Forum

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

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 ... 29
Send Topic Print
Global warming, the science and the consequences (Read 29152 times)
Jovial Monk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Dogs not cats!

Posts: 51474
Gender: male
Re: Global warming, the science and the consequences
Reply #195 - Jul 15th, 2017 at 7:26pm
 
Go back to PA roach. You are a waste of space and not wanted here. Go away!
Back to top
 

OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now!

Topics in the right MRB!
 
IP Logged
 
Jovial Monk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Dogs not cats!

Posts: 51474
Gender: male
Re: Global warming, the science and the consequences
Reply #196 - Jul 15th, 2017 at 7:28pm
 
.
Back to top
 

OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now!

Topics in the right MRB!
 
IP Logged
 
Grendel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male
Re: Global warming, the science and the consequences
Reply #197 - Jul 15th, 2017 at 7:32pm
 
Jovial Monk wrote on Jul 15th, 2017 at 7:19pm:
(410-280)*100/280 = 46%



Quote:
46% and that is causing the globe to heat.


Sorry that is simply wrong.

The Sun is causing the earth to heat.
No Sun =  Iceball Earth.  With or without CO2.

Now the piddling current amount of CO2 in the atmosphere whether or not it is "man made" or not is of no concern, when in the past the Earth has survived a much greater amount for a great many years.

The Earth is dynamic not static.

How many times must YOU be told.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Jovial Monk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Dogs not cats!

Posts: 51474
Gender: male
Re: Global warming, the science and the consequences
Reply #198 - Jul 15th, 2017 at 7:33pm
 
BUT we are not talking a dead Sun are we, idiot roach?
Back to top
 

OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now!

Topics in the right MRB!
 
IP Logged
 
Grendel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male
Re: Global warming, the science and the consequences
Reply #199 - Jul 15th, 2017 at 7:33pm
 
Jovial Monk wrote on Jul 15th, 2017 at 7:26pm:
Go back to PA roach. You are a waste of space and not wanted here. Go away!

Go back to your SEWER Monkeyboy where you can talk to yourself and feel happy.

You need to stop your flaming and trolling of me and others. Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Grendel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male
Re: Global warming, the science and the consequences
Reply #200 - Jul 15th, 2017 at 7:34pm
 
Jovial Monk wrote on Jul 15th, 2017 at 7:33pm:
BUT we are not talking a dead Sun are we, idiot roach?

No and neither was I you idiot. Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Jovial Monk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Dogs not cats!

Posts: 51474
Gender: male
Re: Global warming, the science and the consequences
Reply #201 - Jul 15th, 2017 at 7:36pm
 
It was YOU mentioned a dead sun.

YOU could not argue your way out of a wet paper bag, roach, and we all know it.
Back to top
 

OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now!

Topics in the right MRB!
 
IP Logged
 
Grendel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male
Re: Global warming, the science and the consequences
Reply #202 - Jul 15th, 2017 at 7:39pm
 
Jovial Monk wrote on Jul 15th, 2017 at 7:36pm:
It was YOU mentioned a dead sun.

YOU could not argue your way out of a wet paper bag, roach, and we all know it.


No you idiot.
You said CO2 was heating the globe.
I merely pointed out YOU WERE WRONG...  The Sun heats the Earth.
Greenhouse gases help regulate that heat.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Grendel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male
Re: Global warming, the science and the consequences
Reply #203 - Jul 15th, 2017 at 7:39pm
 
Oh and 1 more thing.

...
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21533
Gender: male
Re: Global warming, the science and the consequences
Reply #204 - Jul 15th, 2017 at 7:41pm
 
Jovial Monk wrote on Jul 15th, 2017 at 7:19pm:
(410-280)*100/280 = 46%


That's the total increase in CO2 dropkick. NOT the anthropogenic portion.

"NATURAL CO2 SOURCES

Natural CO2 sources account for the majority of CO2 released into the atmosphere. Oceans provide the greatest annual amount of CO2 of any natural or anthropogenic source. Other sources of natural CO2 include animal and plant respiration, decomposition of organic matter, forest fires, and emissions from volcanic eruptions. There are also naturally occurring CO2 deposits found in rock layers within the Earth’s crust that could serve as CO2 sources."

https://www.netl.doe.gov/research/coal/carbon-storage/carbon-storage-faqs/what-a...

Or of course you could look at SKS

...

Now if you look at outgoing CO2 - it totals 800Gt.
Anthro -29Gt

29/800*100% = 3.625%

Skewered by one of your favourite sources. Grin Grin Grin Grin
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Jovial Monk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Dogs not cats!

