Do we need to be preparing for Arctic cruising strategies because of Global Cooling

[SV THIRD DAY]

If we use Aerogel around the polar ice caps, will that keep them from melting and destroying the world?

Side bar...do you know:
A 1" thick square foot piece of Polyisocyanurate costs $0.63
A 1" thick (actually 0.8") square foot piece of Aerogel costs $46

R-Values:
Polyiso 6.5/inch
Aerogel 10.3/inch

Science Test.
What is the price different of building an R30 Box measuring 3ft x 2ft x 2ft using Aerogel vs Polyiso?

[jimbunyard]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

If you look at both charts, keeping in mind Michael "The acidic oceans are dissolving organisms" Mann's chart whereby 1000 years is actually around 850 on Alley's chart you will see the data is the same, but Mann cut's off before the reduction in global temps. Essentially both charts display similar data for the period (even though derived from different sources) and you've fallen back on the good 'ole Jackdale tactic of declaring the same data as "fake" because it dares question your apocalyptic global warming ideals.

What ever on earth you're talking about, please don't put words in my mouth. Where have I said anything is fake? I'm not sure you understand that on the graph posted by Udacha, shown directly below, the far right figure is 95 years before 1950 which is, by convention, called 'Present'.
So 95 years before 1950 is 1855.
Therefore the last (most recent) year shown on Alley's graph is 1855.

On Mann's graph the numbering is straightforward; 2000 is to the far right, 1855 would be roughly halfway between halfway (3/4) between 1800 and 2000, going left.

Though I may not be able to explain it well it should be clear just by looking at the two graphs.

You may not like it but as I said:

Oddly enough, while looking into your question about Richard Alley's graph, I came across this interpretation of the one Udacha started this off with:

"Easterbrook plots the temperature data from the GISP2 core, as archived here. Easterbrook defines “present” as the year 2000. However, the GISP2 “present” follows a common paleoclimate convention and is actually 1950. The first data point in the file is at 95 years BP. This would make 95 years BP 1855 — a full 155 years ago, long before any other global temperature record shows any modern warming. In order to make absolutely sure of my dates, I emailed Richard Alley, and he confirmed that the GISP2 “present” is 1950, and that the most recent temperature in the GISP2 series is therefore 1855."

So, the author of the first graph agrees that the post 1855 warming shown on the 'hockey stick' graph does not and can not show on his graph simply because his graph ends in 1855.









It's being pedantic. Besides, you forgot to carry the 155.

My point was that being accurate matters. speaking of which, Alley's graph actually shows 9830 years.


I accept the rate of change has been higher multiple times in the recent past, i.e. post pyramids, based on the data shown. And this is reinforced in just about every other historical temperature record. Only scare mongers like yourself would claim recent changes are extraordinary despite evidence to the contrary.

Would like to have something other than your assurance that this is true.
Fear comes from ignorance; the prepared may have to worry, but at least they're not caught unaware. (Now that's pedantic)

It's only you claiming the graph is misrepresented. No one else has supported your incorrect views. Not even the participating scientist(s).

It was misrepresented by Udacha, and that's all it takes, (although a cursory search on the internet will easily reveal other instances)

Udacha's post;

"It's been amazing to me on this thread how the GW believers (non-scientist) argue and belittle actual scientist (non-believers)
I see a lot of graphs here supporting GW, but they only show the last 150 years, which is not even a blink. Here is one that goes back a bit further. The the little red part is the famous Hockey Stick, as you can see it is quite meaningless. If you actualy dig a little deeper and go back millions of years you will find that high co2 is a RESULT of warming not the cause."

Clearly, when someone referencing a graph says "The the little red part is the famous Hockey Stick", and the author of the graph says that the graph ends before the 'Hockey Stick' begins, some misrepresentation is going on.

You're, of course, free to believe whatever you want...

[Reefmagnet]

Misinterpreted /= misrepresented

Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Celestialsailor]

Originally Posted by SV THIRD DAY

If we use Aerogel around the polar ice caps, will that keep them from melting and destroying the world?

Side bar...do you know:
A 1" thick square foot piece of Polyisocyanurate costs $0.63
A 1" thick (actually 0.8") square foot piece of Aerogel costs $46

R-Values:
Polyiso 6.5/inch
Aerogel 10.3/inch

Science Test.
What is the price different of building an R30 Box measuring 3ft x 2ft x 2ft using Aerogel vs Polyiso?

