Australian Politics Forum - Grendel: man cannot control the climate

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Grendel: man cannot control the climate
Reply #90 - Jul 24^th, 2009 at 6:58pm

Soren wrote on Jul 24^th, 2009 at 6:22pm:

muso wrote on Jul 24^th, 2009 at 2:51pm:

Soren wrote:

Quote:

Also - what is taken to be the 'normal' climate is merely an average of a recorded period. Is it not possible to say, on the basis of these graphs, that the climate is warming only in the sense that it is coming out of an unusually cold period (19th century), which was cold despite the massive increase in atmospheric CO2? That is, undisturbed by human CO2 emissions.

Massive increase in atmospheric CO2? - What massive increase in atmospheric CO2? It rose from around 280ppm to around 290 ppm between 1800 and 1900. (3.5%) Compare that to the period between 1950 and the present day. It rose from 300 to 385ppm (28%)

It's chalk and cheese.

Are you telling us that 19th century industrialistaion, almost entirely fuelled by the dirtiest of coal, increased atmospheric CO2 by only 3.5% over a century?
I don't believe it.

The 21st century is about 9 times dirtier - possibly even ten times, because we make more cement.

It's not just a question of how dirty it is, but how much we burn.What? do you think it's all about soot?

Soren, do you honestly think that we burnt coal at a faster rate in the 19th century? (Please answer that, because I'm getting concerned about you)

If we were burning coal at 19th century rates, we would probably not have a problem.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jul 24^th, 2009 at 7:05pm by muso »

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

mozzaok

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 6741
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Grendel: man cannot control the climate
Reply #91 - Jul 24^th, 2009 at 7:19pm

Soren, muso is quoting scientific statistics, from real scientists, he doesn't just make stuff up.

He really tries to just help people look at the best info possible, that is why it must be frustrating when people choose bloggers, over actual published scientific studies, as sources for accurate information.

He has always been patient and courteous, and just tried to help people access that info, but some refuse to look, and some get abusive for even being asked to look, at what the real scientific work says.

Back to top

OOPS!!! My Karma, ran over your Dogma!

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: Grendel: man cannot control the climate
Reply #92 - Jul 24^th, 2009 at 7:24pm

muso wrote on Jul 24^th, 2009 at 6:58pm:

Soren wrote on Jul 24^th, 2009 at 6:22pm:

muso wrote on Jul 24^th, 2009 at 2:51pm:

Soren wrote:

Quote:

Also - what is taken to be the 'normal' climate is merely an average of a recorded period. Is it not possible to say, on the basis of these graphs, that the climate is warming only in the sense that it is coming out of an unusually cold period (19th century), which was cold despite the massive increase in atmospheric CO2? That is, undisturbed by human CO2 emissions.

Massive increase in atmospheric CO2? - What massive increase in atmospheric CO2? It rose from around 280ppm to around 290 ppm between 1800 and 1900. (3.5%) Compare that to the period between 1950 and the present day. It rose from 300 to 385ppm (28%)

It's chalk and cheese.

Are you telling us that 19th century industrialistaion, almost entirely fuelled by the dirtiest of coal, increased atmospheric CO2 by only 3.5% over a century?
I don't believe it.

The 21st century is about 9 times dirtier - possibly even ten times, because we make more cement.

It's not just a question of how dirty it is, but how much we burn.What? do you think it's all about soot?

Soren, do you honestly think that we burnt coal at a faster rate in the 19th century? (Please answer that, because I'm getting concerned about you)

If we were burning coal at 19th century rates, we would probably not have a problem.

I am not talking about rates of burning.
I am saying that we have a very well documented recent historical period when coal burning skyrocketed COMPARED TO the previous century and millenium. What I am saying is that compared to the bucolic, agrarian, village based 18th century (talking in broad terms), the rapid industrialisation of the following century represents an identifiable period when CO2 emission skyrocketed - but no commensurate warming is detected in the graphs.

So:
IF CO2 is the measure of antropogenic warming then there should be a discernable warming in the industrial age COMPARED TO the pre-industrial age.
If antropogenic CO2 is the culprit, it ought to show up. It doesn't. Why?

Back to top

IP Logged

muso Gold Member Offline Posts: 13151 Gladstone, Queensland Gender:	Re: Grendel: man cannot control the climate Reply #93 - Jul 24^th, 2009 at 7:53pm Soren, I moved your question to the Climate Change Discussion thread, which was intended for discussions of the CLiamte Change Explained 'sticky' topic. I hope you don't mind.
Back to top	« Last Edit: Jul 24^th, 2009 at 7:59pm by muso » 1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Grendel: man cannot control the climate
Reply #94 - Jul 24^th, 2009 at 7:52pm

Soren wrote on Jul 24^th, 2009 at 7:24pm:

I am not talking about rates of burning.
I am saying that we have a very well documented recent historical period when coal burning skyrocketed COMPARED TO the previous century and millenium. What I am saying is that compared to the bucolic, agrarian, village based 18th century (talking in broad terms), the rapid industrialisation of the following century represents an identifiable period when CO2 emission skyrocketed - but no commensurate warming is detected in the graphs.

