Climate Change, 'Greenhouse' effects, Environment, etc part II

Message boards : Politics : Climate Change, 'Greenhouse' effects, Environment, etc part II
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 . . . 28 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile ML1
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 20430
Credit: 7,508,002
RAC: 20
United Kingdom
Message 1024261 - Posted: 11 Aug 2010, 18:51:38 UTC

More effects already seen:


Rice yields falling under global warming

Global warming is cutting rice yields in many parts of Asia, according to research, with more declines to come.

Yields have fallen by 10-20% ...

... In 2004, other researchers found that rice yields in the Philippines were dropping by 10% for every 1C increase in night-time temperature.

That finding, like others, came from experiments on a research station.

The latest data, by contrast, comes from working, fully-irrigated farms that grow "green revolution" crops, and span the rice-growing lands of Asia from the Indian state of Tamil Nadu to the outskirts of Shanghai. ...




It's our only world,
Martin

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)
ID: 1024261 · Report as offensive
Profile ML1
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 20430
Credit: 7,508,002
RAC: 20
United Kingdom
Message 1026148 - Posted: 18 Aug 2010, 16:09:05 UTC
Last modified: 18 Aug 2010, 16:09:41 UTC

Meanwhile, Nero watches whilst the world burns:


Why has extreme weather failed to heat up climate debate?

The world is experiencing the hottest weather on record but politicians have failed to respond. They need a wake-up call

We've had so much record heat around the world lately that the records themselves are setting records: 17 nations have reached new temperature highs, a new record for records in a year. Pakistan hit (129F) 54C, a new record for all of Asia. Moscow had never hit 100F (38C) before; ...

Now scientists have confirmed what's been pretty obvious...



Russia has already banned all grain exports until next year or beyond. That's already having the expected knock-on effects for food supply for the rest of Asia...


It's our only world,
Martin
See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)
ID: 1026148 · Report as offensive
Profile ML1
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 20430
Credit: 7,508,002
RAC: 20
United Kingdom
Message 1026686 - Posted: 20 Aug 2010, 13:49:40 UTC

As well as causing food shortages:


Rising temperatures reducing ability of plants to absorb carbon, study warns

Rising temperatures in the past decade have reduced the ability of the world's plants to soak up carbon from the atmosphere, scientists said today. ...


It's our only planet,
Martin


See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)
ID: 1026686 · Report as offensive
Profile ML1
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 20430
Credit: 7,508,002
RAC: 20
United Kingdom
Message 1028706 - Posted: 26 Aug 2010, 18:54:48 UTC
Last modified: 26 Aug 2010, 19:38:51 UTC

Am I an activist for caring about my grandchildren's future? I guess I am

What had become clear was that our planet is close to climate tipping points. Ice is melting in the Arctic, Greenland and Antarctica, and on mountain glaciers worldwide. Many species are stressed by environmental destruction and climate change. Continuing fossil fuel emissions, if unabated, will cause sea levels to rise and species to become extinct beyond our control. Increasing atmospheric water vapour is already magnifying climate extremes, increasing overall precipitation, causing greater floods and stronger storms.

Stabilising climate requires restoring our planet's energy balance. The physics is straightforward. The effect of increasing carbon dioxide on Earth's energy imbalance is confirmed by precise measurements of ocean heat gain. The principal implication is defined by the geophysics, by the size of fossil fuel reservoirs. Simply put, there is a limit on how much carbon dioxide we can pour into the atmosphere. We cannot burn all fossil fuels. Specifically, we must (1) phase out coal use rapidly, (2) leave tar sands in the ground, and (3) not go after the last drops of oil.

Actions needed for the world to move on to clean energies of the future are feasible. The actions could restore clean air and water globally. But the actions are not happening. ...



James Hansen can be likened to the "Galileo" of Human forced rapid climate change. As an employee of the USA, he's also been harshly treated by the same USA in a number of attempts to harass and silence him. I believe President Bush went as far as cancelling research projects that might highlight the effects of Global Warming. One project sneaked through that was to map mineral deposits including oil. That project also measured the rapid decline of ice mass around the world...

Unlike Galileo for gaining acknowledgement and acceptance of his ideas, this time we don't have a few hundred years for an apology...

(See: STUPID or Not Stupid? The Age of STUPID (Worldwide event!) to follow the parallels...)


It's our only planet.
Martin


[edit]

See The Bush Record, especially "Bush administration slashes funding for global warming research (06/03/04)" a few articles down...

