...
yep its human caused but its based on less water on land than before thus less evaporation to cool the land thus less rain in those area's thus no cooling.
....
Since the time constant of water dammed up in a lake or reservoir is much longer than if it were in a stream, water in such a body would have more surface area, and more evaporation, than if it were in a stream or river.
That would result in more rain, and more cooling.
There are other problems with your arguments in the post, this is only one.
nope
take a litre of water and put it in a bowl and leave in it your yard to evaporate
take another litre of water and spread it across the ground letting it flow in many directions like rivers and strains and wetlands.
i guarantee you the ground water litre would evaporate faster than the litre reservoir bowl
its an easy experiment
heck even get 2 glasses of water. leave one in the glass and pour the other glass onto a towel
i guarantee you the towel dries out faster than the glass of water does
the depth of the reservoir has colder water at the lower levels that keep the water at a higher level cooler for longer. this less evaporation
heck. reservoirs these days have a top layer filled with black balls (like the kiddy ball pool) that prevent the sun getting to the water to create algea and prevent evaporation
other things is that water reflect suns radiation more then carbon does.
this is why the space program is looking at hydrogen/water to put in the fuselage of spacecraft as a 'shield' against radiation instead of using carbon
so when you look at the atmospheric makeup of only 400parts per million of carbon and many thousands of parts of water. you start to see water has a bigger effect.
when you look at the sky on the hottest day of the year. its not because its full of smog. its because there is lack of cloud cover(water)
carbon by itself does have negative impacts on human lungs and also environments of tree's and plants. and algea.
but the correlation between carbon and temperature has been disproven by the frosts of smoggy london vs the heatwaves of clear sky london
the correlation of temperature related to water content in the sky has always existed
remember ground temperature and upper atmosphere temperature are in total different atmospheres.
its not as simple as saying carbon causes heat rises. but it is more simple to show the water associations of heat rises
when water is not evaporation country wide on masses of hectares of wetlands its not creating masses of clouds spaced out to keep the wide area wet when it rains
however the limited evaporation in reservoirs causes clouds in that area. that then release as rain in the nearby mountains to keep fueling the reservoir below. whilst not really releasing their rain in the dry lands in the other direction
thus chain reaction of drylands below/away from a reservoir getting dryer and the mountain elevations getting wetter thus causing more floods.
the whole deforestation is about the dryland/flatlands drying out due to industry. so people move into more fertile land thats prown to rainfall. so the biggest concern is not carbon effecting drylands to then cause forest fires. but saboteurs destroying forrests to then buy the burnt land cheap to make into farms now its no longer a forrest. yep fire is cheaper to destroy a forest than getting a lumber company to strip the land
yep its all human caused. but trying to shift the blame on carbon is all saying its consumer demand caused and about getting funding to move away from carbon because the coal industry wont survive another 50 years on coal alone as supplies are depleting. they need to shift to other energy methods. but they pretend that coal can continue for centuries and the move is for 'the environmental choice' .. the reality is its for continual profit via government/charity grants to diversify away from a business that is running out of supplies
enjoy your research
