Lightfoot and Ratzer have a recent, peer-reviewed paper about the Hunga Tonga submarine volcanic explosion. https://setpublisher.com/index.php/jbas/article/view/2607
This paper attributes the explosion as the cause of a 3-year global surface temperature spike. The peak recorded global temperature was confirmed by the UAH GSAT (Global Surface Average Temperature), and the NOAA satellite data on the increase in stratospheric water vapour. The peak in April 2024 was 1.96 °C above pre-industrial, well above the IPCC and Paris Accord goal of 1.5 °C. There were no tipping points or crises associated with this high temperature. The Earth has been in a cooling period for 18 months! Please read the paper and use it in your legal arguments as you deem useful.
Although there seems to be considerable confusion among governments and the general public, in understanding the difference between Carbon (a particulate) and Carbon Dioxide (a gas), if we overlook that confusion for a moment could the following have any validity?
Using the isotopes Carbon-12, Carbon-13, and Carbon-14, it is argued by some that plants take in less of the rather rare isotope Carbon-13 than the lighter isotope Carbon-12 which is heavily represented in coal and oil. Therefore, the argument goes that because there is much more of the isotope Carbon-12 in our atmosphere, its excessive presence must be because of human’s use of fossil fuels (composed primarily from plants) and inversely not a mineral from volcanoes.
Does such an argument have any validity in determining how much of the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide is anthropogenic?
The adiabatic lapse rate falsifies premise two. The dry adiabatic lapse rate is greater than the moist adiabatic lapse rate. So, as moisture is added to the atmosphere, the atmosphere becomes more isothermal. This is the opposite of what GHT would predict.
Lightfoot and Ratzer have a recent, peer-reviewed paper about the Hunga Tonga submarine volcanic explosion.
https://setpublisher.com/index.php/jbas/article/view/2607
This paper attributes the explosion as the cause of a 3-year global surface temperature spike. The peak recorded global temperature was confirmed by the UAH GSAT (Global Surface Average Temperature), and the NOAA satellite data on the increase in stratospheric water vapour. The peak in April 2024 was 1.96 °C above pre-industrial, well above the IPCC and Paris Accord goal of 1.5 °C. There were no tipping points or crises associated with this high temperature. The Earth has been in a cooling period for 18 months! Please read the paper and use it in your legal arguments as you deem useful.
Enjoyed your article.
Although there seems to be considerable confusion among governments and the general public, in understanding the difference between Carbon (a particulate) and Carbon Dioxide (a gas), if we overlook that confusion for a moment could the following have any validity?
Using the isotopes Carbon-12, Carbon-13, and Carbon-14, it is argued by some that plants take in less of the rather rare isotope Carbon-13 than the lighter isotope Carbon-12 which is heavily represented in coal and oil. Therefore, the argument goes that because there is much more of the isotope Carbon-12 in our atmosphere, its excessive presence must be because of human’s use of fossil fuels (composed primarily from plants) and inversely not a mineral from volcanoes.
Does such an argument have any validity in determining how much of the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide is anthropogenic?
Dr. Ed,
The adiabatic lapse rate falsifies premise two. The dry adiabatic lapse rate is greater than the moist adiabatic lapse rate. So, as moisture is added to the atmosphere, the atmosphere becomes more isothermal. This is the opposite of what GHT would predict.