Author |
Topic: Maybe weird Al was right (Read 1112 times) |
|
Opus
New Board Hall of Famer
(Insert witty comment here)
  
 
Gender: 
Posts: 2509
|
 |
Re: Maybe weird Al was right
« Reply #25 on: Dec 15th, 2006, 12:31pm » |
 Quote  Modify
|
Here is what I believe, take it or leave it:
Any form of energy we use that was not recently created with the suns energy will cause global warming, because heat is added to the earth. CO2 levels have nothing to do with this fact. For example city's are warmer because they create heat and hold it in with concrete. The only safe forms of energy are hydro, solar and wood.
The sun is getting brighter but the effects have been offset by global dimming caused by airplanes with jet engines. So the world evaporation rates have gone down even though the sun is brighter.
The arctic ice is melting. The fact that the ice displaces water and that water increases in volume when frozen may result in ocean levels going down if the ice sheet melts completely. The predictions are if the ice sheet does melt the gulf stream will stop and Europe will be thrown into an ice age.
The Antarctica ice sheets are melting, but not because of global warming but because of under sea volcanoes. This fact is of course never mentioned. There is an island off of Antarctica which has the largest fresh water flow in the world because a volcano on it is melting ice. The mainland of Antarctica's Ice sheet motion is accelerating. This has been found to caused by a volcano melting ice and causing a river to flow under the ice sheet. If there is a major eruption of an volcano in Antarctica, the melt will cause ocean levels to rise quickly. This will not be caused by man, and we should be preparing for it now.
I didn't include links but if anyone is interested I should be able to find them. I have not read this stuff on the internet but have learned it from other sources.
Paul
edited because I suck at proof reading
|
| « Last Edit: Dec 15th, 2006, 12:33pm by Opus » |
 IP Logged |
Zed-Zed-nine plural-Zed alpha,
There is no place like home.
|
|
|
floridian
Guest
|
|
Re: Maybe weird Al was right
« Reply #26 on: Dec 15th, 2006, 12:33pm » |
Quote Modify
 Remove
|
on Dec 15th, 2006, 12:03pm, Paul98 wrote:
What I would like to hear Flo is what is the change in energy retention /M2 in mW for a known % increase in atmospheric CO2. What I keep hearing though is "the Boogie Man is going to get you" through such films ar "The day after Tomorrow", stories that in 10 years the seas are going to rise 100M, and a host of other dooms day stories that the media eagerly doles out as sound science and the politicians with an agenda intoxicate themselves on.
-P.
|
|
When NASA decided to look for life on other planets and realized that only the closest ones could be probed, they developed a pretty exact method for determining life based on the composition and temperature of the atmosphere, which could be remotely sensed. Earth already has a greenhouse effect that raises the temperature of the atmosphere about 60 degrees. Since the industrial age started, we have dramatically increased the amount of carbon dioxide, CFCs and other greenhouse gasses. There is no doubt that this has significantly increased energy retention in the atmosphere. The real questions are how this will be buffered by the oceans and ice, and how it will interact with cloud cover.
Quote:Using a very simple model, we can predict the mean surface temperature of the earth in the absence of a greenhouse effect. We know that about 340 W/m2 of solar power per unit surface area insolates our planet. About 30 percent of this energy is reflected, leaving an average of 240 watts to be absorbed by each square meter of surface area on earth.
All objects with a temperature above absolute zero emit radiation - and the earth is no exception. According to physics, the power emitted by a black body (which for our purposes we will assume the earth to be) is sT4, where T is the surface temperature of the earth and s the Stefan-Boltzmann constant.
If the earth and space are at radiative equilibrium, meaning there is no net gain or loss of heat by the earth, we can solve for the temperature of the earth as a function of the insolation and Stefan-Boltzmann constant. Our model yields an average surface temperature of earth of 255 K, or about 0 degrees Fahrenheit. Many parts of the earth would be even colder. Imagine a world where much of the planet is covered by conditions we associate only with polar or subpolar regions - clearly this planet would be inhospitable to many forms of life on earth today.
Fortunately, the mean surface temperature of our planet is a much more pleasant 288 K (58 degrees Fahrenheit), allowing for temperate conditions over most of the planet suitable for the forms of life we know today. The missing piece of our model is the greenhouse effect - gases that warm our planet the approximately 60 degrees Fahrenheit and produce the climate we know today. The two principal greenhouse gases in our atmosphere are carbon dioxide and water vapor. Other greenhouse gases include methane and the chlorofluorocarbons. These substances absorb heat in the infrared, the band of wavelengths at which the earth emits energy. They then reradiate this energy, directing some of it back toward the earth's surface. This is the extra source of heat that warms the earth beyond the frigid temperatures expected from our non-greenhouse model.
http://www.climate.org/topics/climate/index.shtml
|
|
I worked with the Stefman-Boltzman equation in grad school (remote sensing and geographic information systems). We could go into calculations there with watts/meter, absolute temperature and thermal emissivities - but the question is why? Trying to cast uncertainty and doubt, perhaps? Trying to convince the public that its just too complicated, so believe whatever you want?
