Global Warming Opens Up Antarctic Waterways

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Truth and Breitbart are mutually exclusive. The fact that you'd cite it confirms our suspicion that you'll pluck any vaguely plausible stuff from about anywhere, even though it ultimately rots in the sunlight.

No surprises here. You pick one link out of a collection and do the alarmist "well I have no answer, so I'll just character assisinate". Very typical. Interesting you picked Breitbart. Is he the guy with the silly satirical cartoons? Like the ones you like to throw up? Do you decide to buy your grapes at the supermarket by tasting only the rotten ones in the bunch, too?

How about the stuff from Judith Currie? She's legit. Why not give us your considered opinion of her writings.

And this IPCC conspiracy stuff...

It's not conspiracy. It's conflict of interest.

You're either a consummate troll of 3rd-Day persistence, or you truly believe all that crap, even though it's an inconsistent mess of things that just don't hang together.

Care to explain to us all how you arrived at that opinion from the technical perspective? I suspect not.


Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

How about the stuff from Judith Currie? She's legit. Why not give us your considered opinion of her writings.

Proof positive that you're way more interested in talking than listening.

I already posted my agreement with Dr Curry. Good stuff. You should maybe read some of it.

[sailorchic34]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Proof positive that you're way more interested in talking than listening.

I already posted my agreement with Dr Curry. Good stuff. You should maybe read some of it.

Hey, we all agree that Dr. Curry is a voice of reason. How cool is that.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

How about the stuff from Judith Currie? She's legit. Why not give us your considered opinion of her writings.

Including the three pieces on temperature adjustments!

[SailOar]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

AH I like this. I do not disagree with the measurements taken. I have several takeaways from the above.

1. During the 1990s, further ice core measurements indicated that at the end of the last glacial period, the initial rise of temperature in Antarctica had preceded CO2 changes by several centuries. Some scientists doubted that dates could be measured so precisely, but as as better cores were extracted the data increasingly pointed to a time lag.

I oddly believe that Co2 follows temperature increase as was measured above. Ok you'll point out that co2 has risen to over 400 ppm while temperatures are lagging. Yes, that is true, but the initial warming was due to temperature rising which releases co2 from the oceans and arctic.

If I understand you correctly you are saying that you understand that CO2 lags temperatures during the whole warming part of the cycle. If that is your understanding than I believe it is not correct. In post #1531 it was shown that while CO2 levels did lag temperatures during the initial warming that was initiated by the Milankovitch cycle, CO2 levels soon rose high enough to become the driving force for warming.

2. The new ice cores suggested that a powerful feedback amplified the changes in sunlight. The crucial fact was that a slight warming would cause the level of greenhouse gases to rise slightly. For one thing, warmer oceans would evaporate out more gas. For another, as the vast Arctic tundras warmed up, the bogs would emit more CO2 (and another greenhouse gas, methane, also measured in the ice with a lag behind temperature). The greenhouse effect of these gases would raise the temperature a little more, which would cause more emission of gases, which would... and so forth, hauling the planet step by step into a warm period. Many thousands of years later, the process would reverse when the sunlight falling in key latitudes weakened. Bogs and oceans would absorb greenhouse gases, ice would build up, and the planet would slide back into an ice age. This finally explained how tiny shifts in the Earth's orbit could set the timing of the enormous swings of glacial cycles.

The finding here is that Co2 follows temperature in a feedback loop.

No. CO2 levels follow at some points, but leads at others. That is very crucial to understanding why our artificially increasing CO2 levels can/will/is triggering a non-natural increase in temperatures.

This in my mind, simple though it is, would partly explain why the arctic and antarctic are warming faster then populated area, as CO2 is released that has been frozen for many 1000's of years. If man made Co2 was causing warming, I might expect the temperatures over north America and Europe to rise slightly faster then the arctic. But that's not how it's working out. Of course there may be wind shears that explain the faster rise in arctic temperatures.

CO2 mixes rapidly into the atmosphere, so it does not concentrate for long near any single-point location that generated it. However, CO2 is naturally more concentrated in the northern hemisphere, because most natural CO2 is generated from land plants, not the ocean, and the land masses are more concentrated in the northern hemisphere.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon...27s_atmosphere

3. Eventually geochemists and their allies managed to get numbers for the "climate sensitivity" in past eras, that is, the response of temperature to a rise in the CO2 level. Over hundreds of millions of years, a doubled level of the gas had always gone along with a temperature rise of three degrees, give or take a degree or two. That was in startling agreement with the range of numbers coming from many computer studies. Evidently the computer modelers had not missed something huge.

So co2 has risen as high or higher then it is now in the distant past and none of it was AGW.

Yes and No.

YES, about 1/2 billion years ago CO2 levels may have gotten over 10 times what they are now -- 7,000 ppm then vs 400 ppm now. And there have been other times more recent that have also had higher CO2 levels than now.

But NO, in the last 1/2 million years, where Earth has gone through 5 glaciation periods and warmings, each driven primarily by the Milankovitch cycle, CO2 levels have varied from around 175 ppm during the depths of the glaciations, to 275-300 ppm during the warmest part of the inter-glaciations. Thus, humans increasing CO2 levels to now over 400 ppm, and likely to go much higher if we don't get our act together, is serious cause for concern.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon...27s_atmosphere




420,000 years of Atmospheric CO2 (grey line) plus Atmospheric methane (black line) compared with global temperature variations (red line).

Atmospheric methane is also a serious concern. If arctic permafrost melts and the huge estimated volumes of methane clathrates melt, we could possibly induce runaway global warming and put ourselves in a world of hurt.