Before or after buying cool blue refrigeration?

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Celestialsailor

Before or after buying cool blue refrigeration?

The refrigeration system is immaterial and not part of building the box with an r30 rating.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by SV THIRD DAY

Sorry...I don't play the game Lake...I just giggle the worm for others to bite...put some ice on your lip before it swells...

Hmmm. This forum needs an icon for taking the piss. People might read your acerbic, archly wry parody of the kneejerk right-wing anti-AGW catechisms (MMGW 'cults' - halarious) or the right wing's fears and insecurities about sexual identity, and think that you actually think that stuff.

[Celestialsailor]

Originally Posted by newhaul

The refrigeration system is immaterial and not part of building the box with an r30 rating.

Well it does if you want to keep the food cold. If you add all the cost of building abox one way other the other, the prices are close to the same.
I say this because I used an inch of Aerogel and back filled with Polyiso. Even using a cheap AB unit, the slight extra per cu-ft. wasn't much.

[SailOar]

Extinct smallpox virus could be resurrected by global warming | Mother Nature Network

As the Arctic's permafrost continues to thaw due to global warming, all sorts of ancient afflictions, once trapped by the cold, threaten to re-emerge. For instance, scientists have already discovered viruses in melting layers of frozen soil that were believed to have been extinct for tens of thousands of years.

So far, none of these ancient viruses have proven to be contagious for humans. But scientists now fear that melting permafrost threatens to re-animate a more recent scourge, one that scientists thought had been eradicated: smallpox. [...]

[SailOar]

UK poorly prepared for climate change impacts, government advisers warn | The Guardian

A 2,000 page report by Committee on Climate Change predicts global warming will hit UK with deadly heatwaves, more flooding and water shortages [...]

[SV THIRD DAY]

99% of California's greenhouse gas credits went unsold in the last auction - LA Times

So if you can't sell CO2/Carbon credits in Green California...can you sell them in Poughkeepsie?

[SailOar]

Poor countries to bear brunt of climate change despite emitting least CO2 | PHYS.org

Many of the world's poorest countries are expected to experience daily heat extremes due to climate change sooner than wealthier nations - according to research from an international team including the University of East Anglia.

New findings published in Environmental Research Letters show that the poorest fifth of the global population will be the first to experience more frequent heat extremes - despite cumulatively emitting the least amounts of CO2.[...]

[SailOar]

Are TV Meteorologists Finally Embracing The Science Of Climate Change? | Clean Technica

It’s been publicly noted for a long time now that some highly visible television weathercasters count themselves as being “skeptics” on the matter of climate change science.

Considering how publicly visible many of these weathercaster personas are, and how much people trust them even if they have no training in climate science (typically, they don’t), the situation has been recognized by some as a bit of a problem. After all, if “the weather guy” doesn’t believe in anthropogenic and potentially catastrophic climate change, then why should you?[...]

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

[Reefmagnet]

Gee, it's quiet in here. Time to ask a dumb question. Finally got around to watching the Q and A climate debate on YouTube and watched the usual slugfest start with the "science is settled" and "consensus" argument to conclude with all the alarmists bitchin' and moanin' about all the CSIRO climate scientists sacked. Umm, if the science is settled and there is indeed a consensus, why do we still need so many climate scientists on the public payroll?

Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Gee, it's quiet in here. Time to ask a dumb question. Finally got around to watching the Q and A climate debate on YouTube and watched the usual slugfest start with the "science is settled" and "consensus" argument to conclude with all the alarmists bitchin' and moanin' about all the CSIRO climate scientists sacked. Umm, if the science is settled and there is indeed a consensus, why do we still need so many climate scientists on the public payroll?

You're right, it's a dumb question.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Gee, it's quiet in here. Time to ask a dumb question. Finally got around to watching the Q and A climate debate on YouTube and watched the usual slugfest start with the "science is settled" and "consensus" argument to conclude with all the alarmists bitchin' and moanin' about all the CSIRO climate scientists sacked. Umm, if the science is settled and there is indeed a consensus, why do we still need so many climate scientists on the public payroll?

Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

Reef I think that is actually a rather intelligent question. But I doubt there will actually be any good intelligent answers.
If so settled then we have far better uses for the tax dollars than to continue to study an issue that is " settled" .