You want to hear me talk about watts/meter? I think the burden is on you to refute the National Academy of Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Meteorological Society, the American Geophysical Union, and all the other scientific societies that have stated that global warming is occurring, and that the biggest factor is human change to the composition of the atmosphere.
|
| « Last Edit: Dec 15th, 2006, 12:39pm by floridian » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
George_J
CH.com Alumnus
New Board Hall of Famer
White-Breasted Nuthatch
Gender:
Posts: 4222
|
|
Re: Maybe weird Al was right
« Reply #27 on: Dec 15th, 2006, 12:41pm » |
Quote Modify
|
The fun part about these sorts of conversations is that the climate doesn't care squat what our opinions might be. Whether or not people are causing global climate change, the climate's going to do what it does, no matter how strenuously we opine.
Clearly, we've entered into a short-term warming trend, as compared to the 1400's to the 1800's. About the only thing to argue about is how much of this is attributable to human activity, what this might mean, and what, if anything, ought to be done about it. Global CO2 emissions are one factor in a complex process of climatological change. There have been radical variations in climate before--historically, and prehistorically. I suspect that the synergies driving these changes is still poorly understood. And it would take only one major geological event--one that might not happen tomorrow, but which will inevitably happen--say, for example, the supervolcano under Yellowstone Park blasting off, and dumping cubic miles of dust and megatons of CO2 into the atmosphere to change the entire equation, and render any squabbles we have about human activities hilariously moot.
Is reducing the amount of human-caused CO2 in the atmosphere a good idea or not? If it is a good idea, how is this best accomplished? If reducing atmospheric CO2 would cause a cascade of effects that propelled us into a prolonged period of global cooling, is this a good thing?
I don't know the definitive answers to this--and I doubt that anyone else does either. We're not going to come to any answers, though, by exercising opinions. In any case, whatever happens, I suspect that human beings will survive. We've done it before.
I guess my point is that this ought to be a matter for discussion, not bickering. Is dialogue possible? It seems to be out of fashion at the moment, but I continue to believe that it is possible. It is, in fact, the only way that anything is ever resolved. Let's move forward, not in circles.
Best wishes,
George
|
|
IP Logged |
Ah! The foreigners put on such airs
Wearing the tangerine suits
And their harlequin eyes.
The pain they inspire
Draws in harmonica melodies
And the feathers of birds
Which flame up at their touch.
It all comes to light in the sheer
Debonair.
(Ellen)
|
|
|
Killroy 2.0
CH.com Alumnus
New Board Hall of Famer
Kilroy 2.0 is Here! Kilroy 2.0 is Everywhere!
Posts: 1426
|
|
Re: Maybe weird Al was right
« Reply #28 on: Dec 15th, 2006, 1:19pm » |
Quote Modify
|
1500 years ago scientist knew that the earth was the center of the universe, 500 years ago scientist knew that the earth was flat, today scientist know that global warming is a fact.....
Only time will tell.... 
|
|
IP Logged |
Do the walls speak to you? Do you follow the Geek Messiah? DO YOU COMPLY?!
|
|
|
floridian
Guest
|
|
Re: Maybe weird Al was right
« Reply #29 on: Dec 15th, 2006, 1:35pm » |
Quote Modify
Remove
|
on Dec 15th, 2006, 1:19pm, Gena wrote:1500 years ago scientist knew that the earth was the center of the universe, 500 years ago scientist knew that the earth was flat, today scientist know that global warming is a fact.....
Only time will tell....
|
|
I get your point - sorta. But Eratosthenes calculated the circumference of our globe 2200 years ago - he wasn't exact, but he wasn't far off.
The Babylonians and Greeks knew about celestial orbits and were able to predict eclipses and other events - the Antikythera device was a sophisticated computing device.
It was bad religion and politics that supressed science in Europe. Kinda like the attacks on evolution today.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Paul98
Guest
|
|
Re: Maybe weird Al was right
« Reply #30 on: Dec 15th, 2006, 1:36pm » |
Quote Modify
Remove
|
on Dec 15th, 2006, 12:33pm, floridian wrote:
You want to hear me talk about watts/meter? I think the burden is on you to refute the National Academy of Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Meteorological Society, the American Geophysical Union, and all the other scientific societies that have stated that global warming is occurring, and that the biggest factor is human change to the composition of the atmosphere. |
|
Sorry Flo, I should have phrased my sentence differently. I should have said: "what I want to hear from the media Flo,.....
