If climate change is caused by the sun, will carbon dioxide tip the problem over the edge, are we heading for?

Question

a big disaster?

Answer 1

I'm not saying one should not try to conserve our Earth's natural resources but, don't you know that carbon dioxide is used by trees and other plant life to make Oxygen?

Answer 2

Well ... did man-made carbon "tip the scales" for the last major Ice Age? You know, the one with the wooly mammoths walking on the glaciers that covered Kansas?

What about the little Ice Age of the 1700's?

Answer 3

Let’s look at climate change as a process and a few of the challenges this throws up.

Although earth’s climate has changed many times in the past the key factor has been the speed (rate) of change. When we talk of species migration, to get an idea of the timescales involved think of how long it would take an oak forest to extend its range (migrate).

If a climate change means acorns dropped at the edge of the forest can grow more easily they survive to grow into trees; they drop an acorn a little further out, that grows into a tree and drops another acorn further out still. Measured in human lifetimes this is a very, very slow process.

The most disruptive periods have been those where the changes were very abrupt and with too short a timescale for species to adapt. e.g. the extinction event at the end of the Cretaceous that led to the extinction of the dinosaurs.

The warming of the past half century (1oC) has been very fast in geological terms. Coming out of the last ice age the earth only warmed at the arte of 1oC per 1,000 years. The rate of warming is on the order of 10 times faster today than seen in the ice cores. When change is rapid then species have problems adapting.

a) Speed of adaptation. Species with very short life spans e.g. butterflies that have a lifespan measured in weeks etc can adapt over generations much more quickly than a species that lives for periods of years simply because the process of natural selection takes longer. They have more generations with which to work with.

b) Ability to migrate. Key factors are: Is the way blocked by farmland, cities or a natural obstacle? Not so important for birds, but very important for large mammals or plants. Creating ‘roadways’ for species migration has been suggested. (Though some species such as foxes have adapted to city living. Others may do so as well.)

c) Ability to find a suitable new home? Is the niche already taken? Is there a niche you can settle into?

Species that are already vulnerable, such as those with limited ability to disperse, or specialised habitat requirements, small populations and low genetic diversity will be most at risk.

d) Plant species whose current climatic tolerances are currently very small (due to a stable climate) may be more vulnerable to relatively small increases in global temperatures, while species with larger current climatic tolerances are likely to be more tolerant. Quite a few animals, insects etc have very specialised diets so their fate may be linked to how successful thir main food source is at adapting.

e) Many species will tend to move outward, or upward in elevation, (if suitable habitats exist) in order to keep pace with shifting climate zones but could find that suitable habitats are becoming much smaller increasing population pressures or competition for that enviroment.

The ability of fish to adapt will be interesting. Many fish prefer cold water (cold water can hold more oxygen) which is why the richest fishing grounds are in regions of cold water upwelling. Cod have already moved north from the N. Sea to colder waters, fish that prefer warmer waters are being increasingly seen around the British coast. Whether some fish species will continue to find cold refuges remains to be seen.

Other changes in climate such as temperature and rainfall will directly affect the distribution, lifecycles, habitat use and extinction rates of individual species. In turn, these changes will alter competition and predation between species leading to changes in the structure and composition of communities and ecosystems. One example is changes to the timing of species' lifecycles. There’s already evidence from N. America that the earlier arrival of spring can disrupt food chains. Plants flowers earlier for example but find that the insects aren’t around at that time to pollente other plants as they haven’t adaped to the changes in climate as fast. This then has a knock on effect through the food chain.

For other species – northern forest trees for example – they face increased threats from a) greater fire risks and b) insect infestations. Both of those already a major concern in Canada and Alaska as winters become milder (more insects survive hibernation etc), spring arrives earlier and summer lasts longer.

For us humans even small changes to climate directly impact on the types of crops that can be grown and in what quantity.

Above all it is changes of reduced precipitation for example – or even outright drought – or of increased flood frequency as global circulation patterns change and there potential impact on both wildlife and humans.

The key question about climate change is does this mean WETTER or DRYER, the answer will be different in different regions A warmer atmosphere holds more water vapour, if precipitation is reduced in some areas (SW USA or eastern Africa) it will still go somewhere.

One major atmospheric circulation agent to watch closely are the jet streams that bring the summer monsoon to India and S Asia and China. If this jet stream changes its course even by a small amount the effect could be catastrophic.

Rapid climate change can produce some very stressful challenges for humanity.

Answer 4

No it won't tip it over the edge: http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?F...

Answer 5

No. Carbon gases change drastically on earth, it has in the past and it will again, and I am pretty sure the Dinos didn't drive cars.

Answer 6

To answer your question, if the current warming were caused by the Sun (which we know it's not), then yes, increased atmospheric CO2 would increase that warming.  That's just the simple fundamental physics of the greenhouse effect.

Of course, we know the current warming isn't caused by the Sun because solar output has decreased over the past 30 years as global warming has accelerated rapidly.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/62902...

Because of this, no scientific study has attributed more than one-third of the recent warming to the Sun.  Not one single study, and most put the solar contribution at 0-10%.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...

Answer 7

The pendulum will swing the other way shortly.  The real question should be what we'll do to prepare for the next Ice Age.

Answer 8

We need our atmosphere to protects us and other life on earth from the suns radiation, and cfc's are allegedly damaging the atmosphere.  

So the more cfc's, the more damage will allegedly be caused.

Some people say the Kyoto Treaty is more about controlling tax payers than it is about contolling the climate.

Basically you've got to do your own reading and make your own mind up.

Answer 9

Yea, we are all going to die some day.

Answer 10

check this out

http://ibdeditorial.com/IBDArticles.aspx...

Answer 11

No, All of the IR energy emitted by the Earth  in the infrared absorption band of CO2 is already being absorbed by the CO2 that is present. In fact, it is absorbed in the first 10m above the Earths surface (i.e -very close to the surface). Adding  more CO2 will not cause more warming.