To scientists, the theory is this: adding CO2 to the atmosphere will
somewhat warm the atmosphere.
An age of Western settlement, but the world is made by cardboard, creating
a somewhat warm atmosphere.
Not exact matches
That
atmosphere will continue to
warm in a
somewhat non-linear way, causing non-linear problems.
Temperature tends to respond so that, depending on optical properties, LW emission will tend to reduce the vertical differential heating by cooling
warmer parts more than cooler parts (for the surface and
atmosphere); also (not significant within the
atmosphere and ocean in general, but significant at the interface betwen the surface and the air, and also significant (in part due to the small heat fluxes involved, viscosity in the crust and
somewhat in the mantle (where there are thick boundary layers with superadiabatic lapse rates) and thermal conductivity of the core) in parts of the Earth's interior) temperature changes will cause conduction / diffusion of heat that partly balances the differential heating.
Likewise, the term «global
warming» is
somewhat problematic as well since the planet isn't
warming uniformly — a few places have a short - lived cooling trends — and the word «
warming» sounds downright cozy on a cold day, when, in fact, substantially heating of the
atmosphere and ocean is happening.)
That is, almost all of the water vapour is in the lower
atmosphere over
warm parts of the globe; do water vapour trends elsewhere follow lock - step or are they
somewhat independent, capable of longer residence times, and potentially distinct in terms of greenhouse effect?
Also, does the fact that we're
warming the
atmosphere faster than other times in the past mean things might happen
somewhat faster?