[NatureNS] FW: Fifth Estate tonight at 9 p.m., CBC-TV -- from John Doyle's Globe and Mail column, 11/15/06

Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 10:33:34 -0400
From: David & Alison Webster <dwebster@glinx.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:0.9.2) Gecko/20010726 Netscape6/6.1 (CPQCA3C01)
To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
References: <C18110B7.D2EB%jimwolford@eastlink.ca> <45634591.2040606@glinx.com> <c45c2b572703b26f04847a4b710782a9@dal.ca>
Precedence: bulk
Return-Path: <naturens-mml-owner@chebucto.ns.ca>
Original-Recipient: rfc822;"| (cd /csuite/info/Environment/FNSN/MList; /csuite/lib/arch2html)"

next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects

driven by recent s


Patrick Kelly wrote:

> One of the things about long term trends that comes out in both The 
> Weather Makers and An Inconvenient Truth is that we are now well 
> outside the historical range of temperatures. If you look at the 
> Wikipedia entry on "global warming" there are number of graphs of 
> temperatures and CO2 concentrations that now go back hundreds of 
> thousands of years. This one illustrates the close correlation between 
> temperature and CO2 concentrations.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Co2-temperature-plot.svg
>
Hi Patrick & All,            Nov 24, 2006
    Your e-mail opens many topics but, to avoid discussing an armload of 
questions at once, I will respond selectively.

    I tend to avoid Wikipedia and most internet sources because so much 
content is intentional trash, but taking the contents on this site at 
face value-- I see good indications that high temperatures leads to high 
CO2, precisely what one would expect from soil science and horse sense 
considerations but nothing that would show elevated CO2 to be a 'cause' 
of high temperature.

    The opening figure (these figures are unfortunately not numbered so 
far as I noticed) has displayed in the left panel Vostoc temperature and 
Vostoc CO2 with present on the left, so time runs from right to left. 
Looking first at the right hand side of the peaks, both CO2 and 
temperature rise at about the same time. This could mean EITHER (1) that 
high CO2 leads to high temperature OR (2) it could mean that high 
temperature leads to high CO2.

    The left side of these peaks allows one to chose between these 
alternative conclusions because temperature almost always falls before 
CO2, in some cases by as much as 10,000 years later. If high CO2 were 
the cause of high temperature then temperature would tend not to fall 
until CO2 had decreased.  A lag in CO2 decrease, after a decrease in 
temperature, is on the other hand exactly what one would expect if the 
elevated CO2 were a product of elevated temperature, because the onset 
and rate of decrease of CO2 (net carbon capture if you wish) will be 
conditioned by all factors that influence photosyntheses and not only by 
factors the influence release of fixed carbon.

    Therefore, based on the opening figure, one must conclude that the 
tendency for positive association between CO2 and temperature reflects 
greater release of fixed carbon at high temperatures and does not 
reflect an effect of CO2 on temperature.

    Moving on to a second figure, positioned on the lower right I think, 
one has a chart of Standard Deviations from Mean of Vostoc CO2 data for 
the last 400,000 years
along with EPICA Dome C temperature (whatever that is). In agreement 
with the opening figure, decrease in CO2 lags decrease in temperature by 
up to 10,000 years (at about 330,000 BP), leading to the same 
conclusions as above.




next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects