global warming

Casual discussion amongst spiritual friends.

Re: global warming

Postby Alex123 » Mon Mar 25, 2013 11:10 pm

Buckwheat wrote:
Alex123 wrote:From your link:
"The future level of global warming is uncertain,"
Great, so catastrophic predictions are uncertain and how long will global warming continue is uncertain. Hopefully it will be high enough to prevent Ice Age.

Your own sources tell us that their predictions are UNCERTAIN, and yet you believe that they are certain about future level of global warming?!!!

There is not a single thing in science that does not contain undertainty. The beautiful thing about science is that uncertainty gets quantified. The uncertainty here is that, assuming we continue spouting CO2 into the atmosphere unchecked, the future will either be very difficult or we will simply go extinct. The reason I included that link was to show that predictions are not for the Earth to suddenly explode, but that the difficulties can be studied, quantified, and through mitigation and adaptation we can live through this. If we do nothing, we might have to get really, really good at fasting.


What prevents temperature from going above average of 23C or so? Earth's climate averaged 23C degree for millions of years. This seems to be its more usual temperature. The current 14.51C temperature is unusual.

What prevents interglacial that we live in from turning back into ice age? The fact that temperature is rising is the whole meaning of current Holocene interglacial which started about 11,400 years ago.

Considering that IPCC themselves stated that "The future level of global warming is uncertain" (which is claimed to cause severe weather) you seem to be certain that it is either going to be very difficult or we go extinct? What if the temperature stalls at current levels for long period of time? What if it even goes slightly down. After all, IPCC themselves are uncertain about future level of global warming and we are in interglacial.

I believe that severe weather occurred as long as climate existed. Hot temperature has its downsides, and cold temperature has its own.

As for humans going extinct, there are other possibilities such as asteroid strike (which could have killed the dinosaurs).
”Even the water melting from the snow-capped peaks finds its way to the ocean."
User avatar
Alex123
 
Posts: 2849
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: global warming

Postby Buckwheat » Mon Mar 25, 2013 11:26 pm

I didn't really understand a lot of that post. There is not one story that describes all climate change.

The story for the recurring ice-ages / deglaciations as seen in the Vostek ice cores is this:
1) For some time, there was a relatively constant temps during the ice age.
2) Due to changes in the Earth's orbit, there was a small to moderate amount of global warming.
3) This caused CO2 to be released from the ocean into the atmosphere.
4) releasing CO2 caused more warming, which caused more release of CO2
5) This continued until there was another period of relatively constant temps during the interglacial.

Then the reverse happened:
6) As Earth's orbital characteristics continued to change, there was a small to moderate amount of global cooling.
7) This caused CO2 to be stored in the ocean
8) This caused greenhouse effect to be weakened, which lowered temps further, which caused more CO2 to be stored in oceans.
9) This continued until there was another period of relatively constant temps during the ice-age

For AGW, the story is different:
1) Due to human activity, CO2 is released from deep earth sources (coal, oil, gas) leading to warming

The temerature change predicted by AGW is not nearly as large as happened during the natural cycles of glaciation / deglaciation. What concerns us is how rapidly it will happen and how it will affect our food stores and habitats.
Sotthī hontu nirantaraṃ - May you forever be well.
Buckwheat
 
Posts: 927
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:39 am
Location: California USA

Re: global warming

Postby Alex123 » Mon Mar 25, 2013 11:28 pm

Buckwheat wrote:For AGW, the story is different:
1) Due to human activity, CO2 is released from deep earth sources (coal, oil, gas) leading to warming


If CO2 release LAGS temperature changes by 400-1200 years (that you have accepted in previous post) than it is not the cause nor amplification of those temperature changes 400-1200 years before CO2's rise. This is what means for something to lag. CO2 is not concurrent, it lags by 400-1200.

An interesting quote from your site:
even if we were to immediately stop adding CO2 to the atmosphere, the planet would warm another ~0.6°C until it reached this new equilibrium state (confirmed by Hansen 2005). This is referred to as the 'warming in the pipeline'.


So stopping all CO2, at great price to the economy, the planet would still warm up...
”Even the water melting from the snow-capped peaks finds its way to the ocean."
User avatar
Alex123
 
Posts: 2849
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: global warming

Postby Kim OHara » Tue Mar 26, 2013 2:19 am

Climate scientists say the massive snow storms to hit North America and Europe this year were linked to shrinking sea ice levels in the Arctic.

