More CO2 Peculiarities: The C13/C12 Isotope Ratio

mkpdavies · 29-01-2008, 10:08 AM

Spencer Part2: More CO2 Peculiarities - The C13/C12 Isotope Ratio « Watts Up With That?

Quote:

BOTTOM LINE: If the C13/C12 relationship during NATURAL inter-annual variability is the same as that found for the trends, how can people claim that the trend signal is MANMADE??

No answers to his question yet. Another plank in the "Man did it" theory evaporating away.

g hall · 30-01-2008, 07:23 PM

There are a lot of Planks still left in the MMGW camp

Baron von Lotsov · 31-01-2008, 12:12 AM

Well that is the first time I have seen anyone look at isotopes. Thank goodness there are some real scientists still around. Actually I'm kicking myself that I didn't think of doing that myself. It's a pretty obvious thing to do once you know the deal with isotopes, and you should know about that if you do carbon dating. Excellent work and I'll have to say to the greens get out of that one if you can!

John Cooper · 31-01-2008, 08:43 AM

A very poor article he says :-
"From what I can find digging around on the Internet, some people think this is the signature of anthropogenic emissions."

So he has disproved what some people (no reference to who these people are) but not the majority believe is proof of man made CO2 emissions.

Seems like a classic strawman arguement.

Straw man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

mkpdavies · 31-01-2008, 11:36 AM

Can you answer his final question then John?

Baron von Lotsov · 31-01-2008, 01:06 PM

There is no valid scientific retort to his method as far as I can see. The isotopes in carbon are like date stamps and burning coal and oil is burning organic matter that is very old and carbon dating is one of the best tools scientists have in establishing the date of any previously organic material. It's pretty accurate as well; at the very least it is way beyond the accuracy needed to differentiate between something millions of years old and something produced in the current year.

John Cooper · 31-01-2008, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkpdavies

Can you answer his final question then John?

Of course not it is based on a false hypothesis namely

Quote:

some people think this is the signature of anthropogenic emissions

There is no proof that people believe this. Why does he not provide a link ?

Also if you wanted to prove that carbon dioxide is not from fossil fuels you would look at C14 as it has a short life.

He provides no references at all in this "paper".

John Cooper · 31-01-2008, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baron von Lotsov

There is no valid scientific retort to his method as far as I can see. The isotopes in carbon are like date stamps and burning coal and oil is burning organic matter that is very old and carbon dating is one of the best tools scientists have in establishing the date of any previously organic material. It's pretty accurate as well; at the very least it is way beyond the accuracy needed to differentiate between something millions of years old and something produced in the current year.

carbon dating does not use C13 but C14.

Also of course he does not prove that burning fossil fuels always give the same ratio of C13/C14 does gas from the North sea give the same as oil ?

Baron von Lotsov · 31-01-2008, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Cooper

carbon dating does not use C13 but C14.

Also of course he does not prove that burning fossil fuels always give the same ratio of C13/C14 does gas from the North sea give the same as oil ?

Yes I know it uses C14 but as far as I'm aware the same principle applies, i.e. that of radioactive decay, which gives a different ratio as the exponential decay curve acts on it. Each kind of decay is defined wholly by its half-life since it is always an exact exponential. For reasons of accuracy it is preferred that the half-life is of the order of the time being measures or else your error is multiplied. So other than that the same principle applies and this is established fact. Now maybe he has not proved every detail in the path of reasoning in this piece of text but that's fair enough as he is just communicating this particular finding so other scientists reading it will be looking into it as well. It's not intended as political propaganda but as scientist-to-scientist and much like work in progress. It's the technique that is the key point and others can expand on it.

Clippo · 31-01-2008, 08:28 PM

BVL wrote:-

Quote:

Well that is the first time I have seen anyone look at isotopes. Thank goodness there are some real scientists still around. Actually I'm kicking myself that I didn't think of doing that myself. It's a pretty obvious thing to do once you know the deal with isotopes, and you should know about that if you do carbon dating. Excellent work and I'll have to say to the greens get out of that one if you can!

Doh ! - Where u bin boy ? Who's the self exposed plank then ?

Creep back into your slimy sceptic pits boys – the logical absurdity of Spencer’s crackpot ideas were debunked some time ago.
(& just to annoy mpkdavies, if he thought is was so good, why didn’t he publish it in a peer-reviewed journal. )

:

I think recent estimates are that mankind is emitting nearly 50 billion tons of CO per year into the atmosphere.
How do we know that ? - from basic chemistry of combustion and the known consumption of fossil fuels.

From :-
Stoat: Spencer is totally off his rocker

Quote:

"To believe this (Spencer’s arguments – my insert) , you have to believe that CO2 and other GHG's were stable at pre-industrial concentrations for thousands of years, then suddenly, just as humans started emitting them, some natural process started emitting them, while at the same time removing from the atmosphere an equivalent quantity of the man-made GHGs".

For the technical detail of isotopic evidence in complete support for anthropogenic CO2 emissions, see
RealClimate

Pathetic try from Spencer, apparently a Creationist who therefore by definition does believe in the concept of isotopic half lives.

30-01-2008, 07:23 PM	#2 (permalink)
g hall Uber Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 4,940	There are a lot of Planks still left in the MMGW camp __________________ "That government is best which governs least." "This is a sharp Medicine, but it is a Physician for all diseases and miseries". "To be "matter of fact" about the world is to blunder into fantasy --and dull fantasy at that, as the real world is strange and wonderful."

31-01-2008, 12:12 AM	#3 (permalink)
Baron von Lotsov Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 910	Well that is the first time I have seen anyone look at isotopes. Thank goodness there are some real scientists still around. Actually I'm kicking myself that I didn't think of doing that myself. It's a pretty obvious thing to do once you know the deal with isotopes, and you should know about that if you do carbon dating. Excellent work and I'll have to say to the greens get out of that one if you can! __________________ "A government big enough to supply you with everything you need, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have..."

31-01-2008, 11:36 AM	#5 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,604	Can you answer his final question then John? __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

31-01-2008, 01:06 PM	#6 (permalink)
Baron von Lotsov Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 910	There is no valid scientific retort to his method as far as I can see. The isotopes in carbon are like date stamps and burning coal and oil is burning organic matter that is very old and carbon dating is one of the best tools scientists have in establishing the date of any previously organic material. It's pretty accurate as well; at the very least it is way beyond the accuracy needed to differentiate between something millions of years old and something produced in the current year. __________________ "A government big enough to supply you with everything you need, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have..."

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

31-01-2008, 08:43 AM	#4 (permalink)
John Cooper Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 333	A very poor article he says :- "From what I can find digging around on the Internet, some people think this is the signature of anthropogenic emissions." So he has disproved what some people (no reference to who these people are) but not the majority believe is proof of man made CO2 emissions. Seems like a classic strawman arguement. Straw man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia