Haha. Yeah I saw that story, It's just bait for the deniers (or contrarians), or just weird science to normal folks. For that matter, mushrooms exhale CO2. Trust me, worms are not the cause of global warming.
I want to reply to Craig's comments and to argue scientifically against his denial of Man-made causes of global warming. First lets start with this graphic http://www.climate4you.com/images/CO2%20MaunaLoa%20MonthlySince1958.gif With every seasonal cycle you can see the earth breath. The cycle is cause by vegetation in northern hemisphere dying out each year, releasing stored CO2 back into the air in winter and pulling CO2 back into it's stems and roots during growing season. It's a cyclic effect, and it show very well how easy it is to measure CO2 levels. The trend line in background of that graph is all fossil fuel CO2 from human activity. Craig, I appreciate your wanting to find alternative explanations to global warming that isn't man made. All polluters wish they didn't pollute I guess. But solar input isn't the cause of global warming either. For example; there are sunspots which somehow in denier's rose colored glasses cause the atmosphere to heat up. Exactly how is that to happen when the solar input to earth is REDUCED by sun spots. It's part of the solar forcing equation that balances with how much heat is trapped by CO2 and how much escapes into space. So Craig, I want to point you to THE OBVIOUS, The solar input is as it has been for the past 1million years. The Earth has been as it has for the past 1million years. The only thing that makes these past 63 years different is actually several points; The population growth; the demand for energy, and the commercialization of agriculture and burning fossilized carbon! All are effecting that carbon cycle and pushing more carbon (in the form of carbon dioxide) into the air (CO2 a green house gas) that is trapping even more solar input. I'm ignoring all of the feedback environmental mechanism that accelerate warming, like the polar ice caps melting, glacier melts or excessive amounts of atmospheric water vapor from warming oceans that effect weather patterns globally. So when you look at your graph that shows from 1958 to 2005 showing a hockey stick slope from 315 to 395 just remember this equation; T= 10.31 degreeC + (0.0114 degreeC /ppmv). That is the take away the AGW contrarians need to answer. -- Chuck On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 10:59 PM, Brad Lowe <ecatbuil...@gmail.com> wrote: > It isn't just AGW we need to worry about... > EAGW Earthworm-Accellerated Global Warming is the new hot topic in Climate > Change Research. > > > http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2013/02/global-worming-are-earthworms-accelerating-climate-change > This is peer-reviewed hard science, so please refrain from mocking the > experts. > > - Brad > > > > On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 8:49 PM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Chris Zell <chrisz...@wetmtv.com> wrote: >> >> ** >>> Rich nations can afford......... No, they can't. That's the point. Their >>> populations are suffering and it's going to get much worse. Nor do >>> developing nations operate in a vacuum as markets are now more tightly >>> correlated than ever, contrary to many predictions. >>> >> >> This is the same rationale that poor people use to take out high-interest >> loans; to buy items at the store in tiny quantities, which ends up costing >> more overall; or to forgo car insurance, hoping they won't get caught -- >> they cannot obtain a mortgage that is not on usurious terms, and it is hard >> to justify a big expenditure on bulk items when you're living from paycheck >> to paycheck. In the end, you have to have money to save money, and you >> have to be willing to spend it up front, rather than backload all of your >> expenditures until the time that disaster strikes. >> >> Eric >> >> >