Also:

"Bush League" Science Under George W. Bush

A House committee released documents Monday that showed hundreds of instances in which a White House official who was previously an oil industry lobbyist edited government climate reports to play up uncertainty of a human role in global warming or play down evidence of such a role.

[/edit]
See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)
ID: 1028706 · Report as offensive
Profile razamatraz

Send message
Joined: 23 Oct 07
Posts: 142
Credit: 27,815,748
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1030200 - Posted: 2 Sep 2010, 16:21:05 UTC
Last modified: 2 Sep 2010, 16:26:31 UTC

I'm a little late getting in on this one.

A couple of points:

Clouds are not water vapor, they are in fact liquid water suspended in the air and although they hold heat in latent form at night they actually decrease global temperature more via albedo (reflecting shortwave radiation back into space).

Transparent water vapor is a greenhouse gas at all times, not just night. This is because it, like CO2, CH4 and a large group of powerful but low volume compounds reabsorb longwave radiation that the earth emits (Blackbody radiation) and then themselves re-emit it in all directions..some of which goes back down to earth raising the equilibrium temperature.

All of the pieces of the greenhouse gas effect are proven. Shortwave comes in hits earth, is absorbed as heat, is re radiated as long wave and exits into space. The GHGs absorb some and keep that heat in the atmosphere or surface...This is a good thing, it keeps our temperature livable.

IT is also proven that man made emissions are increasing CO2 concentrations. It doesn't matter how small our emissions are compared to natural..only that they are there. There is a natural concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere held at an equilibrium by inflow emissions and outflow absorption. Human activity has increased emissions through burning of fossil fuels and decreased absorption through the destruction of forests, peat lands, wetlands, ocean agitation etc.

It doesn't matter if the effect is small compared to the natural absorption and emissions, the size only affects the rate of change not the change itself. Any change in emissions levels from natural and any change in absorption from natural changes the equilibrium CO2 concentration and changes in the CO2 concentration change the temperature equilibrium through direct greenhouse effect, water vapor multiplier effects, albedo multiplier effects, the released methane from the peat bogs etc.

There is no remaining question on whether or not there is global warming and climate change. The remaining scientific questions are on how much...The model is not perfect...no model ever is. How much the concentrations will change is up for debate, how much the temperature will rise is up for debate, but they will both continue to go up and that is overwhelmingly a bad thing.

That said claiming that this is only a scientific issue is a bad thing. This is also an economic and social issue. Governments make choices and trade offs all the time. We may decide that the economic impact is to great and so we need to take a longer time and just deal with the climate consequences. The problem is that the impacts will hurt some people more than others (distributional effects) and potentially in the short term make things better for others..and people only seem to care about themselves and politicians only about their own countries.

I read in a tea party manifesto the other day that CO2 and climate should be left to God...to that I have to respond: God didn't choose to burn a trillion barrels of oil, cut down a rainforest and build a thousand coal plants. We did all that ourselves so it is up to us to fix it.
Razz
ID: 1030200 · Report as offensive
Profile William Rothamel
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 3756
Credit: 1,999,735
RAC: 4
United States
Message 1030414 - Posted: 3 Sep 2010, 11:24:31 UTC - in response to Message 1030200.  

Partial truth here mis-applied.

There is no reflection at night of the sun back into space. There is reflection of the latent heat of the earth back down to the Earth from cloud cover. Radiation likes to go in the direction of a cold dark place which is the sky at night. It's just like a blanket.

My pool can lose 2 to three degrees over night . If I put on my pool cover it loses hardly at all maybe a half degree.
ID: 1030414 · Report as offensive
Profile hiamps
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 May 99
Posts: 4292
Credit: 72,971,319
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1042681 - Posted: 16 Oct 2010, 14:17:01 UTC

Oh No, we seem to be cooling....
"Synopsis: La Niña is expected to last at least into the Northern Hemisphere spring 2011.

