Sentences with phrase «co2 is increased»

But if CO2 is increased by human activity then it will contribute to warming.

So the more the CO2 is increased the more it goes elsewhere, and with 38000 gT in the ocean a lot of it has gone elsewhere before.

Then you see if the air at the bottom gets warmer when CO2 is increased.

Hi Coby, You wrote (6 April 2008): «There needs to be a mechanism whereby atmospheric CO2 is increased.

There needs to be a mechanism whereby atmospheric CO2 is increased.

The IPCC chapter on climate models appears to justify use of the models by saying they show an increase in temperature when CO2 is increased.

Even though some of the CMIP models produce a lot of global warming, all of them are still stable in this regard, with net increases in lost radiation with warming (NOTE: If analyzing the transient CMIP runs where CO2 is increased over long periods of time, one must first remove that radiative forcing in order to see the increase in radiative loss).

In the weaker «wing» regions between 14 and 17 um the sensor is seeing the troposphere where irradiance decrease as CO2 is increased.

Recent findings, however, suggest that the rate at which levels of CO2 are increasing today far exceeds that of the PETM era.

But near the poles and in the upper stratosphere, CO2 is increasing the amount of ozone by preventing nitrogen oxide from breaking it down.

If after year ten from now, temperatures have not shown an upturn, then can I say ``... for whatever reason, even though CO2 is increasing, perhaps AWG is not happening»?

Anthropogenic emissions of CO2 are increasing, and accelerating, and current proposals for reducing them present no plausible scenario in which emissions will actually peak and decline in anywhere near the time frame that is required to avoid what are generally considered «dangerous» levels of CO2 (although points 1 - 3 above suggest that the current levels are more dangerous than has been generally believed).

We know why CO2 is increasing now, and the direct radiative effects of CO2 on climate have been known for more than 100 years.

It claimed with over 90 % certainty that CO2 was increasing because of human economic activities and was almost the sole cause of temperature increase.

If CO2 were increased in a pulse of a few parts per million — the atmosphere warms rapidly and there may be a very temporary imbalance in radiative flux at TOA before equilibrium is restored with a warmer atmosphere.

Atmospheric CO2 is increasing because of global warming, and not the reverse.

But we are the reason CO2 is increasing, not any reasonable doubt about that.

That CO2 is increasing is true, and it is also true (sort of) that global temperatures are increasing, so the original argument is?

In the AGW case the argument is that anthropogenic CO2 causes climate change (antecedent), CO2 is increasing (conditional), therefore there is global warming (consequent).

Consequently, atmospheric CO2 is increasing ten times faster than any rate detected in ice core data over the last 22,000 years.

That's not the period to compare with the current situation where CO2 is increasing and it is not just natural emissions, but deeply stored carbon, more akin to volcanic episodes in paleoclimate of which the last 5 million years wasn't one.

Please explain why atmospheric CO2 is increasing linearly when emission is increasing exponentially?

Oh yeah, it's getting warmer and CO2 is increasing and burning fossil fuel adds CO2 to the atmosphere, so if you connect the dots you get: AGW.

Additionally, atmospheric oxygen (O2) is decreasing at the same rate that CO2 is increasing, because oxygen is consumed when fossil fuels combust.

There is essentially universal agreement that atmospheric CO2 is increasing as a result of the consumption of fossil fuels and that this should enhance the «greenhouse» effect leading to a warming of the planetary surface.

Had CO2 been increasing?

If CO2 is increasing, that's OK because there is an upper limit to how much hydrocarbons that humans can burn!

A global trend of increasing atmospheric CO2 means that all local regions are also seeing the same increasing trend; A decline in CO2 locally weakens the well - established claim that global CO2 is increasing significantly; Students may assume that since the atmosphere covers the Earth, CO2 levels in one location would experience the same rate of change and levels of CO2 as in other geographic locations.»

I can not differentiate if I'm suffering from confirmational bias in that I glean that CO2 is increasing but do not find attribution of that CO2 to being definitively causative of warming.

At present, atmospheric temperature is decreasing and CO2 is increasing again showing that CO2 is not the principal driver of climate change.

Man emits CO2, CO2 is increasing half in the atmosphere and the oceans are increasing in CO2 as well.

Since CO2 is increasing at 2ppmv / year but there has not been any detectable change in OLR resulting from this increase; it is safe to say that CO2 increases have not have any more than a trivial insignificant effect on the Earth's energy balance.

In 1968, I explained how CO2 is increasing in the atmosphere.

CO2 is increasing an average of 2.5 parts per million annually, a rate of increase 100 to 200 times faster than during the transition from the last ice age, according to NOAA.

In the discussion about whether the Earth has warmed the «climate scientists» seem to be completely unable to speak the truth because the truth casts doubts on the «CO2 is increasing and will lead to temperature increases which will be bad» theory.

Mesocosm experiments found that when atmospheric CO2 was increased, primary production by plankton community consumed 39 % more DIC.

So John if CO2 is increasing but water vapour is decreasing how can water vapour be a + ve feed back?

Lord Monckton then startled his audience by saying it was settled science that there is a greenhouse effect, that CO2 adds to it, that CO2 is increasing in the atmosphere, that we are largely to blame, and that some warming can be expected to result.

That CO2 is increasing?

So while I don't have any upper bound on the rate of change of temperature during the MWP, beyond what we can deduce from the PCAs of Mann and McIntyre and their respective supporters, I would claim an upper bound on the rate at which CO2 was increasing back then.

Right now CO2 is increasing at 0.66 % per year, but assuming a continuation of the past 54 years, in 10 years time it will be increasing at 0.83 % per year.

CO2 is increasing.

As we now that there has been a period of 18 years with no surface warming when atmospheric CO2 was increasing for each and every year we know that the majority of the warming in the last 50 years was not due to the increase in atmospheric CO2 and the IPCC general circulation model calculated warming due to CO2 is orders of magnitude too high.

Most of the CO2 is also absorbed by natural processes but the net amount of CO2 is increasing and the man made percentage of the net increase was about the 28 to 30 %.

2) The 18 year pause without warming (Strike 2) As atmospheric CO2 is increasing with time, the delta T (increase in planetary temperature due to the increase in CO2) should also be increasing with time.

> 95 % probability 1 (GH effect), 2 (CO2 is a GHG): OK 3 (Atmospheric CO2 is increasing): OK (but would like to see specific references of «hundreds») 4 (Human CO2 emissions are increasing): OK 5 (Human CO2 causes majority of CO2 increase): Seems logical, but isotope studies are not conclusive; annual changes in concentration do not correlated with annual CO2 emissions at all, so something else is also in play here.

But that CO2 is increasing sounds true to them since there has been such a campaign, even though the levels rely on the same equilibrium principles.

The scientific community widely recognizes that CO2 is increasing in our atmosphere, and that it is having dramatic effects on our climate.

30 billion tons emission per year and atmospheric CO2 is increasing about half of that.

The atmosphere is warming because CO2 is increasing.