Climate Conversation Group

Taking the heat out of global warming

For the first time in history, people shouting “the end is nigh” are somehow
the sane ones, while those of us who say it is not are now the lunatics.

  • Home
  • Newsletter
  • Opinion polls
    • SckSckSck
    • Your view of CO2
    • Collective noun for icebergs
    • Stop the ETS
  • News releases
    • February 8, 2010
  • Climate Realists
    • Newsletter #17 6 May 2010
    • Newsletter #16 28 Apr 2010
    • Newsletter #6 11 Feb 2010
  • Carbon Sense
    • Newsletter Feb 15, 2010
  • Files
    • Wind turbine failures
  • About
    • New address
  • Contact

Your view of CO2

Vote now in our poll, below

If humanity influences the climate, then the mechanism involves carbon dioxide. There’s nothing else we do that scientists have said might affect the temperature or any other feature of the weather.

But could carbon dioxide dominate the climate? It certainly affects the climate, through raising the temperature a bit — that much is non-controversial. Measuring the temperature increase as it’s introduced to the atmosphere is problematic, but it appears as though the first 120 ppmv has the most effect, about 2.3°C; the next 267 ppmv (more than doubling it) adds less than 0.5°C.

Calculations show that doubling CO2 again, to about 800 ppmv, would add another 0.5°C, but at the current rate of increase it won’t get to that level until 2255.

Some people say the greenhouse effect of CO2 is too small to dominate the climate (it has much less influence than water vapour), while others say that, like a poison in the body, you don’t need much to have a catastrophic effect.

What do you think? Does CO2 dominate the climate?

Vote here

If the voting buttons are absent, you have already voted (or someone on that machine has).

Click Here for PollOnline Survey
| Website Polls
| Email Marketing

| Crowdsourcing Software
View MicroPoll

To comment on the poll, post a comment below.

What now?

Oppose the madness! Spread word of this poll—we’d appreciate your help with that; please tell people you know and email them this link to the poll to come here to vote.

If you have a web site, please consider using this link to our poll. If you have any questions about handling these links, flick me an email to convenor [at] climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz.

Any of that will make a difference. And you’ll be a blimmin’ hero!

Thanks!

Richard Treadgold

Convenor

Ostrich

What do you think? Huh?

Comments rss
Comments rss
Trackback
Trackback

8 Responses to “Your view of CO2”

  1. David du Toit says:
    February 12, 2010 at 8:03 pm

    Ha ha ha!

    Your poll only registers NO votes – maybe it even registers YES votes as NO votes!

    What a flippen disgrace – fabricating/manipulating evidence to serve your ideology.

    Reply
    • Richard says:
      February 12, 2010 at 11:52 pm

      Hi David,

      You’re quick to make assumptions, but you are wrong. We have no ideology but truth.

      I can assure there’s no trickery involved, as we don’t host the poll, it’s done offsite by a third party. We have no control over it.

      There is a “no” vote registered now. It is the first one. Perhaps that is your vote. Have another look. When you reload the page the updated voting results will be visible.

      If you’re still unhappy, please leave another comment.

      Thank you for visiting. Perhaps you can record your opinions on one of the articles.

      Cheers,
      Richard Treadgold.

      Reply
  2. G/S. Williams says:
    February 24, 2010 at 8:46 am

    Hi, Richard,

    Regarding your polls, referring to the iceberg one, what about naming a group of icebergs as “a melt of icebergs”; after all, once they have broken off whatever they will have started to melt.

    Keep up the good work.
    GSW

    Reply
    • Richard says:
      February 24, 2010 at 9:31 am

      Hi G/S,

      Yes, I agree it’s a good candidate. “Melt” is one of the options in our poll, go ahead and vote for it if you wish.

      Richard.

      Reply
  3. Barry Brill says:
    February 24, 2010 at 12:09 pm

    Richard – a small challenge on one point. You say that CO2 atmospheric concentration will reach 800ppm by 2255 “at the current rate of increase”.

    But the current rate won’t continue. It’s quite closely correlated with global population – which demographers tell us will reach a maximum of nearly 9 billion by about 2050, then reduce to 7.5 billion by 2100. So, on this basis alone, the rate of increase will reduce in 40 years and keep going down thereafter.