Posts: 51474
Gender: male
Re: Global warming, the science and the consequences
Reply #205 - Jul 16th, 2017 at 12:42pm
 
Thwaites glacier is in West Antarctica where all the heating in Antarctica is going on. It has a frontage of 90Km and drains a much bigger area than the Larsen ice sheets on the Antarctic Peninsula. And it is in trouble.

Quote:
The trouble with Thwaites, which is one of the largest glaciers on the planet, is that it's also what scientists call "a threshold system." That means instead of melting slowly like an ice cube on a summer day, it is more like a house of cards: It's stable until it is pushed too far, then it collapses. When a chunk of ice the size of Pennsylvania falls apart, that's a big problem. It won't happen overnight, but if we don't slow the warming of the planet, it could happen within decades. And its loss will destabilize the rest of the West Antarctic ice, and that will go too. Seas will rise about 10 feet in many parts of the world; in New York and Boston, because of the way gravity pushes water around the planet, the waters will rise even higher, as much as 13 feet. "West Antarctica could do to the coastlines of the world what Hurricane Sandy did in a few hours to New York City," explains Richard Alley, a geologist at Penn State University and arguably the most respected ice scientist in the world. "Except when the water comes in, it doesn't go away in a few hours – it stays."


http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/the-doomsday-glacier-w481260

That is not a hugely scientific publication but the above is entirely in accord with the views of climatologists and glaciologists quoted in articles on the Larsen C breakoff.

Maybe we are being too pessimistic? NASA thinks so:

Quote:
The melt rate of West Antarctica's Thwaites Glacier is an important concern, because this glacier alone is currently responsible for about 1 percent of global sea level rise. A new NASA study finds that Thwaites' ice loss will continue, but not quite as rapidly as previous studies have estimated.

The new study, published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, finds that numerical models used in previous studies have overestimated how rapidly ocean water is able to melt the glacier from below, leading them to overestimate the glacier's total ice loss over the next 50 years by about 7 percent.

Thwaites Glacier covers an area nearly as large as the state of Washington (70,000 square miles, or 182,000 square kilometers). Satellite measurements show that its rate of ice loss has doubled since the 1990s. The glacier has the potential to add several inches to global sea levels.

The new study is led by Helene Seroussi, a scientist at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. It is the first to combine two computer models, one of the Antarctic ice sheet and one of the Southern Ocean, in such a way that the models interact and evolve together throughout an experiment—creating what scientists call a coupled model.
Previous modeling studies of the glacier used only an ice sheet model, with the effects of the ocean specified beforehand and unchanging.

Seroussi and colleagues at JPL and the University of California at Irvine (UCI) used an ocean model developed at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge with an ice sheet model developed at JPL and UCI. They used data from NASA's Operation Icebridge and other airborne and satellite observations, both to set up the numerical model simulations and to check how well the models reproduced observed changes.


https://phys.org/news/2017-06-thwaites-glacier-ice-loss-quickly.html#jCp

...

That is what you get when you increase the CO2 in the atmosphere by 46%.
Back to top
 

OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now!

Topics in the right MRB!
 
IP Logged
 
Jovial Monk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Dogs not cats!

Posts: 51474
Gender: male
Re: Global warming, the science and the consequences
Reply #206 - Jul 16th, 2017 at 12:45pm
 
After mentioning Thwaites Glacier several times I noticed nobody here had the wit to actually look at it.

Whichever view point is right about the rate at which Thwaites will melt and/or collapse metres of sea level rise are locked in over the next several decades.

And Thwaites is not the only glacier in rapidly warming West Antarctica.

Something to think about.
Back to top
 

OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now!

Topics in the right MRB!
 
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21533
Gender: male
Re: Global warming, the science and the consequences
Reply #207 - Jul 16th, 2017 at 1:01pm
 
What about the West Antarctic Rift and sub-sea volcanoes? Wink
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Jovial Monk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Dogs not cats!

Posts: 51474
Gender: male
Re: Global warming, the science and the consequences
Reply #208 - Jul 16th, 2017 at 1:03pm
 
Where is the Antarctic Rift, Loser Lees?

Are the volcanoes new or actually active etc?

You are proving nothing, sorry.
Back to top
 

OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now!

Topics in the right MRB!
 
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21533
Gender: male
Re: Global warming, the science and the consequences
Reply #209 - Jul 16th, 2017 at 1:14pm
 
Jovial Monk wrote on Jul 16th, 2017 at 1:03pm:
You are proving nothing, sorry.



You do that all the time and are never sorry. Grin Grin Grin

lee wrote on Jul 15th, 2017 at 7:41pm:
Now if you look at outgoing CO2 - it totals 800Gt.
Anthro -29Gt

29/800*100% = 3.625%


I notice you never responded
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 ... 29
Send Topic Print