Originally Posted by tangentlama said:
WouldBe said:
Warmer water can hold less of any gas. This is a basic scientific fact. Do I really need to provide a source for this basic piece of scientific knowledge?
The whole premise of climate change is that increased CO2 is causing the planet to warm up so of course releasing CO2 from the oceans will cause a positive feedback unless you're claiming that CO2 has different physical properties to anthropogenic atmospheric CO2.
Something odd going on here.
Let's break this down.
This is how the conversation went.
I said this in repy to bigfish:
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=7754980&postcount=626
You replied only to one part:
Originally Posted by tangentlama post 626 said:
These look like a reverse of 'CO2 driver theory i.e. that temperature drives CO2 (never heard of that before).
WouldBe said:
Funny that but climatologists keep stating that warming oceans will release more CO2. This is a fundamental part of the positive feedback that climatologists are so worried about.
However, post 626 addresses bigfish's claim (post 610) that climate modellers use 'CO2 driver theory': (
post 610).
Here's the sum of my reply to him in post 626:
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=7754980&postcount=626. I'll say it again: My understanding is that the relationship between CO2 and temperature (i.e. air + sea temperature) is correlational.
And again:
tangentlama post 626 said:
ln the papers I've read, the correlation between C02 levels and temperature has been discussed, but I have never read anywhere that 'CO2 drives temperature change' (CO2 driver theory).
bigfish asks me to prove that CO2 and temp are correlational with a graph (someone else replies on my behalf with accurate info).
Also, and note this please, bigfish's premise appears to be (wait for it) a one-way CO2 driver theory (see
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=7755210&postcount=637) or when he's anti-IPCC, a one-way Temp driver theory - where the only info we have shows a correlation between temp and C02, but not causation per se.
Back to WouldBe, who then replied to my post 626, selecting only one part of what I'd written to bigfish, and appearing to support bigfish's post which claims that
CO2 driver theory is being used by IPCC with a statement about the
'ocean/ocean-bed part in the CO2-sink/release cycle'
So I made a reply to WouldBe in post 629:
tangentlama said:
I think the oceans are a key factor in the whole cycle.
Water is the biggest carbon-sink after atmosphere, vegetation/landmass.
My small scientific brain is telling me there's probably a maximum CO2 saturation point for the ocean that affects the ocean/atmospheric C02-temp relationship in a dramatic way - for example - increasing acidification of the oceans via C02-absorption could explain mass extinctions of ocean fauna and flora at the end of the Cambrian Period (which trilobites survived, only to disappear the end of the Permian Period).
I really ought to read up on it at some point.
Back to anthropogenic influence on climate change. We're right to be worried, and right to be concerned about human-caused change to the environment. Our effluence and air-pollution is changing the environment - that much we do know. Humankind and the plants/animals we like to eat prefer a certain type of environment, and we ought to do everything within our power to ensure we keep the water and land and air as clean as is humanly possible.
Later on in the thread, and because WouldBe never engaged with my reply in post 629, I then asked WouldBe to provide a source, just in case I had misunderstood WouldBe, noting lack of response to my reply (629). (Also, I was concerned whether WouldBe's apparent trend of leaping in to defend bigfish is any way connected to employees of energy-sector, because that's where bigfish gets most of his information from).
Now to address WouldBe's current reply:
WouldBe said:
The whole premise of climate change is that increased CO2 is causing the planet to warm up so of course releasing CO2 from the oceans will cause a positive feedback
I'm quite sure that the WHOLE PREMISE of climate change is not focused only on CO2.
Is that what you claim?
Warmer water can hold
less of any gas. This is a basic scientific fact. Do I really need to provide a source for this basic piece of scientific knowledge?
No. You don't need to, but the ocean is not so simple, and ocean life/ocean-bed also acts as a sink for co2, which doesn't release in the same way as the warming of ocean itself would.
ANyway, I'm sure the reader would like a clear description of this process anyway, for educational purposes.
tangentlama said:
WouldBe said:
Funny that but climatologists keep stating that warming oceans will release more CO2. This is a fundamental part of the positive feedback that climatologists are so worried about.
But bigfish was claiming that the IPCC models used a one-way CO2 driver-theory.
Anyway, if you really want to, WouldBe, you can provide sources for the reader (for educational purposes) on:
1) Climatologists stating that warm oceans release more CO2 and that cool oceans absorb more CO2. (This is fact, and I'm not querying the oceanic sink/release cycle)
