0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.
In view of these several research findings, it should be obvious that the Roman Warm Period was a very real feature of northern European climatic history, and that it likely was even warmer than the Current Warm Period has been to date. Furthermore, since all of that prior warmth occurred at times when the atmosphere's CO2 concentration was more than 100 ppm less than it is today, there is no compelling reason to believe that the lesser warmth of today has anything at all to do with the air's current much-higher CO2 content.
I have a quote here from another expert in the field:"Yes, that is correct. Light that is absorbed by gases is re-emitted in a random direction. ""The amount of carbon dioxide is enough to absorb all the radiation in the bands where it absorbs within a few meters. So the only effect of an increase in CO2 is to move the location of absorption/re-emission closer to the source".Tom NelsonAre you sure about exactly what is the greenhouse effect? You are not answering the question that I asked in my previoos post?
"CO2 has been as high as 3000ppm,"[O2] used to be zero ppm so it couldn't do any harm to go back to that.From thishttp://www.livescience.com/environment/070312_solarsys_warming.htmlcited by litespeed..."Habibullo Abdussamatov, the head of space research at St. Petersburg's Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia, recently linked the attenuation of ice caps on Mars to fluctuations in the sun's output"And, from the same site"As for Abdussamatov’s claim that solar fluctuations are causing Earth’s current global warming, Charles Long, a climate physicist at Pacific Northwest National Laboratories in Washington, says the idea is nonsense.“That’s nuts,” Long said in a telephone interview. “It doesn’t make physical sense that that’s the case.”"Shall we just say that the evidence doesn't seem altogether uncontraversial?