I have no doubt that global warming is occuring Flo. It has been warming for the last 10,000 years. How much is due to man's activity? All? Some? a wee bit? I have read in AAAS and Science that NASA's measurments of earth's atmospheric temps have actually dropped since they had satellites. So even within the refereed journals there is conflicting conclusions. To cherry pick only articals and research that backs the conclusion you want (you being anybody) is the same as me conducting an experiment 5 times and having the results come out 2 one way and 3 the other way and then me selecting only the ones I want. It is not legit science. The media and the politicians are doing just this and it is wrong.
-P.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
CynthiaB
New Board Veteran
Gender: 
Posts: 118
|
|
Re: Maybe weird Al was right
« Reply #31 on: Dec 15th, 2006, 1:45pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Much like manners, debate and intelligent discussion have fallen out of fashion George.
Thus far, this thread has contributed to an enjoyable Friday afternoon. I hope it continues.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Brew
CH.com Alumnus
New Board Hall of Famer
Low Four!
Gender:
Posts: 6515
|
|
Re: Maybe weird Al was right
« Reply #32 on: Dec 15th, 2006, 1:53pm » |
Quote Modify
|
When someone comes straight out and insults my intelligence by stating that I don't understand how the scientific process works, that's where I end the discussion. It is more than obvious to me that everything - and I mean EVERYTHING - that follows is agenda-driven.
|
|
IP Logged |
Always remember that you're unique, just like everyone else.
|
|
|
floridian
Guest
|
|
Re: Maybe weird Al was right
« Reply #33 on: Dec 15th, 2006, 3:08pm » |
Quote Modify
Remove
|
on Dec 15th, 2006, 1:36pm, Paul98 wrote:
Sorry Flo, I should have phrased my sentence differently. I should have said: "what I want to hear from the media Flo,.....
I have no doubt that global warming is occuring Flo. It has been warming for the last 10,000 years. How much is due to man's activity? All? Some? a wee bit? I have read in AAAS and Science that NASA's measurments of earth's atmospheric temps have actually dropped since they had satellites. So even within the refereed journals there is conflicting conclusions. To cherry pick only articals and research that backs the conclusion you want (you being anybody) is the same as me conducting an experiment 5 times and having the results come out 2 one way and 3 the other way and then me selecting only the ones I want. It is not legit science. The media and the politicians are doing just this and it is wrong.
-P. |
|
The temperature readings from satellites tend to drop over time. We also see satellite images get darker and darker as the imaging system decays.
Uncallibrated, the temperature readings do not show the same rise as we see from other indicators - ground and ocean based thermometers, polar ice, montane glaciers, tree rings, etc. The issue then becomes which paint an accurate picture of what is really going on. If you assume that the space thermometers have always been accurate, then what we see on the Earth is innexplicable. If you accept the idea that the sensors change, then they can be callibrated using information that is higher order and known to be accurate.
The movie you mentioned was craptastic - but so was the Andromeda strain. Science Fiction. As far as the real-news part of the media goes, I agree with you that things are often lacking. The average reporter has never taken time to understand this issue, but that hasn't stopped them from reporting. There are wildly innacurate statements that miss the truth on all sides.
I'm not making dire predictions about global warming, but I do agree with the majority of scientific community that it is real. I think there will be costs in the future - don't know how big, when, or who gets lucky and has to burden those costs. It is to our advantage to start thinking about these economic externalities now - and add them to other 'costs' of fossil fuels that are not included at the pump - pollution, dependency on volatile regions, etc. etc.
|
| « Last Edit: Dec 15th, 2006, 3:10pm by floridian » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Paul98
Guest
|
|
Re: Maybe weird Al was right
« Reply #34 on: Dec 15th, 2006, 3:28pm » |
Quote Modify
Remove
|
Flo, I agree with you that things are and will get warmer. Is it the dire immeadiate calamity that is being hyped? No. Man is not building dwellings that will last for 100's of years any more. Even if say in 2-3 hundred years coastal cities are innundated and crops fail due to weather changes, I think there will be many less humans around to worry about by then. My bet is on a plague on a scale made possible by modern transportation and urban environment.
-P.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Jonny
CH.com Alumnus
New Board Hall of Famer
Give me a shovel Ill dig my own grave!
Gender:
Posts: 26213
|
|
Re: Maybe weird Al was right
« Reply #35 on: Dec 15th, 2006, 3:43pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I blame the cows, the damn cows and their farts
|
|
IP Logged |
It is up to YOU to educate yourself and then help your doctor plan your treatment. If you just sit down in front of your doctor and say "make me better" you are setting yourself up for a great deal of pain.
