Not sure if this means you live in Hawaii or Tonga. Australia??
Global Climate Status Report
- Thread starter babe
- Start date
Not sure if this means you live in Hawaii or Tonga. Australia??
Douchebag K
Well-Known Member
Aussie dude
Douchebag K
Well-Known Member
well we don’t have any such beast ... sooo
So it seems the Yellowstone caldera is a deep pipe to the molten core, but the solid surface layers are on the move. So the place where it blows will be different over time.
Time scale of activity is on the order of hundreds of thousands of years.
For comparison, consider the onset of life on earth about 500 million years ago, with a dozen almost geologiic ages of a hundred million years or so.
Yellowstone is comparatively recent..... lol..... but about a thousand human lifetimes will pass by between Yellowstone caldera events.
Australia may look like a stable place geologically, as it has been geopolitically.
I had a sister who went on an LDS mission to Australia about 1962, and sent me a large fine map of Australia that I hung on my wall and studied and dreamed about.
I think there is spot that is just right for me.... a spring or something five hundred miles from the next water, about 600 miles northeast of Perth.....
Me and about five thousand cows..... huh?
Time scale of activity is on the order of hundreds of thousands of years.
For comparison, consider the onset of life on earth about 500 million years ago, with a dozen almost geologiic ages of a hundred million years or so.
Yellowstone is comparatively recent..... lol..... but about a thousand human lifetimes will pass by between Yellowstone caldera events.
Australia may look like a stable place geologically, as it has been geopolitically.
I had a sister who went on an LDS mission to Australia about 1962, and sent me a large fine map of Australia that I hung on my wall and studied and dreamed about.
I think there is spot that is just right for me.... a spring or something five hundred miles from the next water, about 600 miles northeast of Perth.....
Me and about five thousand cows..... huh?
Last edited:
Sooo.....
Anyway.....
Global Climate Change has politically been relegated to the back burner, seems the Sun has lost its spots and we've lost our hype. Ten to Twenty years in this downturn, maybe a hundred.
Just went the Pacific was getting hot enough to send me some rain.
https://www.swpc.noaa.gov/news/solar-cycle-24-status-and-solar-cycle-25-upcoming-forecast
Anyway.....
Global Climate Change has politically been relegated to the back burner, seems the Sun has lost its spots and we've lost our hype. Ten to Twenty years in this downturn, maybe a hundred.
Just went the Pacific was getting hot enough to send me some rain.
https://www.swpc.noaa.gov/news/solar-cycle-24-status-and-solar-cycle-25-upcoming-forecast
Last edited:
One Brow
Well-Known Member
To be clear, you're off by 3 billion years (likely more).
NAOS
Well-Known Member
Pretty convincing evidence places the dawn of cellular life somewhere near 4 billion years ago.
NAOS
Well-Known Member
The Snake River Plane is track of past hotspot eruptions. If you want to see where “Yellowstone” used to erupt, just trace that valley from east to west. You’ll be going from most recent to least recent.
This is like college parties, people have all kinds of ideas about when the fun starts or stops.
I was vaguely gauging "Life" from the fossil record. Where the chemical deposition of almost pure Ca/Mg carbonates become muddied up with debris from living stuff.
I don't disagree with your view here, though.
As a real "Mormon" philosopher with a few notions like Orson Pratt brought to the Mormon table, I pretty well consider "Life" to pre-date the Big Bang. Used to be a song in the LDS hymnbook about this.... "If Ye Could Hie to Kololb"...... about eternity and the immensity of space and time.... coming to a point of view that we are in a sequence of eternal processes without beginning or end, that there have been worlds zillions or more years ago in our time/space frame or reference.
No doubt evolutionary theory will "see" life in some providential chemicals in the boiling primordial cloud even before it coalesced into a molten ball, and no doubt some space debris from worlds long gone "seeded" our soup with other providential stuff, and you could deny that God exists or existed then, or that He knew what He was stirring up, all day long if you wished.
