tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5337555368793819627.post9079607725540505171..comments2023-06-07T09:04:36.390-04:00Comments on More Grumbine Science: A weird weekRobert Grumbinehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10783453972811796911noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5337555368793819627.post-9495257070632274452015-08-21T18:39:40.572-04:002015-08-21T18:39:40.572-04:00Hi Yazzi,
I'm sorry I missed replying here. ...Hi Yazzi,<br /><br />I'm sorry I missed replying here. The thing is not so much the size of the sources and sinks, but their balance. The human source of CO2 is small compared to the total of all other sources. But you can't only look at income in your financial budget. Have to look at expenses as well (otherwise, I'd be a millionaire), for carbon this means the sinks.<br /><br />Prior to the industrial revolution, the sources and sinks of carbon were in balance. Consequently, all of the increase in the atmosphere's CO2 levels has been due to human sources.<br /><br />A source to dive in to for the balancing of sources and sinks, with citations to the original science as well, is http://grumbinescience.org/radix/climate/scq.CO2rise.html by Jan Schloerer. It's old, but the fact that humans are the source of the CO2 rise is old knowledge (much older than this article). Plus, Jan wrote it up well.Robert Grumbinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10783453972811796911noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5337555368793819627.post-30080465200332439282015-04-05T05:48:10.721-04:002015-04-05T05:48:10.721-04:00Hi Robert, a google search of co2 v temperature pu...Hi Robert, a google search of co2 v temperature pulls up numerous graphs recording the variation in temperature back in history up to 400,000 years ago plotted against Atmospheric co2 concentrations.<br />Thing is, co2 appears to not only follow the temperature value, but also lags a little, which suggests co2 is responding to the temperature effects, not vice versa.<br />Considering, i beleive, natural causes, of which biological activity is a predominant proportion, far outwiegh our own contribution to the current co2 increases, is it not possible that co2 as we record it now is part of natural variability?<br />I'd be more then open to correction in my comments, i'm not a scientist and appreciate when researching on the net it is necessary to seperate the wheat from the chaff!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16604329540859833092noreply@blogger.com