[LINK] The meaning of climate change denial

[Gordon Keith]

On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 09:12:01 AM TKoltai wrote:
> However, I still have lots of unanswered questions e.g.: Why were the
> very persons that are now expounding Global Warming; in 1971 espousing
> the exact oppopsite:
> 
> Vis:  
> 
> Science  9 July 1971:
> Vol. 173 no. 3992 pp. 138-141
> DOI: 10.1126/science.173.3992.138
> Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide and Aerosols: Effects of Large Increases on
> Global Climate
> 
>    1. S. I. Rasool,
>    2. S. H. Schneider
> 
> Effects on the global temperature of large increases in carbon dioxide
> and aerosol densities in the atmosphere of Earth have been computed. It
> is found that, although the addition of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere
> does increase the surface temperature, the rate of temperature increase
> diminishes with increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. For
> aerosols, however, the net effect of increase in density is to reduce
> the surface temperature of Earth. Because of the exponential dependence
> of the backscattering, the rate of temperature decrease is augmented
> with increasing aerosol content. An increase by only a factor of 4 in
> global aerosol background concentration may be sufficient to reduce the
> surface temperature by as much as 3.5 ° K. If sustained over a period of
> several years, such a temperature decrease over the whole globe is
> believed to be sufficient to trigger an ice age.
> 
> Mr. Rasool came to his chilling conclusions by resorting in part to a
> new computer program developed by Mr. Hansen that studied clouds above
> Venus.
> As reported
> http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2007/sep/19/inside-the-beltway-69748
> 548/

>From the above they not saying that global warming isn't real.

They are saying that as well as the threat of the planet warming from CO2 
emissions that there is also a threat that the planet could cool from aerosol 
emissions.

Climate change is mostly caused by feedbacks in the system. One 
palaeoclimatologist claimed (on theconversation I think) that we currently 
have 2.1 degrees of CO2 warming and 1.3 degrees of aerosol cooling. CO2 stays 
in the atmosphere for thousands of years. Aerosols stay in the atmosphere for 
years.

If we stopped all aerosol pollution within a few years we would see the full 
impact of CO2 warming.

If we upped the aerosol pollution enough to completely override the CO2 
warming, we could well plunge into an ice age if we trigger enough feedbacks.

We could have the worst of both worlds and plunge into a short ice age because 
of aerosols and then rebound to a hot world due to the long lasting CO2.

Just because Rasool and Schneider believe there is a real chance of global 
cooling doesn't mean that they don't also believe there is strong likelihood 
of global warming. It's the probability of things staying as they are that is 
getting very low.

Regards
Gordon