Oh sweet. This has come up again?
FWIW, though, the impact of organic compounds (mainly terpenes) released by trees is a big unknown in atmospheric chemistry right now. I mean, "pollution comes mainly from trees" is obviously a ridiculous statement, and no one speculates that the chemicals released by trees are in any way comparable to the damage that humans are doing. But it is a hot topic of research. We know next to nothing about how trees change the forest air--but we do know there are some significant and fascinating impacts. Plus, there's also the big question about how the gases and aerosols we put into the air interact with gases and aerosols emitted by trees. We have a new person coming into our department next year who studies this intensely--it's an exciting time to be an atmospheric chemist. (Which I'm not.)
Another thing I just learned: "global warming" only warms the troposphere. The greenhouse mechanisms will actually cool off the stratosphere. Cooler stratosphere means more polar stratospheric clouds. Polar stratospheric clouds (PSCs) remove certain gases from the air that keep CFCs and the like in check. So a day or so after a PSC forms and then moves on, stratospheric ozone is very rapidly chewed up by the CFCs. Greenhouse gases indirectly lead to a bigger ozone hole.
http://news.google.com/news/more?pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&ncl=dRb2erAZNtt1rAMiydQc8VdFUsLwM&topic=t
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100017393/climategate-the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-of-anthropogenic-global-warming/
Climategate: the final nail in the coffin of 'Anthropogenic Global Warming'?
By James Delingpole Last updated: November 20th, 2009
If you own any shares in alternative energy companies I should start dumping them NOW. The conspiracy behind the Anthropogenic Global Warming myth (aka AGW; aka ManBearPig) has been suddenly, brutally and quite deliciously exposed after a hacker broke into the computers at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (aka Hadley CRU) and released 61 megabites of confidential files onto the internet. (Hat tip: Watts Up With That)
When you read some of those files – including 1079 emails and 72 documents – you realise just why the boffins at Hadley CRU might have preferred to keep them confidential. As Andrew Bolt puts it, this scandal could well be “the greatest in modern science”. These alleged emails – supposedly exchanged by some of the most prominent scientists pushing AGW theory – suggest:
Conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organised resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more.
...
Originally posted by CalJustSee my blog to see my most recent (though not in much depth yet) examination of this issue.
Both timebombted and DannyU are playing with words: If the ACCELERATION (only) is man-made, then the PROBLEM is man-made.
The key issue at stake is that if GW is NOT man-made (as the VP-to-be seems to think), then man can do nothing about it!
Is there somebody on RHP that believes that GW (i.e. the nature-made-but-man-accelerated version) has not be ...[text shortened]... people over there saying it, and I would like to hear some debate supporting that point of view.
Originally posted by EladarLike who?
We'll just have to see how well your model works over the next 10 years. There are scientists out there who believe the sun is a major factor in global warming and the fact that the sun is headed into a low sun spot cycle, the earth is due to cool. The year that it cooled just happened to be the first year of the sun spot cycle.
Originally posted by convectWhat do you think of this?
Wow. Astronomers are *totally* qualified to make statements about climate. I'll soon be publishing a book on how black holes are caused by the jet stream, too.
Seriously, though, if you have a citation from a respectable peer-reviewed scientific journal, I'll look at it, take it into context, and change my tune.
Marinov, I., A. Gnanadesikan, J. L. Sarmiento, J. R. Toggweiler, M. Follows, and B. K. Mignone (2008), Impact of oceanic circulation on biological carbon storage in the ocean and atmospheric pCO2, Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 22, GB3007, doi:10.1029/2007GB002958.
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2008/2007GB002958.shtml
Originally posted by zeeblebotI looked into this, it's complete bollocks, They aren't worried about freedom of information (FOI) because they have anything in particular to hide, they just can't cope with the administration required. When they get a query they have to ensure that every email and every other piece of information pertaining to whatever the request is about is included and make sure that every reply undergoes quality control. Which means too much work for what is basically an academic department at a university.
http://news.google.com/news/more?pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&ncl=dRb2erAZNtt1rAMiydQc8VdFUsLwM&topic=t
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100017393/climategate-the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-of-anthropogenic-global-warming/
Climategate: the final nail in the coffin of 'Anthropogenic Global Warming'?
By James Delingpole Last updated: November ...[text shortened]... manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more.
...