I long ago reconciled my personal knowledge of God with Science and all the other branches of evidentiary offerings with a realization that if we ever had a factual religion we could force skeptics to believe at the point of a sword, we'd be matching the worst sort of humanity we've ever seen on this planet. So I'm glad God isn't doing government orders and enforcement of His edicts, and I think we'd do better to follow His example.
Of course, such speculative religious stuff is seriously indefensible, if you want evidentiary proceedings on the subject.
Joseph Smith opined, I think, that some sort of Puritan folk lived on the Moon, and wore old-fashioned garb to boot. Pretty fun to pop off with imaginative stuff that ooogles the ignoramuses. Pretty sure JS could have done good business with snake oil.
I know there's a path like that, I just think it's not all that simple. Some track it back across Northern Nevada across 12 million years, some want to see it start at Hell's Canyon.
The larger context embraces some horizontal thrust plates that scrunched up and built the Great Basin ranges, and made a path in the cracks for orogeny, and gave material for chemical action that formed the large gold/arsenic deposits on the mountain flanks near the shorelines of basin lakes(Carlin-type deposits).
The thrust plate process rode on a relatively shallow molten insertion between solid layers that pushed in from the Sierras towards the Rockies, as far as Pikes Peak, and which has now receded with subsequent settling and block faulting along the ranges.
The volcanic zone from Northern California to Yellowstone is awesome, and might either be the "mother lode" of lava which fed the thrusting, or be the "daughter lode of lava" which drew from it. I think the geologic orogeny common to most Great Basin sites is 15Mya to 30Mya, so that was probably first.
NAOS
Well-Known Member
All the old thrust faults, from Utah to California, which saw hundreds of miles of new land accreted to the continent, and many of which have be reactivated as normal faults during the era of basin and range extension, are all considerably older than the track left by the hotspot. The two geologic histories aren’t all that hard to keep separate.
with the prospect of a solar minimum, even a whole series of receding solar cycles that could run hundreds of years, perhaps cooling enough to deflate the CC Alarmists, the question could become how are we as a collective on a little vulnerable space rock gonna cope with an Ice Age. I don't think we're gonna hatch out with ideas like subsidizing folks who produce and burn carbon..... like paying the smudge pot crews, so to speak
But I really wouldn't be surprised I mean, it doesn't really matter what the facts are, or what the crisis is, as long good progressive foot soldiers are willing to float with the daily talking points. We can justify global power and arrogance with any crisis.
But I really wouldn't be surprised I mean, it doesn't really matter what the facts are, or what the crisis is, as long good progressive foot soldiers are willing to float with the daily talking points. We can justify global power and arrogance with any crisis.
NAOS
Well-Known Member
The evidence is overwhelmingly clear: the solar minimum will not save us.
Will ice grip the planet again, maybe even in a Snowball Earth event? Almost certainly, yes. Should that have really anything to do with current discussions of climate change? Certainly, no.
Yes, definitely.
Because anthropogenic global warming, with tipping points and all, will not be as destructive as world fascism uploaded with authoritarian but ineffective international commitments that actually doom us as a race.... as a human race..... far more powerfully than anything Nature will do.
The basic character of all government authoritarian propaganda is always falsehoods, outright if not somehow angling off of a few facts.
We are being told that we are setting record heat year by year, that the ice has melted in the Arctic and is melting in the Antarctic, but in the wrong context. These things happen without humans burning stuff. If we burned every last ounce of Carbon Earth has, and tried to restore the natural carbon dioxide atmosphere as it was billions of years ago, we would fail. Whatever carbon we could apply to the task would be soon depleted, and the inexorable processes of photosynthesis would begin again to store carbon and liberate oxygen. Nobody can imagine the quantify of Carbon Dioxide that was our atmosphere in the Precambrian epoch. That atmosphere would just crush us. We are not ever going back to that. The mineral deposits of carbon dioxide will never be significantly reduced. It's an inrreversible natural equation.
