Quote:
Originally Posted by Acolyte
And yet strangely, what I said stands according to the example given - if CO2 was more significant than water vapour there would not be the dramatic effect in the desert. Did you not read the example given? 
And, from what I read about which frequencies get blocked by what, GH effects are distinctly significant with water vapour.
And still we have the problem that of all the GH atmospheric problems, CO2 is a minor part, of all the CO2 produced, humans are a minor part. Yet it is being made out as if only the tiny fraction that is human generated is responsible for the warming. |
You misunderstood my point. Where there is already extensive water vapor, CO
2 can be increased in significance due to its blocking of frequency ranges where water vapor does not block. Note that this assumes already existing water vapor - a good assumption for much of the planet. Where there is little water vapor, that will indeed reduce the effect far more than CO
2 will increase it, however where there is already water vapor, CO
2 will have a far greater effect than a proportional increase in water vapor.