A friend of mine just sent me this. Fitting considering the last two days Obama has been talking about emissions, and how we are destroying the planet with it.

If you read the section I am copying below, you will see CO2 levels have been much higher in the past. If fact, if you look at the graph, it pretty much demonstrates that there is no correlation at all to CO2 and the worlds temperature. Why again are we about to change the world over CO2?

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Carboniferous_climate.html

Similarities with our Present World

Average global temperatures in the Early Carboniferous Period were hot- approximately 20° C (68° F). However, cooling during the Middle Carboniferous reduced average global temperatures to about 12° C (54° F). As shown on the chart below, this is comparable to the average global temperature on Earth today!

Similarly, atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the Early Carboniferous Period were approximately 1500 ppm (parts per million), but by the Middle Carboniferous had declined to about 350 ppm -- comparable to average CO2 concentrations today!

Earth's atmosphere today contains about 380 ppm CO2 (0.038%). Compared to former geologic times, our present atmosphere, like the Late Carboniferous atmosphere, is CO2- impoverished! In the last 600 million years of Earth's history only the Carboniferous Period and our present age, the Quaternary Period, have witnessed CO2 levels less than 400 ppm.

Global Temperature and Atmospheric CO2 over Geologic Time

Late Carboniferous to Early Permian time (315 mya -- 270 mya) is the only time period in the last 600 million years when both atmospheric CO2 and temperatures were as low as they are today (Quaternary Period ). Temperature after C.R. Scotese http://www.scotese.com/climate.htm CO2 after R.A. Berner, 2001 (GEOCARB III)

There has historically been much more CO2 in our atmosphere than exists today. For example, during the Jurassic Period (200 mya), average CO2 concentrations were about 1800 ppm or about 4.7 times higher than today. The highest concentrations of CO2 during all of the Paleozoic Era occurred during the Cambrian Period, nearly 7000 ppm -- about 18 times higher than today.

The Carboniferous Period and the Ordovician Period were the only geological periods during the Paleozoic Era when global temperatures were as low as they are today. To the consternation of global warming proponents, the Late Ordovician Period was also an Ice Age while at the same time CO2 concentrations then were nearly 12 times higher than today-- 4400 ppm. According to greenhouse theory, Earth should have been exceedingly hot. Instead, global temperatures were no warmer than today. Clearly, other factors besides atmospheric carbon influence earth temperatures and global warming.

Come on CO2 isn't exactly a potent greenhouse gas anyway, methane is supposedly 50 times more potent. And I know I've told this story several times, but when I was doing my BSc degree at university I learnt about a chemical that is 17,500 times more potent than CO2 and produced in fairly substantial quantities, but it isn't even taken into consideration when talking about emissions.

I'll take my girlfriends' fathers' point of view on climate change, he's worked as a climatologist for 30 years so I trust him. Humans are having an impact on the climate, but what the media and politicians say is a over hyped. Even so it is hard to measure.

To summarise, my viewpoint is that I believe humans are having an effect on climate change, but it's not 'as bad' as what the media and politicians say, which is a distorted worst case scenario.


But regardless of if you accept it is happening or not an effort must be made to switch to renewable/clean energy and eliminate pollution, because climate change is not the only adverse effect that comes from emissions.

This.

Anyway, there are other things besides global warming that are enough reason for us to try to pollute less.

yeah, and the fossil fuels are running out too, so need be replaced

This too.

I belive it's a big myth. I predict that in 20 years from now people will laugh at this.

my view is pretty simple, making things more efficient and investing in renewables makes sense because fossil fuels will run out, so really, other peoples reasoning is irrelevant, its something we should do regardless of other factors that may or may not exist

I agree with this. I also think we should debate on how we make the world better and cleaner and not if we need to do it or else we would die vs. nothing is gonna happen so we shouldnt do anything.

sure, making it cleaner will also mean whats left of the fossil fuels last longer

C02 does have a link with Temp Mafoo...its just the other way around.

The ocean (ie water) is a natural sink for C02 and the amount it is able to absorb is dependent on its temperature. When the oceans warm they outgas C02 and when they cool they absorb it.

More to the point Z-MATC graphs of actual atmospheric temperature patterns compared to what the models are predicting are miles apart. The models require there to be a heat bubble at around 8-12km stretching from around 30N to 30S...this is where the greenhouse gases are strongest and where any global warming mechanism would work. In order for global warming to have validity this bubble MUST exist. The bubble isn't there (not even faintly) and has never been there in any data from any source at any time....ever.....EVER!