Absolute Proof increased CO2 causes global "cooling"?, page 1
Pages: <<  1    2  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times
Topic started on 16-12-2008 @ 07:37 AM by heliosprime
CO2 emissions from fossil-fuel burning and industrial processes have been accelerating at a global scale, with their growth rate increasing from 1.1% y−1 for 1990–1999 to >3% y−1 for 2000–2004. The emissions growth rate since 2000 was greater than for the most fossil-fuel intensive of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change emissions scenarios developed in the late 1990s.


www.pnas.org...

This data indicates that although the world has worked very hard to decrease CO2 emissions worldwide, in fact CO2 has increased. BUT, data indicates that sine 1998 world temperatures have DECREASED and are thought to be DOWN for the next 23 years.

The official thermometers at the U.S. National Climate Data Center show a slight global cooling trend over the last seven years, from 1998 to 2005.

Actually, global warming is likely to continue—but the interruption of the recent strong warming trend sharply undercuts the argument that our global warming is an urgent, man-made emergency. The seven-year decline makes our warming look much more like the moderate, erratic warming to be expected when the planet naturally shifts from a Little Ice Age (1300–1850 AD) to a centuries-long warm phase like the Medieval Warming (950–1300 AD) or the Roman Warming (200 BC– 600 AD).

The stutter in the temperature rise should rein in some of the more apoplectic cries of panic over man-made greenhouse emissions. The strong 28-year upward trend of 1970–1998 has apparently ended.


acuf.org...

So which is it, CO2 causes warming or is it cooling? Or has the significat effort to REDUCE CO2 emissions reached the true "tipping" point and caused the earth to spiral into another ICE AGE?

Of does CO2 have any effect at all?

CHURCHVILLE VA—Now it’s not just the sunspots that predict a 23-year global cooling. The new Jason oceanographic satellite shows that 2007 was a “cool” La Nina year—but Jason also says something more important is at work: The much larger and more persistent Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) has turned into its cool phase, telling us to expect moderately lower global temperatures until 2030 or so.


www.cgfi.org...


reply posted on 16-12-2008 @ 09:40 AM by Waldy
reply to post by Outlawstar



Its not true that there has been far more co2 in the atmosphere in the past. You need to go 500 million years back to see equal amount of co2 as we have today.

Edit for source: www.pnas.org...



[edit on 16-12-2008 by Waldy]



reply posted on 16-12-2008 @ 10:39 AM by Outlawstar
Originally posted by Waldy
reply to
post by Outlawstar



Its not true that there has been far more co2 in the atmosphere in the past. You need to go 500 million years back to see equal amount of co2 as we have today.

Edit for source: www.pnas.org...



[edit on 16-12-2008 by Waldy]


As early as 300 million years ago there was about 4 times more CO2 in the atmosphere.


reply posted on 17-12-2008 @ 06:24 AM by heliosprime
Originally posted by Waldy
I have posted a link to a scientific study that proofs the CO2 levels have not been as high as today for the past 500 million years. What have you done other than just claim the opposite without posting any source or evidence?

Post your source or stop talking nonsense!

Edit: This is a reply to Outlawstar.

[edit on 17-12-2008 by Waldy]


You are both wrong, CO2 has little effect on warming whatsoever.

Quote 1: The AP said: "Carbon dioxide, the gas largely blamed for global warming, has reached record-high levels in the atmosphere after growing at an accelerated pace in the past year..."

Facts: Carbon dioxide is not the major greenhouse gas (water vapor is).2

Carbon dioxide accounts for less than ten percent of the greenhouse effect, as carbon dioxide's ability to absorb heat is quite limited.3

Only about 0.03 percent of the Earth's atmosphere consists of carbon dioxide (nitrogen, oxygen, and argon constitute about 78 percent, 20 percent, and 0.93 percent of the atmosphere, respectively).4

The sun, not a gas, is primarily to "blame" for global warming -- and plays a very key role in global temperature variations as well.


Quote 2: The AP said: "Carbon dioxide, mostly from burning of coal, gasoline and other fossil fuels, traps heat that otherwise would radiate into space."

Fact: Most of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere does not come from the burning of fossil fuels. Only about 14 percent of it does.5


Quote 3: The AP said: "Global temperatures increased by about 1 degree Fahrenheit (0.6 degrees Celsius) during the 20th century, and international panels of scientists sponsored by world governments have concluded that most of the warming probably was due to greenhouse gases."

Facts: Most of 20th Century global warming occurred in the first few decades of that century,6 before the widespread burning of fossil fuels (and before 82 percent of the increase in atmospheric CO2 observed in the 20th Century7).

The Earth does not have "world governments." It doesn't even have even one, as the United Nations is not a government, but an association of nations.

