Climate Change - 4 Questions To Consider

8 posts / 0 new
Last post
Nichoman's picture
Nichoman
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 1 2008
Posts: 422
Climate Change - 4 Questions To Consider

For those who are interested in the truth about Climate Change Debate...suggest doing research on-line toward answering 4 questions...

 

1.) What does the theory of GHG's (Greenhouse Gases) say how our 3D (horizontal and vertical) atmosphere should change?
2.) What do the 6 major methods of tabulating 3D observational data show and what are the limitations of this data?
3.) Using numerous (dozens?) statistical criteria...what can be attributed to natural and what can be attributed to man made and where does further research need to be pursued?
4.) What is the reliability..or skill of our best models using over 100 criteria to replicate long range climate natural and man made changes at Global and Regional scales and how should output be weighted...if at all...if models are not skillful?

 

Then decide for yourself where we are and where need to go in the Climate Change debate.  How much is known and still needs further research (i.e. uncertain).

 

Nichoman (Atmospheric Physicist) 

Ruhh's picture
Ruhh
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 12 2008
Posts: 259
Re: Climate Change - 4 Questions To Consider

I am posting this same comment because nobody seems to get it. I
can't beleive that the world is still arguing about things like peak
oil and global warming or climate change.

IT DOESN'T MATTER!

Go back and watch chapter 18, seriously.

 

For years now I've always said that global warming or climate change or the fear of peak oil don't mean squat.

If we continue to plunder the earth in the same unquestionalbly
unsustainable ways we have been we are doomed. The temperature won't
matter when the air we breathe, the water we drink and the soil we need
to grow our food has all been poisoned. Think deforestation,
desertification, coral reefs dying, overfishing, air pollution.

These things are happening without question. Maybe we won't see
total degradation of the ecosystem in the next couple of years or maybe
not even in the next generation but the human population will
eventually cause an ecological collapse. Unfortunately the rate that
we're doing this is unsustainable and the root cause is overpopulation and growth economics. We need to come up with alternatives
and solutions to all of these environmental problems and we need to
make this our collective top priority. If we do take serious care of these things, global warming (if human related) it would take care of itself.

mainecooncat's picture
mainecooncat
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 7 2008
Posts: 488
Re: Climate Change - 4 Questions To Consider

Agreed, Ruhh.

I'm not saying, Nichoman, did this, because they didn't, but often times people conflate climate change with other environmental issues and then make the leap that says, well, I've heard global warming could be a hoax, so the environment's not really an issue.

The truth though is that the acrimonious debate regarding man-made climate change is a separate issue from, say, topsoil degradation, due to poor farming techniques or over-fishing, or dwindling supplies of fresh water, or any other significant issue that is really going to squeeze us over the next few years and has been the doing of Homo Sapiens.

Nichoman's picture
Nichoman
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 1 2008
Posts: 422
Re: Climate Change - 4 Questions To Consider

Ruhh...

You bring up good points and dovetails into what I almost included as a 5th point, which is...

5.)  How much can Land Use Change modify the environment and how can we use it to mitigate Climate Change impacts?

 

For those who thirst for Climate Change knowledge and truth...suggest look into a new exciting sub-field many of us define as "biometeorology".   As a carrot...types of plants and how integrated into ecosystems can have several degrees (potentially up to 5+ degrees Fahrenheit...3 degrees Celcius in certain conditions) impacts on local temperatures (local city mitigation to Urban Heat Islands) and increase local carbon capture.  This field needs much further research and is in its infancy...but the important point is its a first order variable that can be used positively if were wise.  Many farmers and rural folks are already somewhat familiar to a certain extent of this potential.

Additionally...will reiterate...optimistic if we don't blow ourselves up...by late this century (personal estimate ~2050-2100) we will use the unique properties of water to mitigate if not marginally manage World Climate because of its incredible specific heat capacity (second greatest in Universe) and most non-linear (i.e. ability to release energy) thermodynamic properties we can access.   Second is E-M aspects applied to water properties to create a type of "solid state air conditioning/heating cycle".      

Water is a remarkable compound that R&D personally involved with displays nearly "mystical" properties (some may have heard of "Cold Fusion" or LLNL) as just one example.  This phenomena so far can't be easily systematically duplicated because existing QEM (Quantum electro-magnetics) limitations which Max Plank and Einstein suggested was not surprising.  There are several other properties of water personally observed which are not fully explainable in physics.