La Niña continued during September 2010 as reflected by the large expanse of below-average sea surface temperatures (SSTs) across most of the equatorial Pacific Ocean (Fig. 1). All weekly Niño SST index values were between –1.3oC and –1.8oC at the end of the month (Fig. 2). In addition, the subsurface heat content (average temperatures in the upper 300m of the ocean, Fig. 3) remained below-average, reflecting a shallower-than-average thermocline in the central and eastern Pacific (Fig. 4). Convection remained enhanced over Indonesia and suppressed over the western and central equatorial Pacific (Fig. 5). This pattern was linked to a continuation of enhanced low-level easterly trade winds and anomalous upper-level westerly winds over the western and central equatorial Pacific. Collectively, these oceanic and atmospheric anomalies reflect the ongoing La Niña."
Official Abuser of Boinc Buttons...
And no good credit hound!
ID: 1042681 · Report as offensive
Profile hiamps
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 May 99
Posts: 4292
Credit: 72,971,319
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1042682 - Posted: 16 Oct 2010, 14:20:06 UTC

As long as Governments allow companies to sell and buy carbon credits and make billions....I will continue to believe human caused warming to be a money making sham.
Official Abuser of Boinc Buttons...
And no good credit hound!
ID: 1042682 · Report as offensive
Profile soft^spirit
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 6497
Credit: 34,134,168
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1042729 - Posted: 16 Oct 2010, 17:18:43 UTC - in response to Message 1042682.  

hiamps, you dismiss the scientific data with "belief". La ninia/ El Nino while having regional weather impact do not directly effect the average global temperature.

In the 1960's.. in schools it was taught and known and not up to question, The artic was frozen over. "Always has been". It has now been circumnavigated. On the surface, not beneath the polar ice. The Canadian oil sands were under ice.
The are no longer. There are complaints now on when the "permafrost" melts each year. When it was called permafrost it had been frozen for thousands upon thousands of years. The evidence is overwhelming. But I can not change your belief system. The government wanted to overturn the entire scientific community and say it was not a problem several years ago.

Belief does not require reason. And it will not listen to reason if it defies the belief. The pointless request I could make is "do your own homework". The information is easily available. And overwhelmingly obvious if you think about it.

I suggest starting with NOAA and NASA and working from there.
Janice
ID: 1042729 · Report as offensive
Profile MOMMY: He is MAKING ME Read His Posts Thoughts and Prayers. GOoD Thoughts and GOoD Prayers. HATERWORLD Vs THOUGHTs and PRAYERs World. It Is a BATTLE ROYALE. Nobody LOVEs Me. Everybody HATEs Me. Why Don't I Go Eat Worms. Tasty Treats are Wormy Meat. Yes
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Jun 02
Posts: 6895
Credit: 6,588,977
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1042857 - Posted: 16 Oct 2010, 23:19:16 UTC

I have done my research and homework and have concluded there is no global climate change caused by Man.

iWorm 'em.
ID: 1042857 · Report as offensive
Profile soft^spirit
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 6497
Credit: 34,134,168
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1042859 - Posted: 16 Oct 2010, 23:26:34 UTC - in response to Message 1042857.  

I have done my research and homework and have concluded there is no global climate change caused by Man.

iWorm 'em.


Fascinating. Can you site the scientific study that confirms that? And what then is the cause of disappearing polar/glacial ice? And what has caused the recent increase of melting? Bleaching of coral which is happening after thousands of years of growing?
Janice
ID: 1042859 · Report as offensive
Profile soft^spirit
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 6497
Credit: 34,134,168
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1042891 - Posted: 17 Oct 2010, 0:00:51 UTC - in response to Message 1042859.  

I have done my research and homework and have concluded there is no global climate change caused by Man.

iWorm 'em.


Fascinating. Can you site the scientific study that confirms that? And what then is the cause of disappearing polar/glacial ice? And what has caused the recent increase of melting? Bleaching of coral which is happening after thousands of years of growing?


Did not think so.
Janice
ID: 1042891 · Report as offensive
Profile hiamps
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 May 99
Posts: 4292
Credit: 72,971,319
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1043081 - Posted: 17 Oct 2010, 12:09:52 UTC - in response to Message 1042729.  
Last modified: 17 Oct 2010, 12:10:29 UTC

hiamps, you dismiss the scientific data with "belief". La ninia/ El Nino while having regional weather impact do not directly effect the average global temperature.

In the 1960's.. in schools it was taught and known and not up to question, The artic was frozen over. "Always has been". It has now been circumnavigated. On the surface, not beneath the polar ice. The Canadian oil sands were under ice.
The are no longer. There are complaints now on when the "permafrost" melts each year. When it was called permafrost it had been frozen for thousands upon thousands of years. The evidence is overwhelming. But I can not change your belief system. The government wanted to overturn the entire scientific community and say it was not a problem several years ago.

Belief does not require reason. And it will not listen to reason if it defies the belief. The pointless request I could make is "do your own homework". The information is easily available. And overwhelmingly obvious if you think about it.

I suggest starting with NOAA and NASA and working from there.