If the AP is referring to the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the AP should become aware that the IPCC report itself (the part written by scientists) reached no consensus on climate change. What did reach a conclusion was an IPCC "summary for policymakers" prepared by political appointees.8 Most reporters quote only the summary, being either too lazy or too undereducated to understand the actual report. This does not explain, however, why reporters don't more frequently interview scientists who helped prepare it -- scientists such as IPCC participant Dr. Richard Lindzen of MIT, who says the IPCC report is typically "presented as a consensus that involves hundreds, perhaps thousands, of scientists... and none of them was asked if they agreed with anything in the report except for the one or two pages they worked on." Lindzen also draws a sharp distinction between the scientists' document and its politicized summary: "the document itself is informative; the summary is not."9


www.nationalcenter.org...


reply posted on 17-12-2008 @ 06:54 AM by Waldy
reply to post by heliosprime



No, I am right, CO2 levels have not been this high for at least 500 million years. The effects of it, however, is debatable.


reply posted on 17-12-2008 @ 05:08 PM by heliosprime
Originally posted by Waldy
reply to
post by heliosprime



No, I am right, CO2 levels have not been this high for at least 500 million years. The effects of it, however, is debatable.


Proof please...............proof...............show me the data from 500 million years ago, want to see the sample.............what was the "test" of the sample? how was it measured? What equipment was used........?


reply posted on 17-12-2008 @ 08:57 PM by ANNED
I have posted a link to a scientific study that proofs the CO2 levels have not been as high as today for the past 500 million years. What have you done other than just claim the opposite without posting any source or evidence?

www.globalwarmingart.com...
anthropology.si.edu...
www.onderzoekinformatie.nl...
anthropology.si.edu...
www.sciencemag.org...
anthropology.si.edu...
adsabs.harvard.edu...
anthropology.si.edu...
adsabs.harvard.edu...

The problem is man would have had no problems living during any of these times in fact man started during high CO2 times.

Man would have no problem living in a world with CO2 at 2000 ppm.
the hoax is that man would die in a world with high CO2 levels.

Yes the tree hugger preach doom from high CO2 levels.
but that is a lie and they know it but will not admit it.

The earth has never had a stable climate.

Its just that changes have taken 1000s of years and because of that no one has recorded them.

[edit on 17-12-2008 by ANNED]

[edit on 17-12-2008 by ANNED]


reply posted on 17-12-2008 @ 09:20 PM by funny_pom
Originally posted by Waldy
Yeah, you can spin this like this but the reality is that it causes global warming that triggers the natural cooling system of the earth to go on overdrive resulting in dramatic cooling. Add the solar minimum to the equation and you get even more cooling.

It has also been debated that we delayed the coming ice age with co2 emissions.


Tell me, please, what this cooling system is, or how it works.

there is no natural cooling system to be had, the earth isn't a thermostat.

however, yes in the event of "global warming" the earth will come out colder, at least for a short while. The mechanism driving said cooling is known as the thermo-haline current, located in the oceans. it brings warm waters from the equator to the poles and visa-verse. Haline, meaning salt, means that it requires a delicate balance of salt in order to function and if this balance equilibrium is disrupted the current will cease to flow, cease to transport warm waters to the poles and colder waters to the equator and so you will end up with temperature extremes between the two. The cold temperatures will eventually proceed towards the equator creating an ice age. this ice age will last for perhaps a few thousand years before temperatures rise, and create a green house environment.

In conclusion, the balance of salts in the oceans is disrupted by the influx of fresh water coming from melting sea ice, case study: the arctic ocean. this melting is caused by increasing atmospheric temperatures caused by an increased green house effect caused ultimately by the "green house gasses"; ie. methane, carbon dioxide and so on.

global warming is true, but is only part of a bigger climate shift event.


reply posted on 17-12-2008 @ 09:26 PM by dooper
reply to post by cancerian42



Yeah, well I suggested that a while back on another thread, and some of the ATS geniuses jumped all over me.

I simply noted that if the polar ice is somehow shrinking, then it would be due to global cooling.

It take four times the heat to melt a pound of steel as it does to transport one pound of snow to the polar regions. Heat is what builds the polar caps. Heat is what provides the snow, which compacts and turns to ice.

Heat, not cold increases the polar ice.

The one factor that the global warming nuts leave out of the equation is precipitation. Logically, the warmer the water, the more water vapor, the more precipitation. Overall, precipitation is the regulating mechanism.

Al Gore can pucker up and smooch my rosy red wrecktum. Idiot.
Pages: <<  1    2  >>    ^^TOP^^



Lake Vostok Antarctica: breakthrough imminent.
  Posted 9 days ago with 175 member flags
Sky Sounds 1/25/2012 Atlanta, GA Personal Video/Audio
  Posted 16 days ago with 146 member flags
Strange sounds warn us of incoming, and very soon...
  Posted 5 days ago with 133 member flags
Volcano in Iceland Erupting Alongside The Aurora Borealis (pics)
  Posted 6 days ago with 121 member flags
6 of the oldest trees from around the world.
  Posted 9 days ago with 108 member flags
West Coast USA: Pay Attention, Cascadia May Be Ready to Rupture
  Posted 7 days ago with 87 member flags
CONFIRMED: Global Warming \'Ended 15 Years Ago\'
  Posted 13 days ago with 75 member flags
Pictures from the Aurora lightshow
  Posted 17 days ago with 73 member flags

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Anonymous hacks CIA
  Breaking Alternative News, Posted 14 hours ago, 109 replies
Free Psychic Readings
  General Chit Chat, Posted 10 hours ago, 94 replies
Hollow Earth Theory New Evidence.
  General Conspiracies, Posted 9 hours ago, 61 replies
Free will
  Philosophy and Metaphysics, Posted 13 hours ago, 50 replies