next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
accelerate s
Stephen Shaw wrote:
>
> For a recent window into the real field of climate research that I just
> happened upon, there are two interesting articles in the weekly journal
> "Nature", 15 May 2008, volume 453, pages 379-382, and 383-386, and a more
> accessible commentary on this area by E. Brook "Windows on the
> greenhouse", on
> pages 291-2. This is the latest about sampling Antarctic ice cores for
> greenhouse gases carbon dioxide and methane, extending back now to
> 800,000
> years before present. This shows remarkably close co-variation among CO2,
> methane and temperature levels in the 800,000 years. The commentary also
> contains the clearest (cleanest) graphic I've yet seen of the CO2 and
> methane
> levels during the past 2000 years. These levels remained essentially
> flat
> throughout the pre-industrial part of the last 2000 years, but started to
> accelerate smoothly upwards ~200 years ago (hockey-stick profile) to
> much higher
> values than at any time in the preceding 800,000. Because Nature has a
> for-profit publisher, I was surprised to find that I could also get to
> this
> commentary on Google from my house, at
> http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7193/full/453291a.html
> This allows enlargement of the Figure 1 in question for a much better
> view than
> I had had, in the paper copy that I had been reading. Hope it works
> for you
> too.
> Cheers,
> Steve, Halifax
Hi Steve & All, June 10, 2008
Here I am getting sucked into this. But just to raise one objection.
Figure 1a shows without doubt that temperature, CO2 & CH4 are
related but--- temperature starts to increase BEFORE CO2 & CH4 start to
increase. There may subsequently be positive feedback, but at least
initially, higher temperatures are driving CO2 & CH4 increase not the
converse.
I suppose one could call this 'tceffe esuohneerg a' but it would be
awfully difficult to pronounce.
Also there was a correction to the effect that the figure on page
291 (?) was based on a 1978 Doctoral thesis. It was not clear whether or
not the figure to which they refer was Fig. 1 but I did not wish to pay
$18 to find out.
Yt, DW
next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects