Unfortunately my lifetime is limited to a little over 3 score and 10, closer to 4 score now than when that was proposed, I could not care less what atmospheric changes occur over 1,000,000 years or so, other than the implication of what could happen today.
Your knowledge of Global Warming is stuck in the 1960's Back when I first read about it.
Of course there can be glaciation in Europe while the rest of the world is heating.
You may well see that .1 % concentration of the atmosphere with CO2, and you may even see it in your lifetime. Close to 99% of the worlds CO2 is stored in the Ocean, as the ocean warms it will give up this stored CO2, With the shutdown of the Gulf Stream tropical warming of the Oceans will accelerate.
"I don't think we can have a glaciation and runaway cooking simultaneously. I suppose the theory is that we'll get both, in sequence."
No the theory is that we can get both simultaneously not sequentially. Warming of the tropics, while Europe, and to a lesser extent North America experience much colder snowier winters. If you stop transporting 1,000,000,000,000,000 watts of heat from the tropics to Britain and Norther Europe via the Gulf Stream, the tropics will suffer appreciable warming while Europe will suffer extremely cold winters.
I suppose on a geologic time frame you could be right, higher CO@ levels could have a stabilizing effect on earths climate, it is quite well proven that the Ice Ages only occurred in the past 1,000,000 years or so. However, there are innumerable possible causes for this, including various land mass distributions ismuses, continental drift, etc. Things like the positioning of the Rocky Mountains effect Europe's weather as much as ocean currents by altering air currents. But the Rockies are not going to move much in the foreseeable future, so other changeable things have to be considered.
As I said your Global Warming theories are based on 1960-1970 thought, perhaps from a class in college??? Research has changed, much more is known. I suggest you devote a few hours of study on the internet before you espouse more idiocy.
"I love the way the Greenhouse Effect will cause another glaciation, or, if it doesn't do that, the polar bears will starve - heads I win, tails you lose."
Once again it can do both simultaneously, The Arctic Ocean can become Ice free while Europe Glaciates. The increased evaporation will fall as precipitation somewhere. The melting of the Greenland Ice now is causing the cessation of the Gulf Stream. Cooling of winters to the East of the Atlantic does not imply cooling of the Arctic Ocean.
CO2 is the bottom of the food chain and it had dwindled to a few parts per million."
CO2 levels until the advent of the Industrial Age fluctuated between 180-200 parts per million, since then they have increased to 360 parts per million 80 ppm in the last 40 years and are increasing at a rate of about 4 parts per million per year. The rate of increase in atmospheric CO2 concentrations has been moderated over the past 100 years by oceanic absorption, the increase in global temperature has also been moderated by oceanic absorption. The point may soon be reached that the warming of the ocean will start forcing the release of CO2 causing an abrupt increase in atmospheric release of CO2. This will create a runaway effect. More CO2, more heat, more CO2.
"We need to think longer term for Earth's happiness, not the short term you mentioned: <Never in the last 460,000 years have Green House gas concentrations even approached present day levels (Antarctic ice cores).> Too many people are thinking short term."
We tend to think in terms of lifetimes, not geologic ages. It matters not a whole lot whether the earth is a snowball, or that I can bask on the beach in Barrow, Alaska, in the year 2100. It does however matter to me whether the winter in London is 20 degrees F colder in the next 10 years, and it should matter to you.
I suggest that in NZ you buy another bucket, one for each foot, as it could warm up a lot more.
r |
