This post tries to interpret the declarations of the Mahattan conference. The post is not based on notions of the blogger, but is a compliation of various studies which intensify the debate:
"Current plans to restrict anthropogenic CO2 emissions are a dangerous misallocation of intellectual capital and resources that should be dedicated to solving humanity's real and serious problems. That there is no convincing evidence that CO2 emissions from modern industrial activity has in the past, is now, or will in the future cause catastrophic climate change."
Global warming that is already locked into the system indicates that there may not be a linear response to rising CO2 levels. There is a danger that at some point we will cross a threshhold when global warming accelerates. By continuing to increase the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere we are getting closer to that threshhold point. It has been shown that the temperature of the Earth's atmosphere and the CO2 content has followed a regular 100,000 year cycle of change with the CO2 content and temperature closely linked and following the same graph line.
Courtesy: Hydrogen Now Journal
But Professor Ian Clark, an expert in palaeoclimatology from the University of Ottawa, claims that warmer periods of the Earth's history came around 800 years before rises in carbon dioxide levels.
The programme on Channel 4, on Great Global Warming Swindle, also highlights how, after the Second World War, there was a huge surge in carbon dioxide emissions, yet global temperatures fell for four decades after 1940.
The system is too complex to say exactly what the effect of cutting back on CO2 production would be or indeed of continuing to produce CO2. It is ridiculous to see politicians, policy makers and activists arguing over whether they will allow the global temperature to rise by 2c or 3c.
No comments:
Post a Comment