So:
IF CO2 is the measure of antropogenic warming then there should be a discernable warming in the industrial age COMPARED TO the pre-industrial age.
If antropogenic CO2 is the culprit, it ought to show up. It doesn't. Why?

Why? - because the effect (the signal if you like) of the low level of CO2 was well below the noise in the 19th century. If you look at the graph on Post 4 in the sticky thread, you'll see the relative contributions of different forcings, and you'll see that the greenhouse gas 'signal' didn't emerge until around the late 50's.

The Earth acts as a perfectly good buffer - within limits. In the 19th century, that was the age of David Livingstone and Mungo Park. Tropical rainforests were still largely intact. When do you think the industrial age really started to kick in anyway? around 1850?

The ocean even now, still absorbs around 1/3 to 1/2 of the excess CO2 that we produce. Back in the relatively pristine 19th Century, it absorbed considerably more.

We also produce methane of course, from gas production etc, but methane doesn't last long in the atmosphere.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jul 24^th, 2009 at 8:03pm by muso »

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: Grendel: man cannot control the climate
Reply #95 - Jul 24^th, 2009 at 8:05pm

muso wrote on Jul 24^th, 2009 at 7:52pm:

Soren wrote on Jul 24^th, 2009 at 7:24pm:

I am not talking about rates of burning.
I am saying that we have a very well documented recent historical period when coal burning skyrocketed COMPARED TO the previous century and millenium. What I am saying is that compared to the bucolic, agrarian, village based 18th century (talking in broad terms), the rapid industrialisation of the following century represents an identifiable period when CO2 emission skyrocketed - but no commensurate warming is detected in the graphs.

So:
IF CO2 is the measure of antropogenic warming then there should be a discernable warming in the industrial age COMPARED TO the pre-industrial age.
If antropogenic CO2 is the culprit, it ought to show up. It doesn't. Why?

Why? - because the effect (the signal if you like) of the low level of CO2 was well below the noise in the 19th century. If you look at the graph on Post 4 in the sticky thread, you'll see the relative contributions of different forcings, and you'll see that the greenhouse gas 'signal' didn't emerge until around the late 50's.

The Earth acts as a perfectly good buffer - within limits. In the 19th century, that was the age of David Livingstone and Mungo Park. Tropical rainforests were still largely intact. When do you think the industrial age really started to kick in anyway? around 1850?

The ocean even now, still absorbs around 1/3 to 1/2 of the excess CO2 that we produce. Back in the relatively pristine 19th Century, it absorbed considerably more.

We also produce methane of course, from gas production etc, but methane doesn't last long in the atmosphere.

Why am I thinking 'Thimblerig, thimblerig, thimblerig?' I can't be the only one.

Back to top

IP Logged

Soren Gold Member Offline Posts: 25654 Gender:	Re: Grendel: man cannot control the climate Reply #96 - Jul 24^th, 2009 at 8:07pm muso wrote on Jul 24^th, 2009 at 7:53pm: Soren, I moved your question to the Climate Change Discussion thread, which was intended for discussions of the CLiamte Change Explained 'sticky' topic. I hope you don't mind. No. Where's the pea again???
Back to top	IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Grendel: man cannot control the climate
Reply #97 - Jul 24^th, 2009 at 8:08pm

This is the graph I mean.

I'm not trying to con you, I assure you. You may not realise it, but you have been sucked in in a major way, like many other people.

Now - do you see how the Greenhouse gas signal emerges around 1958?

Up until then, it was lost in the noise of volcanic activity, solar activity and aerosols etc - some negative, some positive.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jul 24^th, 2009 at 8:31pm by muso »

Climate_Change_Attribution_001.JPG (51 KB | 38 )

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Grendel: man cannot control the climate
Reply #98 - Jul 24^th, 2009 at 8:09pm

Soren wrote on Jul 24^th, 2009 at 8:07pm:

muso wrote on Jul 24^th, 2009 at 7:53pm:

Soren,

I moved your question to the Climate Change Discussion thread, which was intended for discussions of the CLiamte Change Explained 'sticky' topic.

I hope you don't mind.

No.

Where's the pea again???

Ah - you're talking about me moving your post. It just seemed like a more appropriate place for it LOL. I didn't intent to confuse you.

You might not believe me, but I am working very hard at trying to explain the science, because it is so misrepresented elsewhere. I'm trying to clarify the picture.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jul 24^th, 2009 at 8:30pm by muso »

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

tallowood

Gold Member

Offline

Израиль Навсегда

Posts: 9483
Gender: male

Re: Grendel: man cannot control the climate
Reply #99 - Jul 24^th, 2009 at 8:16pm

muso wrote on Jul 24^th, 2009 at 7:52pm:

Soren wrote on Jul 24^th, 2009 at 7:24pm:

I am not talking about rates of burning.
I am saying that we have a very well documented recent historical period when coal burning skyrocketed COMPARED TO the previous century and millenium. What I am saying is that compared to the bucolic, agrarian, village based 18th century (talking in broad terms), the rapid industrialisation of the following century represents an identifiable period when CO2 emission skyrocketed - but no commensurate warming is detected in the graphs.

