What if the CO2 was for nothing in the warming?

Warming and Climate Change: causes, consequences, analysis ... Debate on CO2 and other greenhouse gas.
User avatar
Woodcutter
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4731
Registration: 07/11/05, 10:45
Location: Mountain ... (Trièves)
x 2




by Woodcutter » 17/06/08, 19:27

Christophe wrote:Nice curve but I do not understand anything : Mrgreen: [...]
It is the equilibrium between the various forms of Carbon in water: dissolved CO2, HCO3- and CO3-- according to the pH of the ocean, which itself is a function of the atmospheric CO2 level (in ppm)
0 x
"I am a big brute, but I rarely mistaken ..."
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 17/06/08, 19:28

Woodcutter wrote:How is it that we can measure the CO2 content of the atmosphere at Mauna Loa, when it is at 4200 m altitude? According to his brilliant theories, that "heavy" gas should never be able to rise that far, right? : roll:


That was the question I asked him too ... remember more about his answer if there was one ...

Nowhere did I manage to find a curve which gave the% CO2 according to the altitude ... but this concentration must obligatorily vary.

In addition and you will find that on this one the "he" is right: coring analyzes are always given as being "images" of the earth's atmosphere when in fact it is the earth's atmosphere at ground level of the core of the time ...

Which is not really the same thing.

I am wrong?
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 17/06/08, 19:40

Found that:

Image

Concentration of methane in the atmosphere during the last 15.000 years. Measured evolution (in solid line) of the concentration of methane in the atmosphere during 15 000 last years. It shows the fall in concentration to -13 000 years (counted compared to today), associated with the cold episode known as Younger Dryas, and the gradual increase over the 5 000 last years. Dashed appears the evolution of the concentration as predicted by Bill Ruddiman in the absence of any disturbance other than the evolution of the orbit of the Earth. He attributes the difference between this evolution planned during the last 8000 years and that which is actually measured to human activities.


I understand but then nothing at all ... the solar radiation would be completely independent of% CH4 ??? :?: : Mrgreen:

Interressant also this one:
Image

[url] Concentration of CO² in the atmosphere during the last 8.000 years. [/ url] As for methane, Bill Ruddiman estimates that there is a difference between measurements of the CO² concentration during the last 8.000 ( points) and the one that should have been expected (solid line). According to him, humans are directly responsible for some of this gap, but the main fraction of the difference must be attributed to positive feedback from the climate system: the warming initially induced by humans is magnified by the effects of climate change. ocean circulation and its ice cover or, to be more precise, the absence of changes that would normally have occurred.


Source: http://www.astr.ucl.ac.be/ASTER/index.p ... ER%25news3
0 x
User avatar
Woodcutter
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4731
Registration: 07/11/05, 10:45
Location: Mountain ... (Trièves)
x 2




by Woodcutter » 17/06/08, 19:47

Christophe wrote:[...] Moreover and you avouras that on this blow the "he" is right: coring analyzes are always given as being "images" of the earth's atmosphere when in fact it is the earth's atmosphere at ground level of the core of the time ...

Which is not really the same thing.

I am wrong?
Probably because it is proved that the concentration of CO2 is sufficiently uniform in the part of atmosphere concerned to consider a homgeneity of the thing, right? : Wink:

See this link: http://www.meteofrance.com/FR/glossaire ... x_view.jsp

Apparently, this is the second program ... : roll: But maybe not in 1938! : Lol:
0 x
"I am a big brute, but I rarely mistaken ..."
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 17/06/08, 19:51

Woodcutter wrote:Probably because it is proved that the concentration of CO2 is sufficiently uniform in the part of atmosphere concerned to consider a homgeneity of the thing, right? : Wink:


I was talking about the altitude actually ... but for the geography now that you tell me, the concentration is highly variable depending on the region. I think I put a map not long ago on forums. I will try to find ... without guarantee.
0 x
User avatar
Woodcutter
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4731
Registration: 07/11/05, 10:45
Location: Mountain ... (Trièves)
x 2




by Woodcutter » 17/06/08, 19:52

Nice these curves !!!
I did not think we could see the influence of human activities so far! : Shock:
0 x
"I am a big brute, but I rarely mistaken ..."
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 17/06/08, 19:54

Ben is especially extremely amazing: the industrial activity since 200 years would not have had more influence than the deforestation of 1er men? Frankly, it's on the verge of a negationist scientist paid for by tankers.

Otherwise you're lucky I just found the mapmonde:

Image

There is also the CH4 but for the CO2, it is ballo are not the oceans nor the Antarctic where are made the cores ... :(

https://www.econologie.com/forums/animation- ... t5057.html
Last edited by Christophe the 17 / 06 / 08, 19: 55, 1 edited once.
0 x
User avatar
Woodcutter
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4731
Registration: 07/11/05, 10:45
Location: Mountain ... (Trièves)
x 2




by Woodcutter » 17/06/08, 19:55

Christophe wrote:[..] I was talking about altitude actually ... [..].
No, no, that's the altitude we're talking about. Apparently, the brewing is sufficient for the 0 layer 80 km is considered homogeneous in the content of various gases, put by some local micro-phenomena such as ... wine cellars for example! : Mrgreen:
0 x
"I am a big brute, but I rarely mistaken ..."
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 17/06/08, 19:56

In this case MeteoFrance is in contradiction with the Esa ...

https://www.econologie.com/forums/animation- ... t5057.html

ps: I transmit http://www.meteofrance.com/FR/glossaire ... x_view.jsp to the gentleman
0 x
User avatar
Woodcutter
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4731
Registration: 07/11/05, 10:45
Location: Mountain ... (Trièves)
x 2




by Woodcutter » 17/06/08, 19:59

Christophe wrote:Ben is especially extremely amazing: the industrial activity since 200 years would not have had more influence than the deforestation of 1er men? Frankly it is the limit of the negationist scientist paid by non oil tankers [...]
Hoot! But you have not looked well at my levels! : Lol:

For CO2, the activity of the first human societies increases from 270 ppm to 280 ppm in ... 8000 years!

We (the modern ... : roll:) we did a lot better: from 280 to 387 ppm (2006 I think) in ... 150 years !!! : Shock:
0 x
"I am a big brute, but I rarely mistaken ..."

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Climate Change: CO2, warming, greenhouse effect ..."

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 180 guests