A Bigger contributor to GW than Carbon Dioxide.

[Windguy]

I don't disagree with you at all, what you are saying is right, but to add to that if you add heat into the bonded water molecules, then have added enough kinetic energy (latent heat energy) then they break again.

An experiment to show this (it's not the same thing though) is to drop a salt cube into a saturated solution of salt water. It will eventually turn into a blob on the bottom as the molecules are turning over all of the time. Now if you add water (or heat into the atmosphere) then you'll see that blob become smaller. If you empty some water without losing any Na and Cl molecules (If you remove the heat from the atmosphere) then you'll see the blob get larger.

Those temperature changes are what is needed to help force down the humidity. Since rain alone cools down the atmosphere when it starts the atmosphere then loses more humidity then what it can hold. But to get regular rain (especially monsoonal), then you need a lot of evaporation volume, which normally comes from trees.

So without the major changes such as cold ocean winds, or huge evaporation volume from the forests you will see clouding, more in the morning, less at midday, but a very low chance of rain. I would guess with high humidity levels you have more chance of dew in the morning if the morning becomes quite cool.

[genaman]

Those once huge places full of impossible to count species of plants and animals.Places like the once Great Amazon region? where it would rain prredictably most every day.
Well parts of the Amazon river can testify that those rain psatterns are not happening much anymore. Then we have South American Glaciers melting at ever increasing rates,which Glaciers them;lves are know to create their own weather.
La Nina And El Nino are today most every year occurences, Raise your hands if you heard of those terms as much say 30 or 40 years ago?
When you think about it even concreted cities themselves tend to contribute to weather patterns. Ever wonder why temperatures in the cities are always higher then out in the country?
You know even 50 years ago before we launch weather satelites ,Humans relied on mostly guess work from water people. All they had was spotting weather stations and a few crude instrunents to make a guess which way the weather front would go.
I remember when many people went out and bought Almanacs every year and used them .

Here in Central PA. we have had mucho rain this winter,while very little snow.
Nothern Pa got much more snow then usual. Milwaukee Wisconsin where my sister in law lived for the last 6 or 8 years recieved very little snow until this year.

As far as you know have they even come up with a working theory why the Western USA had The Dust Bowl way back in the 1930's I heard something about improper farming practices ,but that has little to do with getting moisture. Was it some Pacific tropical depression that lingered for many years or what?

It is like they say the deserts ever increase in territory. Yet, if you dig deep enough into any desert your will find traces of huge forest that once lived.
Was that early global warming ? hell we still cannot even answer those questions.

The thing is that we would never be doing ourselves any disservice ,by helping Our Earth regenerate say forest. even for us that is a no brainer. And GOD help us if someone ever finds a way to make it rain where they want it for real. There are government programs right here in the USA that have been working on that for decades.
They fail to realise that if they make it rain say in Denver ,The land east of Denver will recieve less.

Now we can post as much as we want on what we think is causing climate change.
But to this very second not a soul I ever have come in contact with has ever attepted to test my closed garage running vehicle theory. All which is truely man made and how it changes the Earth's weather conditions inside the garage.

andOh yes and you can make it rain inside your home just by using a few everyday in all homes man made inventions. Do I need to tell you what they are? A heat source a pot and water is one.
Those that are say still in their 20's today will see many of what is today researched theories about weather will be proven completely wrong in another 30 or 40year Humans are but babes in the woods knowing what causes weather and why it acts the way it does.

To understand the weather we have to believe us to be totally depended on the Earth. It seems every other living thing but humans understands this

[Wowbagger]

Originally Posted by genaman

Those once huge places full of impossible to count species of plants and animals.Places like the once Great Amazon region? where it would rain prredictably most every day.
Well parts of the Amazon river can testify that those rain psatterns are not happening much anymore. Then we have South American Glaciers melting at ever increasing rates,which Glaciers them;lves are know to create their own weather.
La Nina And El Nino are today most every year occurences, Raise your hands if you heard of those terms as much say 30 or 40 years ago?
When you think about it even concreted cities themselves tend to contribute to weather patterns. Ever wonder why temperatures in the cities are always higher then out in the country?
You know even 50 years ago before we launch weather satelites ,Humans relied on mostly guess work from water people. All they had was spotting weather stations and a few crude instrunents to make a guess which way the weather front would go.
I remember when many people went out and bought Almanacs every year and used them .

