--- John Foster <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> If we take a look at the CO2 concentrations since 800 AD, we see a
> consistent fluctuation between a low of about 275 ppmv and a high of
> about
> 285 ppmv in approximately 1400 AD. After 1400 we see a decline in CO2
John, what are you talking about? There were no measurements of CO2 in
800 A.D. You must be using cooked and skewed data.
Oh wait, it is proxy data. Do I detect some inconsistency here?
[snip]
> It should therefore be intuitive that the greatest and pronounced effect
> of
> long lived greenhouse gases on climate would be in the polar regions.
Uhhhmmmm, I hate to say this, but no it isn't. You haven't given a reason
as to why the CO2 added by man would find its ways to the poles.
> The
> reason for this is rather simple. In the winter months of the polar
> regions
> there is very little direct solar radiation that is converted into heat.
> The
> days are short, the nights are long, and the snow covered surfaces
> reflect
> much of the incoming radiation. Areas above the Arctic circle do not
> have
> significant solar irradiation during winter.
Okay, but this dosn't tell us why the effect should be noticable at the
poles. What it says is that since there is so little light at the poles
any increase would most likely be due to some other cause, such as GHGs.
> The consequence is profoundly simple. If an increase in greenhouse gases
> occurs in the troposphere as a result of fossil fuel combustion and
> forest
> clearing, then the full effect of would be most noticeable in the polar
> regions during periods of low or non-existent solar irradiation. The
The effect, assuming there is one, would be most noticable at the poles
because of the absence of other confounding variables. However, you
haven't said why we should see warming at the poles. Lets assume that
what you are saying is true, that CO2 put in the atmosphere by man is
collecting at the poles. What causes warming? The CO2's ability to
absorb heat right? Where does the heat come from? The sun right? But if
there is so little sunlight then how can we see this warming?
Have you looked at the data on temps around Hudson Bay? There isn't that
much warming as far as I can see.
http://www.scar.utoronto.ca/~hudson/temphb.html
http://www.cfis.org/ubb/Forum2/HTML/000241-2.html
In fact, there is even some cooling
http://www.scar.utoronto.ca/~hudson/hudtemp.JPG
> fact
> that the sun does not even shine above the arctic circle for up to six
> months would should suggest to any observer that annual increases in
> observed average daily temperatures during winter would be caused by the
> addition of anthropogenic greenhouse gases, rather than short wave
> radiation
> from the sun. Since there are virtual no inputs of irradiation during
Explain, for me, how the GHG warm up the atmosphere in the polar regions.
I thought it was the sun's radiaion being trapped by these gases...am I
wrong?
Steve
=====
"In a nutshell, he [Steve] is 100% unadulterated evil. I do not believe in a 'Satan', but this man is as close to 'the real McCoy' as they come."
--Jamey Lee West
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/
|