    Then the second greatest contributor to the rate increase is “carbon intensity”. China says they will reduce theirs by at least 45% within 10 years, and India is expecting to do almost as well. These are the 2 largest future emitters.

    The G20 and others have stated that they don’t want the current level of 285ppm to rise above 350ppm during the next century. On any reasonable set of forecasts, the world will meet that target very comfortably.

    Reply
    • Richard says:
      February 24, 2010 at 1:31 pm

      Excellent news, Barry, thank you! I am pleased to be corrected on these figures, since they were causing some anxiety — distant, but anxiety nonetheless.

      Reply
  4. FijiDave says:
    March 18, 2010 at 1:26 pm

    Barry Brill: “… current level of 285ppm to rise above 350ppm ”

    Shouldn’t that be 385 (or 388) and 450 ppm respectively?

    Just asking.

    Reply
  5. Richard says:
    March 18, 2010 at 9:09 pm

    Good point, FijiDave. Now that you draw my attention to it, I think you could be right. Current level is 388 and the number 450 is a popular one.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

 

Thanks to WordShine for hosting our site. Professional editing services and academic editing — WordShine for polished writing.

Hot off the press

  • To do good, the free will be bound
  • Auckland warming is deception
  • Rudman offensive but NZ temp record dubious
  • A tale of two hemispheres
  • A swelling debate — Chris has questions
  • Maze of mystery maths — NIWA facing fallout
  • Oxford Union Debate on Climate Catastrophe
  • Why can’t scientists agree on Global Warming?
  • Nicks in the myths of time
  • Banned again at Hot Topic

Latest comments

  • Quentin F on Auckland warming is deception
  • Quentin F on Rudman offensive but NZ temp record dubious
  • Quentin F on A tale of two hemispheres
  • Bob D on Auckland warming is deception
  • Flipper on To do good, the free will be bound
  • Huub Bakker on Auckland warming is deception
  • Richard Treadgold on To do good, the free will be bound
  • David White on To do good, the free will be bound
  • David White on To do good, the free will be bound
  • Ron on Maze of mystery maths — NIWA facing fallout
  • Richard Treadgold on Auckland warming is deception
  • Ken on Auckland warming is deception
  • Richard Treadgold on Maze of mystery maths — NIWA facing fallout
  • Ken on Maze of mystery maths — NIWA facing fallout
  • Climate Conversation Group » Auckland warming is deception on Our Statement of Claim against NIWA

Tags

ACT Activists Administration AGW Air temperature Australia Carbon dioxide Carbon Sense Carbon trading Climate Conversation Group Climate Depot Climate profiteering Climate research Climate Science Climate Skeptic Clouds CRU leak Data quality Disproving AGW Energy supply ETS Glaciers Global warming Hot Topic Injustice IPCC Joanne Nova Michael Mann New Zealand NIWA NIWAgate NZCSC NZ Herald NZ temperature records Peter Gluckman Peter Spencer Rajendra Pachauri Rodney Hide Royal Society Roy Spencer Sceptics Science bias UK Watts Up With That Wind turbines

Categories

Admin

  • Log in
  • Entries RSS
  • Comments RSS
  • WordPress.org
What's your opinion?
Stop the ETS — is it madness? Should we stop the ETS?
sckscksck — is the earth warming dangerously from human activities?
Your view of CO2 — does CO2 dominate the climate?
Exercise your word skills — what's the best collective noun for icebergs?

Big Button email campaign

email button

Stop the ETS

Press this Little Button. Read the article. Press the Big Button to set up an email to the Prime Minister. Change the email address to send the message to your local MP or Nick Smith or anyone. Change the message if you like! Add your name! Click Send!
Click to get your own widget

Interested in oil prices?

Scroll down to see a nifty little widget that graphs oil prices back five years.

Climate change links

  • Carbon Sense Coalition
  • Climate Audit—a science blog
  • Climate Debate Daily
  • Climate Depot
  • Global warming at a glance
  • NZ Climate Science Coalition
  • Watts Up With That

 

September 2010
M T W T F S S
« Aug    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930  

Blog stats

page loads since August 2008

Previous posts

Oil price trends

 
 

"Your word is no longer enough, sir; you must give evidence. Without it, why should we bear you? If it is the least you give, it is all you have."

rss Comments rss valid xhtml 1.1 design by jide powered by Wordpress get firefox