No scientific consensus on climate change

[izentrop]

think a little more ...

Anyway, the effect on the RC is negligible, or even zero, or even worsens, when we see the gigantic fires that appear even in places like the Nordic countries ...

In 3, we can see that it works in both directions:

The right side of the graph, positive, corresponds to soot carbon, resulting from incomplete combustion (unburnt), which will absorb solar radiation and therefore heat the atmosphere (positive radiative forcing).
There is also an additional warming effect when this soot settles on snow or ice and darkens it, thus decreasing the reflection of the surface (change of albedo) which reinforces the solar absorption and therefore causes an acceleration. of cast iron. https://bonpote.com/forcage-radiatif-a- ... %20More%20

I repeat, you have to be miro not to see it.

[Exnihiloest]

... Anyway, the effect on the RC is negligible, even zero, or even worsens, when we see the gigantic fires that appear even in places like the Nordic countries ...
...

Human activity is everywhere today. The vast majority of fires are man-made. But it does not weigh heavily on a global warming effect, compared to volcanoes.

[ABC2019]

think a little more ...

Anyway, the effect on the RC is negligible, or even zero, or even worsens, when we see the gigantic fires that appear even in places like the Nordic countries ...

that's not the question, the study shows that the effect was more important before what we thought. So the variation between before and now is LESS important than what we thought, so aeorosols have a forcing weaker than we thought (the forcing being the variation compared to the pre-industrial period).

So since the negative forcing of aerosols is weaker, for the same temperature variation, it is because the positive forcing of CO2 is also weaker (the sum being constant).

This is what is said in the article.

For fires in Scandinavia you have data since when?

[izentrop]

For fires in Scandinavia you have data since when?

I did not speak about this country in particular, but Siberia, Sweden, the arctic circle, well it's no secret that the mega-fires are a recent phenomenon. https://bonpote.com/doit-on-sattendre-a ... limatique/

The Arctic is burning like never before - and that's bad news for climate change.

Wildfires have blown along the Arctic Circle this summer, incinerating the tundra, blanketing Siberian towns in smoke and ending the extraordinary second season of the fires in a row. By the time the fire season wore off at the end of last month, the flames had emitted a record 244 megatonnes of carbon dioxide - up 35% from last year, which also set records. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02568-y

[ABC2019]

For fires in Scandinavia you have data since when?

I did not speak about this country in particular, but Siberia, Sweden, the arctic circle, well it's no secret that the mega-fires are a recent phenomenon. https://bonpote.com/doit-on-sattendre-a ... limatique/

The Arctic is burning like never before - and that's bad news for climate change.

Wildfires have blown along the Arctic Circle this summer, incinerating the tundra, blanketing Siberian towns in smoke and ending the extraordinary second season of the fires in a row. By the time the fire season wore off at the end of last month, the flames had emitted a record 244 megatonnes of carbon dioxide - up 35% from last year, which also set records. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02568-y

I'm not asking you for headlines and high-sounding articles, that I know you're going to find, I've been asking you since when we had statistics?

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

(And Bozo to ask for something more than what we give him as a good dervish ...)

[izentrop]

I'm not asking you ...

I am not at your service and do not do it for the old indecipherable grigous, but for those who have a little critical spirit.
Suddenly, it makes me discover quality information sites like this https://bonpote.com/comment-calculer-son-empreinte-carbone/ which is really well documented

[ABC2019]

I'm not asking you ...

I am not at your service and do not do it for the old indecipherable grigous, but for those who have a little critical spirit.

everyone has their own conception of critical thinking, eh, I ask how long we have had data when we talk about "records" .

Hey, I just broke my longevity record again, do you think it's due to CO2?

[Janic]

owiii ... again!

[Exnihiloest]

...
Suddenly, it makes me discover quality information sites like this https://bonpote.com/comment-calculer-son-empreinte-carbone/ which is really well documented

The kind of completely useless stuff, except to understand that the correlation between CO2 production and standard of living is the result of cause and effect relationships.
And as CO2 is not a pollutant, all life on earth depends on it and the more there is, the better the plants proliferate, making CO2 to improve one's standard of living is also an ecological bonus.