Understanding Common Climate Claims

[sunsettommy]

Understanding Common Climate Claims

This is a draft copy of a paper that will appear in the proceedings of the 2005 Erice meeting of the world federation of scientists on global emergencies.

Richard S. Lindzen
Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Sciences
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

http://ff.org/centers/csspp/library/co2weekly/20060126/20060126_13.pdf

This is a 24 page PDF worth your reading.

He mentions that a doubling of CO2 should produce a heating of about 3.7 watts per square meter.

[Native American]

Understanding Common Climate Claims

This is a draft copy of a paper that will appear in the proceedings of the 2005 Erice meeting of the world federation of scientists on global emergencies.

Richard S. Lindzen
Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Sciences
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

http://ff.org/centers/csspp/library/co2weekly/20060126/20060126_13.pdf

This is a 24 page PDF worth your reading.

He mentions that a doubling of CO2 should produce a heating of about 3.7 watts per square meter.

Let's put that number in perspective. As my first post over in the "coming meltdown" thread reported, the ongoing heating from the Sun is:

1370 watts/m<SUP>2</SUP> received from the Sun at the Earth

IOW, even a doubling of CO2 would only result in a "global warming" increase of a mere 0.27%! Which hardly constitutes a global "emergency" as the symposium title would suggest.

In fact, seeing the word "emergencies" in the symposium title was the first tip-off that the factual data to follow would affirm a non-emergency.

That's even assuming his theorized number was correct!

[DoctorDoom]

1370 watts/m² received from the Sun at the EarthMinor point: that's at the top of the atmosphere. At ground level, it's about 1000 watts/m². That doesn't make a lot of difference, still only 0.37%. BFD.

[sunsettommy]

Let's put that number in perspective. As my first post over in the "coming meltdown" thread reported, the ongoing heating from the Sun is:

1370 watts/m<SUP>2</SUP> received from the Sun at the Earth

IOW, even a doubling of CO2 would only result in a "global warming" increase of a mere 0.27%! Which hardly constitutes a global "emergency" as the symposium title would suggest.

In fact, seeing the word "emergencies" in the symposium title was the first tip-off that the factual data to follow would affirm a non-emergency.

That's even assuming his theorized number was correct!

That is why I brought it up.

You see it correctly.

That even a DOUBLING of atmospheric CO2 produce negligible increase in global warming.

The PDF says it is about 2.7 watts increase at this time.

The mere changes of the suns irradiance or changes in the atmosphere composition and/or water vapor can swamp the slight increase of a TRACE Greenhouse gas contribution to any warming.

The CO2 as THE driver as charged by the IPCC is plain stupid.

[Telit laikitiz]

Glaciers Melting Twice As Fast Now...Threatens Widespread Flooding, Severe Storm Damage Worldwide... Washington Post | Shankar Vedantam | Posted February 16, 2006 11:37 PM
READ MORE: Global Warming (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/global-warming)

We had better put our houses on stilts. We can live like they did in Venice, although there will be no Venice if this is true. Remember, Al Gore has given us ten years before it is too late. Mountain property is the way to go. And a lot of prime real estate will open on Antarctica continent. The sky is falling, the sky is falling?!