? No close correlation exists between temperature variation over the past 150 years and human-related CO2 emissions. The parallelism of temperature and CO2 increase between about 1980 and 2000 AD could be due to chance and does not necessarily indicate causation.
? Atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) is a mild greenhouse gas that exerts a diminishing warming effect as its concentration increases.
? Doubling the concentration of atmospheric CO2 from its pre-industrial level, in the absence of other forcings and feedbacks, would likely cause a warming of ~0.3 to 1.1°C, almost 50% of which must already have occurred.
? The overall warming since about 1860 corresponds to a recovery from the Little Ice Age modulated by natural multidecadal cycles driven by ocean-atmosphere oscillations, or by solar variations at the de Vries (~208 year) and Gleissberg (~80 year) and shorter periodicities.
? Over recent geological time, Earth’s temperature has fluctuated naturally between about +4°C and -6°C with respect to twentieth century temperature. A warming of 2°C above today, should it occur, falls within the bounds of natural variability.
http://nipccreport.org/
NO Global Warming's cause was a ALIEN Organism and Global Warming ended 11/28/2012 confirmed. Mike
The causal relationship is the well-understood quantum behaviour of the CO2 molecule. It absorbs certain IR photons and reradiates them in a random direction, thus trapping their energy in the atmosphere - the "greenhouse effect." What makes it a correlation is the fact that other things are also at work - other greenhouse gasses, modification of surface reflectivity by icemelt and land use practices, cyclic transfers of energy between ocean and atmosphere among other effects.
Since measuring the global average temperature is not easy, but is easy to do wrong, we cannot really have a good correlation. That is why you see estimated temperature changes predicted between an actual cooling, and a large warming. And that is why it is common to see the past global averages revised again and again.
"Preponderance" would be a more accurate description. They say it is a logarithmic equation which simply means that it is too complicated of a formula for them explain in simple terms (one thing makes another react and so forth). It's all connected according to them. It seems that they have unsuccessfully convinced themselves of nothing with the help of inaccurate climate modeling.
Without CO2 in earth atmosphere the planet would be a snowball circling the sun. Increase the greenhouse gases and the planet warms
Best scientific analysis shows that CO2 is mostly the cause.
Both. CO2 does not "cause" global warming as such, but it acts as an air pollutant which disrupts a typically balanced cycle of heat absorption and emmitance.
Also, you should go and find out what a "correlation" means. The word is abused as much a theory (case in point "just a theory")
Have a nice day and don't forget to feed your gerbil.
Zippi62 ---
>> They say it is a logarithmic equation which simply means that it is too complicated of a formula for them explain in simple terms (one thing makes another react and so forth).<<
Uh… a formula is an equation of variables – things that can be described (mathematically or verbally) are not too difficult to describe - and that is not the description of a logarithmic anything.
So much stupidity in one sentence. At least you are efficient.
What you are talking about is known as Le Chatelier's Principal. CO2 can both be a cause and a correlation. That correlation, however, heightens the effects of that original cause.
Le Chatelier's principal: http://chemwiki.ucdavis.edu/Physical_Che...
"If a chemical reaction is at equilibrium and experiences a change in pressure, temperature, or concentration of products or reactants, the equilibrium shifts in the opposite direction to offset the change."
The oceans exhale and inhale CO2 according to what temperature that water is. Here is a map of global CO2 fluxes.
http://pmel.noaa.gov/co2/files/fluxmap.j...
As you can see the CO2 flux changes according to the temperatures of the oceans among other factors. When the oceans warm, that amount of exhaling increases and the amount of inhaling decreases. when they cool the opposite occurs. However, according to Le Chatelier's Principal, the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere and the partial pressure matters as well. Humans are taking carbon out of what is known as the geological carbon cycle and pumping it back into the biological carbon cycle from the burning of fossil fuels. This increases the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere and the oceans must attempt to maintain an equilibrium. That is why the oceans are inhaling more CO2 than they are exhaling currently. Something that would not occur if nature was the cause of the increase in CO2 concentrations.
If we look at the amount of CO2 increases compared to the amount humans emit we see that the atmosphere is increasing at a rate of less than half of human emissions. According to NOAA and Scripps the atmosphere is increasing at a rate of 2ppm per year. This is equal to roughly 15.6 billion tons per year.
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends...
While, according to CDIAC, human emissions of CO2 account for over 33 billion tons per year.
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/ftp/ndp030/global....
So while the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, about 3124.3 billion tons, 400ppm or 0.04%, is greater than the flux into and out of the stock, the stock being the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, as humans continue to emit CO2 the stock will rise until a new equilibrium is established. Concentrations of CO2 have risen from roughly 280ppm in 1880 to 400ppm today. An increase of 959.3 billion tons.
We can see the effects this additional CO2 has in the atmosphere by looking at changes in outbound radiation at CO2 absorption frequencies as well as changes in downward radiation at those same frequencies. CO2 absorbs in a small band centered at 667 cycles per cm. This falls almost in the middle of Earth's blackbody emission spectrum.
http://acmg.seas.harvard.edu/people/facu...
Changes to this band indicate that a greater amount of energy is being retained due to increasing CO2.
http://www.grandkidzfuture.com/the-clima...
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1...
http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.or...
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.10...
Results show that the increases in temperatures are the result of increases in carbon dioxide and related feedbacks such as increases in water vapour concentration.
I need the arguments for CO2 causing global warming and arguments for CO2 levels and global warming being a correlation.
Neither.... "You will Die". Who will take your money before you die is kind of up to you. LMAO
