No, CO2 doesn't impact incoming solar radiation, at least not directly - wrong wave lengths. I ambiguously worded a sentence in the previous post. Additional clouds can reduce incoming solar radiation that reaches the ground. CO2 induced warming can lead to additional clouds. At the risk of stating the obvious, modeling the clouds correctly in the climate models is of some importance. It impacts longwave radiation cooling of the atmosphere (yes, longwave flux divergence in the atmosphere is typically negative), the incoming solar that reaches the ground, and incoming solar absorption by the atmosphere which creates heating.
I believe that we will continue to see anthropogenic warming, to some degree, for the foreseeable future. Whether it will turn out to be an existential threat is, in my opinion, to be determined. Those who believe we are facing an existential threat are probably basing it on climate model simulations and probably the 8.5 scenario. To be clear, there are a lot of uncertainties. Nobody knows for sure. As with almost anything that is complex, the odds of it happening are based on a probability function.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimjamuser
Thanks, OK I can follow that. Maybe instead of a "blanket", the better analogy of the "shroud" (?) in the upper atmosphere would be something like a reflective net that has gotten out of balance and is reflecting more longwave radiation (heat) back to earth while blocking more or less short wave radiation from the sun.
......Basically from my layman's perspective, I have READ that the OVERALL results are a PREDICTION that the earth will be warming for the next 30 years. Now, however, it is your analysis that there will be manmade heating, but it will or may be inconsequential in degree. I stated that Dr Doom believes in your 3rd outcome of excessive heat. I imagine that Dr.Doom has access to expert opinions and information that I do NOT. It would be nice to know upon WHAT he bases HIS conclusion???????
|