From: "Geo." 

"John Beckett"  wrote in message
news:sdrl23lca1v9s717474g1u9frb0q7s8d3p{at}4ax.com...

>> My point is 1.35 x nothing is still nothing.
>
> The reason that a tiny proportion of CO2 is important is:
> - The PROPORTION is not relevant.
> - It is the TOTAL that matters.

This is EXACTLY my point, except it it the total in relation to the total
atmosphere not in relation to the previous total. Look at the atmosphere on
Venus where CO2 is the MAJOR component, that's what it takes to create a
greenhouse effect, not 0.038% but more like about 1000x that total volume
(38%) or more (I think venus is like 75%). We are not talking about salt in
water, CO2 has no magical properties that make the rest of the atmosphere
change, it's just that CO2 itselfs has some capacity to absorb/reflect
sunlight so for that to make a difference you need a significant amount in
comparison to the total atmosphere since you are talking about atmosphereic
change.

> You can argue:
> - It's the volcanoes.
> - It's the forest burning.
> - If we don't do it, China will.
> - I can't hear you LALALALA.
>
> But it is absurd to say that 3E12 tons of CO2 doesn't matter, or that a
> 35% increase in CO2 is unimportant.

How many tons of atmosphere exist on earth? (15 pounds per square inch over
the entire surface of the planet seems like it dwarfs 3E12). In other words
to a flea, your body mass seems like a lot but it makes squat difference to
a planet. Even if you have a 100% increase in body mass, to the plant it's
still squat difference even while it staggers the flea's imagination.

Geo.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5