Why then are we not going after the rising concentrations of these gases, and ONLY working to contain CO2?
In fact, I have not seen any data on the rises of these potent gases, far more potent than CO2, and the relation to "Global Warming" in the Consensus reporting. Or other Global Warming info either.
Were they present in the MWP?
And some mention rises in the CO, which again I have not seen listed as a "Greenhouse" gas nor data on its alleged rise in concentration, compared to the Global Temperature.
Finally, if the ejecta into the atmosphere of a nuclear war, the dust, would cool the earth, and that has been shown in major volcanic explosions, why would not the push recently to clean up smokestacks and other sources of particulate matter added to the atmosphere not be causing a vast warming effect as the short wavelengths of heat radiation can better reach the surface of the earth and be trapped?
Could it be our "problem" is not too much CO2, but too little dust in the air??
2007-06-14
13:17:54
·
5 answers
·
asked by
looey323
4
in
Global Warming