Advancing The Science Of Climate Change

[kallend 2,148]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Houston-based private weather company ImpactWeather

No possible conflict of interest there

So what in his comment on the data was incorrect? Are you saying that having the highest recorded temperature anomalies in several consecutive months is not breaking records?

If they've been measuring for 60 years? Wow! A nanosecond on the timeline.

Not really. Changes over a human lifespan tend to be rather important to us. And how does that relate to a "conflict of interest" exactly?

I guess your having to ask that question is what concerns me the most. We're making decisions based on 60 years of data.

Just a little reminder http://www.zunal.com/myaccount/uploads/1017_timeline.jpg

Well, build yourself a time machine, go back 10,000 years and start measuring.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

To put it another way, if volcanoes erupted a hundred times more often than they do, or each one was a hundred times as violent, then they'd approach our level of climate impact.

What frequency would that be?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[billvon 3,118]

>What frequency would that be?

What frequency would what be? Volcanic eruptions? There are currently about 50-60 a year. If volcanic activity increased by 100 times, then volcanoes would emit about the same amount of greenhouse gas that we do. (Volcanoes emit about 200 million tons of CO2 a year, we emit about 24,000 million tons a year.) Everything else being equal that would mean about 6000 eruptions per year.

[airdvr 210]

It must just drive you bonkers that guys like me don't just get the hell out of the way and let you folks do your good work.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

>What frequency would that be?

What frequency would what be? Volcanic eruptions? There are currently about 50-60 a year. If volcanic activity increased by 100 times, then volcanoes would emit about the same amount of greenhouse gas that we do. (Volcanoes emit about 200 million tons of CO2 a year, we emit about 24,000 million tons a year.) Everything else being equal that would mean about 6000 eruptions per year.

Do you have data to back this up? I rremember reading that one major eruption is like 10 years worth of what man did on his worst year.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>Before or after the 'deniers' showed them where their data was wrong?

Right on cue; your knee is in good shape.

You taught me well.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Houston-based private weather company ImpactWeather

No possible conflict of interest there

So what in his comment on the data was incorrect? Are you saying that having the highest recorded temperature anomalies in several consecutive months is not breaking records?

Funny how months of record cold is just 'weather' but of course YOUR example is proof of AGW.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[billvon 3,118]

>Do you have data to back this up?

Which part? Volcanic eruptions:

http://www.volcanolive.com/vei.html

Volcanic gases:

http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/hazards/gas/index.php

Anthropogenic CO2 emissions:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/bookshelf/brochures/greenhouse/Chapter1.htm

(multiply carbon numbers by 2.7 to get CO2 numbers or just use the graph)

>I rremember reading that one major eruption is like 10 years worth of
>what man did on his worst year.

That can be true - but eruptions like that happen once every few million years and would cause the equivalent of a nuclear winter. The last one that happened created the 40 mile wide crater we now call Yellowstone. If that happens again we have problems bigger than higher CO2 levels. (Compare that to the 1815 eruption of Mount Tambora, which was about a tenth as violent and caused "the year without a summer" due to the trash it put in the atmosphere.)

[kallend 2,148]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Houston-based private weather company ImpactWeather

No possible conflict of interest there

So what in his comment on the data was incorrect? Are you saying that having the highest recorded temperature anomalies in several consecutive months is not breaking records?

Funny how months of record cold is just 'weather' but of course YOUR example is proof of AGW.

Weather is somewhat more local than 'the tropical North Atlantic'. Try again.

PS I see the Arctic ice is STILL melting faster than usual. It's now well below 2007 levels for the same date.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rhaig 0]

Quote

>so are we supposed to look at the graphs of the last 100 years or the last
>thousand years.

Look at whatever graphs you like.

>Because whenever the AGW opponents post graphs, it's "too narrow a
>time scope" so I have to ask for definitions from your lot.

