Return of the Inquisition

[flacaltenn]

Originally Posted by nailer

GW is consumer Science. I'm speaking to the political aspect of the wide spread observation that it does indeed appear to be getting warmer since 1980. Scientist are gathering data and feeding said data into some fairly complex computer models. Fear = Power

With all the coal and oil we've been burning since the emergence of steam power I don't see how any rational person would argue that we haven't been adding heat to the atmosphere. Lot's of carbon dioxide too. I remember when scientists were declaring that the greenhouse effect was going to bring on another ice age if we did change our ways. In addition, modern urban living also makes things warmer.

Speaking of heating up the atmosphere, there is the Sun. Data gather by scientists and massaged by computer models give indication that for a relatively short period the Sun has been putting out more energy warming things up for the inner planets. Scientists think the greenhouse effect reduces the amount of solar energy that reaches Earth's surface.

I have run into some true deniers. Folks I've battled with because they reject basic tenets of the GreenHouse theory. They INVENT science because they are too lazy to tackle the many theories of GW on their merits.

For me -- I accept the GHouse and the fact that CO2 is a critical GH gas. The disconnect on that is that CO2 has accepted powers to warm the surface. And that the GW lore has invented superpowers for CO2 beyond that basic science.

By basic Physics and Chemistry -- it's generally agreed that a doubling of CO2 concentration will "force" about a 1.1degC change in surface temp. ((that's WITHOUT the speculated "runaway feedbacks" and "climate sensitivity" multipliers that are part of the GW thesis)) The Indust. Revolution started at 280ppm and we are now at 400ppm. Not even quite to the FIRST doubling.. And the NEXT doubling won't occur until the atmos conc. reaches 1120ppm !!! That's not likely under any emissions scenario until well into the 22nd Century. So if THAT is the extent of adding our CO2 to the atmos -- it would never be a major confrontational issue.

But instead -- the CO2 "superpowers" invented to get those dire predictions of 6 or even 8degC by 2100 include dubious assumptions about release of frozen calthrates, positive feedbacks involving water vapor (clouds), the oceans refusing to take up the 50% of man's emissions that they currently do (we think) and other items of issue that are NO WHERE NEAR "settled science"..

It's also telling that the public propaganda campaign has purposely confused "carbon pollution" with CO2 emissions to attempt to make CO2 a pollutant merely for it's GHouse properties. The stuff that every living creature that IS NOT a plant emits at 4 to 8 times the concentration of the surrounding "clean air" --- and that plants consider food. If CO2 is a pollutant because of GHouse considerations -- so is the DOMINANT GHouse gas -- water vapor..