What you have is a new religion, another false religion like all the religions we can invent and establish as standards of conduct and belief. If anyone tries to be the iconoclast or heretic, they are just sidelined, marginalized, or yet thrown in prison and executed.
The basic tenets of the new age, of the Progressive or global system coming on, will destroy mankind except for perhaps a few oddballs that managed to hide out til the lunacy runs its course.
NAOS
Well-Known Member
Don’t let me stop you from beating your favorite drum, but you underestimate the calamity that could very well ensue if the permafrost in the Arctic thaws and releases all that methane. It could totally **** food supplies for a decade.
Everybody is handwringing right now about an economy that might only be able to run at 90%. The methane scenario would make 90% look like heavenly abundance.
Old news.
I've been watching the Arctic meltoff for several years now.
Quantifying the methane or whatever greehnouse gases trapped under the ice or muck is wildly speculative, almost as speculative as my estimates of how much excess CO2 is going to be sequestered yearly by raising average temps 4 degrees. You are talking about cenigrade degrees, right? 15C doubles rates, removing the ice increases the sunlight available to photosynthesis. All that methane will be oxidized to C02 with some theoretical half life dependent on sun radiation and temp..... also going much faster.
The additional CO2 will spread worldwide, and it will significantly increase growth rates from photosynthesis.
It might be a pretty wild ride, but as weather changes or climate changes, humans will change too. They will plant in different places maybe. I don't think your egghead fearmongers or your Alarmist Press folks know anything. Really.
But worse yet are our politicians who will use the excuse to actually prevent humans from making adjustments, gathering people into urban corrals, concentration camps really, like Indian Reservations, and making people live on scarce rations of weevily bread or worse.
Nobody kills more people than authoritarian governments, not even Mother Nature.
So what I've been seeing in this meltoff is changed ocean currents, wind patterns..... not exactly the old El Nino/La Nina flipflops. Less cold water runoff from less ice to be melting, the sister fact to warmer temps over land now not covered with ice, or having an ice pack a few inches beneath the surface. This changes the whole climate pattern. What it looks like to me is a stronger polar vortex over Hudson Bay, and warmer surfaces on the oceasns..... the higher lattitude area between Hawaii and Alaska, and warmer water off the Pacific coast, and a lot hotter water in the Gulf of Mexico. I don't know why that is happenintg exactly. I mean the Mississippi and Rio Grande aren't exactly a source of 4C water for the ocean floor.
These are the necessary conditions for starting a new Ice Age, kiddies.
This year the late meltoff in Northern Michigan made the news with some little flood events downstream from crappy reservoirs.
The real question is whether we are just going to have another little cycle a few degrees cooler from the present, or if the warmth of our oceans can sustain a larger buildup of the Hudson ice sheet, which is the largest ice sheet the world sees in an Ice Age.
If we had a strong solar cycle on the 22 yr variation on top of a strong 300 and 3000 year cycle or whatever the periodicities may be, I'd say we could really get a new Ice Age. Or maybe....just maybe.... if we burn enough forests and oil, we can make the difference and help start the next ice age.
Pretty sure it takes something bigger to get our oceans all frozen. Something Galactic, or a helluva lot of calderas blowing off in sync...
This is an equation your egghead experts and paid stooge bureaucrats and Mass Propaganda Alarmists just figure the Peasants really can't be told about. The job to be done is to get the stupid people paniced into better management, as measured by our Fascist Movers and Shakers. Pretty sure the FM&M clique would make damn sure to fire anyone who wrecks their dictated narrative.
Because the fundamental equation for an Ice Age is warm oceans and cool land masses or ice surfaces(less solar heating). a relation that must survive summer meltoffs for several hundred years. In the high Sierras, 20 feet of snow will melt off during the summer, but in the Arctic 5 feet of snow won't. Warmer air generally causes more snow in the higher latitudes and altitudes, and then there is this funny reflectance thing. A fress ice cover will cool the air, especially over Hudson Bay.
I really don't think our expert climate modelers think this far out....
