Burning fossil fuels has opposite effect on so called Global Warming.

[Karlos]

redrumloa wrote:
Those wacky British are at it again! Now we will all die if we stop polluting.

Either you misread it totally or the article has changed since you posted it :-)

That's not what the article says at all. It says that, due to particulate pollution reflecting solar radiation, we have yet to feel the full impact of global warming. It also states the opinion that since particulate pollution is coming under control and greenhouse gas emissions are not then the current temperature rise model has to be revised upwards.

[Karlos]

redrumloa wrote:

Karlos wrote:
Either you misread it totally or the article has changed since you posted it :-)

Nope! Reread it. Buring coal, wood etc is causing global dimming, a cooling effect. They say this cooling effect is offsetting the so called global warming. IE if we stop using fossil fuels, the climate will really heat up.

Your first post made it appear is if you meant "burning fossil fuels does not cause global warming".

This is not true, nor does the article suggest it is.

I read it as follows

1) Burning fossil fuels produces CO2 -> greenhouse effect -> global warming

2) Burning fossil fuels produces particulate pollution -> dimming effect -> cooling

Now the article says that currently the (2) seems to counterbalance (1).

However, particle emission is being brought under control faster than C02 emission. Therefore unless we curb C02 emissions *as well as* particle emissions, we can expect the global warming effect to be worse than previously predicted.