If interested in more about unique properties of water...look at nice web site that a good general reference...

http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/anmlies.html

Finally...remember without water all life wouldn't exist and these properties we heavily exploited throughout human history such a steam power was primary energy source in 1800's.  An "air car" which has proven to work using some thermodynamic properties of water air mixture may be out in next 2-3 years.  Also..."Swamp coolers" are common in drier climates which cool homes at 1/4 to 1/3 to price of central air and water can be recycled.

Again...ignorance leads to fear...potentially close mindedness and poor decisions.  

 

Nichoman (Atmospheric Physicist)

gyrogearloose's picture
gyrogearloose
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 8 2008
Posts: 537
Re: Climate Change - 4 Questions To Consider
Ruhh wrote:

I am posting this same comment because nobody seems to get it. I
can't beleive that the world is still arguing about things like peak
oil and global warming or climate change.

Agree with you on global warming. ( Now called climate change, AGW deniers say it is deceptive move by AGW believers prompted by an apparent recent cooling trend Wink )

 

But I have always considered peak oil just to be the "poster child" of resource depletion. They are all linked in such a way that few people come to grasp on their own.

I have tackled trying to convince people, starting with peak oil, because I see it as an easy one to start with. 

If they "get peak oil" then I show them more of the picture.

Cheers Hamish

Gwentan's picture
Gwentan
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 25 2008
Posts: 8
Re: Climate Change - 4 Questions To Consider

If I have learned one lesson in my investing career it is that confirmation bias is the most dangerous form of self deception. Never trust a goldbug's opinion on the future gold price - it is always up; never trust a Brit when it comes to the pound - he will most likely tell you his opinion of the government,  and for the same reason, never trust an environmentalist to report accurately on the state of the environment.

See here for a staggering example of confirmation bias. Hansen is quoted approvingly on this site in the daily digest - nov 21

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/11/16/do...

I am sorry but I can't think of a non-judgemental way of saying this. Guys, enjoy your posturing but don't make the mistake of thinking that your warnings are not contaminated by your desire to be right.Show a bit more humility and you might get more people to take note.

 

 

Nichoman's picture
Nichoman
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 1 2008
Posts: 422
Re: Climate Change - 4 Questions To Consider
Gwentan wrote:

See here for a staggering example of confirmation bias. Hansen is quoted approvingly on this site in the daily digest - nov 21

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/11/16/do...

FYI...James Hanson degrees are not in Atmospheric Physics or Meteorology.  His specialty is as a modeler.

 

Nichoman 

 

A. M.'s picture
A. M.
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 22 2008
Posts: 2367
Re: Climate Change - 4 Questions To Consider

Nicholman - MOST "meteorologists" are simply "AMS certified" broadcast meteorologists.
Beyond the basics, they have no comprehension of what's actually happening. Their focus is on the meso and micro-scale climatic effects over very short amounts of time. 

Anyhow,

As a person somewhat attached to this career field, I can tell you that there is some seriously misleading information with regards to weather, climate and "change" (probably the most overused word of the decade).

First and foremost, atmospheric data is subject to "relative" observation. When someone says "it's going to be warm", this could mean something radically different to someone in Barrows Point Alaska than it would in Orlando Florida.

Secondly, and equally important, it's critical to remember two things; the earth is on a natural cycle of heating and cooling, and our accurate accounting of this process is only about 100 years old. To put that in perspective, the earth is roughly 4 billion years old. We're not seeing anything that's unprecedented or potentially destructive for the planet. We're seeing thing that could impact humankind. The earth will keep on it's orbit with or without us.

I firmly believe that the "commercialized" climate change hooplah is pure, unadulterated commercialism. Yes, there is very compelling indicators that we're experiencing a shift in climate; however, sloganized, idiomatic thinking such as "your carbon footprint" are simply regurgitation friendly thoughts for the half-wits. Anyone can buy into that idea, because it requires no thought.

Now - that out of the way - there is no possible way to dismiss the alarming rate at which ice is disappearing from our polar regions. This is where we should be concentrating our collective brainpower - but since no one lives up there, only a handful of people really care.

A good, if not heady read can be found here linking solar cycles (which are not examined throughally enough) to terrestrial climate. http://www.warwickhughes.com/agri/Solar_Arch_NY_Mar2_08.pdf

Another compelling bit of research is the Holocene Interglacial theory, that makes the claim that we're simply headed for another ice age. Personally, this is what I believe - though - again, not the hyped up, Hollywood version. Just a period of cooling.

Cheers!

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments