End global warming debate
To the Editor:
Oddly, after people began to question the role of carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas because of its apparent increase after warming began in the last ice age, they suddenly found a way to explain why it appeared before the warming began.
Odder still is that they explain it by attributing the increase to the precession of rotation. That is to say that the polar precession, or rotational wobble of the Earth, brought the sun into a more direct path of sunlight, heating up the oceans and releasing more carbon dioxide.
Well, right, there the increase of carbon dioxide is due to the sun, no? And the increased heating is clearly due to the sun.
Secondly, there is the carrying capacity of carbon dioxide. At 300 ppm, it would have to be very small. It could have a only very negligible effect upon the atmosphere, and its increase or decrease is pure coincidence, not causal. Thermodynamic effects take very large amounts of energy, particularly on very large masses. Like, the sun, for example.
Take any room and double the carbon dioxide. Notice any difference? Take a 20-foot-long tube, measure the intensity of an infrared remote control beamed to the opposite end. Double the carbon dioxide in the tube, and do it again. Now, that’s clear and convincing proof that very low levels of carbon dioxide have a profound impact.
Shea F. Kenny