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.
It's global WARMING that everyone talks about. The earth is warming not cooling. But if we really were in another ice age, I'd be moving to the tropics in a heartbeat!
Do I need to state the obvious? Western Europe and the eastern seaboard of North America comprise a small fraction of the world's area. It's not surprising that unexpected regional effects can occur. I feel sorry for those who live in these areas, but other than that, nothing to see here. Your article mentions "North America" for shock value, when it fact it's just a small portion of eastern North America that is influenced by the Gulf Stream. Areas from Nova Scotia south to about North Carolina, and that's it.
During the summer of 1816, when the entire globe cooled due to volcanic ash in the atmosphere, (present-day) Russia and Ukraine recorded a hotter than normal summer. This is just the reverse of the scenario you state. But no one refers to the summer of 1816 as "that brutally hot summer in Russia". No, because it's the AVERAGE that matters. Same here.
So if you live in Dublin and you're worried about the Gulf Stream shutting down, you have my condolences. You may also want to plan moving somewhere else
Cambium, you are just doing this to get false hope. The earth is warming, it's a sad reality. Don't ignore evidence for something you don't want to happen. We all dream about how wonderful a colder Earth would be, but that's not happening. And even if the Gulf Stream shut down the rest of the world would still be warming.
Look at it this way: CO2 is a greenhouse gas, that's been proven. We humans are emitting a lot of CO2. This would warm up the planet, right? It's inevitable.
Cambium, you are just doing this to get false hope. The earth is warming, it's a sad reality.
Not for the last 200 months it hasn't. Global temps basically flat
Quote:
Don't ignore evidence for something you don't want to happen. We all dream about how wonderful a colder Earth would be, but that's not happening.
Actually a colder earth would be harsher to live in then a warmer one. Think Jurassic when much of the earth was lush and green.
Quote:
And even if the Gulf Stream shut down the rest of the world would still be warming.
True, the most effected would be Europe
Quote:
Look at it this way: CO2 is a greenhouse gas, that's been proven. We humans are emitting a lot of CO2. This would warm up the planet, right? It's inevitable.
What has also been established is that co2 alone doubled will only produce about 1C increase in global temps. The big what if's are the possible positive feedbacks, which we have little understanding of. At least in the short term. Especially with regards to the role of oceans, and their absorption of heat content.
Not for the last 200 months it hasn't. Global temps basically flat
What has also been established is that co2 alone doubled will only produce about 1C increase in global temps. The big what if's are the possible positive feedbacks, which we have little understanding of. At least in the short term. Especially with regards to the role of oceans, and their absorption of heat content.
I love it how MMGWists say that the oceans now ate their global warming since atmospheric temps haven't budged much over the last 16 years.
So all the joules per kilogram that are depicted in the chart from SS add up to how much addition heat content over the last 60 years?
Quote:
The heat content of the World Ocean for the 0–2000 m layer increased by 24.0 ± 1.9 × 1022 J (±2S.E.) corresponding to a rate of 0.39 W m−2 (per unit area of the World Ocean) and a volume mean warming of 0.09°C.
Overestimated global warming over the past 20 years
Quote:
Global mean surface temperature over the past 20 years (1993–2012) rose at a rate of 0.14 ± 0.06 °C per decade (95% confidence interval)1. This rate of warming is significantly slower than that simulated by the climate models participating in Phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5). To illustrate this, we considered trends in global mean surface temperature computed from 117 simulations of the climate by 37 CMIP5 models. These models generally simulate natural variability — including that associated with the El Niño–Southern Oscillation and explosive volcanic eruptions — as well as estimate the combined response of climate to changes in greenhouse gas concentrations, aerosol abundance (of sulphate, black carbon and organic carbon, for example), ozone concentrations (tropospheric and stratospheric), land use (for example, deforestation) and solar variability. By averaging simulated temperatures only at locations where corresponding observations exist, we find an average simulated rise in global mean surface temperature of 0.30 ± 0.02 °C per decade (using 95% confidence intervals on the model average). The observed rate of warming given above is less than half of this simulated rate, and only a few simulations provide warming trends within the range of observational uncertainty...
Quote:
The inconsistency between observed and simulated global warming is even more striking for temperature trends computed over the past fifteen years (1998–2012). For this period, the observed trend of 0.05 ± 0.08 °C per decade is more than four times smaller than the average simulated trend of 0.21 ± 0.03 °C per decade. It is worth noting that the observed trend over this period — not significantly different from zero — suggests a temporary 'hiatus' in global warming.
The article concludes:
Quote:
Ultimately the causes of this inconsistency will only be understood after careful comparison of simulated internal climate variability and climate model forcings with observations from the past two decades, and by waiting to see how global temperature responds over the coming decades.
I don't think there is any doubt that we are seeing a dramatic increase in the concentration of CO2 in our atmosphere. We have seen this uptick since man became fully domesticated roughly 10000 years ago. The rate of rise, then, was gradual for thousands of years but really started gaining traction after the start of the industrial age.
What isn't much mentioned is given how much fossil fuel we burn and how much deforestation we have caused and how much we have altered our arable land for agriculture and other uses, we should be seeing a lot more CO2 than we are at present.
Well, that's a good thing, no? No, not really.
All that extra CO2 has to go somewhere and it's not being sequestered by what plant life we still have. Our oceans and seas are the planet's biggest CO2 sinks. A tremendous amount of all that "excess" carbon is getting dissolved in the water. And in the process, is acidifying it.
We're turning our oceans into giant reservoirs of seltzer water. What this does is two things:
1. It adversely affects much of our phytoplankton community's ability to make the calcium based shells they depend on for survival, thus depriving all other oceanic life the base of their food chain.
2. Kills off all those photo synthesizers that produce the overwhelming bulk of the oxygen we breathe.
Speaking only for myself, I am a whole lot less worried about a 2 to 5 (in C) potential temperature rise than I am about having the bottom of the food pyramid kicked out from under us and having to deal with the loss of O2 production that would result.
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.
