Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
why do deniers think that climate change is a gradual measurable process. It could happen as a cataclysmic event after decades of throwing-up carbon into the atmosphere.
This isn't a parlour game deniers No wonder only 4% of scientists id as "conservative".
Which said multipliers exist and behave precisely as stated. So what is your justification for ignoring them?
There is no occurrence in the historical record of a third party dumping gigatonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere. There are several records during the Holocene showing that once CO2 levels became elevated following Milankovich warming, greenhouse warming came to dominate and took the Earth significantly further than Milankovich would have alone. See Jeremy Shakun, 2011.
There is no occurrence in the historical record of a third party dumping gigatonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere. There are several records during the Holocene showing that once CO2 levels became elevated following Milankovich warming, greenhouse warming came to dominate and took the Earth significantly further than Milankovich would have alone. See Jeremy Shakun, 2011.
We make enough to have raised the atmospheric level from 280 to 400 ppm. When are you going to wise up enough to stop making arguments that you should KNOW will immediately fail?
Does the term "isotopic analysis" sound the least bit familar? How about Keeling Curve? How about that the Earth exited its last glacial period and entered its current interglacial 15,000 years ago. And that at no prior point in that 15,000 years, have temperatures or CO2 levels climbed as they have in the last 150.
God are you stupid!
Does the term "isotopic analysis" sound the least bit familar? How about Keeling Curve? How about that the Earth exited its last glacial period and entered its current interglacial 15,000 years ago. And that at no prior point in that 15,000 years, have temperatures or CO2 levels climbed as they have in the last 150.
God are you stupid!
Does the term "isotopic analysis" sound the least bit familar? How about Keeling Curve? How about that the Earth exited its last glacial period and entered its current interglacial 15,000 years ago. And that at no prior point in that 15,000 years, have temperatures or CO2 levels climbed as they have in the last 150.
God are you stupid!
One of us is stupid, but alas, it isn't me.. The concentration of C13 is not measured directly....it is noted as dC13 via the following calculation..“dC13 = 1000* {([C13/C12]sample / [C13/C12]std ) – 1.....like everything from climate science, the claim that man is entirely responsible for the increase in CO2, is just some more slick mathematical sleight of hand. Of course the ratio of C13 to C12 is going down but it is hardly proof that man is responsible for the increase in atmospheric CO2....
Look again at the above equation (as if you actually understand it in the first place) not only can the C13 ratio decrease from less C13 but it can decrease from increased C2...the earths own natural CO2 output....like everything else..you are making claims that can't be supported...climate science is playing with math to get a politically desired result.
Slick, mathematical sleight of hand. Got it.
I take it when you said "C2" you mean C12. And I take it when you mentioned an increase in natural C12 emissions you had some candidate source for such emissions that no one else in the atmospheric physics field had ever thought of.
Then there are a lot of PhDs out there you're going to have to correct.
An atmospheric 13C 12C reconstruction generated through removal of climate effects from tree-ring 13C 12C measurements - LEAVITT - 2010 - Tellus B - Wiley Online Library
A three-dimensional model of atmospheric CO2 transport based on observed winds 1. Analysis of observational data - Aspects of Climate Variability in the Pacific and the Western Americas - Keeling - Wiley Online Library
Oceanic Uptake of Fossil Fuel CO2 Carbon-13 Evidence
http://www.researchgate.net/publica...f_Atmospheric_CO2/file/79e4150a42d2c97b91.pdf
https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/index.php/radiocarbon/article/viewFile/18082/17814#page=91
Seasonal latitudinal and secular variations in the abundance and isotopic ratios of atmospheric carbon dioxide 1. Results from land stations - Mook - 2012 - Journal of Geophysical Research Oceans 1978 ndash 2012 - Wiley Online Library
Long-term observations of atmospheric CO2 and carbon isotopes at continental sites in Germany - LEVIN - 2002 - Tellus B - Wiley Online Library
A 1000-year high precision record of delta 13C in atmospheric CO2 - FRANCEY - 2002 - Tellus B - Wiley Online Library
Monitoring the isotopic composition of atmospheric CO2 Measurements from the NOAA Global Air Sampling Network - Trolier - 2012 - Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres 1984 ndash 2012 - Wiley Online Library
They show that isotopic analysis reveals an anthropogenic fingerprint, which SSDD had claimed didn't exist. Do you also assert that no anthropogenic fingerprint may be discerned by an isotopic analysis of environmental carbon dioxide?
You've got to be smart enough to realize throwing your lot in with SSDD cannot be to your benefit.