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

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by SV THIRD DAY

Sorry Amigo...as someone like myself living totally off the grid with Solar, I won't be lectured by someone not living their own talk.

You are the one that believes in MMGW, so what are YOU doing to save the world...oh and if arguing on a sailing site is all ya got..ha ha ha..sorry game over. If you won't even go solar and get off evil carbon based fuels, and YOU BELIEVE it..ha ha ah...it means in your gut you know it is all a hoax and have no right to lecture others....well at least not with any credibility.

When a MMGW Denier has a smaller carbon footprint than YOU...ha ha ha...you have some soul searching to do.

(-cough- virtue-signalling -cough-)

Right. Cos retiring early and living on a yacht in So Cal is going to scale up so well.

Anyway, we were talking about trees? Gotta forest on the poopdeck, do ya?

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

You posted that when I was sailing. I cannot find any responses that I made to that paper.

I will say that reforestation is a considered as one adaption to climate change. That reforestation will replace agricultural / pasture land with forest.



The reforestation which they speak is in the tropics, not in the mid-latitudes

I know you like to think that this "blows current models out of the water." It does not.

Story thought you had made a comment prior to now
Also I don't think it blows current models out of the water .

It is just some new information that does change the models and more new data everyday keeps changing. Which IMO is proof positive that the science is definitely not settled on CC .
Just like the later paper I referenced on the increased carbon uptake of forests in Alaska and it didn't say it but IMO the entire mid lattitude fkrrests . Which they state carbon uptake will increase considerably If temperatures warm.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

Story thought you had made a comment prior to now
Also I don't think it blows current models out of the water .

It is just some new information that does change the models and more new data everyday keeps changing. Which IMO is proof positive that the science is definitely not settled on CC .
Just like the later paper I referenced on the increased carbon uptake of forests in Alaska and it didn't say it but IMO the entire mid lattitude fkrrests . Which they state carbon uptake will increase considerably If temperatures warm.

What you said:

Here's a new study just published about carbon sequestrationthat blows the current models out of the water so to speak

http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...ml#post2122150

Yes - models are refined and the science is not settled.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

It looks like a report on the paper I linked to yes and thank you jack just doesn't remember he even commented on my original post of the paper.

Actually that is not the one to which you linked.

Sent from my SM-T705W using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

What you said:



http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...ml#post2122150

Yes - models are refined and the science is not settled.

Well I guess I did say that and yes it does do that .
We now have information that will require them to totally redesign the sequestration models .
This new and developing information basicly renders current models obsolete due to new much more accurate data being presented. Requiring entirely new computation formula to be implemented. Still I'm trying to figure what all of our ( collectavly speaking) has to do with cruising in Arctic waters.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by newhaul

Well I guess I did say that and yes it does do that .
We now have information that will require them to totally redesign the sequestration models .
This new and developing information basicly renders current models obsolete due to new much more accurate data being presented. Requiring entirely new computation formula to be implemented.

Of course, all models are imperfect, improvement is always possible... but I suspect the improvements to the sequestration models will be on the order of adjusting a factor or two, not a total redesign.

I asked this before but no-one took it up - more plant growth still means more carbon is within the natural carbon cycle, which means whatever is bound up in plant matter is released back into the atmosphere when the plants decay and die. Very little of that plant-held carbon will actually be sequestered (ie removed permanently from the carbon cycle as trapped deposits or whatever). So, how significant is increased plant activity going to be as a process for removing carbon for the atmosphere, overall?

Still I'm trying to figure what all of our ( collectavly speaking) has to do with cruising in Arctic waters.

This thread is the new catchbasin/septic field for anything AGW.

[jackdale]

Back on topic. This group has a space for one crew member.

http://polarocean.co.uk/

Sent from my SM-T705W using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by newhaul

Reef remember warm = MMGW
Cold = weather
As to the temperature sensor placement in heat islands we have all been over this a long time ago.

BINGO! VVVVV

Originally Posted by SailOar

You might want to review your Newtonian Laws...





(Status of May 2016 not yet available)

[senormechanico]

GO SAILING PEOPLE !!