We have been melting for 1000's of years. The East Coast used to extend around 700 miles further just a few thousand years ago. The melting of the permafrost is expected when warming from the last Ice Age as we are. Heck the Great lakes haven't even finished rising from the pressure of all the Ice. Take a look at google Earth and look at all the coast lines that have disapeared...But we are warming slower today than we were 5000 years ago....Global warming is a scare tactic that is working and making some very very rich, while they continue to pollute.
Official Abuser of Boinc Buttons...
And no good credit hound!
ID: 1043081 · Report as offensive
Profile soft^spirit
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 6497
Credit: 34,134,168
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1043181 - Posted: 17 Oct 2010, 17:19:11 UTC - in response to Message 1043081.  

hiamps, you dismiss the scientific data with "belief". La ninia/ El Nino while having regional weather impact do not directly effect the average global temperature.

In the 1960's.. in schools it was taught and known and not up to question, The artic was frozen over. "Always has been". It has now been circumnavigated. On the surface, not beneath the polar ice. The Canadian oil sands were under ice.
The are no longer. There are complaints now on when the "permafrost" melts each year. When it was called permafrost it had been frozen for thousands upon thousands of years. The evidence is overwhelming. But I can not change your belief system. The government wanted to overturn the entire scientific community and say it was not a problem several years ago.

Belief does not require reason. And it will not listen to reason if it defies the belief. The pointless request I could make is "do your own homework". The information is easily available. And overwhelmingly obvious if you think about it.

I suggest starting with NOAA and NASA and working from there.

We have been melting for 1000's of years. The East Coast used to extend around 700 miles further just a few thousand years ago. The melting of the permafrost is expected when warming from the last Ice Age as we are. Heck the Great lakes haven't even finished rising from the pressure of all the Ice. Take a look at google Earth and look at all the coast lines that have disapeared...But we are warming slower today than we were 5000 years ago....Global warming is a scare tactic that is working and making some very very rich, while they continue to pollute.


This has greatly accelerated, especially in the last 50 years. If the land mass melts off (and there is no reason to think it will not) Many major cities will be under water. Florida will be almost entirely under water. Inland california, back to an ocean (sacramento and the entire san joquine valley). The Amazon Basin will become a Great ocean Bay. Seattle, Portland, under water.
The list goes on and on.

The great lakes may actually get increased water flow.. for a while. Then the incoming water slows down as they run out of ice. These changes might be "normal" over the course of 100,000 years. But that is not what the scientists are seeing. In a few years (they have some lovely time laps photos you can see glacier flows speed up tremendously over just a few years) we have
seem incredible evidence. "We are warming slower today than 5000 years ago" has no scientific basis.

The Arctic Ice is almost GONE. hundreds of thousands of year old ice shelfs are crumbling. How in this world do people not get the significance of that?
Ignoring it is making some people very rich. Find significant scientific documentation (not oil funded studies) to the contrary. Not pundit nonsense.

The CO-2 sink is now releasing CO2, no longer absorbing. It has warmed enough to release it again. We have crossed the tipping point, and the only question that remains can and will we do anything about it?

People saying "It ain't so" does not stop it. Again, find scientific evidence to the contrary. Find evidence that would reasonably refute the data that NASA and NOAA simply and easily provide. I am still waiting.
Janice
ID: 1043181 · Report as offensive
Profile ML1
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 20430
Credit: 7,508,002
RAC: 20
United Kingdom
Message 1048879 - Posted: 16 Nov 2010, 15:56:06 UTC - in response to Message 1043181.  

... People saying "It ain't so" does not stop it...


The political process procrastinates onwards. Meanwhile, nature waits for noone.

Here's a little reflection upon what was already a year ago:

Climate: The hottest year

I think that the first comment on the article sums up the sad situation:

The ultimate irony for ... scientists ... is that ... [they are] engaged in a philosophical battle against people who use theology and pseudo-science rather than real science to support their claims. While critics are accusing [scientists] of skewing results to meet ... hypotheses, the climate deniers are bound by no such scientific methods. http://www.killingmother.blogspot.com.


So what's it to be?

Cold hard Science?

Or local "gut feelings" and magical charlatans?

Or the funded FUD of the energy and fossil fuels companies?


It's our only world.
Martin



See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)
ID: 1048879 · Report as offensive
Matt Giwer
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 May 00
Posts: 841
Credit: 990,879
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1049011 - Posted: 17 Nov 2010, 10:22:02 UTC - in response to Message 992739.  

It is time to remind the world that statistics has a theoretical foundation. ALL of that foundation is based upon the concept of a true coin, i.e. the input data is what is recorded and nothing else.

