re: Riddle me this (and this is also for TB)
Back 10 or 15 years ago, everyone agreed that CO2 was up and the AGW skeptics did not agree temperature was up. The claim by the climatologists was- increased CO2 would increase temperature- and they presented a causal model based on physics for why this would happen- IR opacity and reflectivity.
15 years later, wow- we are all in agreement that we are warming. But now the new Quibble form the AGW denialist position (held almost uniformly by people who don't work in the field or research and publish in the topic) is 'Oh, Sure- theres warming, but its not caused by the CO2'.
There is evidence that average surface air temperature has increased worldwide by nearly 1 degree F (0.5 C) since 1850. Given the increase of about 25 percent in atmospheric CO2 between the early 1800s and the present, it might be concluded that the greenhouse effect is producing a global warming.
However, there has been little increase in the last 50 years, which raises questions about whether we really have experienced the effect of increasing CO2. The pattern of changing global temperatures suggests that there may be other factors influencing climate. There is also the possibility that the sensitivity to greenhouse gases is less than what most climate models indicate. Scientists feel an increase of 1degree F ( 0.5 degrees C) in 140 years is not necessarily outside the range of natural climate variability.
Do you see the problem yet?
Well, lets continue.
We have the observation that CO2 concentrations and global temperatures rise in tandem, dating back into the distant past. On one hand we have a causal mechanism by which CO2 raises temperature. On the other hand we have what? Pixie dust?
Causal?
To determine the effects produced from greenhouse gases, scientists look for changes such as warmer weather, warmer ocean temperatures, and a cooler stratosphere. The ability to predict these effects presents many difficulties because the Earth's temperature fluctuates for a variety of reasons. Instruments and techniques used to measure changes have not always been consistent. Although it is difficult to determine how much of the warming effect is man-made, it is fairly certain that humans have contributed to the growth of atmospheric CO2. The increase in CFCs is entirely man-made. The cause of the increase in methane is less well understood.
Do you have any science showing how increased temperature leads to increased CO2? You do realize that the Denialist camp claimed not 5 years ago that increased temperature will lead to increased CO2 uptake by encouraging global vegetation.
The consequences of changing the natural atmospheric greenhouse are difficult to predict, but certain effects seem likely:
Meanwhile, some crops and other plants may respond favorably to increased atmospheric CO2, growing more vigorously and using water more efficiently.
Do you have any science attributing the nascent warming trend to anything else?
See first blockquote and
Tropical oceans tend to release CO2, while cooler seas soak up CO2 from the atmosphere as phytoplankton grow and fall to the ocean floor. Changes in factors such as winds, ice cover and salinity would have cut productivity, leading to a rise in CO2.