“We cannot continue using our atmosphere as a garbage can,” said Jos Lelieveld, a German atmospheric chemist.
http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/
Apparently Jos is unaware of the fact nature dumps more than thirty times as much CO2 into the atmosphere as humans. He also appears unaware of the fact that humans depend on fossil fuels for their very existence.
CO2 is a fundamental component of life. Global warming alarmism is the garbage.
Yes!
More evidence that government funded science research is a make work project for otherwise non employables! It was either live off the generosity of the government or be bums on the street!
so it’s not just retarded politicians who are…. well, retarded.
“a German atmospheric chemist”
Is this a joke? Surely if he has more than 2 brain cells he knows the ratio of natural CO2 to that produced by humans.
There is the answer Dave! One needs more than 2 brain cells to understand the Carbon Cycle!
Atmospheric CO2 made easy…
http://autonomousmind.wordpress.com/2010/12/30/atmospheric-co2-made-easy/
Perhaps they might learn something from it.
If they were capable of learning they would have taken up respectable occupations like Street Sweeper! 😉
Haven’t seen that before, thanks AM!
Is the main diagram right? If its a steady-state chart, how are they attributing sources to the CO2 – I didn’t think we could yet attribute anthropogenic sources like this with accuracy. And where did the surface oceans figure of 57% come from – I thought the oceans were a net CO2 sink on a first-order differential basis – isn’t this mixing (sorry, pun) atmospheric and oceanic total CO2?
Tim:
You can not remove a portion of the Biosphere. As the oceans warm from natural variations they will release more CO2. This allows an increase in production of Flora that uses the CO2. That Flora is both on land and in the oceans. During warming periods is has been normal for CO2 to increase so even if human release amounts are known they do not know what the % of gain from year to year is due to Human released CO2. They do make a lot of guesses, mostly on the high side for human contribution. With a estimated 3% gain year to year they claim Humans cause that gain which means that without human intervention there would be a net loss of atmospheric CO2. From that I come to the conclusion that without humans introducing CO2 into the atmosphere life would have ceased to exist on earth about 200 years ago due to lack of CO2 in the biosphere! 😉 Or maybe that was 1959!!!! December 16th to get a better estimate and I would include it would have happened at 1445 GMT! Luckily Humans released enough CO2 to keep the planet thriving. Gaia is soooo Happy she gave us snow to celebrate!
Mike: the commentary refers to “sources of carbon dioxide” and “CO2 emissions” which I don’t think would be a usual description for total biosphere content.
If it is total content, how reliable is the ocean total? Why the legend “Surface Ocean”- what depth does this apply to and why doesn’t it include abyssal content (as the cooler and probably larger volume)?
Does the “respiration” segment account for flora (absorbing CO2) or is this treated just as balancing out the biomass created? What about fauna (eating biomass and exhaling CO2) – how is the biomass consumed accounted for? How reliable is the biomass total generally?
What is the “Deforestation/Changing Land Use” segment – has it been time integrated for total CO2 content or how is it otherwise measured? What was the assumed starting forests/land use content? And why does atmospheric CO2, when absorbed by the ocean, seem to lose attribution between human source and natural, just becoming part of the Surface Ocean segment?
Strikes me as a pretty iffy accounting and chart – sadly, as one would expect from Defra educating our kids to become CAGW believers.
Steve continues to use the Internet as a garbage can…
And rightfully so !! rofl
“a German atmospheric chemist”
Eine kleine dummkopf. It’s 3% CO2 from humans, 97% CO2 from Gaia, (the bitch).
Having read AM, change that to 5% human, 95% Gaia.