Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 16 17 18 19 20 ... 33
Send Topic Print
Re: Climate Science (Read 80960 times)
gizmo_2655
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male
Re: Climate Science
Reply #255 - Sep 18th, 2010 at 1:45pm
 
And also, while there are 7 Billion people on Earth, almost half of them live in poverty stricken countries that really don't produce a great deal of industrial gas, or GHG's...
Back to top
 

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat
 
IP Logged
 
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: Climate Science
Reply #256 - Sep 18th, 2010 at 3:53pm
 
gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 18th, 2010 at 1:45pm:
And also, while there are 7 Billion people on Earth, almost half of them live in poverty stricken countries that really don't produce a great deal of industrial gas, or GHG's...


Good. That's the point I was making too - the 80:20 rule.


Quote:
Very good...Yes there are climate cycles....and yes humans are having 'some' impact.....the question I keep asking is ...HOW much???

From looking at most pro-AGW sites, it seems lots of the people running those sites think it's over 80%...
But consider, given the % of GHG's that humans produce is less than 4% of the total.....how can this be??


You've fallen for that fallacy, have you? - and it is a fallacy. I can see I need to talk about the carbon balance. I'll try to find some of my older posts on that and see if I can clarify them.

You are obviously capable of understanding the issues. It makes for a change. I disagree with p_n that you'll never be convinced.

The science is easy. Getting around the deliberate smokescreens is less easy.

Let me collect my thoughts on the carbon balance and see if I can make sense to you. Keep an open mind - that's all I ask.
Back to top
 

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: Climate Science
Reply #257 - Sep 18th, 2010 at 8:14pm
 
muso wrote on Sep 18th, 2010 at 3:53pm:
The science is easy. Getting around the deliberate smokescreens is less easy.



If the science was really that easy, there couldn't be so many 'deliberate smokescreens'. You introduce a new paradigm - humans determining the weather in the long run - and wonder why it is treated as a new paradigm.

The carbon balance is a simplistic notion, like much of the 'it's only antropogenic CO2' argument. We have no understanding of anything that has a complexity comparable to the climate's. Nothing. Every model of the climate is based on models of much simpler things. Climate science is is phrenology writ large.


Carbon balance is routinely illustrated with a bath tub. You have 100% natural CO2 production and 100% natural CO2 absorbtion - like the bathtub that is in equilibrium when the tap is running at the same rate a the water is diappearing down the plughole. Then you introduce 4% extra human CO2 and the absorbtion doesn't change (the plughole doesn't get bigger) and so the tub overflows, the climate overheats and so forth.

This is kindergarten stuff.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: Climate Science
Reply #258 - Sep 18th, 2010 at 9:02pm
 
You've had your turn Soren.
Back to top
 

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
req
New Member
*
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2
Re: Climate Science
Reply #259 - Sep 23rd, 2010 at 6:37pm
 
Hi friends, Thanks for sharing some good information which is useful to me. I am new to the forum and i am glad to be here.


Thanks
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth  WA
Gender: male
Re: Climate Science
Reply #260 - Sep 23rd, 2010 at 7:53pm
 
req wrote on Sep 23rd, 2010 at 6:37pm:
Hi friends, Thanks for sharing some good information which is useful to me. I am new to the forum and i am glad to be here.


Thanks


Enjoy & join in!
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: Climate Science
Reply #261 - Sep 23rd, 2010 at 10:00pm
 
req wrote on Sep 23rd, 2010 at 6:37pm:
Hi friends, Thanks for sharing some good information which is useful to me. I am new to the forum and i am glad to be here.


Thanks


You're very welcome to join in, regardless of what you actually believe. Dialog is the name of the game.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Sep 24th, 2010 at 6:13am by muso »  

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
req
New Member
*
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2
Re: Climate Science
Reply #262 - Sep 24th, 2010 at 4:14am
 
Hi friends, Thanks for sharing some good information which is useful to me. I am new to the forum and i am glad to be here.


Thanks
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth  WA
Gender: male
Re: Climate Science
Reply #263 - Sep 26th, 2010 at 8:17pm
 
req wrote on Sep 24th, 2010 at 4:14am:
Hi friends, Thanks for sharing some good information which is useful to me. I am new to the forum and i am glad to be here.


Thanks


Are you a real person or an auto program?

You seem to be on auto repeat!
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: Climate Science
Reply #264 - Sep 26th, 2010 at 8:22pm
 
muso wrote on Sep 18th, 2010 at 9:02pm:
You've had your turn Soren.

...

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: Climate Science
Reply #265 - Sep 27th, 2010 at 9:17am
 
Sorry about my delays in posting. I'm a bit busy with real life.
Back to top
 

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth  WA
Gender: male
Re: Climate Science
Reply #266 - Oct 6th, 2010 at 5:19pm
 
August 2010 Global Temperature Anomalies – Supplemental Figures and Information


Summary Figures from the Global Report
The global report is a monthly snapshot of the climate system around the globe that informs the public of the current state of the global climate and helps planners, academics and sector users factor the climate’s current state and recent trends into their decision making. The report details the average global land temperature, the average global ocean temperature, and the combined average of the two. Instead of using raw temperatures, the report presents temperature anomalies, which means the difference from average temperatures for any given area over a period of time. Using anomalies allows for a more accurate understanding of temperature trends over space and time, even with some fluctuations in data availability (see additional information below).

August 2010 Global Temperature Anomalies
This figure depicts the global surface temperature anomalies for the month of July from 1880 to 2010.
...