So:
IF CO2 is the measure of antropogenic warming then there should be a discernable warming in the industrial age COMPARED TO the pre-industrial age.
If antropogenic CO2 is the culprit, it ought to show up. It doesn't. Why?

Why? - because the effect (the signal if you like) of the low level of CO2 was well below the noise in the 19th century. If you look at the graph on Post 4 in the sticky thread, you'll see the relative contributions of different forcings, and you'll see that the greenhouse gas 'signal' didn't emerge until around the late 50's.

The Earth acts as a perfectly good buffer - within limits. In the 19th century, that was the age of David Livingstone and Mungo Park. Tropical rainforests were still largely intact. When do you think the industrial age really started to kick in anyway? around 1850?

The ocean even now, still absorbs around 1/3 to 1/2 of the excess CO2 that we produce. Back in the relatively pristine 19th Century, it absorbed considerably more.

We also produce methane of course, from gas production etc, but methane doesn't last long in the atmosphere.

According to the graphs the Mother Nature can and did this far produced much more climatic variations then humans during all their years of existence.
Is there any guarantee that if all human related processes will stop the Mom is going to stabilise?
That is assuming that we are not part of Mom's regulatory mechanism and have to do what we are designed to do.

Back to top

עַם יִשְרָאֵל חַי

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Grendel: man cannot control the climate
Reply #100 - Jul 24^th, 2009 at 8:28pm

tallowood wrote on Jul 24^th, 2009 at 8:16pm:

According to the graphs the Mother Nature can and did this far produced much more climatic variations then humans during all their years of existence.
Is there any guarantee that if all human related processes will stop the Mom is going to stabilise?
That is assuming that we are not part of Mom's regulatory mechanism and have to do what we are designed to do.

Well - that's correct up until the last 50 years or so, Tallowood.

What you ask (in bold) is a very good question. Maybe we should start a new thread on it. I don't have an instant answer, but there has been a lot of research done on that very question.

I'll attempt to answer it in detail at a later date.

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

tallowood

Gold Member

Offline

Израиль Навсегда

Posts: 9483
Gender: male

Re: Grendel: man cannot control the climate
Reply #101 - Jul 24^th, 2009 at 8:46pm

muso wrote on Jul 24^th, 2009 at 8:28pm:

tallowood wrote on Jul 24^th, 2009 at 8:16pm:

According to the graphs the Mother Nature can and did this far produced much more climatic variations then humans during all their years of existence.
Is there any guarantee that if all human related processes will stop the Mom is going to stabilise?
That is assuming that we are not part of Mom's regulatory mechanism and have to do what we are designed to do.

Well - that's correct up until the last 50 years or so, Tallowood.

What you ask (in bold) is a very good question. Maybe we should start a new thread on it. I don't have an instant answer, but there has been a lot of research done on that very question.

I'll attempt to answer it in detail at a later date.

That is a good and scientific answer. When you analyse the situation think about a man walking on a rope stretched in space-time but the rope is not tied by men but has life of its own.

Back to top

עַם יִשְרָאֵל חַי

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: Grendel: man cannot control the climate
Reply #102 - Jul 24^th, 2009 at 9:09pm

muso wrote on Jul 24^th, 2009 at 8:09pm:

Soren wrote on Jul 24^th, 2009 at 8:07pm:

muso wrote on Jul 24^th, 2009 at 7:53pm:

Soren,

I moved your question to the Climate Change Discussion thread, which was intended for discussions of the CLiamte Change Explained 'sticky' topic.

I hope you don't mind.

No.

Where's the pea again???

Ah - you're talking about me moving your post. It just seemed like a more appropriate place for it LOL. I didn't intent to confuse you.

You might not believe me, but I am working very hard at trying to explain the science, because it is so misrepresented elsewhere. I'm trying to clarify the picture.

I am only teasing with intent, if you know what I mean.

Back to top

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Grendel: man cannot control the climate
Reply #103 - Jul 24^th, 2009 at 9:47pm

Soren,

I have nothing against skepticism, and I also hate it when anybody tries to take away our way of life, or give my hard earned money to the dole bludgers. We're not talking about a return to communism or a new retro fashion for tye-died shirts and bell-bottoms and reefers.

We are talking about a gradual change in technology in a way that will preserve our prosperity. Poverty sucks. I've seen the direct relationship between prosperity and respect for the environment in West Africa, where the environmenta norm is - "If it moves, eat it"- "if it burns, burn it" - "If it's pristine, sh1t on it"

Examine everything carefully and cross examine, but in the end, be prepared to change your views if you do come to the inevitable conclusion that maybe you were wrong.

I'll see you again in September.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jul 24^th, 2009 at 9:54pm by muso »

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Grendel Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 28080 Gender:	Re: Grendel: man cannot control the climate Reply #104 - Jul 25^th, 2009 at 3:39pm So Bozo how is it again we can control the Earth's climate? I mean that is the topic.
Back to top	IP Logged