More: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-03-26/northern-blizzards-linked-to-arctic-sea-ice-decline/4594802
:coffee:
Kim
User avatar
Kim OHara
 
Posts: 3052
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: global warming

Postby Buckwheat » Tue Mar 26, 2013 2:24 am

Alex123 wrote:An interesting quote from your site:
even if we were to immediately stop adding CO2 to the atmosphere, the planet would warm another ~0.6°C until it reached this new equilibrium state (confirmed by Hansen 2005). This is referred to as the 'warming in the pipeline'.


So stopping all CO2, at great price to the economy, the planet would still warm up...


Yes, we already waited to long to act, so we are stuck with ~0.6°C temperature rise. The longer we wait to act, the larger that number gets.
Sotthī hontu nirantaraṃ - May you forever be well.
Buckwheat
 
Posts: 927
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:39 am
Location: California USA

Re: global warming

Postby Kim OHara » Tue Mar 26, 2013 6:55 am

Buckwheat wrote:
Alex123 wrote:An interesting quote from your site:
even if we were to immediately stop adding CO2 to the atmosphere, the planet would warm another ~0.6°C until it reached this new equilibrium state (confirmed by Hansen 2005). This is referred to as the 'warming in the pipeline'.


So stopping all CO2, at great price to the economy, the planet would still warm up...


Yes, we already waited to long to act, so we are stuck with ~0.6°C temperature rise. The longer we wait to act, the larger that number gets.

... and there are in fact great benefits to the economy from shifting away from fossil fuels and stopping CO2 emissions. I have already provided links to sources for that in this thread and can't be bothered trawling through it to find my post, but a domain-limited google search for "Garnaut" will find it.

:namaste:
Kim
User avatar
Kim OHara
 
Posts: 3052
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: global warming

Postby manas » Tue Mar 26, 2013 7:56 am

Kim O'Hara wrote:... and there are in fact great benefits to the economy from shifting away from fossil fuels and stopping CO2 emissions. I have already provided links to sources for that in this thread and can't be bothered trawling through it to find my post, but a domain-limited google search for "Garnaut" will find it.
:namaste:
Kim


Pity that so many of our brightest talents in the field of solar R&D ended up in China, due to the Australian Government's actual lack of interest in it. So, we end up with a carbon tax, higher electricity prices, massive Government handouts to the Coal-burning power plants, but diddly-squat investment in solar or other renewable energy. In reality, our Govt doesn't give a damn about AGW, real or not; the only reason they did it was because the Greens made it a condition of their support.

I'm actually in favour of more renewable energy Kim, unlike our corporate-controlled Govt. But that doesn't stop them from squeezing a bit of revenue out of us, using AGW as a pretext.

:anjali:
User avatar
manas
 
Posts: 2109
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: global warming

Postby Kim OHara » Tue Mar 26, 2013 8:03 am

manas wrote:
Kim O'Hara wrote:... and there are in fact great benefits to the economy from shifting away from fossil fuels and stopping CO2 emissions. I have already provided links to sources for that in this thread and can't be bothered trawling through it to find my post, but a domain-limited google search for "Garnaut" will find it.
:namaste:
Kim


Pity that so many of our brightest talents in the field of solar R&D ended up in China, due to the Australian Government's actual lack of interest in it. So, we end up with a carbon tax, higher electricity prices, massive Government handouts to the Coal-burning power plants, but diddly-squat investment in solar or other renewable energy. In reality, our Govt doesn't give a damn about AGW, real or not; the only reason they did it was because the Greens made it a condition of their support.

I'm actually in favour of more renewable energy Kim, unlike our corporate-controlled Govt. But that doesn't stop them from squeezing a bit of revenue out of us, using AGW as a pretext.

:anjali:

Yes. Aussie politics aren't of any interest to most on DW but let me say that Labor's policies have not impressed me at all and the Ministers (until recently - I know at least one has gone) for the Environment and for Mines acted like they hated the environment and loved the miners. Grr!
But when Labor drifts to the right, it's leftish supporters drift towards the Greens :juggling:
It may get ugly but I'm pretty sure it's going to be interesting.

:namaste:
Kim
User avatar
Kim OHara
 
Posts: 3052
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: global warming

Postby manas » Tue Mar 26, 2013 8:27 am

Kim O'Hara wrote:Yes. Aussie politics aren't of any interest to most on DW but let me say that Labor's policies have not impressed me at all and the Ministers (until recently - I know at least one has gone) for the Environment and for Mines acted like they hated the environment and loved the miners. Grr!
But when Labor drifts to the right, it's leftish supporters drift towards the Greens :juggling:
It may get ugly but I'm pretty sure it's going to be interesting.
:namaste:
Kim

I know I diverged a bit, I just wanted to make the point that myself (and to my knowledge many other AGW 'sceptics' here) are actually in favour of moving towards less-polluting sources of energy. In how I try to live and organise my life, I'm actually quite 'green'. And I'm frustrated at how our amazing environments and ecosystems continue to be given second place to mining interests. When they have mined and fracked every last bit of mineral and gas out of this land, it is we who will be left with a big mess to clean up - assuming that ground water contaminated with fracking chemicals actually can be cleaned up.

Anyway I'll leave off my angry rant :tongue:

:anjali:
User avatar
manas
 
Posts: 2109
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: global warming

Postby Kim OHara » Tue Mar 26, 2013 11:29 am

manas wrote:...
I know I diverged a bit, I just wanted to make the point that myself (and to my knowledge many other AGW 'sceptics' here) are actually in favour of moving towards less-polluting sources of energy. In how I try to live and organise my life, I'm actually quite 'green'. And I'm frustrated at how our amazing environments and ecosystems continue to be given second place to mining interests. When they have mined and fracked every last bit of mineral and gas out of this land, it is we who will be left with a big mess to clean up - assuming that ground water contaminated with fracking chemicals actually can be cleaned up.

Anyway I'll leave off my angry rant :tongue:

:anjali:

No, don't stop ranting! Just make it bigger, louder - get up on a rooftop and shout! Wave placards!!
Make the bastards listen - and never, ever, give up!!
:jedi:
But don't lose your sense of proportion along the way.
:smile:
:meditate:

Kim
User avatar
Kim OHara
 
Posts: 3052
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: global warming

Postby Alex123 » Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:21 pm

manas wrote:I know I diverged a bit, I just wanted to make the point that myself (and to my knowledge many other AGW 'sceptics' here) are actually in favour of moving towards less-polluting sources of energy. In how I try to live and organise my life, I'm actually quite 'green'. A


Right. I am myself all for greener and less polluting future. It would be wonderful if we had better and greener energy sources.
We need to develop better and cleaner technologies to avoid polluting the environment as much as possible (and in perfect world not to pollute at all).

Kim O'Hara wrote:... and there are in fact great benefits to the economy from shifting away from fossil fuels and stopping CO2 emissions.


I am all for better energy sources.
”Even the water melting from the snow-capped peaks finds its way to the ocean."
User avatar
Alex123
 
Posts: 2849
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: global warming

Postby Alex123 » Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:51 pm

Buckwheat wrote:Yes, we already waited to long to act, so we are stuck with ~0.6°C temperature rise. The longer we wait to act, the larger that number gets.


Remember, temperature rises approximately 400-1200 before CO2 rises.
”Even the water melting from the snow-capped peaks finds its way to the ocean."
User avatar
Alex123
 
Posts: 2849
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: global warming

Postby Kim OHara » Tue Mar 26, 2013 9:23 pm

Alex123 wrote:
Buckwheat wrote:Yes, we already waited to long to act, so we are stuck with ~0.6°C temperature rise. The longer we wait to act, the larger that number gets.


Remember, temperature rises approximately 400-1200 before CO2 rises.

Not always.
This time is different.
We have told you so repeatedly.
You don't listen, don't seem to be willing to learn, let alone want to learn.
:toilet:

:popcorn:
Kim
User avatar
Kim OHara
 
Posts: 3052
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: global warming

Postby Alex123 » Tue Mar 26, 2013 9:44 pm

Kim O'Hara wrote:This time is different.


Laws of physics, chemistry, etc, have changed?

Kim O'Hara wrote:Not always.


The study suggests that CO2 is produced after temperature change. So CO2 is neither the cause, nor amplification of temperature.

