- #1
MikeeMiracle
- 398
- 313
- TL;DR Summary
- Historic CO2 levels, climate change
Not trolling here, just have genuine confusion over CO2 levels comparied to what we believe CO2 levels have been historically and their effect on climate change.
I recently saw some Facebook group infographic posts which claimed that CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is the lowest it has ever been. I didn't believe this initially but even Wikipedia states that current levels are around 400ppm but have potentially been as high as 4000ppm in the past around 500 million years ago. If we take just this single fact at face value then it would seem the current fear of a runaway greenhouse effect from higher CO2 levels doesn't quite add up, however...I have been a member of this forum long enough to know that the above statement is a huge over simplification and not to take a single piece of "evidence" by itself as a sole reason for any cause and effect.
So to my question, what am I missing? I suspect quite a bit...I am vaguely aware of the Carbon cycle where CO2 relased into the atmosphere needs to balance with CO2 absorbed through various process's by the planet to cancel each other out so I suspect that the amount of CO2 being absorbed by the planet must be a hell of a lot lower now than it has been in the past when CO2 levels were higher? Otherwise we should have had runaway climate change in the past when level of CO2 were higher? What's changed so that the absortion ability is so much less now than it was in the past? Am I even on the right track with this train of thought?
Thanks
I recently saw some Facebook group infographic posts which claimed that CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is the lowest it has ever been. I didn't believe this initially but even Wikipedia states that current levels are around 400ppm but have potentially been as high as 4000ppm in the past around 500 million years ago. If we take just this single fact at face value then it would seem the current fear of a runaway greenhouse effect from higher CO2 levels doesn't quite add up, however...I have been a member of this forum long enough to know that the above statement is a huge over simplification and not to take a single piece of "evidence" by itself as a sole reason for any cause and effect.
So to my question, what am I missing? I suspect quite a bit...I am vaguely aware of the Carbon cycle where CO2 relased into the atmosphere needs to balance with CO2 absorbed through various process's by the planet to cancel each other out so I suspect that the amount of CO2 being absorbed by the planet must be a hell of a lot lower now than it has been in the past when CO2 levels were higher? Otherwise we should have had runaway climate change in the past when level of CO2 were higher? What's changed so that the absortion ability is so much less now than it was in the past? Am I even on the right track with this train of thought?
Thanks