Science Forums 2

[UncleAl]

Compare the total documented annual anthropogenic carbon contribution to that of summed natural sources - vulcanism, wetlands, tundra, jungle, forest litter, wildfires, etc. The uncertainty in natural emissions is much larger than the total exquisitely well-documented human contribution. Look it up.

The human contribution is utterly lost in natural noise. The human contribution doesn't matter at all Let's run one small number all by itself: "Alaska fires during 2004 burned over 6.38 million acres."

http://www.nifc.gov/stats/historicalstats.html
Would the government lie?

Let's say the burn averaged 5 grams of fuel/cm^2 - one short small twig. That is way underestimated, but we'll try it out. Through Google, 6.38 million acres = 2.5818944 × 10^14 square centimeters giving 1.3x10^15 grams of fuel. Say 50% carbon by weight to give about 2.4x10^15 grams of CO2 or 2.4 billion metric tonnes of CO2. From one fire. ONE FIRE.

CO2 emission from burning a gallon of gasoline is 19.4 pounds or 8800 grams,

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/420f05001.htm
Would the government lie?

That single Alaska fire - one fire in one year - was equivalent to burning 270 billion gallons of gasoline. The world's total petroleum consumption was 1.1 million bbl/d in 2005,

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/steo/pub/contents.html
Would the government lie?

or (42 gallons/bbl)(1.1x10^6 bbl/day)(365 days) or 17 billion gallons. One single Alaska fire put out more CO2 than the whole world burning petroleum for 15 years.

Human production of CO2 doesn't even show up in the noise of natural CO2 sources. Go ahead, run the numbers yourself. The human contribution is totally invisible

THEY ARE LYING TO YOU It isn't even a good lie. It is crap at face value to anybody who can do arithmetic, hence American Zero-Goal education and Every Child Left Behind.