'Recent assessments agree that tropical cyclone intensity should increase as the climate warms. Less agreement exists on the detection of recent historical trends in tropical cyclone intensity. We interpret future and recent historical trends by using the theory of potential intensity, which predicts the maximum intensity achievable by a tropical cyclone in a given local environment. Although greenhouse gas–driven warming increases potential intensity, climate model simulations suggest that aerosol cooling has largely canceled that effect over the historical record. Large natural variability complicates analysis of trends, as do poleward shifts in the latitude of maximum intensity. In the absence of strong reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, future greenhouse gas forcing of potential intensity will increasingly dominate over aerosol forcing, leading to substantially larger increases in tropical cyclone intensities.'

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/353/6296/242

Looks like we need to boost aerosols again.

lee wrote on Jul 15^th, 2016 at 2:15pm:

Looks like we need to boost aerosols again.

Now that the propellant is CFC free the aerosols we are already using are just fine.

You are confusing propellants with aerosols. All aerosols are not  propellants.

lee wrote on Jul 16^th, 2016 at 12:18pm:

You are confusing propellants with aerosols. All aerosols are not  propellants.

I never said they were.



lee wrote on Jul 15^th, 2016 at 2:15pm:

Looks like we need to boost aerosols again.

Boost aerosols again? We never reduced them, we just changed the propellant. Looks like you were the one confusing propellants and aerosols.

The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 16^th, 2016 at 12:42pm:

Boost aerosols again? We never reduced them, we just changed the propellant. Looks like you were the one confusing propellants and aerosols.

You have never heard of  "global brightening"? It is what happened when we went from manufacturers individually burning coal, to centralised burning of coal and again when particulate filters were used to reduce particulates.

lee wrote on Jul 16^th, 2016 at 12:18pm:

You are confusing propellants with aerosols. All aerosols are not  propellants.

The_Barnacle should deliver an apology for creating minor confusion in this thread. A Self ban is not required at this point in time, but the apology should be in writing.

well done lee

well done mate on scoring your only victory point in the last 52 days. You should be very proud of your slow and hate filled descent into mediocre insanity

congratulations lee - you did it mate - well done

http://www.smays.com/oldimages/photos/uncategorized/2007/07/01/chimp150.jpg

Chimp_Logic wrote on Jul 16^th, 2016 at 6:08pm:

lee wrote on Jul 16th, 2016 at 12:18pm: You are confusing propellants with aerosols. All aerosols are not  propellants. The_Barnacle should deliver an apology for creating minor confusion in this thread. A Self ban is not required at this point in time, but the apology should be in writing.

Well I blame Lee's deliberately vague form of debating. If he was referring to soot, ash and sulfur dioxide then he should have said so.

But I hardly think that increasing industrial pollution is a good tactic to reducing global warming.


Quote:

Some scientists have gone so far as to propose deliberate manipulation of the dimming effect to reduce the impact of global warming, in other words increasing particulate emissions. But Gavin Schmidt, an atmospheric scientist argues that such a scheme would hardly provide a long term fix to our environmental excesses and ills and amount to a Faustian bargain, bringing with it “ever increasing monetary and health costs.” http://business-ethics.com/2010/11/08/5647-global-dimming-vs-global-warming/

The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 17^th, 2016 at 11:04am:

Well I blame Lee's deliberately vague form of debating. If he was referring to soot, ash and sulfur dioxide then he should have said so.

So you don't know the meaning of aerosols, and it is all my fault. :D :D :D :D

Quote:

bringing with it “ever increasing monetary and health costs.”

Only from "climate models"^TM

There is a thread somewhere about a Chinese population living longer than a US population )city comparison), despite higher pollution.

There have been claims of asthma levels increasing, but there are causes postulated.  most notably super clean houses and less outside activity, where they don't build up any immunity to pathogens.

lee wrote on Jul 17^th, 2016 at 11:56am:

Quote: bringing with it “ever increasing monetary and health costs.” Only from "climate models"TM

No, they are talking about the cost of creating all that extra airborne pollution



lee wrote on Jul 17^th, 2016 at 11:56am:

There is a thread somewhere about a Chinese population living longer than a US population )city comparison), despite higher pollution. There have been claims of asthma levels increasing, but there are causes postulated.  most notably super clean houses and less outside activity, where they don't build up any immunity to pathogens.

Are you seriously trying to suggest that pollution doesn't cause bad health outcomes?
What relevance does personal hygiene have to a discussion about pollution?

The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 17^th, 2016 at 12:55pm:

Are you seriously trying to suggest that pollution doesn't cause bad health outcomes? What relevance does personal hygiene have to a discussion about pollution?

They were comparing health of sample cities, one really polluted and one"clean". To mis-characterise that as personal hygiene is a mistake. If you think about it you are saying that the personal hygiene of the Chinese city is far and away above the personal hygiene of the US citiy in the study. Do you have any proof of that?

http://www.china-mike.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/worldwide-obesity-rates-economist-2009.gif

....Chinese people, including the elderly, also do a lot of this sort of thing

http://www.advantour.com/img/china/martial-arts/martial-arts5.jpg

although the gap between China and the USA is narrowing

http://itbulk.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Graph-chart-life-expectancy-LEX-China-vs-USA-1950-2013.jpg

Chimp_Logic wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2016 at 5:27pm:

http://www.china-mike.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/worldwide-obesity-rates-economist-2009.gif ....Chinese people, including the elderly, also do a lot of this sort of thing http://www.advantour.com/img/china/martial-arts/martial-arts5.jpg although the gap between China and the USA is narrowing http://itbulk.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Graph-chart-life-expectancy-LEX-China-vs-USA-1950-2013.jpg

Obesity is related to cyclone intensity?

yes