A reminder to PM Gillard: you are a carbon based life form. Here’s the entire slide show online from Philip R. Wood in Australia given July 14th.
Here’s the slide show link – it may take a bit to load on your PC as it is large.
While there are some good points in the presentation, there are a couple of slides that are questionable due to them not showing the most current data, such as the UAH satellite plot taken from my blog in April. The most recent one is here:
Werner Brozek says:
July 27, 2011 at 5:35 pm
….”If the temperature of Earth were to suddenly heat up, the oceans would expel a lot of CO2. But at the present time, the oceans are not changing much in temperature,…….”
No, not presently…. but they were. And quite significantly in some areas.
I’m not sure I could have stated it better.
BTW, love your explanation for the past, but, haven’t Milankovitch cycles persisted? The explanation you gave quotes cycles and principles that still apply today, and nothing has changed about that. Yet, our climate is significantly different. Chatelier’s principle and a persistent cycle are not harbingers of change, but causation for the status quo. I think the problem is most people reckon the earth was in equilibrium about 100 years or so ago. Or, for you and Ferdinand, a million up towards 1000 years or so, when there’s no evidence that either is true. And, the reasoning is the same. Some believe mankind is an aberration of nature and causes nature to change. I believe mankind is as much part of nature as anything else and if nature changes through us, it is because it was necessary for nature to change and it would have found a way to accomplish it, regardless of our existence. It changed without us, it changes with us, and it will continue to change, with or without us.
Werner, its been a pleasure, I look forward to having more discussions with you and Ferdinand. You guys both gave well reasoned, articulate responses……. wrong, in some cases, but well reasoned.
Much appreciated,
James
O/T But everyone tune into Joanne Nova’s site. There is a national convoy organised, yes, national coming from as far as Darwin (up north) and from as far away as Perth (west) to converge on Canberra. With a strong anti carbon tax message and no confidence in the government. With this type of mass protest it is hard to see if the legislation will pass.
Sorry fellow Canuke, we don’t want it as it is useless and destructive for our economy and way of life. The convoy made up of truckies and anyone with a motor vehicle, sounds like Ghandi’s march to the sea to make salt, eh, in protest to the British Raj tax on salt. It will be converging and stopping at various points on their way to Canberra, one will be on the 14th August in Tamworth (Tony Windsor’s seat) that is also holding public rallys and forums on this day.
I heard of this when I attended Robert Carters forum on the 21st July in Tamworth. I just hope it doesn’t get violent or the stupid government bring in the traffic cops. Especially as Christine Milne wants to stop the media from publishing anti-carbon tax articles and real climate change science that contradicts their stupid and political One world government agenda. Good talk by the Czech
president at the National Press club, Canberra on the 25th July. Available on http:/samuelgordonstewart.com/2011/07/president-klaus-address-to-the-national-press-club Probably a bit too intellectual for a lot of AGW warmists. But Cardinal Pell, Prof Robert Carter, Lord Christopher Monckton were present and he praised the last two’s books. Well worth an hour to watch. He was prohibited from entering parliament house by the way, but ex PM Tony Blair was admitted no problems at all. I’ve never seen anything as big as this in Australia, not
Nation wide at least that is how strong Australian’s feel about this present government’s agendas.
James Sexton says:
July 27, 2011 at 4:46 pm
But, the very fact that you state the human contribution is about 200% of the measured increase in the atmosphere tells me we don’t know what we don’t know.
If the calculated emissions are about twice what we measure accurately in the atmosphere, what do you need more to know? As long as no CO2 escapes to space, the difference must be absorbed somewhere by nature. Where it is absorbed is interesting (and roughly known), but completely irrelevant for the increase in the atmosphere. It is quite simple: if nature as a whole was a larger source than sink for CO2, the increase in the atmosphere would be larger than the emissions, not smaller…
What you and others are essentially stating, is that a CO2 sink mechanism lay dormant for about a million years not engaging, but only engaging in the last 60 years to compensate for man’s emissions.
No, what we state is that nature over the last near million years shows a dynamic equilibrium between temperature and CO2 levels. That means that any disturbance of that equilibrium will give a reaction of the components that will counteract the disturbance. That is Le Châtelier Principle (as Werner Brozek already said), see:
http://www.chemguide.co.uk/physical/equilibria/lechatelier.html
No matter if the disturbance is positive or negative: a sudden outbreak of many volcanic vents, human emissions or excessive rock weathering (which absorbs CO2) or increased plant growth.
In the case of human emissions: that gives a small increase in CO2 levels, but an increase in CO2 levels will increase the uptake by plants and oceans. That will reduce the atmospheric increase caused by CO2 from the emissions, but doesn’t eliminate the total emission.
What happens in the first 1,000 m over land is unimportant
Sorry, I was not clear in my response: the first 1,000 m over land are not relevant for measuring global CO2 levels, as a halving or tripling of CO2 there only represents a few ppmv in the bulk of the atmosphere. One can measure CO2 levels there which change hundreds of ppmv within a few hours, see e.g. a few days in the modern life of CO2 measurements in Giessen (Germany):
http://www.ferdinand-engelbeen.be/klimaat/klim_img/giessen_background.jpg
That makes that historical measurements taken over land have little meaning for the rest of the globe.
But a continous addition or absorbing of CO2, as happens mostly over land by humans and vegetation, of course will find its way to the bulk of the atmosphere, as can be seen in the seasonal cycle (mainly over the NH) and the continuous increase…
“suyts says:
July 27, 2011 at 11:01 pm
…and if nature changes through us, it is because it was necessary for nature to change”
I do not completely agree here. We have caused pollution and things like Chernobyl happened that would not have happened otherwise.
“You guys both gave well reasoned, articulate responses……. wrong, in some cases, but well reasoned.”
I would suggest that “wrong” is not the correct word. Just because you did not agree with everything does not mean we were wrong.
“Ferdinand Engelbeen says:
July 28, 2011 at 4:16 pm
As long as no CO2 escapes to space, ”
As you no doubt know, we can be certain that is not happening. With the Boltzmann Distribution Curve and Earth’s gravity and temperatures at the outer atmosphere, only hydrogen and helium can reach the escape velocity and since kinetic energy is 1/2mv2, the lighter elements have the higher potential speeds.
“What happens in the first 1,000 m over land is unimportant”
I am glad you clarified that! It was the only thing you said that perplexed me. I guess it is sort of like taking the air temperature with jet exhaust fumes blowing against the thermometer.
Australians once could all rejoice
When we were young and free;
We worked darn hard in our backyards
And fished the mighty seas.
Then came a government outrage
That wanted to be noted,
For taxing people, who dared breathe
Polluting Earth with Carbon.
So sadly now we all must sing
Goodbye Australia Fair!
http://justmeint.wordpress.com/2011/07/29/australia-once-was-fair/