- #36
Bystander
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
- 5,624
- 1,757
vanesch said:(snip)I was more thinking about the argument - if I understood it correctly - that the CO2 rise in the atmosphere is "for 60% due to fossil fuel burning", and that the proof that it is *this* CO2 is the isotopic ratio which has a "fossil signature". Now, maybe this is just a summary of a much more complex argument - that's actually my question.
But if the argument stops there, then this is only at most *suggestive*, and no *proof*: you cannot logically derive the necessity of the CO2 rise by just observing this isotopic marking.(snip)
"n" reservoirs with "n" isotope signatures exchanging carbon via n2 mechanisms that partition isotopes by kinetic and/or thermodynamic effects at n2 rates isn't a system of equations that lends itself to "trivial" solution; got some of the isotope ratios, very little rate data, and one reservoir mass (atmosphere). Hence, the question, "Wanta try cataloguing the reservoir-mass-flux data situation?"