Why?
Comment on State shift (?) in Earth’s biosphere by Tom
↧
↧
Comment on State shift (?) in Earth’s biosphere by Jim Cripwell
In answer to the bonus question, I think
http://www.arcus.org/search/seaiceoutlook/2012/june
is an interesting source.
↧
Comment on State shift (?) in Earth’s biosphere by timg56
A.. Moose,
Do you make this stuff up or simply believe whatever someone tells you?
US population growth is a bit above 2.1%, which places it among the highest in the industrialized world. That growth rate is just one of the reasons the US has a future brighter than many other industrialized nations.
↧
Comment on State shift (?) in Earth’s biosphere by Tonyb
Fan
Presumably you mean during the very short satellite era?
Tonyb
↧
Comment on State shift (?) in Earth’s biosphere by A fan of *MORE* discourse
Jim Cripwell, as a follow-up you might want to watch one of the most dramatic high-technology moments in engineering, namely, the test-to-destruction of an airliner wing
If an airliner wing fails at less than 150% of the design load, the wing fails certification (which is a safety-related disaster). Yet if the wing fails at more than 155% of design load, then the wing is needlessly heavy (which is an economic disaster).
So engineering tolerances are tight, and accurate simulation codes are absolutely vital. The resulting tests are high-drama epics! 
What James Hansen is pointing out, is that we humans are similarly testing our planet’s climate stability — possibly to the point of inducing the “state-shift” that in aerospace engineering breaks wings, and on our planet Earth, melts ice-caps.
This planetary climate test too is a high-drama epic. Because the faith that “wings can’t break” is just plain wrong, in both aerospace engineering and climatology.
↧
↧
Comment on State shift (?) in Earth’s biosphere by capt. dallas 0.8 +/-0.2
lolwot, what happens to the imbalance as the internal heat content changes?
It is the rates of change and the changes in the rates of change. If the rate of change of OHC is decreasing while the rate of CO2 increase is near constant, the system is approaching a conditional equilibrium. Your observations are about as good as the real estate pros and dot com investment analysts.
↧
Comment on State shift (?) in Earth’s biosphere by hunter
Michael,
Show us where ocean pH has been measured from accurate samples to be changing in anyway outside of typical fluctuations. Additionally, show damage from the same.
No projections. No models. Sampled data from the ocean.
TIA,
I take it that you acept the other parts of my list?
↧
Comment on State shift (?) in Earth’s biosphere by Bart R
Knowledgeable, rational, supported by data, relevant, timely and with a halfway decent sense of humor.. I see no cause anyone would have to think you’re connected to me in any way.
One of the principle applications of sufficiently detailed models is to allow us to understand on what scales chaos begins and ends, and to understand which vectors it does involve. However chaotic an airstream, it will always obey the various conservation laws, e.g.; this tells us among other things how good or bad our data collection is: Santer’s 17 year signal:noise at 95% confidence calculations tell us our global temperature data is poor, if a model predicts decadal confidence is obtainable (though I think the actual limit is likely 14-15 years based on Vaughn Pratt’s comments about an apparent 14.5 year lag mediated by delay in deep ocean heat circulation), which would tell us our global temperature data is still fairly poor.
↧
Comment on State shift (?) in Earth’s biosphere by hunter
R. Gates,
The topic is AGW, not right wingers.
Nice dissembling, but I think I will pass.
↧
↧
Comment on State shift (?) in Earth’s biosphere by hunter
NW,
It is because the paper is stupid beyond belief and is no more of a sicence paper than some article discussing UFO’s.
↧
Comment on State shift (?) in Earth’s biosphere by JCH
A few years ago a noted skeptic made a prediction about the recovery of multi-year ice.
↧
Comment on State shift (?) in Earth’s biosphere by Kip Hansen
Students of biological and geological history will already know that human habitation causes state shifts in regional biospheres. Greece, Lebanon, Turkey, Palestine, the Yucatan, the American Northeast forests and the Central Plains, all of the United Kingdom: all have been found to have been massively altered by long-term human habitation.
To predict that this will continue is the ‘no change–business as usual’ hypothesis.
↧
Comment on Causes(?) of ocean warming by Wagathon
Do you know what do Charles Dickens and George Washington both have in common? They both lived during the Little Ice Age that occurred from about the mid thirteenth century to the 1860s. Dickens wrote about a “White Christmas”; and, our vision of Washington is crossing the Delaware afloat with chunks of ice.
<a href="http://evilincandescentbulb.wordpress.com/2012/05/28/climate-change-was-not-an-ideologically-driven-agenda-for-charles-dickens/" title="Climate Change was NOT an Ideologically-Driven Agenda for Charles Dickens" rel="nofollow">Climate Change was NOT an Ideologcally-Driven Agenda for Charles Dickens</a>
↧
↧
Comment on State shift (?) in Earth’s biosphere by Bart R
It’s a pleasure to read your post, though with some slight criticism.
“Assuming X” is a frequent first step in rational arguments that lead us further than questions of X. In reductio ad absurdum it is necessary to begin with a proposition of this sort to defeat it. (While failure to defeat a proposition by finding no absurd outcomes — or better, finding absurd outcomes that actually resulted in the real world, like fan’s example of the Northwest Passage becoming navigable — doesn’t prove any proposition, it’s an indication of an interesting premise.)
Similarly, assuming the US currency were the berliner (or in the case of Ron Paul, the gold standard) allows one to construct interesting Economics cases.
I wouldn’t rest an argument on the assumption of correctness alone, and where the mindset it reflects (a potential danger) is apparent, it of course ought be challenged to confirm if indeed the mistake of reliance on a faulty premise has occured.
Btw, SUPRAnet looks extraordinarily interesting, and I hope Dr. Curry features her comments about this network for us, too.
↧
Comment on State shift (?) in Earth’s biosphere by Wagathon
Dangling official government thermometers in the exhaust of a commercial jets and extrapolating winter airport temperatures (where the snow is cleared from asphalt runways on an hourly basis) to global warming is an example of a charlatan's hand.
GIGO--> God's Truth In Garbage Out. It doesn't really matter if you believe in Nature or not. The point is, does anyone really believe that fearful Western government-funded schoolteachers are saving humanity from global warming?
<a href="http://evilincandescentbulb.wordpress.com/2012/03/25/126/" title="Global Warming? Hell Nyet Not Yet!" rel="nofollow">Global Warming? Hell Nyet Not Yet!</a>
↧
Comment on Causes(?) of ocean warming by capt. dallas 0.8 +/-0.2
Web, being able to calculate the rate of diffusion from a to b is wonderful, but generally more productive if you have an over view of what the problem is before finding solutions. So think of the simplest model of a system in steady state internally and overall equilibrium.
If you have two objects in an insulated box that are in thermodynamic equilibrium with each other, they will be in thermodynamic equilibrium with the ambient conditions outside of the box. If 50% of the objects are at one temperature or energy level higher than the rest, they determine the steady state condition of the thermodynamic equilibrium. So if the energy flux from the warmer half to the cooler half is 100Watts, the energy flow from the total of the interior to ambient will be 100Watts. You can vary the percentages anyway you like, the warmer will still determine the steady state condition if the system is in equilibrium. If you add insulation to the box, the energy flow from warmer to colder will increase proportionally to the decrease in energy flow to ambient until equilibrium between the interior objects is restored.
http://redneckphysics.blogspot.com/2012/06/slowing-down.html
The link has a simple sensitivity curve for 3.7Wm-2 with the average ocean SST and the average land temperature.
↧
Comment on State shift (?) in Earth’s biosphere by andrew adams
Drought –
All the four forms of the PDSI show widespread drying over Africa, East and
South Asia, and other areas from 1950 to 2008, and most of this drying is due to recent warming. The global percentage of dry areas has increased by about 1.74% (of global land area) per decade from 1950 to 2008.
↧
↧
Comment on State shift (?) in Earth’s biosphere by Latimer Alder
@R. Gates
‘Place the barrel of that gun against your child’s or grandchild’s head. How much would you pay to make sure that the trigger wasn’t pulled?’
Sorry – you are of course right You weren’t talking about shooting your own children…you were talking about shooting mine, in what seems little short of an extortion/blackmail racket. If such threat had been made to a Australian climatologist, they might really have had something to complain about!
But where I am having difficulty is in treating any of your alarmist scaremongering with anything like the seriousness that you would wish me to.
Trite remarks like
‘Civilizations come and go, and each civilization’s own “Malthusians” will be wrong continuously until the one time they are right’
may impress the weak-minded, but seem to be a wee bit lacking in evidence or nor have enough substance to produce damp patches in my undergarments.
When I was growing up in UK a popular TV comedy show ‘Up Pompeii’ was set in Ancient Rome. One of the characters was ‘Senna The Soothsayer’ who went around shrieking ‘Woe, Woe and Thrice Woe, The End is Nigh’ while doing a lot of wailing and rending of her raiment.
It has been great fun reading this thread and being reminded of those innocent teenage days….and it is good to know that the Spirit of Senna(*) still lives on deep in the bowels of so many alarmists..
(*) Any confusion with well known laxative preparations is, of course, entirely intended.
↧
Comment on State shift (?) in Earth’s biosphere by andrew adams
Regarding Greenland, I think it’s fair to say that at least the southern tip was particularly warm during medieval times, which doesn’t contradict lolwot’s point above but does tie in with the stories about Vikings growing grapes or whatever. Here’s an excellent paper which supports that claim –
http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/shared/articles/MannetalScience09.pdf
↧
Comment on Causes(?) of ocean warming by stefanthedenier
Tomcat | June 15, 2012 at 1:37 am | said: ''Mmm … I seem to have missed a bit somewhere…''
WRONG again tomcat, you missed a lot!!! Ocean temp has nothing to do with the GLOBAL temp!!! The instant that heat is released into the atmosphere from the sea - it becomes part of the global temperature, not before!!! Heat into the sea, in the plutonium, in your oven, or in your butt becomes part of the global temp, only after is released . Using ocean's temp as GLOBAL, is only to confuse the already confused; like you, for example. The instant is heat released from the sea, from volcano, from atom bomb -> troposphere expands instantly as much as necessary, and wastes / discharges the EXTRA heat in a jiffy. Q: do you know: why oxygen + nitrogen expand INSTANTLY, when warmed up? Q: do you know that: oxygen + nitrogen are 998999ppm in the troposphere? Q: do you think they shrink / expand, INSTANTLY, in change of temp, because they have nothing better to do; or the truth that: they are regulating the temp overall, to be same every day of every month and millenia and to make fools of all the Warmist & fake skeptics??? Cheers
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
