The control mechanism of C02 atmospheric concentration is rather abrupt. C02 may accumulate in the atmosphere, increasing temperature and therefore evaporation and later rain. the rain leaches soil, sending large amounts of carbon to the sea. increased C03- ion leads to increased precipitation of calcium carbonate, efectively sequestrating carbon and eventually leading to an ice age. the trick is on the different speeds of the fluxes composing the geochemical cycles.
since we had ice ages no so far [1,2], than the C02 concentration should not be above average.
Maybe Nomad can tell.
however: [1] - the configuration of the continents encircling the arctic must be responsible for switches between normal and ice ages, so these ice ages may unusual [2] - is it possible that climate stability is much smaller than we have assumed. the rapid chances of recent past may be better known just because their clues have not yet been erased.
We do not have to worry that we would emit too much water wapour, say, with hydrogen cell cars - the additional H2O would be a tiny fraction of the atmospheric H2O flow. But higher H2O potential as greenhouse gas means that fluctations of H2O circulation can determine very much of how the greenhouse effect would develop. By standard assumptions, H2O circulation is determined by physical causes and effects - there might be dominant positive or negative feedbacks; or by deterministic or stochastic chaos - if the basic underlying dynamical system is chaotic. But it is also possible that the atmosphere reacts to increasing greenhouse stresses (whether anthropogenic or "natural" or accidental) as a cybernetic system, and that compensating (or possibly "rebooting") event sequences are already in place.
The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political rattle.
First of all, I think there's a typo in the last word, which should be "battle" (or "combat", combate politico).
Then I don't get what he's saying. Social control? How? What freedom is he suggesting is being infringed? By or on behalf of whom?
Major businesses? What's their interest? If this notion is true, why is the country that has the biggest businesses and in which big business has perhaps the longest arm, fighting against the alarm on climate change?
Political combat? Does he mean one side of the political spectrum is using climate change fear against the other? That would be the left against the right? Or, or...?
I can't answer for the social control, I also don't know exactly what it meant. Maybe social conditioning could have been a more fortunate choice of words - there are some veins of thought that behind the climate change issue is a global governance project. I doubt prof. Delgado Domingos was referencing that.
As for your last two questions, Anthropogenic Global Warming became a political issue when the then Senator Al Gore tried to descredit Richard Lindzen at Congress. From then on it became a political option between Conservatism and Liberalism. As in Europe about 80% of the voters support Liberal politics this division was never apparent, but it is quite so in the US.
As for business, Al Gore spoke at Lisbon last year, charging more than a monthly minimum wage to every attendee. Check how his fortune has been growing since he left office and follow from there. Vencit omnia veritas.
denialist
I love that word.
I didn't know that about the PP. The issue is that the People's party is undermined by Liberals. Take for instance the case of Barroso, when he joined the portuguese liberal party (PSD) it belong to the European Liberal group; somewhere during the turning of the century they simply left and joined the conservatives, in so doing gaining practical grip on the Parliament.
And before you know it, a man that started his carer in the Communist Workers party is head of the Commission backed by Conservative Europe :-)
The debate on Anthropogenic Global Warming shouldn't be a plitical option, like every scientific issue. Vencit omnia veritas.
So - the root cause of global warming is increases of concentration in other molecules. Clearly, concentrations of CO2, NOx, and sulfate ions in the atmosphere have been on the rise since not-long-after the start of industrial development. CO2 shows the largest increase - for obvious reasons, since the main energy sources have been combustion of hydrocarbons - and, in fact, there is significant correlation between the rise in CO2 levels and the rise in temperature, using reasonable estimates of the data.
After temperatures rise, other factors, such as methane release from previously-frozen Siberian bogs, become significant factors. Also, once glaciers melt, the exposed ground absorbs heat that the glaciers tend to reflect. These kinds of thresholds are almost irreversible, once started. So - we have to work on the factors that we can control. The Professor isn't helping in that regard, when he makes statements in a popular journal that undermine action concerning CO2 reduction. paul spencer
The climatic effects of water vapour.
--
Clearly, concentrations of CO2, [...] in the atmosphere have been on the rise since not-long-after the start of industrial development.
