Gizmo, I'd like to continue our discussions on Climate Change if possible.

gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 17^th, 2010 at 1:48pm:


OK, here's one. Ocean acidification (reduced alkalinity) is taking place as a direct result of increased CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. This will have increasing effects on a large number of marine organisms which rely on extracting calcium from the ocean for part of their structure.

Let's tackle this from the carbon dioxide perspective to start with.  

Do you dispute that the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere is a direct result of activities such as the burning of fossil fuel, the production of cement and the deforestation of tropical rainforest?

The carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere is very easily measured, and we can work out that it is increasing. It has increased to nearly 400ppm, up from about 320ppm in 1960.  

I'd just like you to answer honestly. I don't have a political agenda, and I'm not a 'froth at the mouth' greeny who thinks we should all become poor overnight, but in this case, I believe that there is a problem and we should acknowledge that fact so that we can work to remedy the situation before it gets worse.

I don't know if you're familiar with the Stockdale Paradox. You can read about General Stockdale here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Stockdale

I'm a firm believer in facing the facts, "warts and all" so that we can be in a better position to tackle the problem.

Thanks, muso, your interpretation is as good as any.
I have noticed 2 things about the graph.

1 From 266mya to 247mya level level of CO2 increased from 350ppm to about 1900ppm 86ppm/million years, increase rate of 0.082ppm/thy.
Compare to http://www.ozpolitic.com/yabbfiles/Attachments/vostok.jpg
Increase from 220mmp to 380ppm in 800 thousands, increase rate of 0.2ppm/thy


2 Increase of CO2 level is trailing increase of temperature, not other way around.

Fair bit of difference despite that ~250my ago there were more cataclysmic events then in last 1my. That is strange.

It is hard to read the past but it is even harder to read the future.

Where did all that CO2 come from 250 years ago?

It's much easier to read 50 years ahead than it is to read 250 million years ago.

muso wrote on Dec 18^th, 2010 at 8:10pm:



Sure it is. If you are a boffin, anything's possible.

Cannot see future. Only past. Future lies beyond. Need time machine to see future.

Global surface temperature has increased Ϸ0.2°C per decade in the past 30 years, similar to the warming rate predicted in the 1980s in initial global climate model simulations with transient greenhouse gas changes. Warming is larger in the Western Equatorial Pacific than in the Eastern Equatorial Pacific over the past century, and we suggest that the increased West–East temperature gradient may have increased the likelihood of strong El Niños, such as those of 1983 and 1998. Comparison of measured sea surface temperatures in the Western Pacific with paleoclimate data suggests that this critical ocean region, and probably the planet as a whole, is approximately as warm now as at the Holocene maximum and within Ϸ1°C of the maximum temperature of the past million years.

We conclude that global warming of more than 1°C, relative to 2000, will constitute ‘‘dangerous’’ climate change as judged from likely effects on sea level and extermination of species.