Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: maceng2 who wrote (10319)	3/11/2007 10:42:50 PM
From: Thomas A Watson	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 36917

The graph you posted is a perfect example of no correlation between CO2 and global warming or global ice age. As to CO2, water vapor has beed ascribed as the 96 to 98% greenhouse gas. CO2 is supposed (wild ass guessed ) to increase temps by a few degrees over a century by the models that cannot predict the past or the present. On the other hand in a dry dessert the earth can cool 50 degrees over night, but where there is cloud cover it cools only a few degrees over night. So water vapor does have an greenhouse warming effect of a few degrees per hour based upon known measured variations. But CO2 has a wild ass guess effect of a few degrees per 876000 hours. I don't worry about 876000 hour wild ass guess effects when known 1 hour effects swamp them every day and every night.

To: maceng2 who wrote (10319)	3/17/2007 4:20:04 AM
From: Ali Chen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 36917

"You don't think the recent change in CO2 levels is anything to be concerned about?" The recent trend in CO2 concentration is hard to deny, and there is a concern. However, there is no material evidence that the root cause of this in man made. Your graph tries to combine recent _instrumental_ records with pre-historical _reconstructions_ of CO2 concentrations. These reconstructions are derived from analysis of microscopic bubbles of air trapped in polar ice during transition from snowfall to firn to ice. This transition occurs over several thousand years before the final occlusion happens, then the gases diffuse into solid ice and form so-called clathrates under piling pressure. When the bore samples are extracted during drilling and depressurased, variety of reverse processes occurs, and on a quite shorter time scale. It is known that the dynamics of gas release is different for different gas components of atmosphere, while the samples are not immediately analysed, and may be stored in open air for several years before getting into analyzer. So the CO2 concentration can be anything but not the original. The whole methodology lacks any substantial error analysis, and there is no reliable calibration procedure of the proxy records. In short, the graph is an attempt to stitch several incompatible data sets, with non-established scales. More, the very same ice core data indicate that increases in CO2 concentrations always _trailed_ increases in temperatures by several hundred years, so the growth of CO2 is not the cause of historical warmings, but rather some side result. The whole chart also does not correlate well with other methods. For example, paleogeological methods show that while the Co2 concentrations have been much higher than today by a factor of 20 or so, the Earth surface temperature had limited fluctuations of about +-5 deg.C around the average of 17C, and ever exceeded 22 deg.C. And all this did occur without any industrial intervention.