Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
I am not sure how to answer this question given all that is known about what affects our climate. However, for example, growing vegetation will on a net basis take CO2 out of the atmosphere, if ice melts and vegetation grows perhaps the interplay of those variable will have an offsetting affect. I have not seen a serious analysis of those kinds of factors in Hansen's work. Certainly he talks about the "‘albedo flip" involving ice and water, but what about the other variables, or has he concluded they don't matter?
I would imagine, that as with most study the focus was on a certain aspect of the conditions that come into play for a climate model. Othere scientists have most certainly researched the variables you bring up, but it seems you are asking one man to study every aspect of a complex system, which is physically impossible for a human brain....and likely for a computer model as well.
Given the age of the earth what period of time should be used to establish statistically meaningful determination of the globe warming. We are fixated on yearly measurements and look at the trends in that past 100 or so years. You guys are saying we need to accept that without question?
|
No one is saying any such thing, And as usual you have taken a reasonable debate and exagerated the statements of your opponents to make them seem unreasonable. I believe those arguing against you here, are doing so only because YOU are putting forward a belief and expecting US to have no questions. Then when we do actually question what you say, it is for the most part ignored in favor of a rewording of the same argument without any consideration of the information we provide to counter your claims.
As for the time frame used to put Data in context, there are multiple studies using many different spans of time. Some go back tens of thousands of years, others only hundreds, but the strange thing is...they all show this to be the fastest and most dramatic increase in global atmospheric change ever seen. Just imagine the suprise when the comparison of CO2 with temperatures were showed to cooincide with each other almost perfectly
(though some delay between increased CO2 and temp. is obviously there). Even more astounding was the exact same phenomenon taking place during previous bouts of warming....hmmmmm.
The thing is, now we are watching the change take place in decades....vs. hundreds of years or thousands. We are also watching the atmospheric CO2 change in lockstep with these temperatures, IN OUR LIFETIMES. In my humble opinion, there may very well be a pretty good case for the link virtually every scientist who studies the atmosphere agrees is there. Can you see why your opinion on this carries a bit less weight than theirs?