Alph, if the argument that tiny amounts of CO2 increases in the atmosphere has such a large effect on climate was true then why are we not in a runaway greenhouse effect now? How did the earth avoid a runaway greenhouse effect when there was 3 times the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere in the past?
CO2 has been increasing for the past 17.8 years but temperatures have not been increasing as indicated by empirical evidence. This proves that CO2 induced global warming theory is fundamentally flawed.
Everything in our Universe is a continuum. It is a miracle the Universe even exists! If, for example, the speed of light were to change by 0.00000000000012 m/s, our Universe could not exist. Our entire existence consists of improbable coincidences and Physics that when changed by a microscopic fraction would result in the destruction of everything there ever is and/or was.
Our world is exactly this on a smaller scale. It took 4oC to bring us out of the last Global Ice Age. Only 4oC. If you put things into perspective, 1% of 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,... isn't as small as we think, and that little 1% can be the make or break factor in any ecosystem.
Our world was perfectly balanced so that everything was taken into account for.
Creatures create CO2 and use O2. Plants create O2 and use CO2. Evaporation, condensation. Yin, Yang, whatever you view it as, life as we know it on Earth is about harmony. And when that balance changes in either direction, it has dramatic consequences because the world was not designed to have that extra 40% of carbon dioxide we have put there, or the ecosystems were not made to exist without the trees we cut down.
It seems strange how an amount so small can change things so much, but that was how our world was designed to work, and now that we are changing and ultimately defying nature, the world as we know it is changing.
No actually the smaller the quantity of a GHG the more important it is in warming, methane is considered a more powerful gas than CO2 solely because it is in such small quantities ppb not ppm,
It is logarithmic, as these gases rise in concentration so their warming effects diminish, a doubling of CO2 to 800ppm will produce one more degree C in warming, then you have to reach 1600ppm to have another degree C warming and so on.
Did you just make up those numbers? They are completely wrong. I wonder what you think the greenhouse gases are. The amount of CO2 (by volume) in the atmosphere is approximately 10% that of water vapor, which is the most abundant greenhouse gas. Even though it's the most abundant, water vapor is only responsible for about 62% of the total effect, if you throw in clouds (even though they're not water vapor), then that rises to around 80%--still nowhere near 98%.
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2010/2010...
EDIT: Poor Maxx still doesn't understand greenhouse gases.
Specific heat is irrelevant for comparing greenhouse gases. Hydrogen is not a greenhouse gas, and yet it has the highest specific heat of any gas.
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/specif...
And if not for carbon dioxide, water vapor would be frozen solid. Water vapor is a feedback, not a forcing.
edit
The percent of any gas in a mixture by volume is always 100%, since it would occupy the same volume if all other gases were removed. A gas can be mole %, partial pressure %, which are equivalent with ideal gas mixtures, or, less frequently, mass percent.
CO2 will heat when exposed to sunlight, just like any other gas in the atmosphere. But it's a minority gas and does not DRIVE warming like Alarmists want you to believe.
If you want to learn, then learn from some of the world's leading experts in the field. Watch these, you will be amazed.
Top climate scientists say there is no man-made Global Warming.
The Great Global Warming Swindle
CO2 is a controlling gas, like a small match can start a forest fire. Water vapor is indeed powerful, but it's concentration is dependent on temperature, and the amount of CO2.
the 'tiny' argument does not wash. a small amount of plutonium can kill you, as very small bacteria. It's not the amount, it's the effect.
Humans have increased co2 by 40%, but that is still only .4% or less of the net greenhouse gases in the atomosphere. Also, water vapor, which makes up about 98% of the greenhouse affect, has a much higher specific heat than co2: therefore, not only is it more abundant, it also is more potent at warming per unit. Methane, which makes up just under 1% of the greenhouse affect, has a higher specific heat than co2, and therefore is also more potent than co2. How is the tiny amount of human greenhouse gas contributions the main cause if global warming? Just curious here, no hate. I want to learn.
