[ RadSafe ] RE: extremism

[Steven Dapra]

March 22

In reply to Ruth Sponsler I (Steven Dapra [SD]) wrote:

At the same time, global warming proponents are moaning and groaning about 
CO2. According to the above link,
[< http://www.clearlight.com/~mhieb/WVFossils/ice_ages.html>] 186 billion 
tons of CO2 are produced every year. Six billion of these tons are man-made 
a mere three percent. The other 97% comes from natural biological processes 
in the ocean, and from decaying plant matter. As can plainly be seen, the 
human contribution to greenhouse gases is insignificant.

Kjell Johansen replied to me, saying:

"It is my understanding from meteorology classes that while water vapor 
acts as a green house gas, the amount of water vapor in the air depends 
upon the temprature. Increasing the CO2 in the atmosphere traps more heat 
which in turn generates the water vapor by evaporating liquids. Long story 
short, without the driving force of carbon dioxide, and other gases such as 
methane (which has about 16x more forcing power than CO2), there would not 
be much water vapor to ta act as a greenhouse gas."

SD:

         I have never taken a meteorology class.  What you say sounds 
plausible.  How did you manage to overlook what I said, to wit, only three 
percent (3%) of CO2 is man-made?  Are you saying that this 3% from humans 
is the sole (or major) cause of evaporation?  As a corollary of this, are 
you also saying the naturally produced 97% of CO2, that we humans can not 
control, has nothing to do with any alleged global warming?  It will be 
futile to drag out methane and its 16x forcing power.  There is even less 
man-made methane than there is man-made CO2, so even with its 16x forcing 
power it still can't even begin to approach the influence of the 97% CO2 
that occurs naturally.

Kjell also wrote:

"To suddenly (200 years is sudden on the geological time scale) dump large 
amounts of carbon which has been sequesterd in the earth for millions of 
years into the atmosphere and expect that the earth's biogeochemical cycles 
will not be upset is not logical."

SD

         Approximately how much CO2 has been dumped into the atmosphere in 
the preceding 200 y, and how does that amount compare in actual tonnage, 
and in percentage, to the amount that has been dumped by natural processes 
during the same period?

         You wrote, Kjell, "It is a form of reverse hubris to think that 
humanity can not effect [sic] global climate change."

         I would say it is a form of stupendous arrogance and vast, 
un-warranted self-assurance to say that humanity *can* affect the earth's 
biogeochemical cycles.  A mere foot of snow will paralyze most cities in 
the United States.  Six inches of rain causes everyone to go into a panic 
about how the dams or the levees will break and wash everyone and 
everything away.  What makes us humans think we can do so much, or that we 
can have any influence at all on nature.  A simple windstorm will tear a 
roof off a multi-million dollar building.  Who do we think we're fooling?

Steven Dapra
sjd at swcp.com