Climate Change - Is CO2 the cause?

This is a big job, I'll get back to you on this one.

 

misplace thermometers?.?.? oh now I get why the ice caps are melting.

 

Ironblade87 adds: Water vapour is actually the largest contributor to climate change. It's just that CO2 is the only one that humans have a large contribution to.

 

Good point

Ok, here's my first stab. I think it'd be best if I deal with this bit by bit, instead of posting everything in one chunk.

I doubt the factual accuracy of 5:00-5:20 in part one, where he's pointing at the ice-core graph and saying that rates of warming have been similar during several different periods over the past 2000 years. These are proxy measurements and should have big margins of error. It's ridiculous to state that this rate of temperature change is nothing unusual with nothing but the evidence he was seeing on that screen.

 

If you skip to page 467 here, you can see how these sorts of reconstructions don't serve for making definite statements about anything:

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=8-m8nXB8GB4C&printsec=frontcover#PRA1-PA467,M1

I'm not asking you to consider the validity of the content, just note the discrepancies between the different datasets as graphed, and the confidence levels represented on the reconstructed temperature graph.

The issue is that Carter didn't qualify his remarks. How can he thunder on so confidently while showing us that sort of evidence to back up his argument? It's unscientific.

Well the IPCC have substantiated this further, and have concluded it is "very likely" that Northern Hemisphere temperatures over the past 50 years have been higher than any other 50 year period in the last 500 years, and "likely" for the past 1300 years. Only one of several reconstructions suggests slightly warmer conditions than the past 50 years occurred during the 11th century.

 

So, like Carter, I can get any one of my "495 unsound datasets" and use it to say whatever I like, even when the actual answer is that we don't know for sure? The IPCC don't know for sure. However, Bob Carter implies when he points at the graph and tells the audience that temperatures have increased at this rate before, that is absolutely not unusual.

There are other question apart from temperature change that need addressing if you want to extend your argument to the success in farming:

*Was the MWP a global phenomenon?
*How did the climate change around the world during the MWP?

And furthermore, why would the majority of studies be inaccurate and miss off the bulk of the effect of the MWP? It looks to me like you're cherrypicking results you want to believe rather than objectively assessing all the available information.

 

i don't think so, because it would take a lot more CO2 for it to have that effect if you count in all of the plants.

 

CO2 graph

You see, the red line here is the difference between summer and winter i.e. when plants lose their leaves in the northern hemisphere where it's greener, the ppm goes up. Increased plant growth isn't going to make a very big difference.

 

were probably just learning more about the world than before, so what ever factual data we get now, may have no real relevance to what was before, so you shouldn't compare it. second only in the past 40 year have we been able to accurately map the ocean floor, ice caps, and climate. The real fact is that the world is getting hotter, not much, but enough. The media has just bastardized us all in believing in stuff, this is a fact not a belief. We would be better off if we invested in clean renewable energy sources then relying on fossil fuels. Saudi Arabia knows this; they have plans on building massive solar cells across their land and building zero resistant wires (Aluminum in -260 temp has no electricity resistant) to carry electricity to the world. So should we invest in cleaner fuels or stay the same and see what happens, Cause if the world does get hotter, the ocean currents may shut down, cooling the earth in an Massive ice age. Going green is not being a conformist it's the right thing to do.

 

co2 cannot be the cause as its been around millions of years why would it do it now?

 

Like what Finniscool said cars, planes, space shuttles, etc. have not been around for millions of years. 1 lbs. of gasoline produces 20 lbs. of CO2, which is a staggering number. There have been fluxes of CO2 in the atmosphere but the CO2 that has been produced in the last 40 years went way beyond those flux amounts.

There is also a lot less trees/plants on Earth than there were millions of years ago, so the margin between the production of CO2 and the intake of it greatly increases with each passing year. Adaption I think is not an option anymore. Stephen Hawking himself said "If the human species wants to continue living, we need to find a new planet". Just my 2 cents.

 

Sythe...if your that inquisitive and want to watch something which elaborates on the topic, I suggest "An Inconvenient Truth" by Al Gore. You can read up about it here: http://www.climatecrisis.net/
Also, I'm sure you could find it on another site which hosts movies. If you'd like to watch it, it's an hour and 40 minutes, just post and I'll check for a site.

 

What do you think about it?

 

in laymen's terms; don't pollute the environment = pollute the environment = research "cleaner" technology = use "cleaner" fuels = believing what a guy says in a 40 min video = researching it on you own = believing the media and all their propaganda = getting some facts from the media =| doing good for your world after all it's the only reason why your alive = I hope that was a compelling augment