In any event, I don't see the worlds governments doing enough to make a measurable reduction in co2, so for all practical purposes we are talking about how many angels fit on a pin head. Myself, I've already reduced my carbon foot print to less then a 1/4 of average. Gee I was riding a bicycle to work way back in the 70's. So if man IS the driver for global warming, I'm already doing my part.

Yes, I admire that about you. Wish I could say I was doing the same.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Proof positive that you're way more interested in talking than listening.

I already posted my agreement with Dr Curry. Good stuff. You should maybe read some of it.

Care to recap then?


I think you realise you have no answer. Breitbart didn't actually have the cartoons. I'm guessing you're unaware of that. It did have a couple of authentic links to giss.nasa.gov to support its argument, however.

Originally Posted by jackdale

Including the three pieces on temperature adjustments!

Since you now claim to be a skeptic, how do you interpret this summary?

In*summary I found that while individual stations are subject to large and what often appears to be arbitrary and robotic adjustments in V3, the average outcome across all 30 stations is effectively zero. At the regional level, homogenisation does not appear to be responsible for adding warming in Australia. But the thing that truly astonished me was the fact that the mean temperature trend for these 30 stations, 1880 to 2011, was a completely flat line. There has been no recorded warming across a very large portion of the Australian continent.

How about this conclusion?

Homogenisation of climate records changes virtually everything and nothing at the same time. The objective of homogenisation is to remove non-climate artefacts. Wholesale re-writing of the temperature history everywhere is not consistent with the stated aims. Homogenisation appears to have added warming or cooling to records where neither existed. Homogenisation may also have removed real climate signal.

I find zero warming over such a large part of the Australian continent to be a surprise result that is consistent with Roger Andrew’s observation of no to little warming in the southern hemisphere, an observation that still requires more rigorous testing.

Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

Hey, we all agree that Dr. Curry is a voice of reason. How cool is that.

It's beyond cool. It would be a great starting point for moving forward.

Yet there's something about ... fiberglass, and saltwater and too much time on their hands ... or whatever... that seem to make some CFers (present company excepted ) into doctrinaire 'deniers', happy to take their talking points from whatever paid front supplies them.

Like Jackdale, I have all the time in the world for genuine skeptics. It would be interesting to be discussing this from a point of intelligent skepticism. The "AGW conspiracy"/"scientists lied"/algore folk get me down.

Oh well. Our boat hits the lake next week, so I'll have something else to do.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Care to recap then?


I think you realise you have no answer. Breitbart didn't actually have the cartoons. I'm guessing you're unaware of that. It did have a couple of authentic links to giss.nasa.gov to support its argument, however.

Wow. Can't make any sense out of that.

You know, you don't have to wallow through cesspools like Breitbart to find NASA, NOAA or other docs, right?

[LakeSuperior]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Oh well. Our boat hits the lake next week, so I'll have something else to do.

Great! It was 17 F here yesterday mid morning and we got about 4 inches of snow in the last couple days. Still some snow on the ground. Still ice on the water in places. This is Michigan. Cheers!!


Global warming anyone?

[Rustic Charm]

There are some aspects of this discussion that is starting to disintegrate into personal insults. Polite insults, but none the less insults.

I've personally read along ever since this thread has started and I started reading the thread with a strong lean on the scientists side (yes the MMGW side) and after more than a hundred pages, I've read almost nothing to weaken my thoughts on it. In fact, with the help of those who deny it, I'm now firmly in the majority camp.

The following is a very funny response to something that is so overwhelmingly realistic that it also is the final comment in my mind. Yes, I know Reefmagnet will have a come back, which of course will be a comical one, but I think Reefmagnet will still be making jokes when when the financial impacts of GW and refugees are directly impacting him and he will still be denying it's got any thing to do with GW. Anyway, enjoy this clip.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjuGCJJUGsg

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

How about this conclusion?






Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

Why did you leave this out?

There is no evidence in this data set to support the more serious allegation that has been made for GHCN and NASA GISS adjusting records to manufacture global warming. Individually, the GHCN V3.1 records cannot be treated as climate records since each one contains fragments of code designed to create regional homogeneity.

Temperature adjustments in Australia | Climate Etc.

I guess it did not suit your agenda?

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by LakeSuperior

Great! It was 17 F here yesterday mid morning and we got about 4 inches of snow in the last couple days. Still some snow on the ground. Still ice on the water in places. This is Michigan. Cheers!!


Global warming anyone?

Regional cooling; global warming.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

There are some aspects of this discussion that is starting to disintegrate into personal insults. Polite insults, but none the less insults.

I've personally read along ever since this thread has started and I started reading the thread with a strong lean on the scientists side (yes the MMGW side) and after more than a hundred pages, I've read almost nothing to weaken my thoughts on it. In fact, with the help of those who deny it, I'm now firmly in the majority camp.

The following is a very funny response to something that is so overwhelmingly realistic that it also is the final comment in my mind. Yes, I know Reefmagnet will have a come back, which of course will be a comical one, but I think Reefmagnet will still be making jokes when when the financial impacts of GW and refugees are directly impacting him and he will still be denying it's got any thing to do with GW. Anyway, enjoy this clip.

I'm sure you'll be the first to open your home, heart and wallet for all those displaced Tuvaluvians.

Originally Posted by jackdale

Why did you leave this out?



Temperature adjustments in Australia | Climate Etc.

I guess it did not suit your agenda?

Umm, because the less serious allegation she proved was all I needed?



Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Umm, because the less serious allegation she proved was all I needed?

Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

Nice contextomy.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by jackdale

Nice contextomy.

Nice dodge.


Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app