Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
One of the guys in our coffee club is retired Cal professor. His theory is underwater magma vents from deep volcanoes periodically melt the caps based on a fairly constant eruption cycle over the millenia.
Recent discovery of undersea vents and giant warm water tunnels of water ties in with the theory.
There are other climate drivers besides just feedback loops. Ocean circulation springs to mind-- slowdowns in the thermohaline circulation are thought to be responsible for the 1500 year cycles (known as Dansgaard-Oeschger events).
That slowdown is thought to be driven by fresh water addition to the North Atlantic in part, it is a very complex system. The swings in ocean level were on the order of 3 to 6 feet during the last ice age as apposed to what maybe 6 inches for the little ice age?
Anything that couples the output of a system back into the input is a feedback loop. If it apposes the change then it is negative, if it amplifies the changes then it is positive. Oscillating around a median means feedback loop. particularly over a long time scale.
The amplitude following the amount of ice tends to indicate that the ice is a player. Causation and correlation are two different things. But if you look at when the climate has been stable there has been no ice.
One of the guys in our coffee club is retired Cal professor. His theory is underwater magma vents from deep volcanoes periodically melt the caps based on a fairly constant eruption cycle over the millenia.
Recent discovery of undersea vents and giant warm water tunnels of water ties in with the theory.
And human emissions of CO2 triggered the deep sea volcanoes and magma vents?
One of the guys in our coffee club is retired Cal professor. His theory is underwater magma vents from deep volcanoes periodically melt the caps based on a fairly constant eruption cycle over the millenia.
Recent discovery of undersea vents and giant warm water tunnels of water ties in with the theory.
Considering that underwater volcanic activity is primarily a factor during ice ages, is very low at the preset moment, and drives LONG-term climate change (10,000 years as opposed to 60) through CO2 emissions, I'm pretty sure that the far larger amounts of CO2 that humans are pumping into the atmosphere have a much greater effect.
Here's an interesting quote from an author of the volcano study:
Quote:
However, the contribution of undersea volcanic eruptions to the rise in global temperatures does not mean that the present-day climate change in not driven by human activity. During her study, Tolstoy reportedly found that despite high sea levels and lower rate of eruptions, which is what the planet is currently experiencing, the overall carbon dioxide levels are rising.
“The fact that we have fewer eruptions means that less carbon dioxide should be entering the system, but what we're seeing is carbon dioxide going up,” Tolstoy reportedly said. “This definitely supports the fact that anthropogenic impacts are affecting our climate.”
So either the author of the study is part of the liberal plot (or the scientist made his statements at gunpoint), or the interviewer anticipated the denier reaction and made sure to get extra clarification for the scientifically illiterate.
I can't wait for the day when such disclaimers are no longer necessary.
Here's another article featuring multiple interviews with climatologists and volcanologists, including the author of a study used by deniers to 'prove' their points. All of them emphatically deny that volcanism is a greater factor than the warming oceans.
Considering that underwater volcanic activity is primarily a factor during ice ages, is very low at the preset moment, and drives LONG-term climate change (10,000 years as opposed to 60) through CO2 emissions, I'm pretty sure that the far larger amounts of CO2 that humans are pumping into the atmosphere have a much greater effect.
Here's an interesting quote from an author of the volcano study:
So either the author of the study is part of the liberal plot (or the scientist made his statements at gunpoint), or the interviewer anticipated the denier reaction and made sure to get extra clarification for the scientifically illiterate.
I can't wait for the day when such disclaimers are no longer necessary.
Here's another article featuring multiple interviews with climatologists and volcanologists, including the author of a study used by deniers to 'prove' their points. All of them emphatically deny that volcanism is a greater factor than the warming oceans.
What I found was that the original theory was put forward by a geophysicist from Columbia and was published. Peer reviewed.
The fact that the CO2 concentrations were not as expected doesn't discount the theory.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