Think about it: temperature warms up and more CO2 gets released into the air from ocean, snow, etc.
”Even the water melting from the snow-capped peaks finds its way to the ocean."
User avatar
Alex123
 
Posts: 2849
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: global warming

Postby SDC » Wed Mar 27, 2013 1:06 am

Hey all, what's this thread about?! :tongue:

I'll tell you one thing, all the excess body heat being generated from y'all's passion for this issue may be what is making this earth hotter. Here's to global cooling :toast:

Image

^^^East coast of the US, btw
User avatar
SDC
 
Posts: 1019
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm
Location: North Jersey

Re: global warming

Postby Buckwheat » Wed Mar 27, 2013 1:36 am

Alex123 wrote:
Kim O'Hara wrote:This time is different.


Laws of physics, chemistry, etc, have changed?

Kim O'Hara wrote:Not always.


The study suggests that CO2 is produced after temperature change. So CO2 is neither the cause, nor amplification of temperature.

Think about it: temperature warms up and more CO2 gets released into the air from ocean, snow, etc.


The definition of "feedback" is that CO2 is both a cause and an effect of global warming. Once in the atmosphere, it is a cause. When in the ocean, global warming is the cause leading to it going into the atmosphere. So, when there is another cause of warming, CO2 rise is an effect. But when CO2 is artificially release from deep earth sources (via coal mining, oil drilling, and fracking) then the additional CO2 in the atmosphere can be a cause of global warming. Therefore, a rise in CO2 is both a cause and effect of global warming. A fall in CO2 is both a cause and effect of global cooling.

Your assertion that CO2 can not cause warming because it is an affect of warming assumes that: If A causes B, then B does not cause A. However, this assumption is not necessarily true in a multi-variable equation with feeback loops. There are several lines of evidence that CO2 in the atmosphere does cause warming. The Vostek ice cores are not necessary to prove that fact.

I provided this link before, but I think it is again relevant:
This entire link is worth reading, but I will quote the especially relevant point:
http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
The heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and other gases was demonstrated in the mid-19th century.2Their ability to affect the transfer of infrared energy through the atmosphere is the scientific basis of many JPL-designed instruments, such as AIRS. Increased levels of greenhouse gases must cause the Earth to warm in response.
Sotthī hontu nirantaraṃ - May you forever be well.
Buckwheat
 
Posts: 927
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:39 am
Location: California USA

Re: global warming

Postby Buckwheat » Wed Mar 27, 2013 1:37 am

SDC wrote:...


Oooooooo, that pow pow looks sic!!!
Sotthī hontu nirantaraṃ - May you forever be well.
Buckwheat
 
Posts: 927
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:39 am
Location: California USA

Re: global warming

Postby Buckwheat » Wed Mar 27, 2013 1:40 am

Alex123 wrote:
Kim O'Hara wrote:This time is different.


Laws of physics, chemistry, etc, have changed?


No, the initial cause changed. In the past, warming intiated by changes in Earth's orbiatal characteristics triggered a chain of events. This time, human activity (extracting hydrocarbons from deep within the earth and releasing CO2 into the atmosphere) is triggering a chain of events.
Sotthī hontu nirantaraṃ - May you forever be well.
Buckwheat
 
Posts: 927
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:39 am
Location: California USA

Re: global warming

Postby SDC » Wed Mar 27, 2013 2:10 am

Buckwheat wrote:
SDC wrote:...


Oooooooo, that pow pow looks sic!!!


Oh yeah! My condolences on your low snow season in Cali, serious bummer. Looks like everything fell before January...crazy.
User avatar
SDC
 
Posts: 1019
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm
Location: North Jersey

Re: global warming

Postby Kim OHara » Wed Mar 27, 2013 2:54 am

Buckwheat wrote:
Alex123 wrote:
Kim O'Hara wrote:This time is different.


Laws of physics, chemistry, etc, have changed?


No, the initial cause changed. In the past, warming intiated by changes in Earth's orbiatal characteristics triggered a chain of events. This time, human activity (extracting hydrocarbons from deep within the earth and releasing CO2 into the atmosphere) is triggering a chain of events.

:twothumbsup:
Exactly what I was going to say.

:namaste:
Kim
User avatar
Kim OHara
 
Posts: 3052
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

PreviousNext

Return to Lounge

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 9 guests