No Rise of Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Fraction in Past 160 Years, New Research Finds

[Maluco]

Who is pushing it? The ultra-left, not the right.

It is, the "Green Movement" is the newest facade trying to push Socialism on the US. "Climate Change" and the Healthcare movement are both about the gov't taking more money from you and having more direct control over your life.

Period.

This!

I can see there are environemental experts here. I feel safer now.

are there not online boards in Canada!???

[mrsleeve]

You should! most of us carry guns too!!!!!

I can see there are environemental experts here. I feel safer now.

[Massive Lee]

are there not online boards in Canada!???

Yes. In Brazil too.

[gwb72tii]

Who is pushing it? The ultra-left, not the right.

It is, the "Green Movement" is the newest facade trying to push Socialism on the US. "Climate Change" and the Healthcare movement are both about the gov't taking more money from you and having more direct control over your life.

Period.

absolutely 100% spot on
the libs could not get the public to buy into their bullhit so what do they do?
have the government declare CO2 a toxic gas so the can regulate the economy as they wish without the public having any say.
this is the exact same bullshit as having polar bears declared a threatened species which has killed oil exploration/production in the arctic. never mind the polar bear population is growing and has doubled in the past 30yrs.
the sheer arrogance of the left infuriates me.

[Bimmerman325i]

Just to clarify: the percent of anthropogenic (man-made) CO2 in the air per year has not changed year to year, and has stayed constant at 40% regardless of total emissions and concentrations. What has not stayed constant is the total amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. What the paper is saying is that over the last 160 years, no matter how much we have emitted into the atmosphere, only 40% of that years' emissions stays in the atmosphere. However, multiply 40% per year by 160 years and you get an awful lot of CO2 in the atmosphere that otherwise would not be.

Did any of you actually read the paper in question?

And before I get flamed as a liberal fuckwit, I don't think climate change is entirely due to man, so stfu.

[gwb72tii]

anthropogenic CO2 is less than 5% of all CO2 emitted per year

[Hallen]

Just to clarify: the percent of anthropogenic (man-made) CO2 in the air per year has not changed year to year, and has stayed constant at 40% regardless of total emissions and concentrations. What has not stayed constant is the total amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. What the paper is saying is that over the last 160 years, no matter how much we have emitted into the atmosphere, only 40% of that years' emissions stays in the atmosphere. However, multiply 40% per year by 160 years and you get an awful lot of CO2 in the atmosphere that otherwise would not be.

Did any of you actually read the paper in question?

And before I get flamed as a liberal fuckwit, I don't think climate change is entirely due to man, so stfu.

Where did you get the full paper? I can't find it online without paying for it. There is longer article on the subject http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1110141842.htm

And I can't tell from what they are saying if the percentage is in relation to the total CO2 in the atmosphere, or if it is like what you say.

I think the important thing about this is it's pointing out that most climate alarmists use horribly flawed and misunderstood "models" (in other words, simulations and extrapolations) to predict this great disaster that we are going through. The more credible data they get, the more their models are proven grossly over estimated. They really don't know what they are doing, and if they do, then they are being deliberately misleading. Either way, it just shows that things aren't as they have been painted to be.

[Bimmerman325i]

anthropogenic CO2 is less than 5% of all CO2 emitted per year

didn't know that. The percent itself doesn't matter for what I was saying- the title of this thread is misleading, so I clarified it. The atmospheric CO2 fraction has risen in the past 160 years, the percentage of anthropogenic CO2 that remains in the atmosphere per year has not over the same time period. That is what the paper is on.

[gwb72tii]

didn't know that. The percent itself doesn't matter for what I was saying- the title of this thread is misleading, so I clarified it. The atmospheric CO2 fraction has risen in the past 160 years, the percentage of anthropogenic CO2 that remains in the atmosphere per year has not over the same time period. That is what the paper is on.

yes
and that's the crazy part of the green argument on limiting CO2
Kyoto would have been catastrophic for world economies and would have cut anthropogenic CO2 by about 20%, or 1% total

[Bimmerman325i]

Where did you get the full paper? I can't find it online without paying for it. There is longer article on the subject http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1110141842.htm

And I can't tell from what they are saying if the percentage is in relation to the total CO2 in the atmosphere, or if it is like what you say.

I think the important thing about this is it's pointing out that most climate alarmists use horribly flawed and misunderstood "models" (in other words, simulations and extrapolations) to predict this great disaster that we are going through. The more credible data they get, the more their models are proven grossly over estimated. They really don't know what they are doing, and if they do, then they are being deliberately misleading. Either way, it just shows that things aren't as they have been painted to be.

Very odd, it was open for public viewing, now it isn't. I can PM/email you the paper if you're interested.

The paper basically is explaining how the actual data does not agree with the current models. According to the models we should have a shitload more in the air than we do per year, and since we don't, the models need to be corrected.

Of the current 10 billion tons of carbon (GtC) emitted annually as CO2 into the atmosphere by human activities [Boden et al., 2009; Houghton, 2008], only around 40% [Jones and Cox, 2005] remain in the atmosphere, while the rest is absorbed by the oceans and the land biota to about equal proportions [Bopp et al., 2002].

Translation: 40% of our emitted CO2 stays in the atmosphere annually. Not the total CO2 atmosphere fraction.

This airborne fraction of anthropogenic CO2 (AF) is known to have stayed remarkably constant over the past five decades [Jones and Cox, 2005], but if it were to increase in a way predicted by models, this could add another 500 ppm of CO2 to the atmosphere by 2100 [Friedlingstein et al., 2006], significantly more than the current total.

Translation: Models don't agree with real data since in reality the AF is constant. Not the total atmosphere concentration/fraction of CO2.

[LBJefferies]

anthropogenic CO2 is less than 5% of all CO2 emitted per year

prove it

[Jand3rson]

I can't believe you guys seriously have nothing better to do than continue bitching back and forth about this shit.

[gwb72tii]

google it holmes
its actually closer to 3%

[mrsleeve]

Josh is LBJ's new special designation under his name your doing ?


thank you.