Shpiker wrote:So how does one account for the fact that these changes began happening at a greater rate prior to industrialization and therefore a man-made infusion of higher quantities of the so-called greenhouse gasses??
I don't accept that as fact. Got a source?
Shpiker wrote:I got your back on this one:
Humans can only claim responsibility, if that's the word, for abut 3.4% of carbon dioxide emitted to the atmosphere annually, the rest of it is all natural
Your links don't support your conclusions. From the Woods Hole graphic
, sea and land sources emit and absorb around 100 petragrams per year. In other words, it's pretty much in balance.
Fossil fuel combustion contributes 6.5 PG and deforestation 1-2 PG. Add it up, and the net contribution to increased CO2 levels is all
due to hman activity, at 7.5 to 8.5 petragrams per year. (Note: I don't pretend to know what a petragram is. Megaconverter doesn't know, either.)
Thanks for playing.
Shpiker wrote:Got some help for you here too from Junk Science
He goes on to a long rant using talking points from this Junk Science web site with no sense of caution given the site name (who pays for Junk Science?).
Well, the models have actually been pretty well vindicated. And, they also include negative feedbacks such as more clouds reflecting some energy.
But even without the models, the science is strong. We all agree the greenhouse effect exists. We agree that more CO2 and other greenhouse gases increases the greenhouse effect. Many of the impacts; increased warming at the poles, changes in local climate, increased pests, drier lands in mid-continent regions, etc are expected.
We don't need models to know that gobal warming is happening. Some people want to trust our future to wishful thinking, others (me) want us to take actions now that will be beneficial anyway to the economy, public health, the environment and national security.
Shpiker wrote:Well fine, then the only ones talking about global warming are the lefties who are engaging in the same fear-mongering that they do when ANY environmental issue is considered. There- I can generalize just as good as you.
Well, thing is, you're wrong. Just ask Sen McCain, or CEOs of many multinational corporations.