So, wait, are they saying that carbon dioxide, what they call carbon pollution, has little to do with the minor increased global temperatures since 1850?
UN report: Covid crisis does little to slow climate change
The global response to Covid-19 has barely made a dent in the causes of climate change, according to a major new report.
While emissions of CO2 plummeted during lockdown, concentrations of the long-lasting gas have continued to rise in the atmosphere.
The period from 2016 to 2020 will likely be the warmest five years on record, the study finds.
The authors say “irreversible” climate change impacts are increasing.
Of course they do
The United in Science report brings together experts from a large number of international organisations, including the UN and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), to give an updated snapshot of the state of the global climate.
The study shows that global lockdowns had a significant and immediate impact on emissions of greenhouse gases, with daily levels in April 2020 falling by 17% compared with 2019.
But this steep drop hasn’t been maintained. As the world returned to work, emissions rose and by June were within 5% of the previous year.
Over 2020, the expectation is that emissions will fall 4-7%.
While emissions can tell us what is happening on the ground, it is the concentrations of these gases in the atmosphere that makes all the difference for global temperatures.
They always have an excuse to perpetuate the continuation of the Cult of Climastrology. One would think that a 4-7% reduction this year would have an impact per their Dogma, but, they know it is all a bunch of mule fritters, so, they are already making Excuses.
We explained this to TEACH a while back but he just won’t listen. He’s too interested in scoring cheap political points than the truth, preferring to supply ignorant talking points to his followers.
Global warming results from the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, not by the amount added over a few month’s time. As the astute TEACH knows, CO2 levels have an annual cycle, peaking around May (see pdf). He also knows, being a climate savant, that the sensitivity to CO2 would have to be ginormous for a 7 ppm drop in CO2 to be detectable as a change in global mean surface temperature. So obviously professor TEACH is just having fun with you guys, as reducing the output of CO2 for 6 months (a 4-7% drop in emissions, not concentrations) would have a negligible effect on the mean surface temperature.
https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/dv/iadv/tmp/1599687041.0064089.pdf
It will take years of reduced emissions to have a noticeable effect. Think of it as stopping an oil tanker.
You seem to confuse concentration with accumulation.
CO2 levels have an annual cycle
They do? really?
Think of it as stopping an oil tanker.
Engine room, all stop.
Wotta maroon.
By all means, tell us more about concentration vs accumulation. Does this have to do with your hypothesis that CO2 gathers around our ankles in a layer because it’s heavier than N2?
Yes, CO2 levels have an annual cycle. Really? You didn’t know that? You can see it here: https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/dv/iadv/tmp/1599687041.0064089.pdf
Where does that CO2 go every year?
Wotta maroon.
So what effect would it have decreasing it, seeing we’re still trying to figure what effect, if any, there is now?
The Earth is warming rapidly as a result of increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere.
Decreasing CO2 levels would reduce the rate of warming.
What is your hypothesis to explain the CO2 level oscillating about 7 ppm every year?
Termites emit more CO2 worldwide every year than all of humankind combined.
Lolgfy