Could you substantiate this with a reference? Are you basing that assertion on proxy data or direct measurements? Vencit omnia veritas.
An atmospheric CO2 record for the past 200 years was obtained from the Siple Station ice core. ... Neftel et al. (1985) concluded that the atmospheric CO2 concentration ca. 1750 was 280±5 parts per million by volume (ppmv) and that it increased by 22.5% to 345 ppmv in 1984 essentially because of human factors. Graphs in Friedli et al. (1986) also reported that the preindustrial (pre-1800) CO2 concentration was ~280 ppmv.
...
Neftel et al. (1985) concluded that the atmospheric CO2 concentration ca. 1750 was 280±5 parts per million by volume (ppmv) and that it increased by 22.5% to 345 ppmv in 1984 essentially because of human factors. Graphs in Friedli et al. (1986) also reported that the preindustrial (pre-1800) CO2 concentration was ~280 ppmv.
A different result from a different proxy:
Kouwenberg, L, Wagner, R, Kurschner, W and Visscher H, 2005. Atmospheric CO2 fluctuations during the last millenium reconstructed by stomatal frequency analysis of Tsuga heterophylla needles, Geology, 33: 33-36. Vencit omnia veritas.
Oh, and measuring the concentration of gases trapped in ice is a better proxy than growth rates of organisms. We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
Oh, and measuring the concentration of gases trapped in ice is a better proxy than growth rates of organisms.
That's a highly disputable assertion. Do you know the work of Zbigniew Jaworowski? You'll understand the 83 year joke there.
There was not a lot of direct measurement of atmospheric composition before the 19th century, was there?
But you are aware that the measurements made from the XIX onwards do not match the ice proxies, don't you? Vencit omnia veritas.
Jaworowski is a global warming skeptic. His works on ice cores were published in Jaworowski (1994, 1992) and in reports Jaworowski (1990, 1992). Jaworowski has suggested that the long-term CO2 record is an artifact caused by the structural changes of the ice with depth and by postcoring processes. However, increases in CO2 and CH4 concentrations in the Vostok core are similar for the last two glacial-interglacial transitions, even though only the most recent transition is located in the brittle zone. Such evidence argues that the atmospheric trace-gas signal is not strongly affected by the presence of the brittle zone. [1] Similarly Hans Oeschger [2] states that "...Some of (Jaworowski's) statements are drastically wrong from the physical point of view".
Jaworowski is a global warming skeptic.
His works on ice cores were published in Jaworowski (1994, 1992) and in reports Jaworowski (1990, 1992).
Jaworowski has suggested that the long-term CO2 record is an artifact caused by the structural changes of the ice with depth and by postcoring processes. However, increases in CO2 and CH4 concentrations in the Vostok core are similar for the last two glacial-interglacial transitions, even though only the most recent transition is located in the brittle zone. Such evidence argues that the atmospheric trace-gas signal is not strongly affected by the presence of the brittle zone. [1]
Similarly Hans Oeschger [2] states that "...Some of (Jaworowski's) statements are drastically wrong from the physical point of view".
Zbigniew Jaworowski on CO2 measurements
The data from shallow ice cores, such as those from Siple, Antarctica[5, 6], are widely used as a proof of man-made increase of CO2 content in the global atmosphere, notably by IPCC[7]. These data show a clear inverse correlation between the decreasing CO2 concentrations, and the load-pressure increasing with depth (Figure 1 A) . The problem with Siple data (and with other shallow cores) is that the CO2 concentration found in pre-industrial ice from a depth of 68 meters (i.e. above the depth of clathrate formation) was "too high". This ice was deposited in 1890 AD, and the CO2 concentration was 328 ppmv, not about 290 ppmv, as needed by man-made warming hypothesis. The CO2 atmospheric concentration of about 328 ppmv was measured at Mauna Loa, Hawaii as later as in 1973[8], i.e. 83 years after the ice was deposited at Siple. An ad hoc assumption, not supported by any factual evidence[3, 9], solved the problem: the average age of air was arbitrary decreed to be exactly 83 years younger than the ice in which it was trapped. The "corrected" ice data were then smoothly aligned with the Mauna Loa record (Figure 1 B) , and reproduced in countless publications as a famous "Siple curve". Only thirteen years later, in 1993, glaciologists attempted to prove experimentally the "age assumption"[10], but they failed[9]. ... 3. Jaworowski, Z., T.V. Segalstad, and N. Ono, Do glaciers tell a true atmospheric CO2 story? The Science of the Total Environment, 1992. 114: p. 227-284. ... Jaworowski, Z., Ancient atmosphere - validity of ice records. Environ. Sci. & Pollut. Res., 1994. 1(3): p. 161-171. Schwander, J., et al., The age of the air in the firn and the ice at Summit, Greenland. J. Geophys. Res., 1993. 98(D2): p. 2831-2838.
