The Philosophy of Global Warming


If you are interested in the relationship between the human species and the rest of life on Earth, individual and collective human purpose, evolution, cosmology, the nature of reality, astrology, spirituality, and how all of this relates to global warming & the environmental crisis of modernity, then I am sure that you will like my new book 'The Philosophy of Global Warming'. In the post below I have provided the book description, the list of contents and the first two sections of the book. You can find out how to get hold of the book by clicking on this link:

The Philosophy of Global Warming





Sunday, 23 November 2014

The link between atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations & global warming


There is currently still much debate concerning the link between atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations and global warming. Many global warming sceptics seem to have the following belief:


* Over the past 10/20 years atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations have been steadily rising, yet there has been no rise in the average global atmospheric temperature over this period, therefore rising atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations do not cause global warming.


Such a view is simplistic and misplaced. There is no simple correlation between the two phenomena wherein a change in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations automatically results in higher atmospheric temperatures. There are multiple factors affecting atmospheric temperature, and these factors intertwine in complex ways through unfolding and varying time-lag processes (I go into this in my book 'The Philosophy of Global Warming'). What this means is that there will be a 'jumpy' relationship between the two phenomena, a relationship that is characterised not by automatic responses, but by the building up of forces which are yet to be manifest (again, see my book 'The Philosophy of Global Warming' for more on this).

In short, the regulatory systems of the planet have become increasingly perturbed by human activities, through an ever increasing force for global warming. This force is the culmination of multiple phenomena interacting in complex ways both spatially and temporally. To be blinded to this reality, to base one's reasoning on a simple relationship between two phenomena over an exceptionally short period of time, is intellectually indefensible.

The ever increasing force for global warming, which is still growing in strength every day, every week, every year, is what we should be focused on. To focus on the link, over the past 10/20 years, between atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations and atmospheric temperatures, is to miss the wood for the trees, it is to concentrate on the tip of an iceberg and to ignore Antarctica.

Periodic increasing global temperatures are simply the tip of an iceberg, when we should be concentrating on 'Antarctica', the massive force for global warming. Because of the lack of a simple correlation between perturbation of the Earth's regulatory cycles, atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations, and atmospheric temperatures, what this means is that the situation is very dangerous. This is because the factors which are determining the future state of the Earth's atmosphere and biosphere are not 'out in the open' and clear to see. Rather than there being a process which we can easily control - a process in which gradually rising atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations lead to a gradually increasing temperature - the reality is that a prolonged system of perturbation will lead to a sudden system shift wherein the atmospheric temperature instantaneously jumps upwards to a new steady state, this could be to a level which makes most of the planet inhospitable for human habitation.

In other words, steady atmospheric temperatures, accompanied by short-term rising atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations, can give the outward appearance that everything is okay, that there is nothing to worry about. However, the reality that lies beneath this outward facade is that the force for global warming is continuously increasing in strength and the conditions are forming which are set to lead to a substantial jump in the planetary atmospheric temperature (unless this force is offset by the active geoengineering of the atmospheric temperature).



Share/Bookmark

2 comments:

  1. If you link CO2 to temperature, then you must in turn address how temperature affects all other atmospheric gases particularly Oxygen (20.95% concentration) and Nitrogen (78% concentration). In addition you must address how temperature affects the heights of atmospheric boundary layers ....Even if you were to falsify correlation between CO2 and apparent dynamics of the atmosphere you would still need to address geomagnetism and Earth's Radiative Budget Equation (see Van Allen Belts).....

    I am bored...(1) CO2 is rising because the filthiness of the ocean basins (especially at the circulation gyres) has reduced Oceanic plant Life (its sink capacity)
    (2) When temperatures fall CO2 increases >>sea ice extent increases same as less plant life
    (3) When temperatures rise the rate of Oxygen & Nitrogen production increases so if CO2s atmospheric concentration is to increase with warmer temps its production must exceed Oxygen and Nitrogen rates as a result of warming and not because of sink capacity (btw methane is too light to remain in the atmosphere ...its bonds are shattered by magnetic vibrations & its remnant particles attach to the ionosphere)>>>>

    delete this blog post and stay out of my kitchen

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi there. I am not linking CO2 to temperature; it is just a fact that CO2 is linked to temperature, you can see this by looking at any graph of the two phenomena. I don't know why you assert that I am seeking to "falsify the correlation"? I am simply rebuking the claim of the sceptic that a short-term rise in atmospheric CO2 that is unaccompanied by a simultaneous rise in atmospheric temperature is evidence that human-induced global warming is a mirage. The relationship between the two phenomena is not so simple and direct as this.

    ReplyDelete