Environment

Mar 4, 2011

The Australian Academy of Science: what is climate change?

The period for estimating climate is usually 30 years or more, long enough to sample a full range of weather.

67 comments

Leave a comment

67 thoughts on “The Australian Academy of Science: what is climate change?

  1. Meski

    Water vapour is an important greenhouse gas but it is not like the greenhouse gases affected directly by human activities.

    A little disingenuous, human activities (eg large scale logging) affect the location of water vapour considerably.

  2. mattsui

    Water vapour eventually falls from the sky of it’s own accord….. GHGasses may remain up there indefinately.

  3. birdsnewworld

    “Water vapor is about half the present-day greenhouse effect”

    Even if you buy into the standard view that back-radiation is powerfully important, the above statement is an outrageous lie. Just incredible. I’d not expect this sort of rubbish from the most repulsive liars of Goddard or realclimate. What a far out statement. You see this constant lying isn’t going to stop until we start sacking people. This lie is second only to the USGS lie about volcanic CO2 emissions.

    Here’s the absorption-scattering spectrum just to take a look at things. And whereas the other alleged greenhouse gases are trace gases, water vapor is up at 1%. So there is the CO2 and its puny in three respects.

    1. There is so little of it. Barely enough for the plants to grow. No more than 390ppm if the compulsive liars monopolizing the measuring of it are to be believed. And of course you need 10 000 ppm just to get to 1%

    2. As you will see the regions of infra-red wavelengths that CO2 absorbs are tiny. Or skinny if you look at the graph.

    3. These regions, at most places and temperatures are usually pretty much saturated already by water vapor.

    So make no mistake about it. The report kicks off with a known and transparent lie. They get away with lying so much they must now be feeling deeply confident about it.

    http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_wXDx9TVRBL8/Sc6YF7FBeOI/AAAAAAAAA1w/9xNkidL2Kns/s400/Picture+e.png

  4. birdsnewworld

    “Water vapour eventually falls from the sky of it’s own accord….. GHGasses may remain up there indefinately.”

    Indefinitely? You cannot let these people stooge you fella. There’s a carbon cycle just like there is a water cycle. How is your comment relevant? Are you hoping that the extra CO2 will help us a little bit when the air is too cold to hold water vapor?

  5. birdsnewworld

    “Water vapor (H2O) ~0.40% over full atmosphere, typically 1%-4% at surface”

    Here wiki is talking about atmospheric composition. But what really counts is that its concentrated at the surface to mid-troposphere region. Thats why we can be quite sure that the scattering and absorption activities of water vapor will have a net warming effect. Because of its location. Water vapor has a warming effect for other reasons which I won’t go into. But at least with water vapor its very hard to make the case that the scattering and absorption component of what it does could ever be net negative.

    Whereas increases to CO2 levels at the surface slowly make their way up far above the troposphere. Where they would obviously have a cooling rather than a warming effect since they will scatter that part of the spectrum, and more than half of that scattering will make its way back out to space.

    This is a scandal that this claim has been made. I’ve taken all the names of the people involved in this sham organisation with such a high-fallooting name, and highlighted them on my blog. If they continue with this lie without retraction I MAY WRITE A LETTER.

    Well all jokes asides, I’ll try and alert the media even further than what I have already.

  6. Meski

    @Mattsui: Yes, but deforestation means that a larger percentage of it falls into the ocean, rather than on the land.

  7. birdsnewworld

    “@Mattsui: Yes, but deforestation means that a larger percentage of it falls into the ocean, rather than on the land.”

    But there has been massive regrowth of biomass. The problem is I cannot make a strong claim because I need a start and end date and its hard to get hold of the data. But over the last few decades, as troubling as the loss of biomass from the tropical areas has been, there has been massive reforestation in many first world areas and especially a lot of biomass growth in the far North.

  8. danr

    You can’t just treat CO2 as if it’s the only gas in the system.

    It is a complex interactive system and the reason Global Warming Protagonists wont discuss this is because it involves “real” science, not climate change science.

    Besides, heat from the sun liberates CO2 held in the ocean. This is an effect which swamps the “agw” effect.

    To top it all off, the biggest greenhouse gas is water vapour, against which effect CO2 is insignificant and man made CO2 effect barely noticeable within the error limits..

    Joke

    If Carbon pollution is CO2 then what is Hydrogen pollution.

    Yes, RAIN.

    If either was missing from our lives we would not be here. Both are life essentials.

  9. JamesH

    @ Danr

    “You can’t just treat CO2 as if it’s the only gas in the system. It is a complex interactive system and the reason Global Warming Protagonists wont discuss this is because it involves “real” science, not climate change science”.

    You have no idea what you are talking about. “Complex interactive system” is not a magic passphrase that protects you from science.

    “heat from the sun liberates CO2 held in the ocean. This is an effect which swamps the “agw” effect.”

    Heat from whatever source liberates CO2 from the ocean. If the heat of the atmosphere rises due to CO2, more CO2 will be released, which will cause more heat. This effect does not “swamp” but add to anthropogenic releases. The natural carbon cycle is balanced; we are unbalancing it.

    ” biggest greenhouse gas is water vapour, against which effect CO2 is insignificant and man made CO2 effect barely noticeable within the error limits.”

    Wrong. CO2’s absorbtion is not blocked by water vapour and is independently measurable and significant in size. Water vapour is a feedback not a forcing; water only remains resident in the atmosphere for a few days before condensing into rain, so it cannot raise the temperature for long periods as CO2, with a residency time of many years, can.

    “If Carbon pollution is CO2 then what is Hydrogen pollution”?

    Extremely dangerous.

    HTH.

Leave a comment

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details

Sending...