Global warming causes a rise in CO2, not the other way round

Watch
gerrygerry
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#1
Now that the orthodox view is CO2 increase causes global warming, what if it is the other way around. Global warming, causes CO2 to rise, as warming oceans store less gas. Long term the earth has always cycled into and out of ice ages. with ice age being the "norm" and warm periods abnormal. Seems to me there are a lot of tax rises being justified, and resources wasted fighting a natural thermal cycling of the earth. What are they going to do if they reduce emissions to zero and the earth continues to cycle hot and cold in response to natural forces way beyond mans control,
0
reply
DrMikeHuntHertz
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 year ago
#2
The sun is trying to feed the plants and the evil libtards are trying to stop it.

But on a more serious note the green regulations/taxes are about expanding control over the lives of people, it was never about the environment.
0
reply
ZombieTheWolf
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#3
Report 1 year ago
#3
Why does global warming cause CO2 to rise? Just wanting to know the scientific explanation behind this.

Ah nevermind, reread the the thread. Oceans store a very small amount of CO2,

Attachment 790752

For comparison, the atmosphere has 0.04%. Surely the 1.4% in oceans will not completely evaporate. So we cannot expect a 1.4% increase in CO2 levels from oceans.
Last edited by ZombieTheWolf; 1 year ago
0
reply
username4350740
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#4
Report 1 year ago
#4
(Original post by gerrygerry)
Now that the orthodox view is CO2 increase causes global warming, what if it is the other way around. Global warming, causes CO2 to rise, as warming oceans store less gas. Long term the earth has always cycled into and out of ice ages. with ice age being the "norm" and warm periods abnormal. Seems to me there are a lot of tax rises being justified, and resources wasted fighting a natural thermal cycling of the earth. What are they going to do if they reduce emissions to zero and the earth continues to cycle hot and cold in response to natural forces way beyond mans control,
The earth goes through cycles yes but here's the key thing..... they don't happen in a day.It takes thousands/ hundreds of thousandsof years to go from ice age to warm periods and vice versa.It doesn't happen in 200 years.
0
reply
OxFossil
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#5
Report 1 year ago
#5
(Original post by gerrygerry)
Now that the orthodox view is CO2 increase causes global warming, what if it is the other way around. Global warming, causes CO2 to rise, as warming oceans store less gas. Long term the earth has always cycled into and out of ice ages. with ice age being the "norm" and warm periods abnormal. Seems to me there are a lot of tax rises being justified, and resources wasted fighting a natural thermal cycling of the earth. What are they going to do if they reduce emissions to zero and the earth continues to cycle hot and cold in response to natural forces way beyond mans control,
With respect, your opinion on the climate crisis is worthless - unless you happen to be a recognised scientific authority on the subject?

Every major professional scientific body in the world has endorsed the consensus on anthropogenic climate change. A recent review concluded that "the finding of 97% consensus in published climate research is robust and consistent with other surveys of climate scientists and peer-reviewed studies." http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10...26/11/4/048002
1
reply
ByEeek
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#6
Report 1 year ago
#6
(Original post by OxFossil)
With respect, your opinion on the climate crisis is worthless - unless you happen to be a recognised scientific authority on the subject?

Every major professional scientific body in the world has endorsed the consensus on anthropogenic climate change. A recent review concluded that "the finding of 97% consensus in published climate research is robust and consistent with other surveys of climate scientists and peer-reviewed studies." http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10...26/11/4/048002
Where as I agree with the status quo on climate change it is a feedback cycle but we are part of the feedback. As the temperatures rise, there will be increased demand for air conditioning and the associated power consumption that will in turn contribute to increased warming. Refrigeration and the use of HFCs in fridges is one of the biggest greenhouse gases but interestingly, food consumption and land management are also massive contributors to global warming.
0
reply
Stiff Little Fingers
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#7
Report 1 year ago
#7
Oh joy, another person who probably got a C in GCSE science here to tell us why 97% of climate related scientists are wrong. Next up "volcanoes are causing it" despite most supervolcanoes being well overdue for an eruption...

Fundamentally lacking understanding in feedback loops here OP - the climate change threatens to run away, as the changes caused by humans cause further climate change. This isn't a natural warming/cooling cycle, no respectable scientist would entertain that notion.
3
reply
OxFossil
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#8
Report 1 year ago
#8
(Original post by ByEeek)
Where as I agree with the status quo on climate change it is a feedback cycle but we are part of the feedback. As the temperatures rise, there will be increased demand for air conditioning and the associated power consumption that will in turn contribute to increased warming. Refrigeration and the use of HFCs in fridges is one of the biggest greenhouse gases but interestingly, food consumption and land management are also massive contributors to global warming.
Yes, as you say, the problem is that it's a positive feedback loop.
0
reply
ByEeek
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#9
Report 1 year ago
#9
(Original post by OxFossil)
Yes, as you say, the problem is that it's a positive feedback loop.
ish. It isn't that hard to stop / reverse. Just takes a bit of will power and the changing of habits. But we are already doing a lot e.g. wind farms and solar panels and I note that Veganuary is now a thing.
0
reply
gerrygerry
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#10
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#10
There are plenty of scientific papers opposing the current orthodoxy. Whether they are 97% for CO2, 3% against CO2 causing warming I wouldn't know, although I doubt it.
Image


