Investing in Precious Metals 101 Ad

The Definitive Global Climate Change (aka Global Warming) Thread — General Discussion and Questions

Login or register to post comments Last Post 869872 reads   4 posts
  • Tue, Jun 11, 2013 - 01:28am

    #1381
    Eric Meyers

    Eric Meyers

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Feb 21 2013

    Posts: 169

    count placeholder

    From what I understand

The comparison is of observations of satellite measurements and radiosonde weather balloons TO models of the mid-troposphere in the latitudes 20N to 20S.  So, I would say it's apples to apples.  I would much rather trust satellite and weather balloon measurements than surface station measurements.  And, correct me if I'm wrong but this section of the atmosphere (in the troposhere, in the tropics) is where the warming is supposed to be most pronounced -per the theories of positive water vapor feedback to enhance the "greenhouse effect". From my layman's perspective this is pretty damning evidence showing the failure of climate models in a specific crucial part of the atmosphere (to their projections).  Now, alarmists will try to cloud the point (pun intended) by pointing to other data, like surface stations etc. 

  • Wed, Jun 12, 2013 - 08:56am

    #1382
    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1612

    count placeholder

    “I was mistaken.”Al Gore.

Cold Fusion mentioned at 19:33min

  • Wed, Jun 12, 2013 - 09:51am

    #1383
    Hrunner

    Hrunner

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Dec 28 2010

    Posts: 209

    count placeholder

    Please don’t frighten me with more Al Gore pictures

Arthur,

As a public service, it is too disturbing for those with weak hearts to see pictures of this disingenuous and scary man. 

Please for the sake of public health Arthur, don't post any more a this person that was just few votes away from the presidency.

 

  • Wed, Jun 12, 2013 - 11:24am

    #1384
    Doug

    Doug

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 01 2008

    Posts: 1380

    count placeholder

    Hrunner wrote:Arthur, As a

[quote=Hrunner]

Arthur,

As a public service, it is too disturbing for those with weak hearts to see pictures of this disingenuous and scary man. 

Please for the sake of public health Arthur, don't post any more a this person that was just few votes away from the presidency.

[/quote]

A few Supreme Court votes away from the presidency.  He won the popular vote.

Doug

  • Thu, Jun 13, 2013 - 04:43am

    #1385

    sofistek

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 02 2008

    Posts: 557

    count placeholder

    Thanks

Mark, thanks for the post about the possibility of a total Antarctic meltdown. I suspected as much but there are still those who think it is not only possible, but likely this century. I can discount such predictions now.
Any thoughts on the Age of Limits conference, concerning climate change?

Tony

  • Fri, Jun 14, 2013 - 03:03am

    #1386
    alfrede

    alfrede

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: May 15 2013

    Posts: 21

    count placeholder

    arctic methane

NASA – Is a Sleeping Climate Giant Stirring in the Arctic?

(hat tip to risa bear)

'There's a strong correlation between soil characteristics and release of carbon dioxide and methane. Historically, the cold, wet soils of Arctic ecosystems have stored more carbon than they have released. If climate change causes the Arctic to get warmer and drier, scientists expect most of the carbon to be released as carbon dioxide. If it gets warmer and wetter, most will be in the form of methane.

The distinction is critical. Molecule per molecule, methane is 22 times more potent as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide on a 100-year timescale, and 105 times more potent on a 20-year timescale. If just one percent of the permafrost carbon released over a short time period is methane, it will have the same greenhouse impact as the 99 percent that is released as carbon dioxide. Characterizing this methane to carbon dioxide ratio is a major CARVE objective."

….

Early Results

The CARVE science team is busy analyzing data from its first full year of science flights. What they're finding, Miller said, is both amazing and potentially troubling.

"Some of the methane and carbon dioxide concentrations we've measured have been large, and we're seeing very different patterns from what models suggest," Miller said. "We saw large, regional-scale episodic bursts of higher-than-normal carbon dioxide and methane in interior Alaska and across the North Slope during the spring thaw, and they lasted until after the fall refreeze. To cite another example, in July 2012 we saw methane levels over swamps in the Innoko Wilderness that were 650 parts per billion higher than normal background levels. That's similar to what you might find in a large city."

Ultimately, the scientists hope their observations will indicate whether an irreversible permafrost tipping point may be near at hand. While scientists don't yet believe the Arctic has reached that tipping point, no one knows for sure. "We hope CARVE may be able to find that 'smoking gun,' if one exists," Miller said."

