Do you have any figures to quantify mankind's contribution to climate change?

Question

Or am I just middle-aged?

Answer 1

No, I can't quantify.

Answer 2

Yes.  1.6 W/m2 (human) vs. 350 W/m2 (nature).  I've yet to see a reasonable explanation why the climate balances 350 but not 351.6, especially since 350 is not a constant.

It's clear from the numbers above that nature has over 200x more control over climate than humans.

An honest climate scientist will tell you that the the reasons for natural variation in the climate are not fully understood, and that no one knows what a NORMAL climate looks like.

Then again, not everyone's honest.

OK - not to be mean - but does everyone see how misleading it is to say that humans are responsible for 80% - it makes it sound like humans have control over the climate.  In reality humans are adding 1.6 W/m2 to 350 W/m2.  This tells us humans don't control the climate.

Answer 3

Here is what NASA's recent study says:

http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/...

Answer 4

It's difficult to quantify precisely, but humans are responsible for approximately 80-90% of the warming over the past 30 years.

Answer 5

The GW cultists no longer need science it is now their religion. If you question them you are a heretic. Be careful.

Answer 6

obviously the intent of the question is to cast doubt on whether we're responsible for the observed climate change.

lots of folks seem to think the same thing.

what i don't understand is, why they think they're so much smarter than all of the scientists that say there is a problem.

even those that Bush pays, and would like for them to deny the problem.

At this point, there's a bit less than a rise of 1 degree C in the average planetary temperature.

I think I can actually calculate this.

First, one ought to point out that we didn't make a big fire and heat stuff up.

What we did is similar to putting on an extra blanket, so that the heat we get from the sun does not get lost.

The average temp of the earth is the balance between the energy we receive from the sun, + the energy that is conducted up from the center of the earth, balanced by the amount of energy radiated away from the earth.

And the 40% increase in CO2 in the atmosphere has reduced the amount of energy radiated away from the earth.

After considerable searching, I think I found how to look at the air temp increase.

What I propose to do is see what the effect would be if the atmospheric heating were to be applied to the 5 great lakes.

This will, in fact, minimize what we think of as the heating somewhat, because water is hard to heat.  It absorbs more energy, per pound, than almost anything else, for a given temperature rise.  To a large degree, that's why we don't see a large temperature change on the earth.  The ocean is absorbing all the energy, and changing temperature very slowly.  The first thing to do is go look for the data we'll need.

http://environment.newscientist.com/chan...

The graph indicates a temp increase about 0.8 degrees C (from -0.3 to +0.5) in the last 100 years.

http://www.iop.org/activity/education/Te...

specific heat capacity of air is about 1000 J / kg

water with a specific heat of 4200 J / (kg oC).

So how much air is there?  first calculate surface area of earth.

Sphere Surface Area = 4 • π  Ã¢Â€Â¢ r² = π • d²

or (8000*5280)^2*pi  or

((8 000 * 5 280)^2) * pi = 5.6052849 × 10^15  <== surface area of earth, in sq ft.

Now over every sq in of earth, there are 14.7 pounds of air (that's what makes air pressure)

so, converting to sq ft 14.7*144

And the total weight of atmosphere is  (8000*5280)^2*pi*14.7*144  or

((8 000 * 5 280)^2) * pi * 14.7 * 144 = 1.18652671 × 10^19 <== total weight of air in pounds.

http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/statsrefs.html -- next, how much water is there in the great lakes?

The water volume is 22,600 Km^3 in the the 5 great lakes

Since  1 kilometer = 3,280.8399 feet the total weight of water in the great lakes is

3281^3*62.4  or  (3 281^3) * 62.4 = 2.20395783 × 10^12 <== total weight of water in all 5 lakes.

So now, we have the total weight of air and water in the great lakes.

We note that the air is surprisingly heavier.

Oh, we've used Joules.  what are they?  One joule = the energy required to heat one gram of dry, cool air by 1 degree Celsius.  or, in our case, 1/453.6 pounds

We've raised the temperature of the atmosphere 0.8 degrees C in the last 100 years.

So, if we were to apply the energy of that temperature change, to the water in the great lakes, what would it do?

Above, we've noted that the specific heat of water is 4 times that of air.

So what we want to calculate is how many degrees would the great lakes heat up, if the energy we've added to the atmospher was concentrated in the water of the great lakes.

To do that, we calculate #air/#lake*1000/4200/453.6  or

--- air weight--- !- water weight -!air/water specific heat-!-grams/pounds-!- 0.8 degree rise

((8000*5280)^2*pi*14.7*144)/(3281^3*62...  or that's enough heat/energy to raise all the water in the 5 great lakes by:

(((((((8 000 * 5 280)^2) * pi * 14.7 * 144) / ((3 281^3) * 62.4)) * 1 000) / 4 200) / 453.6) * 0.8 = 2 260.69456  degrees.

The energy that's been stored is enough to raise the temp of all the water in all 5 great lakes 2,260 degrees.

Or, raise the temp of all 5 lakes, top to bottom, from freezing to boiling, 22 times over.

Or, raise the temp of all 5 lakes, top to bottom, from freezing to boiling, and boil them all dry, 3 1/2 times over.

And that's only considering the energy we've added to the atmosphere, and skipping the ocean heating and ice we melted in glaciers, ice fields, permafrost, and floating ice, which, if i could figure out how to calculate it, would likely be much larger.

Answer 7

You won't get any real answers to this because there are none.  The whole thing is so grossly exaggerated out of proportion that it's become ridiculous.

You may be middle-aged, but you're pretty smart.

btw, what a cute kitty.  Is it yours?

Answer 8

I'd be more interested in the figure that climate change is contributing to the treasury.

Answer 9

The figures quoted by the GW priests are CO2 emmisions over many years taken from ice core samples.  And yes there seems to be some correlation between mans use of fossil fuel and CO2 increases.

They have not made a connection, in my oppinion to CO2 and GW, in fact there are many other factors that indicate temps were on the rise at the same rate before man began burning hydro carbons.

Take a look at the data in this link

http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm#...

Answer 10

I'd just like to know whether Betty has a daughter. I'm hot for 25-30 year-olds.

Answer 11

I have a figure that might give a man of your kind some global warming.

I'm hot for the middle ages.

Answer 12

al gore says so, so it's so.

Answer 13

How many airliners are in the sky right now, pumping out CO2 from the fossil-fuel they are burning?  Did you see how much clearer the skies turned just after the 9/11 attacks, when no-one was flying?  What irony is this, that Ossy Bin Laden was the man to demonstrate the level of our pollution!

Answer 14

Linlyons: Obviously, if you have the  answer then the planet can spare you two minutes to present the calculations. Keep thinking.