Any "massaging" of the input data invalidates the applicability of statistics.

The entire CRU issue is over massaged input data. Fact is statistics is inapplicable to massaged data. The most that can be done is applying statistics to the raw and the massaged data to get an estimate of the effect of the massaging whatever that might mean.

Statistics is simply inapplicable to massaged data. I cannot change that. No one can make it applicable by argumentation. Only by modification of the theoretical basis of statistics can the modified "new" statistics be considered applicable.

Unvarnished
Haaretz
Jerusalem Post
The origin of the Yahweh Cult
ID: 1049011 · Report as offensive
Profile ML1
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 20430
Credit: 7,508,002
RAC: 20
United Kingdom
Message 1049329 - Posted: 18 Nov 2010, 14:52:50 UTC - in response to Message 1049011.  
Last modified: 18 Nov 2010, 14:54:08 UTC

It is time to remind the world that statistics has a theoretical foundation. ALL of that foundation is based upon the concept of a true coin, i.e. the input data is what is recorded and nothing else.

Any "massaging" of the input data invalidates the applicability of statistics.

The entire CRU issue is over massaged input data. Fact is statistics is inapplicable to massaged data. The most that can be done is applying statistics to the raw and the massaged data to get an estimate of the effect of the massaging whatever that might mean.

Statistics is simply inapplicable to massaged data. I cannot change that. No one can make it applicable by argumentation. Only by modification of the theoretical basis of statistics can the modified "new" statistics be considered applicable.


Thanks for adding to the FUD. Indeed, data can be biased, and statistics can be abused. And then, in some areas such as marketing, you can also claim that statistics are always abused...

One very clear fact that has come out of the in depth investigation of CRU, and from all the very long painful intense scrutiny, is that despite the most fearsomely brutal best efforts from the entire anti-global-warming camp snooping through decades of many thousands of personal private emails of the researchers, nothing untoward of any significance was found. Indeed, the most damaging comment found (and only one comment at that!) centred on the use of the word "trick". Taken out of context, all manner of bad things have been conjured up or even just simply fabricated. Taking that email comment in context makes no news at all.

Is this all really just a story of how to publicly falsely vilify honest hard working researchers who have dedicated their entire working careers to finding the truth?

And that's the best that the anti-global-warming rhetoric can come up with. Intimidation and FUD.


A very nasty business indeed.

Oh, and we're still cooking our planet, ever faster.

It's our only one planet,
Martin
See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)
ID: 1049329 · Report as offensive
Profile William Rothamel
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 3756
Credit: 1,999,735
RAC: 4
United States
Message 1050542 - Posted: 23 Nov 2010, 10:04:52 UTC - in response to Message 1049992.  

Daddio always looks form the silver lining in any controversy--sort of the rose among thorns as you might say>

ID: 1050542 · Report as offensive
Profile ML1
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 20430
Credit: 7,508,002
RAC: 20
United Kingdom
Message 1051106 - Posted: 25 Nov 2010, 16:01:35 UTC - in response to Message 1050542.  

Very good Daddio and very apt!

Cheers,
Martin

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)
ID: 1051106 · Report as offensive
Profile ML1
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 20430
Credit: 7,508,002
RAC: 20
United Kingdom
Message 1051109 - Posted: 25 Nov 2010, 16:07:34 UTC
Last modified: 25 Nov 2010, 16:31:28 UTC

And here is a very sad example of the gulf between the climate denialists and reality:


On the anniversary of Climategate the Watermelons show their true colours

Watermelons: green on the outside, red on the inside. This is the theme of my forthcoming book on the controlling, poisonously misanthropic and aggressively socialistic instincts of the modern environmental movement. So how very generous that two of that movement’s leading lights should have chosen the anniversary of Climategate to prove my point entirely. ...


I certainly won't bother buying that book! But just like all the followers of Erich von Däniken and other believers of the supernatural and conspiracy theorists alike, I'm sure the book will be ravenously gobbled up, blindly.

The two 'examples' given in the article are very typical of taking perfectly reasonable reasoned comments but instead presenting them in a poisonous context to completely misrepresent them.


Unfortunately, how gullible are the public for soaking up all the (Marketing driven?) FUD such as is given in that article.

Honest scientist just do not have the repertoire to argue at such a fabulously low level of make-believe!

Incredible!


It's our only one planet...
Martin
See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)
ID: 1051109 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 . . . 28 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Climate Change, 'Greenhouse' effects, Environment, etc part II


 
©2024 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.