Stratospheric Cooling and the Real Cause of Global Warming... (solution, rating, leader)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Since the consensus explanation offered by warmers for sharp stratospheric cooling (now leveling off) at a time when the lower troposphere warmed (also now leveling off) defies the laws of thermodynamics, and since common sense tells me that CO2, if it is indeed capable of driving temperatures higher, would have more or less the same warming effect in the stratosphere that it does closer to the Earth`s surface, I decided to do a little digging around to see if I could find a better answer for why this phenomenon of a cooling stratosphere and warming lower troposphere has occurred.
Of course we know that CFCs and other chemicals introduced into the atmosphere caused a decline of ozone levels and that their being banned worldwide has allowed the ozone layer to begin recovering. We also can see that stratospheric cooling and its recent leveling off correspond to a rebound in ozone levels, but what Professor Lu at the University of Waterloo has theorized is that the now paused rise in surface temperatures is directly related to the now paused cooling of the stratosphere.
"Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are to blame for global warming since the 1970s and not carbon dioxide, according to new research from the University of Waterloo published in the International Journal of Modern Physics B this week. CFCs are already known to deplete ozone, but in-depth statistical analysis now shows that CFCs are also the key driver in global climate change, rather than carbon dioxide emissions."
And while correlation is not causation, this theory goes a long way to explain the apparent lack of any cause and effect connection between increased/decreased CO2 levels and surface temperature, the increase of surface temperatures throughout the industrial era and the pause in surface warming at a time when CO2 levels have increased.
Thanks for posting. It makes a lot more sense. As the article says, carbon dioxide had been increasing for a long time before CFCs were introduced, yet the warming only came after the later.
But, gosh, I hope this doesn't prevent rich people from getting taxpayer-funded subsidies for solar panels, wind turbines, geothermal systems, electric cars, etc. That just wouldn't be fair. (sarcasm)
So.. the warmers are celebrating that global warming IS man made but they just have been blaming the wrong culprit and their solution to it would have no effect on it. That means the scientists and the majority and leaders they have so much faith in are wrong. Do the warmers realize that this means they have no clear understanding of the problem and have no scientific data to cling to?
What we COULD do is take another hard look at CFCs and stop the silly obsession over CO2. That wouldn't make the select few wealthier like they want and wouldn't make the targeted people poorer but it would help the environment. But since its all about money, I don't think the global warmers will get on board with that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
