Re: Whoops! The Atlantic Makes Trump Look EPIC In Cover Intended as a Smear

On Fri, 20 Sep 2024, Paul S Person wrote:

On Fri, 20 Sep 2024 10:05:53 +0200, D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>

>
>
On Thu, 19 Sep 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>

On 9/19/2024 3:03 PM, quadibloc wrote:

On 9/18/2024 2:49 PM, D wrote:
>

Why was Svante Arrhenius wrong about CO2?

>

Overestimation of Temperature Increase
One of the primary reasons
Arrhenius was considered wrong about CO2’s impact on temperature is that
he significantly overestimated the effect of a doubling of CO2
concentration.

>
I'm not aware that scientists concerned about global warming
are going around insisting Svante Arrhenius' estimates were
right.
>

Neglecting Water Vapor’s Dominance
Another critical factor in
Arrhenius’s miscalculations was his underestimation of water vapor’s
role as a greenhouse gas. Water vapor constitutes a much larger portion
of the atmosphere compared to CO2 and has a more significant impact on
climate due to its higher concentration and ability to absorb heat
across various wavelengths. While Arrhenius recognized CO2 as an
important greenhouse gas, he did not adequately emphasize that its
effects would be overshadowed by those of water vapor.

>
Now, this one is a total red herring.
>
The reason should be obvious.
>
What determines the level of water vapor in the atmosphere? Is it
being increased, say, by irrigation projects spraying water on
crops, which we should curtail before worrying about fossil
fuels?
>
No. The amount of water vapor in the atmosphere... is mostly due to
evaporation from the oceans and lakes and rivers. Which is controlled
by global temperatures.
>
So water vapor is part of a feedback loop that amplifies the effects
of extra carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Because the carbon dioxide
level is a *free* variable, that we're affecting significantly by our
use of fossil fuels.
>
John Savard

>
We have extra water in the upper atmosphere right now due to the underwater
volcano spewing water vapor, "Tonga Eruption May Temporarily Push Earth
Closer to 1.5°C of Warming"
https://eos.org/articles/tonga-eruption-may-temporarily-push-earth-closer-to-1-5c-of-warming
>
"The underwater eruption of Hunga Tonga–Hunga Ha‘apai sent megatons of water
vapor into the stratosphere, contributing to an increase in global warming
over the next 5 years."
>
Lynn

>
Let me just add a note here, that this was a natural process and not man
made.

>
Then perhaps it should be pointed out that it is also /temporary/ and
not part of the secular increase in global temperature, which is not
temporary.
>

Incorrect. There is no definition of temporary. Some natural events caused changed for a day, others for 1000s of years.