For other frequencies, only a small proportion is currently absorbed,
so higher levels of greenhouse gases do make a difference.
For other frequencies, only a small proportion is currently absorbed,
so higher levels of greenhouse gases do make a difference.
Not exact matches
Radiation from the atmosphere's
greenhouse gases is narrow - band, even at sea
level but increasingly
so at
higher altitudes as the effect
of pressure - broadening decreases.
Mr. Solanki said that the brighter sun and
higher levels of so - called «
greenhouse gases» both contributed to the change in the Earth's temperature, but it was impossible to say which had the greater impact.
So, for example, if we go through a period
of relative
higher solar output, and less volcanic activity, relatively less cloudiness, and
higher greenhouse gas levels, these would all tend to increase ocean heat content.
This is
so because in addition to the theological reasons given by Pope Francis recently: (a) it is a problem mostly caused by some nations and people emitting
high -
levels of greenhouse gases (ghg) in one part
of the world who are harming or threatening tens
of millions
of living people and countless numbers
of future generations throughout the world who include some
of the world's poorest people who have done little to cause the problem, (b) the harms to many
of the world's most vulnerable victims
of climate change are potentially catastrophic, (c) many people most at risk from climate change often can't protect themselves by petitioning their governments; their best hope is that those causing the problem will see that justice requires them to greatly lower their ghg emissions, (d) to protect the world's most vulnerable people nations must limit their ghg emissions to
levels that constitute their fair share
of safe global emissions, and, (e) climate change is preventing some people from enjoying the most basic human rights including rights to life and security among others.
This is
so because: (a) it is a problem mostly caused by some nations and people emitting
high -
levels of greenhouse gases (ghg) in one part
of the world who are harming or threatening tens
of millions
of living people and countless numbers
of future generations throughout the world who include some
of the world's poorest people who have done little to cause the problem, (b) the harms to many
of the world's most vulnerable victims
of climate change are potentially catastrophic, (c) many people most at risk from climate change often can't protect themselves by petitioning their governments; their best hope is that those causing the problem will see that justice requires them to greatly lower their ghg emissions, (d) to protect the world's most vulnerable people nations must limit their ghg emissions to
levels that constitute their fair share
of safe global emissions, and, (e) climate change is preventing some people from enjoying the most basic human rights including rights to life and security among others.
31) Despite activist concerns over CO2
levels, rising CO2
levels of some
so - called «
greenhouse gases» may be contributing to
higher oxygen
levels and global cooling, not warming
Even though the rate
of emissions
of greenhouse gasses slowed down temporarily for some regions
of the world, those
gasses stay in the air after they are released,
so this year
greenhouse gas levels reached new record
high levels
What I'd suggest here is that, in order to work, the argument you're putting forth here would require a yet unknown mechanism that un-explains the
high level of certainty that we have about
greenhouse gases, and adds a yet -
so - far completely unknown forcing to take its place.
There is the «business as usual» case that assumes 4 degrees
of global warming is inevitable,
so we should use the cheapest and most plentiful energy sources available regardless
of the fact that burning these fuels will raise atmospheric
greenhouse gas concentrations 40 percent
higher than current
levels.