3. Jaworowski, Z., T.V. Segalstad, and N. Ono, Do glaciers tell a true atmospheric CO2 story? The Science of the Total Environment, 1992. 114: p. 227-284.
Jaworowski's article in ESPR is so hard to locate, it wouldn't be too unreasonable to suspect that the journal is not eager now for people to take much notice of it. But it did get noticed by one giant in climate science -- Hans Oeschger. Prof. Oeschger was the founder of the Division of Climate and Environmental Physics at the Physics Institute of the University of Bern. His name is attached to the Oeschger Counter that enabled Carbon-14 dating to be applied to geophysical problems, and to the Dansgaard-Oeschger 1,500 year cycle of slow cooling and abrupt warming observed in sediments and ice cores. He was active and influential in climate science until his death in 1998. His assessment of the Jaworowski article was blunt.
The ice core data matches Maona Loa only after the 83 year shift. Vencit omnia veritas.
Not meaningfully, according to
URS SIEGENTHALER, ERIC MONNIN, KENJI KAWAMURA, RENATO SPAHNI, JAKOB SCHWANDER, BERNHARD STAUFFER, THOMAS F. STOCKER, JEAN-MARC BARNOLA, HUBERTUS FISCHER (2005) Supporting evidence from the EPICA Dronning Maud Land ice core for atmospheric CO2 changes during the past millennium Tellus B 57 (1), 51-57.
The most direct method of investigating past variations of the atmospheric CO2 concentration before 1958, when continuous direct atmospheric CO2 measurements started, is the analysis of air extracted from suitable ice cores.
The abstract continues:
Here we present a new detailed CO2 record from the Dronning Maud Land (DML) ice core, drilled in the framework of the European Project for Ice Coring in Antarctica (EPICA) and some new measurements on a previously drilled ice core from the South Pole. The DML CO2 record shows an increase from about 278 to 282 parts per million by volume (ppmv) between ad 1000 and ad 1200 and a fairly continuous decrease to a mean value of about 277 ppmv around ad 1700. While the new South Pole measurements agree well with DML at the minimum at ad 1700 they are on average about 2 ppmv lower during the period ad 1000-1500. Published measurements from the coastal high-accumulation site Law Dome are considered as very reliable because of the reproducibility of the measurements, high temporal resolution and an accurate time scale. Other Antarctic ice cores could not, or only partly, reproduce the pre-industrial measurements from Law Dome. A comparison of the trends of DML and Law Dome shows a general agreement. However we should be able to rule out co-variations caused by the same artefact. Two possible effects are discussed, first production of CO2 by chemical reactions and second diffusion of dissolved air through the ice matrix into the bubbles. While the first effect cannot be totally excluded, comparison of the Law Dome and DML record shows that dissolved air diffusing to bubbles cannot be responsible for the pre-industrial variation. Therefore, the new record is not a proof of the Law Dome results but the first very strong support from an ice core of the Antarctic plateau.
Meaning, (as in other topics as asbestos) that we should be more complex in our answers. The road an roof part (albedo and watertight surfaces) should be more addressed, independently of CO2 ! "What can I do, What can I write, Against the fall of Night". A.E. Housman
so the standard answer now is:
"Yeah sure... and AIDS is not produced by a virus".
A pleasure I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude
This is not a complaint, but if you would like to see how to post links, take a look at the New User Guide. You'll also get explanations on a number of other posting topics.
Look forward to reading you again!
