RegGuheert wrote:The positive effects of additional CO2 in the atmosphere are unmistakable: a rapid greening of the planet. The idea that we should remove CO2 from the atmosphere is an idiotic one, even if it were free to do.
0.5C warming is very likely a net positive. We have likely released enough CO2 to skip the next glacial advance, and likely the glacial advance beyond that. Takes the climate back to about 8,000 years ago. We passed this already.
Huh? It seems the fact is that sea ice in both Antarctic AND the Arctic are near their highest levels in the past 10,000 years
But more pertinent to this discussion, the sea surface temperature has been dropping and the sea ice has been increasing in the Southern Hemisphere in recent decades
In addition, glaciers in the Alps used to be much smaller than they are today
. They peaked during the Little Ice Age, which was a period of terrible climate that killed many creatures on this Earth, including humans. I have no desire to return to those times.
WetEV wrote:I agree that the first 100PPM should not be removed. 1C warming might be a net positive.
That's a virtual certainty. Conditions on Earth have indeed gotten much better as we have climbed out of the Little Ice Age.
WetEV wrote:Maybe. We are about here today.
Agreed we are likely there today. Do you have evidence that there is something negative related to increasing CO2 in the atmosphere to date?
WetEV wrote:Takes the climate back to the last interglacial period.
Climate? You were talking about CO2. You have a LONG way to go in order to link climate to CO2.
Scientists have measured the greenhouse effect on Earth
. It is unchanged in the last 25 years. In other words, increases in CO2 levels in our atmosphere do NOT result in increases in the Earth's greenhouse effect. This is not at all surprising, since CO2 is a very minor player in the greenhouse effect on this planet.
WetEV wrote:2C warming probably is a net negative.
4C warming is just a bad idea.
10C warming? Do you really need to ask?
And 20C warming is probably possible. Maybe we are not that dumb.
Predictions of that type of warming are just that: predictions. They are based on poor science which ignores the fact that the warming experienced at the end of the 20th century corresponded directly with a reduction in cloud cover over the Earth. The forcing due to that several-percent change in cloud cover is orders of magnitude higher than any change due to CO2 thus far. Plus, reduction in cloud cover allows sunlight to warm the ocean directly. The temperature of the surface of the ocean is the main control of the temperature of our atmosphere, as can be readily seen by the effects on an El Nino event. And the Sun is what heats the waters in the oceans. Currents in the ocean move water of different temperatures around.
But the idea that the surface of the oceans, as a whole, will increase by 4C or more due to very small changes in the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere (and hence, the greenhouse effect) is ludicrous. In other words, predictions of that magnitude are completely non-credible. Believe them at your own peril.
BTW, living in an interglacial period is a great thing for life on this planet. If you want to worry about something, I suggest you worry about the onset of the next glacial period. THAT is when things will get bad.