You could all get swallowed up with a giant earthquake in the middle of the night. ISIS could nuke you like you were at a nightclub. (Nothing personal)
Don't worry about what MIGHT happen in a bazillion years..,

If you even HAVE a boat (which for some of you, I'm not so sure) GET IT OFF THE DOCK !

What would Bob Perry have said?

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by senormechanico

GO SAILING PEOPLE !!

You could all get swallowed up with a giant earthquake in the middle of the night. ISIS could nuke you like you were at a nightclub. (Nothing personal)
Don't worry about what MIGHT happen in a bazillion years..,

If you even HAVE a boat (which for some of you, I'm not so sure) GET IT OFF THE DOCK !

What would Bob Perry have said?

I do go sailing a couple times a week between Dr appts . But still find time to check in here on cf .

[SailOar]

Iron Fertilization In The Pacific Will Not Solve Climate Change | Tech Times

Iron fertilization in the Pacific is not an effective solution to climate change, a new research has revealed.

Experts believed that iron fertilization can cause sporadic growth of algae that absorbs carbon in the ocean. They said more iron means will result in higher algae productivity, thus, increasing the carbon dioxide absorbed from the atmosphere and sank to the sea floor.

However, airborne dust irons in the Pacific did not translate to an increase in algae's ability to absorb carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, said Gisela Winckler, study lead author and a geochemist from Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory (LDEO) in Columbia University.

In fact, the study correlated that previous iron fertilization in the Pacific have resulted in lower production of algae. Even though iron fertilization conducted in the past have controversial outcomes, it does not suggest that the same findings will be applicable in other areas.[...]

In 2004, the European Iron Fertilization Experiment (EIFEX) in the Southern Ocean was successful in making algae captured carbon dioxide in their organic tissue.

On the other hand, in 2009, German-Indian Lohafex experiment in the South Atlantic Ocean only resulted in minimal algal bloom, most of which were consumed by marine animals. This has resulted in carbon dioxide going into the food cycle, instead of sinking it.[...]

Cores from deep sea sediments were gathered from three different areas in the equatorial Pacific. The researchers used these to test for barium to establish the level of organic matter that was brought to the ocean floor. The researchers also tested for opal that came from groups of algae. Thorium-232 measurements were also taken to identify the iron dust that came from land.

The authors concluded that the purposeful addition of iron to the water surface of the Pacific will not result in a significant impact on mitigating the effects of atmospheric carbon dioxide.[...]

The study was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on May 16.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by senormechanico

GO SAILING PEOPLE !!

You could all get swallowed up with a giant earthquake in the middle of the night. ISIS could nuke you like you were at a nightclub. (Nothing personal)
Don't worry about what MIGHT happen in a bazillion years..,

If you even HAVE a boat (which for some of you, I'm not so sure) GET IT OFF THE DOCK !

What would Bob Perry have said?

Would love to go sailing. On June 1 I ruptured the quad tendon in my right leg playing squash. Heading for Maui on July 27 to bring back a Vic Maui boat. My surgeon assures me the leg should be OK by then.

Sent from my SM-T705W using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by jackdale

On June 1 I ruptured the quad tendon in my right leg playing squash.

Ouch. Best wishes for a fast and full heal.

[SV THIRD DAY]

Did someone say Scientific Consensus?

High cholesterol 'does not cause heart disease' new research finds, so treating with statins a 'waste of time'

Do you know how many Billions of Dollars this "Consensus" has cost people in Dr Visits and Drugs.

The Follow the Money game Continues....

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by SV THIRD DAY

Did someone say Scientific Consensus?

High cholesterol 'does not cause heart disease' new research finds, so treating with statins a 'waste of time'

Do you know how many Billions of Dollars this "Consensus" has cost people in Dr Visits and Drugs.

The Follow the Money game Continues....

the link quotes the following skeptics:

But Professor Colin Baigent, an epidemiologist at Oxford University, said the new study had “serious weaknesses and, as a consequence, has reached completely the wrong conclusion”.

Another sceptic, consultant cardiologist Dr Tim Chico, said he would be more convinced by randomised study where some patients have their cholesterol lowered using a drug, such as a stain, while others receive a placebo.

... and we love skeptics, right?


Also, the article is focussed on cholestorol and the elderly. Statins arguably have more clear-cut benefit for the middle-aged who have high LDL cholesterol, linked to early heart-attacks.