Why bother? Some people's minds are made up, and all the data in the world won't change them. Look at any graph you like. If you'd like to look into the science behind them, journals like Science and Nature are great. If you just want a political position to spout, Glen Beck is a great source of predigested ones.

You're endorsing Beck?

Seriously?

And are you assuming I'm a fan of his? (you're wrong again) You know what Benny Hill said happens when you assume right?

--
Rob

[Amazon 7]

Quote

It must just drive you bonkers that guys like me don't just get the hell out of the way and let you folks do your good work.

Well there are still idiots out there that believe the earth is flat.....contrary to ANY evidence presented to them.

So even after the oceans are 75 meters higher..... The Great American Desert extends all the way acoss the continent to the Atlantic and since that region currently produces the food that our species relies upon across the planet, famines will reduce our species population accordingly, especially since a very high percentage of what used to be arable land in coastal regions will be under water as well.

[billvon 3,118]

>You're endorsing Beck?

Nope. He's just a great source of opinions if you don't want to think too much.

>And are you assuming I'm a fan of his?

Again, no. Listen to whoever you like; read whatever research (and whatever graphs) you like.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Houston-based private weather company ImpactWeather

No possible conflict of interest there

So what in his comment on the data was incorrect? Are you saying that having the highest recorded temperature anomalies in several consecutive months is not breaking records?

Funny how months of record cold is just 'weather' but of course YOUR example is proof of AGW.

Weather is somewhat more local than 'the tropical North Atlantic'. Try again.

Thanks for proving the point, seeing as how the entire Northern HEMISPHERE had one of the worst winters on record.

Quote

PS I see the Arctic ice is STILL melting faster than usual. It's now well below 2007 levels for the same date.

Must be the 'weather'.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

You're endorsing Beck?

Seriously?

And are you assuming I'm a fan of his? (you're wrong again) You know what Benny Hill said happens when you assume right?

No, he's trying to insinuate that anyone that doesn't agree with him is too stupid to read any scientific papers and must be getting their info from Beck.

It's his (and kallend's) default position.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[airdvr 210]

Quote

Quote

It must just drive you bonkers that guys like me don't just get the hell out of the way and let you folks do your good work.

Well there are still idiots out there that believe the earth is flat.....contrary to ANY evidence presented to them.

So even after the oceans are 75 meters higher..... The Great American Desert extends all the way acoss the continent to the Atlantic and since that region currently produces the food that our species relies upon across the planet, famines will reduce our species population accordingly, especially since a very high percentage of what used to be arable land in coastal regions will be under water as well.

So you're saying it's our fault?

How can you be so sure?

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[Amazon 7]

Intelligence and observation.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

In April the average temperature in the tropical North Atlantic was 1.38 Celsius degrees above average, or about 2.5 Fahrenheit degrees, by far the largest anomaly ever recorded.

That is significant, said Fred Schmude, a forecaster with the Houston-based private weather company ImpactWeather, because scientists have tracked these waters for 62 years.

In those 744 months, the recorded value has exceeded the long-term average by 1 or more Celsius degrees just five times. Three of those five times have occurred in February, March and April of this year.

“Not only are we breaking records, but we are shattering them,” Schmude said.

This is interesting. It seems like this indicates a weather-producing phenomenon. Hurricanes are "weather." However, thanks to Mr. Gore, many people think that the number of hurricanes will increase with global warming.

A paper in Science a few months ago suggested otherwise - that the number of hurricanes will DECREASE with warmer seas but that they will be more powerful on average.

Also - a place where the greenhouse effect is not expected to be nearly as effective in the tropics. It's effects will be strongest in the winter in cold, dry expanses because of the effect of water vapor, etc.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Intelligence and observation.

So, just *where* have you observed this 75m rise in the oceans, pray tell?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Intelligence and observation.

So, just *where* have you observed this 75m rise in the oceans, pray tell?

Well gee Mike... If all the ice melts... sea level rises..(you can figure that part out right??) I think that was elementary school earth science.

