Real cause of increased co2?

On 7/30/2010 4:28 PM, @&*$?%gmail.com">erschroedinger @&*$?%gmail.com wrote:
> On Jul 30, 4:02 pm, Beam Me Up Scotty > Everyth…@Blackhole.NebulaX.com> wrote:
>> On 7/30/2010 3:24 PM, Orval Fairbairn wrote:
>>
>>> In article
>>> ,
>>> “erschroedin…@gmail.com” wrote:
>>
>>>> On Jul 30, 4:58 am, Giga2 wrote:
>>>>> On 30 July, 09:24, “Rob Dekker” wrote:
>>
>>>>>> “Giga2″ wrote in message
>>
>>>>>> news:10cf8c28-0609-47d8-9f67-1f48df297415 @&*$?%j9g2000yqn.googlegroups.com…
>>>>>> On 29 July, 15:33, “erschroedin…@gmail.com”
>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Jul 29, 5:49 am, Giga2 wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>> The higher quality data available since 1950 has allowed the team
>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> calculate that since that time, the world has seen a phytoplankton
>>>>>>>>> decline of about 40%.
>>>>>>>>> The amount of phytoplankton – tiny marine plants – in the top
>>>>>>>>> layers
>>>>>>>>> of the oceans has declined markedly over the last century, research
>>>>>>>>> suggests.
>>>>>>>>> Photosynthesis by phytoplankton removes carbon dioxide from the air
>>>>>>>>> and produces oxygen.
>>
>>>>>>>>> In several parts of the world, notably the Southern Ocean,
>>>>>>>>> scientists
>>>>>>>>> have already noted that the waters appear to be absorbing less CO2
>>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>>> although this is principally thought to be because of changes to
>>>>>>>>> wind
>>>>>>>>> patterns – and leaving more CO2 in the air should logically lead to
>>>>>>>>> greater warming.
>>
>>>>>>>>> “Phytoplankton… produce half of the oxygen we breathe, draw down
>>>>>>>>> surface CO2, and ultimately support all of our fisheries,” said
>>>>>>>>> Boris
>>>>>>>>> Worm, another member of the Dalhousie team.
>>
>>>>>>>>> “Logically you would expect that as fishing has gone up, the amount
>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>> zooplankton would have risen – and that should have led to a
>>>>>>>>> decline
>>>>>>>>> in phytoplankton,” he told BBC News.
>>
>>>>>>>>> “So there’s something about fishing that hasn’t been factored into
>>>>>>>>> this analysis.”
>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-10781621
>>
>>>>>>>> No, plankton take CO2 out of the air; absence of plankton doesn’t put
>>>>>>>> CO2 in the air — it just means less will be taken out.
>>
>>>>>>> And when less is taken out, more remains. Its not that difficult is
>>>>>>> it?
>>
>>>>>> Yes it is. And that is concerning.
>>>>>> One may wonder why phytoplanckton would not reproduce faster, with the
>>>>>> higher levels of CO2 available, and fewer fish to eat them.
>>>>>> “What we think is happening is that the oceans are becoming more
>>>>>> stratified
>>>>>> as the water warms,” said research leader Daniel Boyce from Dalhousie
>>>>>> University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
>>
>>>>>> “The plants need sunlight from above and nutrients from below; and as it
>>>>>> becomes more stratified, that limits the availability of nutrients,”
>>
>>>>>> Now, the 40% decline in phytoplanckton sounds a bit like a wild guess to
>>>>>> me
>>>>>> (after all, the data is based on old records of using “Secchi disks” to
>>>>>> measure the transparancy of the sea. Transparancy is affected by many
>>>>>> different factors, not just phytoplanckton, and also old Secchi disk
>>>>>> measurements are few and far between.
>>
>>>>>> But if true, that plytoplanckton levels declined due to warming oceans,
>>>>>> then
>>>>>> we are faced with yet another “positive feedback” on the climate system.
>>>>>> Increased temperatures causes increased CO2 levels, which again causes a
>>>>>> bit
>>>>>> more warming. And this is one positive feedback that has NOT been part of
>>>>>> climate models so far.
>>
>>>>>> I wonder how many more positive feedback mechanisms mother Nature has
>>>>>> hidden
>>>>>> from us so far.
>>
>>>>>> After all is said and done, the IPCC projections may be very much
>>>>>> underestimating the sensitivity of the global climate system to changes
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> GHG forcing….
>>
>>>>> It may well be another feedback if reduced co2 uptake is important at
>>>>> all. However as you know temperatures started rising long before
>>>>> industrialisation, right?
>>
>>>> Uh, no. Both started mid 19th century.
>>
>>> So, how did the Ice Age end 12000 years ago? Are you telling us that the
>>> earth hasn’t been warming for the past 12000 years?
>>
>>> The National Weather Service started keeping detailed temperature
>>> records only since 1880.
>>
>> and had few temperature monitoring stations on the Ocean….
>
> And so like when we go further back, we use proxies.

Guess work?

To use in a computer model that makes guesses on code written by
programmers that guessed on the math that creates weather.

If you can factor in that many variables and get the correct outcome of
all possible interactions to an accuracy that can predict world wide
weather and climate, Why the hell didn’t you tell us with those
Computer models that the MORTGAGE MARKETS and the economy were going to
collapse…. and why can’t you accurately model the economic recovery?
Every week the economists are surprised by the numbers…..

>> so most of
>> the DATA is from 1/3 of the planet that is land, and those on the land
>> were mostly in the industrialized Nations and even many of those were no
>> well maintained…..
>>
>> So you get real DATA from the USA which is about 1% of the mass of the
>> world?
>>
>> I wouldn’t buy a TV commercial with demographics lacking that much DATA.
>
> I’ve never bought a TV commercial.

You have bought a line of bullshit.