- Guiseppi
|
|
|
LeLimey
CH.com Alumnus
New Board Hall of Famer
OUCH-US - Less "ME" and more "WE"
Gender:
Posts: 11720
|
|
Re: Maybe weird Al was right
« Reply #36 on: Dec 15th, 2006, 3:44pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Dec 15th, 2006, 3:43pm, Jonny wrote:| I blame the cows, the damn cows and their farts |
|
Jonny's right!
|
|
IP Logged |
The arsehole I'm divorcing needs to get a life and stop stalking mine
|
|
|
Paul98
Guest
|
|
Re: Maybe weird Al was right
« Reply #37 on: Dec 15th, 2006, 3:46pm » |
Quote Modify
Remove
|
on Dec 15th, 2006, 3:43pm, Jonny wrote:| I blame the cows, the damn cows and their farts |
|
It ain't the cows...Pull my finger Bro
-P.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
LeLimey
CH.com Alumnus
New Board Hall of Famer
OUCH-US - Less "ME" and more "WE"
Gender:
Posts: 11720
|
|
Re: Maybe weird Al was right
« Reply #38 on: Dec 15th, 2006, 3:47pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Dec 15th, 2006, 3:46pm, Paul98 wrote:
It ain't the cows...Pull my finger Bro
-P.
|
|
Yeah.. just another load of old bull 
|
|
IP Logged |
The arsehole I'm divorcing needs to get a life and stop stalking mine
|
|
|
Jonny
CH.com Alumnus
New Board Hall of Famer
Give me a shovel Ill dig my own grave!
Gender:
Posts: 26213
|
|
Re: Maybe weird Al was right
« Reply #39 on: Dec 15th, 2006, 3:51pm » |
Quote Modify
|
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/GlobalWarming/story?id=2723201&page =1
|
|
IP Logged |
It is up to YOU to educate yourself and then help your doctor plan your treatment. If you just sit down in front of your doctor and say "make me better" you are setting yourself up for a great deal of pain.
- Guiseppi
|
|
|
vietvet2tours
CH.com Alumnus
New Board Hall of Famer
Team MOOSE DROOL Stinky Stuff on a Hook Prostaff
Gender:
Posts: 1499
|
|
Re: Maybe weird Al was right
« Reply #40 on: Dec 15th, 2006, 4:09pm » |
Quote Modify
|
It's my fault.I'll go talk to the girls about their gaseous problem and let ya know how it goes
|
|
IP Logged |
Kill em all let God sort em out
|
|
|
JeffB
CH.com Alumnus
New Board Hall of Famer
Wide open till you see God, then brake
Gender:
Posts: 2729
|
|
Re: Maybe weird Al was right
« Reply #42 on: Dec 15th, 2006, 4:35pm » |
Quote Modify
|
We should feed them Bean-o after their meals.
|
|
IP Logged |
" It's been my experience that people who have no vices have very little virtues."
|
|
|
BarbaraD
CH.com Alumnus
New Board Hall of Famer
Hugs to ya
Gender:
Posts: 5164
|
|
Re: Maybe weird Al was right
« Reply #43 on: Dec 15th, 2006, 4:47pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Dec 15th, 2006, 12:16pm, BobG wrote:The weather was invented in Vegas. Vegas has all rights to weather. It is sold to the highest bidder on an as-needed basis.
|
|
And apparently some of us (states that is) forgot to bid and we just got what you gave us -- Live and learn!!!
|
|
IP Logged |
What don't kill ya, Makes ya stonger!
|
|
|
BobG
New Board Hall of Famer
Gender:
Posts: 5747
|
|
Re: Maybe weird Al was right
« Reply #44 on: Dec 15th, 2006, 5:26pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Global warming? Global cooling? It all depends on the person selling the book. Follow the money.
And, I don't give a rat's ass.
|
|
IP Logged |
Stay stressed. Never relax. Never sleep. Ever.
|
|
|
Charlie
CH.com Alumnus
New Board Hall of Famer
Happy to be here
  
Gender:
Posts: 14968
|
|
Re: Maybe weird Al was right
« Reply #45 on: Dec 15th, 2006, 6:07pm » |
Quote Modify
|
The deal is that it would be nice not to add to the problem. We can do that if we want.
Those that spend the most time howling about how it's all bullshit are those that would have to pay the most for dealing with it.
Charlie
|
| « Last Edit: Dec 15th, 2006, 6:08pm by Charlie » |
IP Logged |
There is nothing more satisfying than being shot at without result---Winston Churchill
|
|
|
CynthiaB
New Board Veteran
Gender:
Posts: 118
|
|
Re: Maybe weird Al was right
« Reply #46 on: Dec 15th, 2006, 8:21pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Long before we are extinct from the effects of global warming, we will have hated each other to death.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home
Help
Search
Members
Member Map
Login
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print
test rss