But, we're going to experience some very, very, very bad times before we reach that limit, if we don't take measures to at least slow the warming.
The scenario they are trying to portray is what happened on the planet Venus. True runaway global warming where the concentration of C02 in the atmosphere is 96%. To get runaway global warming would require the CO2 levels to be so high as to be lethal to most animal life on the planet. According to the IPCC report AR5 (Section D item 3) they have no idea why the earth has been on a cooling trend since 1998. And the fact that they use QUALITATIVE judgements (use of terms like low confidence, likely, probably, etc.) rather than QUANTITATIVE measurement indicates that they have no real proof and that their observations are more or less opinions. In this section they are blaming volcanoes and hairspray for disproving their models.
"The observed reduction in surface warming trend over the period 1998 to 2012 as compared to the period 1951 to 2012,is due in roughly equal measure to a reduced trend in radiative forcing and a cooling contribution from natural internal
variability, which includes a possible redistribution of heat within the ocean (
medium confidence). The reduced trend in radiative forcing is primarily due to volcanic eruptions and the timing of the downward phase of the 11-year solar
cycle. However, there is low confidence in quantifying the role of changes in radiative forcing in causing the reduced warming trend. There is medium confidence that natural internal decadal variability causes to a substantial degree the difference between observations and the simulations; the latter are not expected to reproduce the timing of natural internal variability. There may also be a contribution from forcing inadequacies and, in some models, an overestimate of
the response to increasing greenhouse gas and other anthropogenic forcing (dominated by the effects of aerosols). {9.4, Box 9.2, 10.3, Box 10.2, 11.3}"
This was produced by the United Nations IPCC and it contradicts the other 1500 pages by saying " There may also be a contribution (sic. to cooling) from forcing inadequacies and, in some models, an overestimate of the response to increasing greenhouse gas and other anthropogenic forcing " which means they may have way overstated man's ability to actually affect climate change.
It's a big CYA paper trying to push climate change. It is hardly a scientific document. If you have ever written a science lab report, a sure way to get poor grades is to use terms like probably, or low confidence in, or less likely in your conclusion. There is no mention of standard deviations or margins of error, nor are there any real calculations. Just like a kid that cherry picked data so he could fudge a chemistry lab report.
In a nutshell, the earth will reach a maximum average temperature and the climate will adjust according to the diurnal cycle of the sun. As more co2 is administered into the atmosphere, the earth will be protected from the sun and oceans will cool
Current climate models suggest both scenarios are possible along with about 200 others. Anything that happens is because of man made global warming.
If we were to continue to add carbon dioxide to the atmosphere at a linear rate, the rate of increase in temperature would very slowly go down, because the relation between temperature and carbon dioxide concentration is logarithmic.
In practice, eventually the addition of carbon dioxide to Earth's atmosphere will stop, because their is only a limited quantity of hydrocarbon resources on Earth,
There is medium confidence that natural internal decadal variability causes to a substantial degree the difference between observations and the simulations
Assuming CO2 causes warming (which I don't believe) then that warming will slow down and nearly stop, because the effectiveness of CO2 decreases as concentrations increase, if it takes a doubling of the 400ppm to 800ppm to raise warming 1C (without feedbacks that is) next time it will take a doubling to 1600ppm to raise 1C ie the law of diminishing returns.
Also the Stefan Boltzmann equation states that radiation increases to the 4th power, with increase in temperature. meaning that as things get hotter they dispropionately radiate more heat, eventually the heat radiated out will equal the heat coming in and warming will stop.
check out James Hansen's book "Storms of my Grandchildren." Unfortunately, the earth will keep heating for many decades because of all the carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere, and will only stop a few decades after we stop emitting. The situation will be quite dire if we don't change our ways. If you want to help, check out citizensclimatelobby.org.
When the CO2 level has stabilized, then the temp will stabilize.
See Chem Flunky.
it was 40 degrees in July in the Mid west this summer
God controls the weather
There must be a limit. The earth cannot be hotter than the sun.
It will get colder after thousands of year
yes it has certain limit but it will continuously rise upto certain years until some preventive measure is taken.
If you can get an environmentalist climate scientists ("alarmist") to explain how the average temperature of the planet rose by almost 1C in just over 1 year (1997-1998) and then cooled by over 1C in the next 2 years (1998-2000) and then explain why they are concerned about a 0.8C rise over the past 150 years, then maybe you will get a direct answer to your question.
Very interesting answers here
What warming ? , No seriously, what warming ?
The weather has been getting cooler, not warmer.
In a few centuries or millennia, yes. By which time many generations will have suffered economically due to the myopia of our generation, lulled into inaction -in part- by deliberate and greed-based anti-science deception.
world temperature stop rising in 1997
