4 other warming periods in the geologic record.

expos4ever

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2008
10,592
5,732
Montreal, Quebec
✟248,004.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
edberry.com the peer reviewied paper found here refutes that man is more important to the climate than nature.
I will almost certainly bet that this is what is going on here. Let me suppose that it is indeed true that man contributes only a tiny percentage of the CO2. Even if that is true, that contribution can tip the scales in the direction of disaster.

Analogy: Imagine your bathtub can drain 1 quart per hour. And let's say the faucet is on and delivering 1 quart per hour. Result: your bathtub will not overflow.

Now let's suppose I am in your bathroom and I add one measly liquid ounce per hour while everything else stays the same.

Guess what is going to happen ultimately.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: JackRT
Upvote 0

Hans Blaster

Rocket surgeon
Mar 11, 2017
14,647
11,691
54
USA
✟293,961.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
edberry.com the peer reviewied paper found here refutes that man is more important to the climate than nature.

I went through 6 pages of that web site (going back almost 4 years) and only found references to a couple pre-prints. Pre-prints are published and their aren't peer reviewed.

I did look briefly at the pre-print, but it seemed a rather simplistic model, but I can't say right away if its right or wrong with out more in depth review.

[There are also some presentations of the pre-print at meetings with abstracts. Meeting posters/talks aren't peer reviewed either and many societies give members the right to present at the annual meeting.]
 
Upvote 0

sjastro

Newbie
May 14, 2014
4,852
3,887
✟273,723.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
So the model uses a simple continuity equation.............
A quick look at the paper indicates increasing CO₂ levels is through out-gassing from the oceans in which case increasing temperature is driving CO₂ levels rather than around the other way according to AGW.

Satellite temperature measurements destroys the model.
If temperature is driving CO₂ levels both the troposphere and lower stratosphere temperatures would be in phase (both would be increasing with time).
As explained on many occasions a signature of AGW is troposphere and lower stratosphere temperatures are out of phase, the temperature of the troposphere is increasing while the lower stratosphere is decreasing.
 
Upvote 0

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
The CO2 mankind produces is no different then the CO2 produced by nature. And the ocean and plants are a constant sink for CO2 balancing it out of the atmosphere.

Actually, they were balancing it out until the industrial age arrived.
 
Upvote 0

greatcloudlives

Active Member
Dec 28, 2019
347
39
63
Oregon City
✟26,155.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
In the geological record co2 and temperature both have been higher than the measurements of the modern era and plants and animals have thrived. We are in no danger of destroying the Earth's climate. Even if all the fossil fuels were burned at one time it would be only a slight difference. Mankind is not destroying the Earth's climate.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
In the geological record co2 and temperature both have been higher than the measurements of the modern era and plants and animals have thrived. We are in no danger of destroying the Earth's climate. Even if all the fossil fuels were burned at one time it would be only a slight difference. Mankind is not destroying the Earth's climate.
Destroy? No, that will not happen. Alter catastrophically? Yep, that appears to be the case.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Ophiolite
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Mankind produces only seven ppm of the CO2 produced the rest is from nature. This minute amount compared to 400 ppm from nature is too small to affect the warming we have.
Once again it has increased to 400 ppm due to man's activities. You should be trying to understand how we know this.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
The time when CO2 stays in the atmosphere is four years. Why than when CO2 radiates out is the heat not greatly Deminished according to the law of entropy.

Where do you get our "facts and figures"? The number of years that carbon dioxide lasts is complicated. It is not four years:

Greenhouse Gases: How Long Will They Last?

Carbon dioxide acts as a blanket. It lets sunlight in but is opaque to heat. That means it lets energy (sunlight) in, but it holds the reradiated sunlight, (heat) to the Earth.
 
Upvote 0