Highlights:
The global land and ocean surface temperature (land and ocean) for August 2010 was the third warmest August on record, behind 1998 (warmest) and 2009 (second warmest).
This was the 306th consecutive month with a global temperature above the 20th century average. The last month with below average temperatures was February 1985.
It was the second warmest August on record for the land surfaces of the globe. Previous record was set in 1998. It was the warmest August on record for the Northern Hemisphere and all land areas of the Northern Hemisphere.
The worldwide oceans experienced the sixth warmest August on record. Sea surface temperatures across the eastern and central equatorial Pacific Ocean continued to decrease as La Niña continued to develop. This tends to have a slight cooling influence on global sea surface temperatures, much as El Niño tends to have a slight warming influence on them.
The data from China had not yet arrived by the time NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center “froze” its analysis of August temperatures. The Chinese Meteorological Agency reported that August 2010 was the warmest on record for China, so it is likely that the final August temperature analysis is very slightly warmer than reported, especially for the Northern Hemisphere land component.

Year-to-Date January - August 2010 Global Temperature Anomalies
This figure depicts the global surface temperature anomalies for the period of time from January to August 2010. The temperature is compared to the average global temperature from 1971-2000.
...

Highlights:
The global land and ocean surface temperature (land and ocean) for January–August 2010 tied with 1998 as the warmest such period on record.
It was the warmest January–August on record for the land surfaces of the globe. The previous record was set in 2004.
The worldwide oceans experienced the second warmest August on record, behind 1998.

Comparing 10 years of Global Temperature Trends
Each of the 10 warmest average global temperatures recorded since 1880 have occurred in the last thirteen years. The warmest year-to-date on record, through August, was 1998 (note: although 1998 was the warmest year through August, a late-year surge in 2005 made that year the warmest total year). Analysis by the National Climatic Data Center reveals that, averaged globally, 2010 had the third-warmest August on record, and is virtually tied with 1998 for the warmest from January through August.


This graph plots the year-to-date average global land and ocean temperature. The 2010 value, complete only through August, is shown in bright red. On the graph, "ONI" stands for Oceanic Niño Index, which is one way of measuring whether El Niño or La Niña is occurring. Each of the three warmest years on record (2005, 1998, and [so far] 2010) began with a positive ONI, which is associated with El Niño and warmer than normal conditions across much of the equatorial Pacific Ocean. However, each of these years eventually transitioned into negative ONI values at some time in the year, which - after some lag - tends to depress global average temperatures slightly below the long-term trend.
...

Link -
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/20100915_globalstats_sup.html
===================
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth  WA
Gender: male
Re: Climate Science
Reply #267 - Oct 6th, 2010 at 6:45pm
 
Vast East Siberian Artic Shelf Methane Stores Destabilizing & Venting


Methane release from the not-so-perma-frost is the most dangerous amplifying feedback in the entire carbon cycle. Research published in Friday’s journal Science finds a key “lid” on “the large sub-sea permafrost carbon reservoir” near Eastern Siberia “is clearly perforated, and sedimentary CH4 [methane] is escaping to the atmosphere.”

...

Scientists learned last year that the permafrost permamelt contains a staggering “1.5 trillion tons of frozen carbon, about twice as much carbon as contained in the atmosphere,” much of which would be released as methane.  Methane is  is 25 times as potent a heat-trapping gas as CO2 over a 100 year time horizon, but 72 times as potent over 20 years!

The carbon is locked in a freezer in the part of the planet warming up the fastest (see “Tundra 4: Permafrost loss linked to Arctic sea ice loss“).  Half the land-based permafrost would vanish by mid-century on our current emissions path (see “Tundra, Part 2: The point of no return” and below).  No climate model currently incorporates the amplifying feedback from methane released by a defrosting tundra.

The new Science study, led by University of Alaska’s International Arctic Research Centre and the Russian Academy of Sciences, is “Extensive Methane Venting to the Atmosphere from Sediments of the East Siberian Arctic Shelf” (subs. req’d).  The must-read National Science Foundation press release (click here), warns “Release of even a fraction of the methane stored in the shelf could trigger abrupt climate warming.”  The NSF is normally a very staid organization.  If they are worried, everybody should be.

It is increasingly clear that if the world strays significantly above 450 ppm atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide for any length of time, we will find it unimaginably difficult to stop short of 800 to 1000 ppm.

Note:  As part of the Climate Science Project, I’m making this post as definitive as I can by including other recent scientific findings on the tundra.  Please add other relevant links in the comments.

The lead author, Natalia Shakhova, explains the new findings in this video:


Link -
http://climateprogress.org/2010/03/04/science-nsf-tundra-permafrost-methane-east...
============
Re-inforcing feedback loops, both ways!
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: Climate Science
Reply #268 - Oct 7th, 2010 at 9:07am
 
It's a concern, but it needs to be quantified better. There is no major evidence of increased atmospheric methane levels around the tundra to date, and we can measure that real time from satellite. If there is going to be a significantly greater effect than that from CO2, it will occur after 2100.

Of course we're getting into unknown territory, so it's possible that  we'll see methane start to rise again.  So far, it has plateaued. If methane clathrates start decomposing, we don't even know if we can stop it. The best option might be to capture it if possible and use it for fuel.
Back to top
 

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: Climate Science
Reply #269 - Oct 8th, 2010 at 8:53pm
 
muso wrote on Oct 7th, 2010 at 9:07am:
it will occur after 2100.




Predicting the futrure is as silly as it's always been, Captain Nemo, er... Muso.


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 16 17 18 19 20 ... 33
Send Topic Print