Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Does CO2 really drive global warming?
Chemical Innovation ^ | May 2001 | Robert H. Essenhigh

Posted on 04/25/2003 6:38:20 AM PDT by kidd

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-49 next last

1 posted on 04/25/2003 6:38:20 AM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: kidd
Nah, CO2 drives a Yugo.
2 posted on 04/25/2003 6:53:14 AM PDT by SAJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kidd
Saved for later,bookmarked at FR and faved on my webtv from the source. I like to send the original by email rather than FR thread. I scannned to the bottom for a very logical set of points.
3 posted on 04/25/2003 7:02:42 AM PDT by larryjohnson (MS meteorology)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kidd
I'm waiting for the new troll to weigh in on this with his words of wisdom and rebuke.
4 posted on 04/25/2003 7:04:38 AM PDT by Balding_Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kidd
If there are flaws in these propositions, I’m listening; but if there are objections, let’s have them with the numbers.

*********

Numbers? We don't need no stinkin' numbers!

Numbers get in the way of a perfectly good 'surrender your rights to Big Brother' opportunity.

And as a special added bonus for this time only - Global Warming is a way to pull down the U.S. relative to competing nations!

Why would you want to let facts and (*gasp*) numbers get in the way of such a beautiful thing?!
5 posted on 04/25/2003 7:06:47 AM PDT by Gorjus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kidd
Global warming is bad science BUMP
6 posted on 04/25/2003 7:10:19 AM PDT by KC_for_Freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kidd
It's likely that the sun will be the driver for all of it. We'll need a few thousand more years to be sure. ;)
7 posted on 04/25/2003 7:12:22 AM PDT by Brett66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kidd
The author has an interesting thesis. I have written in the past a similar argument with respect to CO2 having an absorbing function for incoming radiation (sun light) but not a radiation blocking function at night because it absorbs and emits preferentially at 4.26um where the earths radiates back to space (cools)preferentially in the range of 8.0 - 12.0um due to the Black Body curve and laws according to Planck. Therefore, CO2 in this simple example would not have a definitive effect. Think of this, because there is strong 4.26um radiation from the sun, CO2 gets hot and the heat is radiated and conducted to all gasses and to the surface. At night the radiating temperature is now 300K degrees and the peak Black Body emission wavelength for that temperature is right at 10.0um. 10.0um light (radiation) goes right through a 4.26um absorber (CO2) but because water has such a broad absorption-emission band then water interferes with the radiation back to space (like on a cloudy night). Other strong green house gasses include methane (natural gas) and would behave similarly. It can't be this simple.
8 posted on 04/25/2003 7:17:16 AM PDT by Final Authority
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cogitator
ping
9 posted on 04/25/2003 7:21:29 AM PDT by boris (Education is always painful; pain is always educational)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kidd
MIT researcher finds evidence of global warming on Neptune's largest moon

JUNE 24, 1998

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. -- We're not the only ones experiencing global warming. A Massachusetts Institute of Technology researcher has reported that observations obtained by NASA's Hubble Space Telescope and ground-based instruments reveal that Neptune's largest moon, Triton, seems to have heated up significantly since the Voyager space probe visited it in 1989. The warming trend is causing part of Triton's surface of frozen nitrogen to turn into gas, thus making its thin atmosphere denser.

While no one is likely to plan a summer vacation on Triton, this report in the June 25 issue of the journal Nature by MIT astronomer James L. Elliot and his colleagues from MIT, Lowell Observatory and Williams College says that the moon is approaching an unusually warm summer season that only happens once every few hundred years. Elliot and his colleagues believe that Triton's warming trend could be driven by seasonal changes in the absorption of solar energy by its polar ice caps.

"At least since 1989, Triton has been undergoing a period of global warming. Percentage-wise, it's a very large increase," said Elliot, professor of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences and director of the Wallace Astrophysical Observatory. The 5 percent increase on the absolute temperature scale from about minus-392 degrees Fahrenheit to about minus-389 degrees Fahrenheit would be like the Earth experiencing a jump of about 22 degrees Fahrenheit.

Triton is a simpler subject than Earth for studying the causes and effects of global warming. "It's generally true around the solar system that when we try to understand a problem as complex as global warming -- one in which we can't control the variables -- the more extreme cases we have to study, the more we can become sure of certain factors," Elliot said. "With Triton, we can clearly see the changes because of its simple, thin atmosphere."

The moon is approaching an extreme southern summer, a season that occurs every few hundred years. During this special time, the moon's southern hemisphere receives more direct sunlight. The equivalent on Earth would be having the sun directly overhead at noon north of Lake Superior during a northern summer.

Elliot and his colleagues believe that Triton's temperature has increased because of indications that the pressure of the atmosphere has increased. Because of the unusually strong correlation between Triton's surface ice temperature and its atmospheric pressure, Elliot said scientists can infer a temperature increase of 3 degrees Fahrenheit over nine years based on its recent increase in surface vapor pressure. Any ice on Triton that warms up a little results in a big increase in atmospheric pressure as the vaporized gas joins the atmosphere.

Scientists used one of the Hubble telescope's three Fine Guidance Sensors in November 1997 to measure Triton's atmospheric pressure when the moon passed in front of a star. Two of Hubble's guidance sensors are normally used to keep the telescope pointed at a celestial target by monitoring the brightness of guide stars. The third can serve as a scientific instrument.

