What if the CO2 was for nothing in the warming?

[Christophe]

Rah you dared to calculate the "overweight".

But the fact is that this overweight is the same everywhere (assuming everything is homogeneous as you incisted on it before): so I do not think it would have any influence since it is fluid following the principle of Archimedes...

On the other hand it should have an influence "to the 1 / 10 meadows" on the atmospheric pressure ...

I think that the increase of the water vapor in the atmosphere instead of the O2 will have much more influence ... not simple anyway as a problem ...

[Targol]

Thanks to you 2 for this very constructive discussion.

For my part, having neither the necessary scientific culture, nor the infuse science to invalidate or confirm the words of this gentleman (who is not the 1er, by the way to launch such statements), I would be satisfied with the following observation:
Whether we attribute the greenhouse effect to CO2 or methane is of little importance insofar as the relative concentrations of both have left their "normal" threshold due to human activities. and the energy mismanagement associated with it (see the curves presented by Christophe on the 2nd page).

The cause-consequence relationships between the concentration of these gases in the atmosphere and the warming are, in my opinion closely related (see the example of permafrost which is slowly thawing, releasing tons of methane into the atmosphere itself. generates warming, etc ...).
Nevertheless, this opinion is based more on intuition than anything else.

What is the point of knowing why the fire started when the house burns? We first try to extinguish !!!

It's strange, but every time I see these kinds of theories, I get the impression that the subliminal message behind it is "keep on stuffing yourself, the ecosystem will handle".

Whether it's CO2 or my grandmother's farts that are responsible for global warming, after all, how important? Is there not also a moral issue behind our habits of life? Can we continue to loot the ecosystem and economies of the southern countries just for our little egoistic comfort indefinitely?
Unfortunately, this kind of moral considerations weighs little in front of the latest model of 4x4 air-conditioned or a nice 127cm plasma screen.
So, true or not? If the CO2 can serve as a scarecrow and curb the consumerist ambitions of a number, we continue to talk about it.
After all, aren't religions, for the most part, "lies" (or at least amounts of unverifiable information) whose purpose is to change human behavior? Why not use the same recipes to try to save what can still be saved in our ecosystem?

In short, excuse this esoteric parenthesis in the middle of a scientific discussion ... Continue, I take great interest to read you!

[Lietseu]

Sorry guys, but ... this homogeneity of gases is all theoretical (as the rest of our discussion elsewhere)

The question I was asking myself had to do with the imbalances that must necessarily exist on the scale of the planet ...

For Targol: it goes without saying that none of us want to hand over the "fault" to someone else, econology is already engaging, in a process of reflection which is: I come out of my bubble, I see what others are doing, to see what together we can do ... I offer solutions, I offer the products of my hours spent on the net to share them etc ... here is a link:

http://www.futura-sciences.com/fr/sinformer/actualites/news/t/physique-1/d/des-batteries-a-nanofils-de-tres-longue-duree_13995/

or another one that will not fail to interest you: http://www.eolprocess.com/Index.php

[Woodcutter]

Sorry guys, but ... this homogeneity of gases is all theoretical (as the rest of our discussion elsewhere)

The question I was asking myself had to do with the imbalances that must necessarily exist on the scale of the planet ...
[...]

I gave you my opinion. Do whatever you want with it.

[Remundo]

Hello everyone!

Ah I saw that, it's funny as a theory!

"CO2 is heavier than air and therefore no greenhouse effect."

Huge !!

Although I confirm that in confined environments and in the absence of any convection, the CO2 migrates downward into the atmosphere, it is quite different. I also confirm that in Clermont Ferrand, people have died in the caves / cellars and that the test is to have a candle at ground level and to watch if it does not go out to certify the presence of enough oxygen ...

So, think that if the reasoning of this Mr. F. Tatard was right, we would all be breathing PUR oxygen since the nitrous oxide is lighter than the oxygen.

Or that Mountaineers would die immediately of asphixia in the mountains, or the passengers of an aircraft ...

Outside measurements show that at any altitude, there is substantially the same proportion of O2 and N2.

Imagine that you have a glass of syrup, and that you shake gently with a spoon, your syrup will always be 99% homogeneous.

Here you have a good picture of the atmosphere gently stirred by solar radiation.

And even if the CO2 is in the lower layers of the atmosphere, it does not cancel its greenhouse effect.

In addition, the water dissolves the CO2 (in H2 CO3 form) and carries it in the clouds, or also the seas (hence the problem of limestone formation, unbalanced marine environments ...).

Last remark, why the ozone layer does not fall on the ground (O3 is even heavier than CO2

All this is homogenized to a few riddles.

Finally, we laugh well

[Former Oceano]

[Humor Mode ON]
Well yes, summer in the big cities, the ozone layer falls flush with daisies (if it remains in the lawns). The proof there are plenty of alerts for ozone pollution
[Humor Mode OFF]
Everything mixes in the atmosphere. It is enough that a big cumulo nimbus arrives and hop it plays the role of giant spoon.

[Lietseu]

the craziest in this story is the side, "English humor" a little (a lot) offbeat

Thank you for the subject Christophe, it's a pleasure!

[dedeleco]

Hold ! http://www.futura-sciences.com/fr/news/t/climatologie-1/d/le-co2-aurait-bien-mis-fin-au-dernier-acentge-de-glace_37995/.

A big stick in the wheels of the deniers of global warming of anthropic origin!

The Nature article is very important because huge US, Chinese and French work, all over the globe in 80 locations, measurements in ice and sediment on past 22000 temperatures and past CO2 values, which does not is not a simulation, but shows the past reality, that the average temperature of the globe followed the CO2 and especially that the T of the northern hemisphere was very late on the CO2 and the global T, warmed well before melt the ice cap north.
So it is proved by this past experience that the CO2 released by a first local warming, triggered a global warming of the whole earth, which released even more CO2, which then melted with thousands of years of delay, the ice cap in the north. With these ice caps, the climate of the earth is very unstable.

This scientific article is so important that I put on econology with figures.
It is to read with great care, because he has measured the climatic reality of the deglaciation on the 22000 years spent on all the earth, and conditions all our future, with the current CO2 that will melt still a lot of ice caps, about 20 m of rising sea, with the current CO2 and much more if we continue to make it mount this CO2 !!

https://www.econologie.info/share/partag ... XYam3n.pdf