 

Mark, Tony, all please comment. Seems extremely important to me. I don't have perspective for interpretating, the 650ppb reading, & comparing this to a city's emissions.

  • Fri, Jun 14, 2013 - 04:23am

    #1387

    Stan Robertson

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 07 2008

    Posts: 516

    count placeholder

    Is it different this time?

[quote=alfrede]

Mark, Tony, all please comment. Seems extremely important to me. I don't have perspective for interpretating, the 650ppb reading, & comparing this to a city's emissions.

[/quote]

Alfrede,

Take a look at the Greenland ice core data and then explain exactly why we would have an unprecedented problem with more Arctic warming. The current decadal mean temperature for Greenland is about -30C. The long term effect of methane release would be to increase CO2 concentrations as it oxidizes on about a decade time scale. But it would be only be a very minor increase to the much larger CO2 concentration.

Stan

  • Fri, Jun 14, 2013 - 08:00am

    #1388

    sofistek

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 02 2008

    Posts: 557

    count placeholder

    +65ppm

Alfrede,
650ppb is more than a third of the current levels up in the Arctic. If that translates to 65,000ppb CO2 equivalent, in the short term, that’s an extra 65 ppm on top of an elevated level for the Arctic, compared to the rest of the globe.

An earlier article in Climate Progress (which comments on the NASA article, here) points to research showing permafrost melt could add up to 1.4°F (0.8°C) to warming by 2100 (that’s one feedback).

Tony

  • Fri, Jun 14, 2013 - 10:32am

    #1389
    alfrede

    alfrede

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: May 15 2013

    Posts: 21

    count placeholder

    thanks tony

the second link is especially helpful; particularily the comments. I gather the "650ppb is a third of current levels" means a third 'higher' than current levels? thanks.

Tony, all.  

In the comments 'joan savage' raised the question of different measures in the verticle column since lighter than air. That seems important to me. The 500ft. I suspect is a safe flying limitation.

I also remember Mark linking to an article that methane goes into a chemical change process.  I also don't remember if there is a timescale that is important to the 'chemical change process'; or is that directly related to the change over time of methane's potiency as a greenhouse gas [the short term as Tony puts it]. thanks.

 

  • Sat, Jun 15, 2013 - 02:10am

    #1390

    Stabu

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Nov 07 2011

    Posts: 99

    count placeholder

    Small Note On Models

Mark,

 

I completely agree with you that modeling climate is a necessary exercises. I'm also agnostic about whether or not these models should be variable or momentum based – when I look at the problem from my own modeling work the complexity indicates that climate models should probably be both.

 

While I am convinced that the climate is changing, humans are causing it, and we should at least slow down the process, I'm still not very convinced at all that this is a total disaster. Two examples from economics: I was once part of a team doing massive models that were run on computer networks (akin to super computers) and the results were completely wrong. We used the best of theories (consensus if you may), checked and checked the data etc. and what we got was something that didn't even closely match reality. Back in 2006 before the market started tanking, the consensus of the economist profession (which is a lot larger than the climate scientists profession) thought that everything was fine with the economy and there were an abundance of indicators pointing to that direction. Two years later and the markets were in full panic. I came off unharmed mainly because I was widely read, didn't trust the consensus or the models. The point I'm trying to get to is that while I agree that the climate is changing and humans are causing it, all indicators that point towards an absolute disaster are either based on models, consensus or both (again, to reemphasize, this is not an argument for inaction).

 

After exhausting over 230 hours on this topic (which is of course minimal in your eyes), I've came to the conclusion that the range of scenarios varies from Stan's mild warming to Guy's catastrophic warming, but what is exactly going to happen is anybody's guess. If Stan is right, the problems are minor and the time to prepare is long, if Guy is right – well, then nothing really matters. Assuming a normal distribution between those extremas, a central point is a more likely outcome, in which case I should keep preparing as I've done against peak oil, except to buy an air-conditioning system, install a deep well, build a cistern, and get plants and animals that show resistance to extreme weather. Political action is rather pointless (and according to many too late anyway), since no political viable alternatives exist, especially as long as we are in a collapse environment.

 

What else is there to do?

Viewing 10 posts - 1,381 through 1,390 (of 3,753 total)

Login or Register to post comments