In this case, the guidance sensor measured a star's gradual decrease in brightness as Triton passed in front of it. The starlight got dimmer as it traveled through Triton's thicker atmosphere and then got cut off completely by the moon's total occultation of the star. This filtering of starlight through an atmosphere is similar to what happens during a sunset. As the sun dips toward the horizon, its light dims because it is traveling through denser air and because the sun's disk gets "squashed."

By detecting that Triton's atmosphere had thickened, astronomers were able to deduce that the temperature of the ice on Triton's surface has increased. "This pressure increase implies a temperature increase," Elliot wrote. "At this rate, the atmosphere has at least doubled in bulk since the time of the Voyager encounter." Like the Earth, Triton's atmosphere is composed mostly of molecular nitrogen, but its surface pressure is much less than that of the Earth--about the same as that 45 miles high in the Earth's atmosphere.

In their Nature paper, Elliot and his colleagues list two other possible explanations for Triton's warmer weather. Because the frost pattern on Triton's surface may have changed over the years, it may be absorbing a little more of the sun's warmth. Or changes in reflectivity of Triton's ice may have caused it to absorb more heat. "When you're so cold, global warming is a welcome trend," said Elliot.

About the same size and density as Pluto, Triton--one of Neptune's eight moons--is 30 times as far from the sun as the Earth. It is very cold and windy, with winds close to the speed of sound, and has a mixed terrain of icy regions and bare spots. Triton is a bit smaller than our moon, but its gravity is able to keep an atmosphere from completely escaping because it is so cold. Its composition is believed to be similar to a comet's, although it is much larger than a comet. Triton was captured into a reverse orbit by Neptune's strong gravitational pull.

Other astronomers who participated in this investigation are MIT research assistant Heidi B. Hammel and technical assistants Michael J. Person and Stephen W. McDonald of MIT; Otto G. Franz, Lawrence H. Wasserman, John A. Stansberry, John R. Spencer, Edward W. Dunham, Catherine B. Olkin and Mark W. Buie of Lowell Observatory; Jay M. Pasachoff, Bryce A. Babcock and Timothy H. McConnochie of Williams College.

This work is supported in part by NASA, the National Science Foundation and the National Geographic Society.

--END--

10 posted on 04/25/2003 7:24:25 AM PDT by boris (Education is always painful; pain is always educational)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brett66
Considering what the geology shows, this certainly makes more sense than the contention that CO2 is causing global warming. If that were the case, the CO2 / temperature change correlations seen in the geologic record (during times when mankind was numbered in the hundreds of thousands and living in caves and the trees) would make no sense at all. It does seem more logical and better supported by long term geologic evidence that warming (and cooling) cycles affect CO2 concentrations, not the reverse.

With their arguments more and more refuted by factual data and logic, it will be interesting to see how long the pinheads in the environmental movement can hold out.

11 posted on 04/25/2003 7:28:23 AM PDT by katana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: kidd
CO2 or any other gasses manufactured by any activites either naturally occuring or intentional become so unimaginately diluted by the sheer volume of the earths atmosphere comparred to emmissions that they have no effect now or forever after. Molelules of these gasses therefore become totally isolated and can have no refractive effect since they are magnitudes smaller than the wavelengths of solar radiation. We are talking parts per bazillion here.
12 posted on 04/25/2003 7:32:11 AM PDT by aspiring.hillbilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kidd; EdZ
bump to EdZ
13 posted on 04/25/2003 7:33:05 AM PDT by larryjohnson (MS meteorology)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kidd
Does CO2 really drive global warming?

Depends on what planet one is analyzing. Planet Earth has been experiencing global cooling since the 11th century.

14 posted on 04/25/2003 7:50:58 AM PDT by T. Jefferson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: T. Jefferson
Ask Eric the Red...
15 posted on 04/25/2003 7:54:27 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: kidd
Regardless of the answer to this question, it's clear
to me that man's activities on this planet do not
cause climate change world -wide! Consider the massive effect of a large volcano epuption or the effect of the
natural venting of a methane pocket.
16 posted on 04/25/2003 8:35:06 AM PDT by upcountryhorseman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kidd
Series question:

Is the increase in CO2 the reason that the trees, grass, etc. are more GREEN now than I remember them as a child.

I live on the Texas Gulf Coast. As a child, I remember summers when the grass and EVERYTHING would be literaly brown, from the heat and lack of moisture. I recall that the "lawn work" came to a stop -- but no more.

Now, the grass stays green and grows ALL SUMMER LONG.

Does this have anything to do with the raise in the CO2 level?

Thanks,

17 posted on 04/25/2003 8:36:33 AM PDT by i_dont_chat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kidd
The earth is only 6000 years old.
18 posted on 04/25/2003 8:39:55 AM PDT by biblewonk (Spose to be a Chrissssstian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: *Global Warming Hoax; Ernest_at_the_Beach
http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list
19 posted on 04/25/2003 8:56:22 AM PDT by Free the USA (Stooge for the Rich)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: i_dont_chat
My understanding (from another thread) is that plants are starved for CO2. Any increase in CO2, I suspect, would be visibly beneficial. Then again, you might just have seen a string of dry years when you were younger. I'm not sure how old you are, but as an example there was a string of dry years in Oklahoma-Texas in the mid-30s that lead to the dustbowl.
20 posted on 04/25/2003 10:22:33 AM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-49 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson