenhouse gas you would realize we are long past any additional greenhouse effect from CO2.

But, like Rectum, you are just an AGW layman. If you knew anything at all you would realize this summer is the last hurrah for the AGW Alarmists. Any new warming peak should have already occurred but instead it is colder. In just a couple more years you will see the reality of what is happening and you will fade from the sunset until you get yourself a new username as your futurecunt username will be the laughing stock here. (actually it already is)