Ocean acidifcation .

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by SailOar

You stated that the southern half of Africa is showing elevated levels of CO2. The southern half of Africa contains quite a bit of non-tropical land.

Here is a NASA video that shows the fluctuation of CO2 throughout the year. Note that south Africa does show significant seasonal variation, though not as much as the northern hemisphere.

it was a snapshot in time not a seasonal run .

Explain why the co2 output is higher in the southern half of Africa right now.
I didn't ask about seasonal variations . That is just an attempt to redirect from the specific question.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

I don't believe that. It's just you taking something out of context.

why can't you believe what he wrote aside from it has nothing to do with man.
You really need to read what is posted not just the scan points you want to see.
http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...ml#post2946557

Here I will cut and paste it as well .

CO2 values fluctuate seasonally. They go down in the growing season when plants are building cellulose from CO2 taken from the air. In winter, when plants are not growing, the CO2 levels rise. It's winter in the southern hemisphere, so values there are now higher than they are in their summer.

Is that better?

Also note that most of the land mass in question is in tropical and sub tropical regions of the planet.

[SailOar]

Originally Posted by newhaul

Explain why the co2 output is higher in the southern half of Africa right now.
I didn't ask about seasonal variations . That is just an attempt to redirect from the specific question.

Because it's winter in Africa right now. Stop the video at July 31 (1:00) (the closest date to today's date). You'll see that CO2 levels are peaking in the southern part of Africa.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

its all here
http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...rs-158143.html

Take some time to refresh your memory a bit .
It's not my issue I know you will never believe the truth .

There are 349 pages of posts. To which specific post do you refer?

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

sorry but the Danes show things a bit differently.

http://data.meereisportal.de/maps/la...xtent_s_en.png

The DMI graph shows 1 SD below the mean.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by newhaul

why can't you believe what he wrote aside from it has nothing to do with man.

Dude, chill. You're just chasing your own tail at this point, and making less and less sense.

Try to stay on the larger points. Taking stuff out of context and then attacking those little distortions you create is not a good look. Your best arguments have come when you are challenging broader points and you usually have some data or cites, which is more than I can say for some other "skeptics".

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

There are 349 pages of posts. To which specific post do you refer?

there are so many perhaps you should do your due diligence and review all 349 pages .
But it won't change your views so it is actually futile to even attempt to give you the facts that are in opposition to your beloved IPCC and its jaded views based on their terms of reference.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

that is not what he said .
Try to keep up

I did not says that fossil fuels are ONLY reason. I said that a reason. I understand seasonal variation, especially in the Northern Hemisphere.

Originally Posted by jackdale

The areas with high are those spewing out CO2 from fossil fuels.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by AllenRbrts

Perhaps a small step in the right direction would be to stop selling coal to them[emoji3]

A larger step in the right direction would be for China to stop building new coal plants throughout Africa and other parts of the developing world.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

What makes you so confident that sinks and sources are in sync? It's effectively two competing systems, not a symbiotic one.

Great point, and another area of the science that is not well understood. Notwithstanding, our very own "experts" here on CF will present it as if it is yet another scientific truth, and use charts, graphs, and "peer-reviewed studies" that they only superficially comprehend to validate their assertions.

[AllenRbrts]

Originally Posted by Exile

A larger step in the right direction would be for China to stop building new coal plants throughout Africa and other parts of the developing world.

Couldn't agree more, but sometimes you need to take baby steps first.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Because all the sources and sinks we know about have been more or less in balance, as expressed in pre-industrial natural records. If something 'natural' has gone out of whack so badly in the last 200 years that could increase CO2 at a rate anywhere near that of fossil fuels, you'd kind of think we'd pick up on that, yes? Unless you subscribe to Exile's Natural Forces That Cannot Be Measured.

More expert assumptions from the vast body of non-experts on the internet. Natural forces cannot be quantified, and neither can sources of CO2 while in the atmosphere. But that obviously doesn't mean they don't exist. The issue is how much of each is contributing to warming. If the IPCC et al. says the added human contribution of CO2 is a "significant" factor driving warming, then the remainder must be "natural" forces. Yet some within the science, and significantly more on the internet, claim that all the warming is caused by human forces, and we'd be in a cooling phase without the added CO2. I have no grounds for choosing which theory I happen to like, but at least I think I have a reasonably realistic handle on what the various theories within the science actually are. I don't understand why so many non-experts feel that ignoring or obfuscating them helps with overall understanding, or with their own credibility.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by AllenRbrts

Couldn't agree more, but sometimes you need to take baby steps first.

I assume you mean baby steps which are realistic. When it comes to China, I don't think there are any, at least none that can come from outside China itself.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by newhaul

from satellite measurements that are commonly available .

The real question is why haven't you availed yourself of it .

Btw just so you know the data is on a 2 hour lag time .
https://earth.nullschool.net/#curren...19.312,-10.621

Very interesting cite Newhaul, along with the ensuing discussion. I've used this site for several years for passage planning, etc., but never knew it could overlay CO2 concentrations on top of wind.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by stevensuf

Attachment 197211

Originally Posted by stevensuf

Surely the antarctic should be melting as well?

Originally Posted by jackdale

It is winter in the Southern hemisphere.

Look again. The graph records minimum months of sea ice extent from both hemispheres. (Feb. in Antarctica).