> There are also another much less studied sink under our feet: the cold soils 
> and
> bedrocks, warming ice on glaciers and ice sheets, melting of marine and 
> terrestrial
> ice. The ever increasing break-up of ever larger and ever more frequent ice 
> shelves
> into sea water also mops up huge amounts of heat.

I would call those reservoirs, rather than sinks.  It lets the point
be summed up with a contrast of just two words.

On May 1, 5:01 am, Albert Kallio <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dear Eugen (?),
>
> "While a higher concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere should increase 
> average surface temperature through what is improperly called the greenhouse 
> effect, the average surface temperature would be increasing in any case 
> independent of anthropogenic emissions."
>
> I totally repudiate this statement that it is "improper" to call CO2 as 
> greenhouse effectant. If carbon dioxide did not produce heat trapping our 
> planet would be just a cold snowball.
>
> If there are a natural climatic forcing from chemicals called greenhouse 
> gases that trap the heat, surely there will be also for the anthropogenic 
> sources that have been added into air.
>
> This seems argument similar to Holocaust deniers. If greenhouse gases are 
> added, more climatic warming forcing is added, if greenhouse gases are 
> deducted climatic forcing reduces. What one might debate, is how much is the 
> underlying forcing in relation to variability. Even this question setting is 
> highly dubious due to risen GHG concentrations and the added heat flows into 
> the polar regions being absorved by melting ice and cold grounds.
>
> All too often the meteorologists look to the sky and space beyond as the sink 
> of the heat. There are also another much less studied sink under our feet: 
> the cold soils and bedrocks, warming ice on glaciers and ice sheets, melting 
> of marine and terrestrial ice. The ever increasing break-up of ever larger 
> and ever more frequent ice shelves into sea water also mops up huge amounts 
> of heat.
>
> Let us only await when the Antarctic Penisular ice shelve breakups extend to 
> Ronne and Ross and once these have their spectacular break-ups, we see a 
> sudden the "latest Dryas" in parts of the world where these ice masses 
> dissolve and melt into sea water.
>
> I am also surprised of the surface temperature increasing over long-term 
> context, could you please explain this as most people think the opposite that 
> it is decreasing as without addition of greenhouse gas effectants the 
> Milankovits' orbital forcing tends towards cooling.
>
> I am here assuming the prevailing assumption that the orbital changes 
> originated the ice age(s) rather then my own thesis of geothermal 
> fluctuations from the Mid-Atlantic ridge inducing large scale warming of the 
> North Atlantic Ocean leading to percipitations that rapidly built up the 
> Laurentide Ice sheet on the north of the North American continent as the 
> complainant nations behind UNGA 101292 say to the United Nations General 
> Assembly. If you take Milutin Milankovits away, then you are free to say 
> anything you like. But I just can't take geothermal heat fluctuations and 
> large scale volcanic seabed eruptions around Icelandic seas to take away any 
> argument for us from constraining from CO2 emissions.
>
> So where you get your idea that we are heading towards warming, do you mean 
> sun is turning now into supergiant phase, that heat output increas will occur 
> over billions of years, not even during millions of years this is yet to be 
> seen and well below solar radiation variability. In fact, the sun is now 
> cooling down rather than hotting up and lacks sunspots.
>
> With kind regards,
>
> Veli Albert Kallio
>
> The climatic
>
>
>
> > From: [email protected]
> > To: [email protected]; [email protected]
> > CC: [email protected]
> > Subject: [geo] Re: Televised debate
> > Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 17:16:52 -0400
>
> > I keep saying it but you all seem to either disagree, but say nothing, or do
> > not understand. While a higher concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere should
> > increase average surface temperature through what is improperly called the
> > greenhouse effect, the average surface temperature would be increasing in
> > any case independent of anthropogenic emissions. It is what the Earth has
> > done many times in the past and is doing again quite independent of AGW. So
> > even if we stopped all anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions tomorrow, the
> > Earth would continue to warm; albeit more slowly and not monotonically; but
> > warm it will. Ultimately geoengineering will be needed independent of
> > whether we cease the AGW component or not. Don't view geoengineering as a
> > stopgap until we can get out act together. It will prove to be essential.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [email protected]
> > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected]
> > Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 4:15 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Cc: geoengineering
> > Subject: [geo] Re: Televised debate
>
> > Are you crazy? This is not the question. No-one on the geoeng "side"
> > is suggesting we give up on mitigation. We MUST MUST MUST do this.
> > Geoeng will (in my view) probably needed as well.
>
> > Please see my paper on Combined Mitigation and Geoeng in Science a couple of
> > years ago.
>
> > Tom.
>
> > ++++++++++++++++++
>
> > > Dear all,
>
> > > We at One Planet Pictures are interested in setting up a televised
> > > debate on geoengineering. Something on the lines of: "This house
> > > believes we should give up trying to reduce emissions and concentrate
> > > instead on finding a technofix".
>
> > > Can anyone suggest any companies or institutions that might be
> > > interested in sponsoring such a debate?
>
> > > Many thanks
>
> > > Gus
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Share your photos with Windows Live Photos – 
> Free.http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/134665338/direct/01/
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to