AS far as observing it...... Ever heard of a wave cut terrace???? It has happened in the past and they are all over the world we even have some here on the Pacific Coast in the Pacific NorthWET.... so by all means.. lets make sure to speed it up so that more people can get some waterfront property... OK??

Cool sea level pictures for Mike

Be sure to check out the pictures of TEXAS... and how much of the east coast goes gurgle gurgle.... And some GREAT sailing opportunities over Sacramento and Stockton

Using the ice volume figures from above it is straightforward to estimate the effect on sea level were all this ice melted. Melting the 29,300,000 km3 of grounded ice would produce 26,100,000 km3 of water. Note that melting of floating ice has no effect on sea level. Also, about 2,100,000 km3 of the grounded ice in Antarctica is below sea level [19] and would be replaced by water. Thus, the net addition to the world's oceans would be about 24,000,000 km3 of water spread over the 361,000,000 km2 area of the world's oceans, giving a depth of 67 meters. The new ocean area would be slightly larger, of course, since some areas now land would be covered with water. The final result would be around 66 meters (current estimates range between 63 and 75 meters).

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Intelligence and observation.

So, just *where* have you observed this 75m rise in the oceans, pray tell?

Well gee Mike... If all the ice melts... sea level rises..(you can figure that part out right??) I think that was elementary school earth science.

Link

Quote

Globally, it doesn't sound like much – just 0.049 millimetres per year – but if all the sea ice currently bobbing on the oceans were to melt, it could raise sea level by 4 to 6 centimetres.

4 to 6 centimeters if all the ice melted? Holy crap, the coastal areas better evacuate to the Rockies!!

Quote

so by all means.. lets make sure to speed it up so that more people can get some waterfront property... OK??

At the current rate of melt (200km^3/year), the Greenland icecap should be all gone in... 12 to 15 THOUSAND years.

Wow, looks like that '75 meter rise' is coming even sooner than you think, eh Jeanne?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[lawrocket 3]

Jeanne:

We will run out of hydrocarbons quite some time before the ice sheet in Greenland melts - at least 500 years. If Greenland melts then it'll be oh, 20k years or so after we exhaust hydrocarbons.

I understand that this may be difficult to handle - that ice keeps on getting added to most of Antarctica (the peninsula is warming) and that the ice that is ablating on Greenland's coast is made up for by accreting on the interior. But Miami is not going to be an AGW Atlantis for a long time...

Yours is a scare tactic...

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Amazon 7]

I know that is what you guys are hoping and praying for.. but...... BIG BUT..... I think your children and their children are going to not be so flippant.. when the feedback loops kick in.

I think the reality of their world is going to be beyond scarry..

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

I know that is what you guys are hoping and praying for.. but...... BIG BUT..... I think your children and their children are going to not be so flippant.. when the feedback loops kick in.

I think the reality of their world is going to be beyond scarry..

What was the feedback loop in the Medieval Warm Period, then? The Roman Warm Period? The Minoan Warm Period?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Amazon 7]

Interesting that you would include the carbon data from the Paleozoic and Mesozoic.... You do realize how "interesting" that world was in that time compared to the world we have evolved in

The ocean coverd MOST of the world... lots of shallow sea...and life far different from our own... or the species that we rely on for food.

The other 3 warm periods... what pray tell do you think caused those..... CARBON introduced into the environment if memory serves.

COOL ... thanks for proving the point.. add CO2 from volcanic eruptions.. world temps go up... so adding it at hundreds of times what the volcano's have in the past CANT POSSIBLY have any effect

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

COOL ... thanks for proving the point.. add CO2 from volcanic eruptions.. world temps go up... so adding it at hundreds of times what the volcano's have in the past CANT POSSIBLY have any effect

Interesting you can't tell us what the feedbacks where for the Minoan, Roman and Medieval Warm periods, but have to concentrate on dinosaur days to even come close to making a point.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706