Not exact matches
For example, let's say that evidence convinced me (
in a way that I wasn't convinced previously) that all recent
changes in land surface temperatures and sea surface temperatures and atmospheric temperatures and deep sea temperatures and sea ice extent and sea ice volume and sea ice
density and moisture content
in the air and
cloud coverage and rainfall and measures of extreme weather were all directly tied to internal natural variability, and that I can now see that as the result of a statistical modeling of the trends as associated with natural phenomena.
CO2 could impact the atmosphere
in other ways:
changes in specific heat capacity,
density, interaction with water droplets and
cloud formation.
A
change in clouds may reflect it or if the optical
density of the atmosphere due to water + CO2 (+ everything else) is already saturated at those wavelengths then no additional energy will get added.
On the basis of the current
density -
cloud hypothesis the variations
in the current
density change the charge status of aerosols that affect the ice production rate and hence the
cloud microphysics and climate [e.g., Tinsley and Dean, 1991; Tinsley, 2000].