Astronomical Theory Offers New Explanation For Ice Age
ImageBy Jeffery Kahn, [email protected]
July 11, 1997
BERKELEY, CA -- Recent ice ages -- ten periods of glaciation in the past million years -- are caused by changes in the tilt of the Earth's orbit, according to research published in the July 11 issue of Science magazine. The new analysis also presents strong evidence that another long prevailing theory does not account for these ice ages.
Researchers Richard A. Muller of the Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab), and Gordon J. MacDonald of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Austria, are co-authors of theScience article.
Muller and MacDonald report that cyclical changes in the location of the Earth's orbit cause differing quantities of extraterrestrial debris to come into the Earth's atmosphere. This, in turn, results in variations of climate on the planet.
Said MacDonald, "As the Earth moves up and down in the plane of the solar system, it runs into various amounts of debris, dust and meteoroids. Our work was an outgrowth of investigations of larger impacts, such as the comet or asteroid that killed the dinosaurs. However, meteoroids and dust are much smaller and more spread-out over time."
Muller notes that this new research has important implications for the understanding of the present climate, and for predictions of future climate.
"As far as we know," he said, "none of the present climate models include the effects of dust and meteors. And yet our data suggests that such accretion played the dominant role in the climate for the last million years. If we wish to make accurate predictions, we must understand the role played by such material."
Despite the current relatively warm climate on Earth, regular recurring epochs of glaciation have dominated the planet for the past million years. Ten times, glaciers have advanced and then retreated with the duration of retreat (and corresponding warmth) frequently lasting not more than 10,000 years. The Earth has been in a warm period for about 10,000 years now.
In the paper in Science, the researchers compared the geological record to the climactic cycles that would result from their theory and to that of the competing theory, first published in 1912 by Serbian scientist Milutin Milankovitch. Using a geological fingerprinting technique, Muller and MacDonald found that the climactic changes recorded in the rocks matched their theory but not that of Milankovitch.
Milankovitch said the ice ages are caused by variations in sunlight hitting the continents. In his theory, the ice ages are linked to "eccentricity," a very gradual, cyclic change in the shape of the Earth's egg-shaped orbit around the sun that completes a cycle roughly every 100,000 years. Eccentricity changes the Earth's average annual distance from the sun and slightly alters the amount of sunlight hitting the Earth.
To visualize the different astronomical cycle that Muller and MacDonald have found to match that of the climatic record, imagine a flat plane with the sun in the center and nine planets circling close to the plane. In fact, all the planets orbit the sun close to such a fixed orbital plane. The Earth's orbit slowly tilts out of this plane and then returns. As Muller first calculated in 1993, the cycle of tilt repeats every 100,000 years.
In their Science paper, Muller and MacDonald examine the geological record of the past million years to see which of the two 100,000-year cycles (eccentricity or tilt) matched the data.
They applied a technique called spectral analysis to ocean sediments taken from eight locations around the world, examining the oxygen-18 composition. This isotope is generally accepted to reflect the percentage of the Earth's water frozen in ice.
Muller and MacDonald's analysis yields "spectral fingerprints" which can be compared to the predictions of the two theories. Their analysis shows a clear pattern: The fingerprints of the ice ages show a single dominant feature, a peak with a period of 100,000 years. This precisely matches their theory. The fingerprints do not match the expected trio of peaks predicted by the Milankovitch theory.
Said Muller, "The mechanism proposed by Milankovitch could be adjusted to explain the cycles of glaciation that occurred prior to one million years ago. However, for the past million years the glacial record is an excellent match to the cycle of tilt."
Berkeley Lab conducts unclassified scientific research for the U.S. Department of Energy. It is located in Berkeley, California and is managed by the University of California.


Image
Search | Home | Questions
0
reply
RogerOxon
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#11
Report 1 year ago
#11
(Original post by gerrygerry)
Now that the orthodox view is CO2 increase causes global warming, what if it is the other way around. Global warming, causes CO2 to rise, as warming oceans store less gas. Long term the earth has always cycled into and out of ice ages. with ice age being the "norm" and warm periods abnormal. Seems to me there are a lot of tax rises being justified, and resources wasted fighting a natural thermal cycling of the earth. What are they going to do if they reduce emissions to zero and the earth continues to cycle hot and cold in response to natural forces way beyond mans control,
There are feedback mechanisms, which we're poking with a sharp stick.
0
reply
ScullywagonSix
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#12
Report 1 year ago
#12
(Original post by DrMikeHuntHertz)
The sun is trying to feed the plants and the evil libtards are trying to stop it.

But on a more serious note the green regulations/taxes are about expanding control over the lives of people, it was never about the environment.
yh governments used it as an excuse. The environmental taxes are stupid and the idea of changing the warming cycle is stupid, smaller counties will not destroy their economy to persue a colder earth, so why should the larger counties. Also the world has always been changing, people these days overreact too much
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Current uni students - are you thinking of dropping out of university?

Yes, I'm seriously considering dropping out (87)
14.01%
I'm not sure (29)
4.67%
No, I'm going to stick it out for now (196)
31.56%
I have already dropped out (13)
2.09%
I'm not a current university student (296)
47.67%

Watched Threads

View All