Here in Central PA. we have had mucho rain this winter,while very little snow.
Nothern Pa got much more snow then usual. Milwaukee Wisconsin where my sister in law lived for the last 6 or 8 years recieved very little snow until this year.

As far as you know have they even come up with a working theory why the Western USA had The Dust Bowl way back in the 1930's I heard something about improper farming practices ,but that has little to do with getting moisture. Was it some Pacific tropical depression that lingered for many years or what?

It is like they say the deserts ever increase in territory. Yet, if you dig deep enough into any desert your will find traces of huge forest that once lived.
Was that early global warming ? hell we still cannot even answer those questions.

The thing is that we would never be doing ourselves any disservice ,by helping Our Earth regenerate say forest. even for us that is a no brainer. And GOD help us if someone ever finds a way to make it rain where they want it for real. There are government programs right here in the USA that have been working on that for decades.
They fail to realise that if they make it rain say in Denver ,The land east of Denver will recieve less.

Now we can post as much as we want on what we think is causing climate change.
But to this very second not a soul I ever have come in contact with has ever attepted to test my closed garage running vehicle theory. All which is truely man made and how it changes the Earth's weather conditions inside the garage.

andOh yes and you can make it rain inside your home just by using a few everyday in all homes man made inventions. Do I need to tell you what they are? A heat source a pot and water is one.
Those that are say still in their 20's today will see many of what is today researched theories about weather will be proven completely wrong in another 30 or 40year Humans are but babes in the woods knowing what causes weather and why it acts the way it does.

To understand the weather we have to believe us to be totally depended on the Earth. It seems every other living thing but humans understands this

Sorry, what is your post about?

[genaman]

Humans thinking they do not need our Earth to survive and their rejection that they have a responsibility for many of the things that are causing Climate Change.
Just to plant even one native tree ,or realise that deserts were once forest.
Look you can keep hitting the nonbelievers with new Scientific reports daily,but few minds will change.
We need to personalize what Climate Change reality is and how those nonbelievers will be affected by it.
You mean the Idea of making it rain in your own home was over your head?
Or A running motor in a closed garage was beyond your understanding that humans do effect their environment.
Or or melting Glaciers will change the availability of water even before they melt to the last drop.
Or every forest is teaming with millions of different beneficial and all connected to each other life forms?
Or is this just you being sarcastic? Whatever!

John Lennon once wrote and sang a song you might want to find and listen to it today. Then perhaps you could be a part for the betterment of both Our Earth And Humans IMAGINE!

[Windguy]

12345 theres the five characters hhmmm

Sharply reducing the amount of "black carbon" - commonly known as soot - in the atmosphere could help slow global warming and buy precious time in the fight against climate change, new research says.

Soot produced by burning coal, diesel, wood and dung causes significantly more damage to the environment than previously thought, two US researchers have found. Black carbon could cause up to 60% of the current warming effect of carbon dioxide, making it an important target for efforts to slow global warming.

Around 400,000 people are estimated to die each year due to inhaling soot particles, particularly because of indoor cooking on wood and dung stoves in developing countries. These deaths are mainly among women and children.

Greg Carmichael, of the University of Iowa, one of the authors of the study, published in Nature Geoscience, said: "Trying to develop strategies that really go after black carbon is a very good short term strategy and a win-win strategy [from] both climate and air pollution perspectives."

Professor Carmichael and Veerabhadran Ramanathan, at Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego, put together data from satellites, aircraft and surface instruments on the warming effect from black carbon.

They conclude that its effect in the atmosphere is around 0.9 watts per square metre, higher than the estimate of 0.2 to 0.4 watts in last year's report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

The 8 million tonnes of soot released into the atmosphere every year have also created a number of "hot spots" around the world, contributing to rising temperatures.

The plains of south Asia along the Ganges River and continental east Asia are both such hot spots, in part because up to 35 percent of global black carbon output comes from China and India.

Fine black soot settling on snow and ice - and thus trapping more of the sun's radiative force - have also accelerated the melting of glaciers in the Himalayas and ice cover in the Arctic, two regions that have been hit especially hard by climate change in recent decades.

