<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Sensenbrenner&#8217;s hypocrisy and a SwiftHack science update</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2009/12/03/sensenbrenner-swifthack/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2009/12/03/sensenbrenner-swifthack/</link>
	<description>Think.  It ain&#039;t illegal yet...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 21:48:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian Angliss</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2009/12/03/sensenbrenner-swifthack/comment-page-1/#comment-75523</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian Angliss</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Dec 2009 20:18:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=13377#comment-75523</guid>
		<description>TLP - you&#039;re right about the atmospheric content of CO2 in the atmosphere being very low.  The problem is that over 99% of the atmosphere doesn&#039;t matter for the greenhouse effect.  Water vapor and CO2 make up the two largest portions of the atmosphere responsible for the greenhouse effect.

Water vapor averages about 0.4% of the atmosphere, CO2 0.039%.  So CO2 is about 10% of the atmosphere responsible for the greenhouse effect.  Water vapor lasts a very short period of time in the atmosphere (less than a month), so it can&#039;t drive climate disruption - it can only be a feedback term, not a forcing term.  The next most common greenhouse gas is CO2, and it lasts in the atmosphere for centuries once released.  So it is a forcing term (although it&#039;s also a centuries-long feedback as well).

As for your claim that humans add 0.7% of CO2 to the atmosphere, this is also an insufficient explanation.  Natural CO2 is largely in balance in the global ecosystem with geologic weathering, ecological uptake and conversion to biomatter, and absorption into the ocean.  CO2 emitted by man is stuff that was sequestered underground for millions, perhaps billions, of years.  And since pre-industrial days, human-emitted CO2 has increased the overall amount of CO2 from 0.028% to 0.039%, an increase of about 1.4x the baseline.  Furthermore, isotopic analysis of the CO2 in the atmosphere points incontrovertibly to human origins rather than geologic origins (volcanoes).

Your comment from the CRU emails neglects to mention that the comment was made in response to ocean warming and in a context of bemoaning the lack of sufficient spatial and temporal resolution in the ocean heat monitoring sensor network.

And finally, I&#039;ve addressed the CO2 vs. flat temps over the last 10 years &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2009/07/01/the-weekly-carboholic-cassava-yield-toxicity/comment-page-1/#comment-67242&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;repeatedly&lt;/a&gt; in other &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2009/09/23/the-weekly-carboholic-climate-disrupts-volcanism-too/comment-page-1/#comment-71801&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;comments&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>TLP &#8211; you&#8217;re right about the atmospheric content of CO2 in the atmosphere being very low.  The problem is that over 99% of the atmosphere doesn&#8217;t matter for the greenhouse effect.  Water vapor and CO2 make up the two largest portions of the atmosphere responsible for the greenhouse effect.</p>
<p>Water vapor averages about 0.4% of the atmosphere, CO2 0.039%.  So CO2 is about 10% of the atmosphere responsible for the greenhouse effect.  Water vapor lasts a very short period of time in the atmosphere (less than a month), so it can&#8217;t drive climate disruption &#8211; it can only be a feedback term, not a forcing term.  The next most common greenhouse gas is CO2, and it lasts in the atmosphere for centuries once released.  So it is a forcing term (although it&#8217;s also a centuries-long feedback as well).</p>
<p>As for your claim that humans add 0.7% of CO2 to the atmosphere, this is also an insufficient explanation.  Natural CO2 is largely in balance in the global ecosystem with geologic weathering, ecological uptake and conversion to biomatter, and absorption into the ocean.  CO2 emitted by man is stuff that was sequestered underground for millions, perhaps billions, of years.  And since pre-industrial days, human-emitted CO2 has increased the overall amount of CO2 from 0.028% to 0.039%, an increase of about 1.4x the baseline.  Furthermore, isotopic analysis of the CO2 in the atmosphere points incontrovertibly to human origins rather than geologic origins (volcanoes).</p>
<p>Your comment from the CRU emails neglects to mention that the comment was made in response to ocean warming and in a context of bemoaning the lack of sufficient spatial and temporal resolution in the ocean heat monitoring sensor network.</p>
<p>And finally, I&#8217;ve addressed the CO2 vs. flat temps over the last 10 years <a href="http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2009/07/01/the-weekly-carboholic-cassava-yield-toxicity/comment-page-1/#comment-67242" rel="nofollow">repeatedly</a> in other <a href="http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2009/09/23/the-weekly-carboholic-climate-disrupts-volcanism-too/comment-page-1/#comment-71801" rel="nofollow">comments</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Last Pundit</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2009/12/03/sensenbrenner-swifthack/comment-page-1/#comment-75512</link>
		<dc:creator>The Last Pundit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Dec 2009 06:46:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=13377#comment-75512</guid>
		<description>0.038% of the atmosphere is CO2
Man contributes 0.7% of the CO2 and CH4 to the total amount going into the atmosphere yearly. 
CO2 has risen for the past 10 years
Temperature has remained flat to slightly downward. 
&quot;We can not account for the lack of warming.... and it is a travesty&quot; NOAA
IPCC = eugenics NOT environmentalism</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>0.038% of the atmosphere is CO2<br />
Man contributes 0.7% of the CO2 and CH4 to the total amount going into the atmosphere yearly.<br />
CO2 has risen for the past 10 years<br />
Temperature has remained flat to slightly downward.<br />
&#8220;We can not account for the lack of warming&#8230;. and it is a travesty&#8221; NOAA<br />
IPCC = eugenics NOT environmentalism</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ClimateGate: Probe begins on the other side of the pond - Michael Roston - Newsbroke - True/Slant</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2009/12/03/sensenbrenner-swifthack/comment-page-1/#comment-75043</link>
		<dc:creator>ClimateGate: Probe begins on the other side of the pond - Michael Roston - Newsbroke - True/Slant</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 19:37:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=13377#comment-75043</guid>
		<description>[...] Capitol Hill, House Republicans have requested that a hearing be held on ClimateGate. Of course, as Brian Angliss points out on Scholars and Rogues, it&#8217;s interesting to see the reaction when the shoe&#8217;s [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Capitol Hill, House Republicans have requested that a hearing be held on ClimateGate. Of course, as Brian Angliss points out on Scholars and Rogues, it&#8217;s interesting to see the reaction when the shoe&#8217;s [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

