Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 12:54pm PT
|
Ed, I have great respect for you, but why do you persist?
|
|
rectorsquid
climber
Lake Tahoe
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 01:13pm PT
|
Listening to NPR yesterday or the day before, there was a discussion about some volcano and how it spewed sulfur into the air. Apparently, sulfuric acid in the upper atmosphere creates a reflective (can't remember the terms they used) situation and causes global cooling. About -0.5f change from that volcano.
Then the idea was presented that we could offset human caused climate change (not arguing that it is real or not) by using human created global cooling. Very interesting idea, if only because it suggests "tera-forming" like in sci-fi movies.
No chaotic system is unpredictable, but many chaotic systems are unpredictable to us because of our limited ability to observer and calculate. Is global weather unpredictable with current human technology? Clearly, some people think so and some do not. Only time will tell who is wrong in the matter. Let's hope that the climate change proponents are wrong because if the politicians and skeptics are wrong, we're screwed. I guess that in this case, it's better to believe in Santa in hopes of getting presents, because disbelief and being wrong will have dire consequences.
Dave
|
|
crunch
Social climber
CO
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 01:44pm PT
|
Good points rectorsquid.
Yeah, volcano eruptions add lots of dust to the atmosphere and thus less sunlight reaches the earth and the earth will stay cooler for a months. There are colorful sunsets, too.
The whole system is incredibly complex. My own guess is that, just as with weather forecasting, climate forecasting will improve but may never be totally accurate. But who knows? Biology has taken huge leaps forward: DNA analysis/sequencing was science fiction a few decades ago.
In the last 150 years there has been obvious warming, in line with humans adding CO2. Only have to look around at glaciers and ice climbs and they are almost all shrinking.
In the last ~17 years, atmospheric warming has slowed. Pretty much stopped. CO2 is still being added to the atmosphere. Possibly the oceans are now absorbing a lot of the warmth. Maybe the warming has, in fact, stopped, due to some effect that is far stronger than currently assumed. Maybe the warming will kick in again, worse than ever. More needs to be done to understand this.
I'm optimistic; we already have the technology to reduce CO2 output and even reduce atmospheric concentrations. If temps really crank up, we will start building the machines. If temps stay about where they are, we have more time to discuss, debate, try to understand what, if anything we need to do.
And all the while engines, cars, power generation and batteries improve and become more efficient.
It's all good....hopefully....
http://www.keith.seas.harvard.edu/book
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 02:03pm PT
|
Not if we count the whole planet.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 03:01pm PT
|
Hey Chief, is all of the arctic included in those graphs?
Or, Er, do you not want to count all of the arctic?
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 03:20pm PT
|
No, Chief, they do not include the arctic.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 03:20pm PT
|
Here is the data set with an excellent (relatively speaking) global coverage, and even it does not include most of the arctic and antarctic.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 03:24pm PT
|
We've been calling datasets 'global' for about 130 years, Chief.
Do you really think they've been covering the whole globe, even without the arctic and antarctic, for that time?
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 03:28pm PT
|
And of course, you have to start your 'pause' well above the trend line.
What gives with that, Chief?
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 03:32pm PT
|
Interesting, you now say global means we've had the same temp thermometer coverage over the whole whole planet for 130 years.
LOL, 12 stations in the antarctic means full coverage. Good one, Chief.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 03:58pm PT
|
Cowtan and Way fills in the missing areas with data from Spencer's satelite data.
So your coverage goes from this:
to this:
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 04:00pm PT
|
What's your point? Are you implying the Met Office Global Temperature records are inaccurate?
Not at all, Sketch. You tell me why the 'pause' starts with most of a decade worth of warming above the trend line at that time?
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 04:11pm PT
|
You should read the paper, Sketch.
It's very consistent. This is tested by removing known surface temp data for a certain area, and filling in with satellite data, then comparing the results.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 04:14pm PT
|
So why is nearly a decade worth of warming ignored, when the 'pause' is started.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 04:15pm PT
|
How did I move the goal post, Sketch?
That was my original question. Notice the question in the graph?
Why does noting that the 'pause' starts nearly a decade worth of warming above the trend line, moving the goal posts?
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 04:42pm PT
|
Yep, it's telling because the arctic has experienced the most warming during that last period.
Cowtan and Way does not do much net correction before that period.
And that's the whole point, Sketch. When you count that arctic warming, the pause just about disappears.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 04:53pm PT
|
So why does it start above the trend line?
You are ignoring nearly a decade of warming just to start it there.
Notice how the trend lines are connected in your graph?
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 04:56pm PT
|
The missing area is filled in using Spencer's satelite data. He's not considered a warmist.
The same reconstructions over known themometer data area proves accurate.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 05:04pm PT
|
Why does it have to, Sketch?
Why not just connect trend lines, as shown in your graph?
Of course, the 'pause' has to start well above the trend line, so the deniers can ignore nearly a decade's worth of warming.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 05:46pm PT
|
LOL, deny, deny, deny.
You are saying that you can't use the intersection point in this graph to come up with connected trend lines?
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!