Breitbart's headline falsely claimed Gore "admit[ted]" temps cause CO2 increases but "not the other way around"
A headline at Andrew Breitbart's website Breitbart.tv falsely claimed that Al Gore admitted that "temperatures cause CO2 to increase not other way around." In fact, in Gore's 2007 congressional testimony that Breitbart highlighted, Gore acknowledged that temperature increases have occasionally preceded CO2 increases, but also that "[t]he opposite has also been true in the past"; moreover, Breitbart omitted Gore's ensuing comments, which reflect the overwhelming scientific consensus on global warming, that "what's happening now is that we because of human action are overwhelming all of those cycles."
Breitbart.tv headline: "Gore Admits Temperatures Cause CO2 To Increase Not Other Way Around"
From Breitbart.tv, accessed December 9:
Gore explicitly rejected the notion that "temperatures cause CO2 to increase not other way around"
Gore: "The opposite has also been true in the past. But what's happening now is that we because of human action are overwhelming all of those cycles." On March 21, 2007, during a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee hearing, Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) stated, "I have an article from the Science magazine, which I will put into the record at the appropriate time, that explains historically a rise in CO2 concentrations did not precede a rise in temperatures but actually lagged temperature by 200 to 1,000 years -- yes, lagged. CO2 levels went up after the temperature rose. It appears that temperature appears to drive CO2, not vice versa." During his response, Gore stated, "[T]he fact that more CO2 traps more heat in the lower part of the Earth's atmosphere is really beyond dispute. I mean, it's not -- that's not me saying that; that's what the scientists have known for 180 years. And for 100 years they've done the calculations on pretty much exactly what the magnitude of the heating effect is." After Barton then claimed that "the temperature goes up before the CO2 goes up," Gore responded:
GORE: Sometimes that has been true in the past. The opposite has also been true in the past. But what's happening now is that we because of human action are overwhelming all of those cycles. [Joint House committee hearing, 3/21/07 (accessed via Nexis)]
Breitbart ignored larger point, central to consensus, that global warming is "overwhelming" historical cycles
Breitbart.tv video ends before Gore makes broader point. In cutting the video of Gore's testimony, Breitbart did not include Gore's comments that, regardless of past cycles, "[W]hat's happening now is that we, because of human action, are overwhelming all of those cycles."
In the current, human-driven warming scenario, not only has atmospheric CO2 doubled in 150 years, the carbonic acid content of the oceans has likewise increased. What happens when the oceans warm sufficiently to significantly reduce the solubility of CO2 therein? All that CO2 we've released that has been absorbed (sunk) into the oceans will begin to be released, leading to a feedback loop that will be devastating to human civilization.
And when he does, he takes it out of context and then doesn't understand it even then?
Could he be more incompetent?
2. Adding CO2 to the atmosphere does increase warming.
3. So our adding of massive amounts of CO2 to the atmosphere is raising the planet's temperature, regardless of whatever did or did not initiate natural warming cycles that have occurred in Earth's history.
Good lord, is that so hard to understand?
As you said, the past cycles were initiated by warming trends. As swamps, colder regions, and oceans warmed, they released CO2. The charts show warming first, then peaks of CO2 several hundred years later.
You may be aware of this already, but there's a good series of videos that cover a lot of this info. So easy, even a denier could understand them, if they wanted to.
http://sites.google.com/site/dallastrees/potholer54-climate-change
Another set:
http://sites.google.com/site/dallastrees/greenman3610-climate-denial-crock-videos
And a nice video about how to separate baloney from facts:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUB4j0n2UDU&feature=player_embedded#
Um, for the purposes here, it is. The fact that warming trends can be initiated by causes other than increasing CO2 concentrations is irrelevant to the fact that increasing CO2 concentrations, which what we're doing, causes warming. That latter fact is just basic physics of a sort that has been well understood for over a century.
I don't believe anything respectable can come from CRU again. To me, it is completely discredited as are the politicians who have been running it and claiming to be scientists.
These scientist say the earth is 4.4 BILLION years old, It started out at 8,000 degrees then have had (there not sure up to four?) but at least one ice age, and we have 150 years of data in a 4.4 BILLION year old planet. And we can now say the debate is over and Global Warming IS man made. WoW, Climate change has been going on for 4.4 BILLION years on earth, BUT we can take 150 Years worth of data and YES some of this is now in question, and make decisions and end debate. Well I guess if that is what you want to hear, you would say the debate is over, and call anyone that disagrees deniers and other names. I guess I would rather see a little less conflicting Data. (You know where we started cooling the earth from 8,000 degrees to an ice age and then pulled from a ice age and started warming again and then started cooling again) but there is really no natural cycle, this is ALL man made.
Why are they in science books?And why would you dismiss it? When these are being taught all over the country, on how the earth began? Or are you dismissing yourself for NO facts and no credibility?
And I referred to that fact that your personal sense of credulity is less than meaningless. It's actually laughable.