Oh David - give it up http://www.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl=http://elmhcx9.elmhurst.edu/~chm/onlcourse/chm110/issues/images/lawdome.GIF&imgrefurl=http://elmhcx9.elmhurst.edu/~chm/onlcourse/chm110/issues/issue197.html&h=348&w=479&sz=9&tbnid=FU-xbg0Q8vJawM:&tbnh=94&tbnw=129&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dco2%2Bin%2B%2Batmosphere&zoom=1&q=co2+in++atmosphere&hl=en&usg=__WMEV_DDiRBvO2nn3Iz8MgmOiy7c=&sa=X&ei=WsSRTKmAFs34cZ-omYMH&ved=0CCwQ9QEwAw
Are you objecting to a goal of carbon neutrality by 2050? Clearly exceeding Australian Green Party policy? I don't know what I have done wrong. Shouldn't take risks with planetary life support systems? Doesn't seem controversial. Navier-Stokes partial differnential equation of fluid motion? Edward Lorenz? Climate models? No that's right. IPCC? Chaotic weather? Climate as average weather? No that's exactly what they say. The US National Academy of Sciences published a report called “Abrupt Climate Change: Inevitable Surprises”. It is based both on paleoclimatic proxy data and modern climate records and identifies mechanisms and examples of abrupt climate change from ancient times to the modern era. The definition of abrupt climate change is that small initial changes in conditions result in large and sudden changes in climate. Climate both past and present is chaotic based on reconstructed and observed data. A numeric approach by Anastasios Tsonis and colleagues used sea surface temperature and atmospheric pressure records to identify abrupt climate changes in 1909, the mid 1940’s, the late 1970’s and 1998/2001. The 2007 study is called ‘A new dynamical mechanism for major climate shifts’. The 2009 study, “Has the climate recently shifted?’ was reported on realclimate (‘climate science by real climate scientists’) in a blog entitled ‘Much ado about natural variation’. If climate is chaotic we are likely to see another 10 years at least of more frequent La Niña, resulting in flooding in Australia, and no increase in global surface temperature. I might be wrong – but 20 plus years of no global warming from 1998 is a big deal and will result in almost all people falling into the sceptic camp by default. You need to wake up and see which way the wind is blowing. Cheers On Sep 16, 9:37 am, "David B. Benson" <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sep 10, 6:42 pm, Robert I Ellison <[email protected]> > wrote:> ... Just when carbon dioxide emissions were taking > > off at the end of the 2nd World War, ... > > Not so. CO2 concentration increases during the 1940s and 1950s are > amoung the lowest since before the 1880s. > > After that, your misunderstandings multiply seemingly without end. > > You are seriously embarassing yourself and ought to study before > offering comment. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of global environmental change. Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude. 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/globalchange
