An inconvenient truth

[xoxoxoBruce]

PHP Code:

That CO2 is new CO2, and it was never part of the biosphere. 


Never? I thought oil and coal were flora and fauna that were buried long ago? Weren't they once part of the exposed system?
New flora and fauna are constantly being sub-ducted, along with the co2 they contain and create as they decompose, but I suppose they weren't balancing.

If the fossil fuels were dragging out of the Earth contain co2 that was once part of the surface system, when it was, where was the co2 that's being sub-ducted today? Did the co2 level drop until we started bringing back up?

On the warming trend....since warmer air can hold more water and that's the biggest influence on the greenhouse effect, which causes warmer air that can hold more water, etc etc etc. We have to start building multi-national desiccate bags....ones so big you don't have to put "Do Not Eat" on them.

[tw]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

If the fossil fuels were dragging out of the Earth contain co2 that was once part of the surface system, when it was, where was the co2 that's being sub-ducted today? Did the co2 level drop until we started bringing back up?

It was not a world of CO2. It was a world of methane. Plant and simple animal life converted this earth from a methane sphere into the one that could support advanced animal life. By that time, vast amounts of carbon was locked into earth or deep in the oceans.

One additional problem with melting ice caps - significant amounts of methane (another global warming gas) would be released.

Ten nations recently completed analysis of an 800,000 year ice core. It has again confirmed that increase in global warming gases is unprecedented in earth's history. In but 17 years, we have increased global warming gases in what previously took earth - during a most rapid change - 1000 years.

There is no doubt that man is changing the atmosphere. Only remaining question is how fast and how destructively. So George Jr's administration quashed a large number of environmental research satellites. Clearly science (environmental, quantum and nuclear physics, stem cell, public school education) is also on the George Jr enemy's list.

[xoxoxoBruce]

It would appear we've had an effect on the speed of warming, but I wonder if it's more from the fuels we burn or the plants, that convert CO2 into Oxygen, we've destroyed.
Of course much of the plant life we destroyed was burned, but it still may be the loss of their service that hurt the most.
I don't know.

I guess the people berating Hummer drivers will have to slack off the global warming and stick to the wars and suffering caused by the politics of oil.

[tw]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

It would appear we've had an effect on the speed of warming, but I wonder if it's more from the fuels we burn or the plants, that convert CO2 into Oxygen, we've destroyed.

The complexity is why we need more supercomputers. Jet contrails contribute to change. Sulfur content of fuels contribute. Speed of Greenland ice melts affect the intensity of hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico. Even plankton in oceans contribute half as much as land plantlife (an interesting study that suggests iron in the ocean may decrease global warming by creating more plankton.

That the earth is getting hotter faster and in direct agreement with a rapid increase in global warming gases is obvious. But each detail adds massive numbers to prediction equations making it a classic horse race. The clear favorite includes no Arctic Icecap in 50 years. Hopefully the favorite will break his leg.

Something about newly available beachfront property on Canada's northern 'resort' islands.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

It would appear we've had an effect on the speed of warming, but I wonder if it's more from the fuels we burn or the plants, that convert CO2 into Oxygen, we've destroyed.

It's both. The plants could take up some of the slack from the oil we burn, but we don't even let that happen.