"A major focus on decreasing black carbon emissions offers an opportunity to mitigate the effects of global warming trends in the short term," the authors conclude.

Most particulates in the atmosphere in the atmosphere reduce the warming effect from greenhouse gases by bouncing radiation back into space - so called global dimming. But black carbon has the opposite effect and professors Ramanathan and Carmichael argue that its contribution to global warming has been underestimated.

The researchers say programs to replace wood-burning stoves with clean technology in developing countries should be pursued to reduce the number of deaths caused by inhaling the smoke.

The authors stress that these measures are not the magic bullet for climate change.

"It is important to emphasise that black carbon reduction can only help delay and not prevent unprecedented climate changes due to CO2 emissions," they wrote.

James Randerson (in London - Guardian News and Media, Agence France-Presse)
For the Sydney Morning Herald.

[forfismum]

I think we need more theories, more hypotheses , we need to go out and shake the trees for I feel that there are many many more academics hidden in the branches who have yet to speak,who have yet to pose before the cameras with the rictus botox smile upon their faces and share with us the Truth.

[UrbanFarmboy]

The greatest single cause of global warming is population growth beyond relatively sutainable levels.

[cbacba]

really?

Is that why the little ice age ended a few hundred years ago and maybe why we aren't already in a full scale ice age again?

what population caused the global warming that drove the planet out of the ice age a little over 10,000 years ago?

[Windguy]

Originally Posted by forfismum

I think we need more theories, more hypotheses , we need to go out and shake the trees for I feel that there are many many more academics hidden in the branches who have yet to speak,who have yet to pose before the cameras with the rictus botox smile upon their faces and share with us the Truth.

I believe it would be better if it was only CO2. CO2 with 1.5W/m^2 forcing is about 1.4 degree increase by the Vostok ice cores. So add another 1W/m^2 for methane and other man made GHG's, another 0.9W/m^2 for carbon dust or soot then on top of that, my theory of slowing down of the evaporation rain cycle (unproven) and the aerosols are equal to -0.18W/m^2. So our speed is dictated by all of them, for which there are signs of La Nina slowing down now. So we should tackle the easiest first, biggest bang for our bucks, i.e. the soot and deforestation and hopefully that should slow our heating down a bit.

Lastly my evaporation rain cycle I have been trying to find evidence though meteorology reports and have not found anything that signifies it is happening as I said. Only two months of the year have shown definite trends of slowing down the evaporation rain cycle in Australia, but I'll keep on hunting.

[cbacba]

if 80 ppm (or 100ppm) is responsible for 1.4 deg K rise from 1.5W/m^2, then each doubling would account for 3 deg K rise in temperature. Since the earth's atmosphere is responsible for a 33K rise in T over no atmosphere, then the 12 doublings which have occurred for co2 would be responsible for 36 degrees rise. Considering that co2 is a minor ghg and that h2o vapor is responsible for about 2/3 of the rise, if not 90% of the rise, then the temperature rise would have to be about 100 deg K or even 300 deg K. Considering that the temperature is not at 300 deg K, one can understand that there is something wrong with the assumption. Also, the variation from summer in the NH to summer in the SH results in a difference in insolation of 90 W/m^2 and since the IPCC presumes (incorrectly) that a W/m^2 is a W/m^2 then there should be a difference in summer time temperatures approaching 100 Deg K. That is, if it's 330 deg K hot temperature in the NH during summer heat waves, it should then be around 420 deg K for SH summer heat waves. Converting to deg C, we have, hmm, uhh, err, just under 150 deg C. Somehow, I don't think that is happening, even in the Aussie land outback.

Since an accepted value for co2 contribution to ghg totals is about 10%, and the contribution of all ghgs is about 33 K, one could get the idea that the actual real life contribution of co2 total might be around 3.3 degrees K. However, each doubling from the point where the peaks are opaque to the atmosphere, somewhere around a few cm, has about the same contribution, it would seem we're talking about 10-12 doublings, with each contributing less than the previous doubling. That would put 3.7 W/m^2 somewhere in the vacinity of 3.3/10 or 0.33 deg K rise for a doubling. That seems to get us within a factor of two, although a bit high.

Consequently, it would seem your number is likely off by about 1 order of magnitude or slightly more.