Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagor
You haven't a clue what you're talking about when you bring up this silly little statement.
Of course it goes up. Every man and his dog knows that. You however seem to think it's something that was discovered yesterday when you're about 10 years behind the rest of the planet.
Let me give you a simple example of why this has been common knowledge to the world's populations sans you since the dawn of time.
Temperature gets warmer. Permafrost melts. GGs trapped underneath the permafrost are released. Temperature gets warmer ... CO2 trapped in the deep ocean is released.
It's nothing new or remarkable. I appreciate you getting excited but sorry to tell you you're about 10 years behind. Hey, at least you're catching up.
Try and think in the context of amplification of change and feedback loops.
Actually ... don't bother. Continue as you were, it's entertaining.
Let me be as silly as you. Tomorrow in Ottawa it is forecasted to be 8 degrees. Historical data shows that on the same day last year it was a max temperature of -3.7 degrees.
This shows clearly and without doubt and is a f-a-c-t that the planet is warming at an alarming rate of 11.7 degrees a year.  |
Well, now we're getting into a chicken and egg type of scenario, and opening up a whole new set of questions. CO2 and temperature are both higher than historical averages right now, there's our current data that we can stand pretty firmly upon. But, did we get here because CO2 drove temperature, or because temperature drove CO2? If CO2 drove temperature, what was the cause of the increase in CO2 concentration? Was it increased human activity, or were there other natural events at play (say, for argument's sake, an increased level of volcanic activity)? Or perhaps some combination of both? If both, how much can be properly attributed to human activity? Or, if there was an initial temperature increase that kicked off the increase of CO2, how much of the current increase in CO2 concentration came from the fact that temperatures were increasing?
Now, the AGW side of the debate seems to go something like this: CO2 and temperature are both higher than normal. CO2 is known to trap heat via the greenhouse effect. Humans have been emitting CO2 at an increasing rate. Conclusion: humans are responsible for the increase in temperature.
We're told that this conclusion is supported by models that have factored out natural effects to show conclusively that human activity is largely responsible for the increase. However, to get back to the initial point of this thread - the released emails, this was done without much peer review, except by those within the AGW camp.