Every Ice Age we have information on was preceded immediately by a temp spike like what we see now,,,,,, well about twice what we see now.
But cheer up, this is a cycle that will produce feedbacks that limit it, usually. cold water from under the ice restoring normal heat balances to our oceans. More clouds, more humidity over the ice helping to hold heat in ou atmosphere Growth rates and CO2 depletions shrinking.... all that stuff.
I've been watching the Arctic meltoff for several years now.
Quantifying the methane or whatever greehnouse gases trapped under the ice or muck is wildly speculative, almost as speculative as my estimates of how much excess CO2 is going to be sequestered yearly by raising average temps 4 degrees. You are talking about cenigrade degrees, right? 15C doubles rates, removing the ice increases the sunlight available to photosynthesis. All that methane will be oxidized to C02 with some theoretical half life dependent on sun radiation and temp..... also going much faster.
The additional CO2 will spread worldwide, and it will significantly increase growth rates from photosynthesis.
It might be a pretty wild ride, but as weather changes or climate changes, humans will change too. They will plant in different places maybe. I don't think your egghead fearmongers or your Alarmist Press folks know anything. Really.
But worse yet are our politicians who will use the excuse to actually prevent humans from making adjustments, gathering people into urban corrals, concentration camps really, like Indian Reservations, and making people live on scarce rations of weevily bread or worse.
Nobody kills more people than authoritarian governments, not even Mother Nature.
So what I've been seeing in this meltoff is changed ocean currents, wind patterns..... not exactly the old El Nino/La Nina flipflops. Less cold water runoff from less ice to be melting, the sister fact to warmer temps over land now not covered with ice, or having an ice pack a few inches beneath the surface. This changes the whole climate pattern. What it looks like to me is a stronger polar vortex over Hudson Bay, and warmer surfaces on the oceasns..... the higher lattitude area between Hawaii and Alaska, and warmer water off the Pacific coast, and a lot hotter water in the Gulf of Mexico. I don't know why that is happenintg exactly. I mean the Mississippi and Rio Grande aren't exactly a source of 4C water for the ocean floor.
These are the necessary conditions for starting a new Ice Age, kiddies.
This year the late meltoff in Northern Michigan made the news with some little flood events downstream from crappy reservoirs.
The real question is whether we are just going to have another little cycle a few degrees cooler from the present, or if the warmth of our oceans can sustain a larger buildup of the Hudson ice sheet, which is the largest ice sheet the world sees in an Ice Age.
If we had a strong solar cycle on the 22 yr variation on top of a strong 300 and 3000 year cycle or whatever the periodicities may be, I'd say we could really get a new Ice Age. Or maybe....just maybe.... if we burn enough forests and oil, we can make the difference and help start the next ice age.
Pretty sure it takes something bigger to get our oceans all frozen. Something Galactic, or a helluva lot of calderas blowing off in sync...
This is an equation your egghead experts and paid stooge bureaucrats and Mass Propaganda Alarmists just figure the Peasants really can't be told about. The job to be done is to get the stupid people paniced into better management, as measured by our Fascist Movers and Shakers. Pretty sure the FM&M clique would make damn sure to fire anyone who wrecks their dictated narrative.
Because the fundamental equation for an Ice Age is warm oceans and cool land masses or ice surfaces(less solar heating). a relation that must survive summer meltoffs for several hundred years. In the high Sierras, 20 feet of snow will melt off during the summer, but in the Arctic 5 feet of snow won't. Warmer air generally causes more snow in the higher latitudes and altitudes, and then there is this funny reflectance thing. A fress ice cover will cool the air, especially over Hudson Bay.
I really don't think our expert climate modelers think this far out....
Every Ice Age we have information on was preceded immediately by a temp spike like what we see now,,,,,, well about twice what we see now.
But cheer up, this is a cycle that will produce feedbacks that limit it, usually. cold water from under the ice restoring normal heat balances to our oceans. More clouds, more humidity over the ice helping to hold heat in ou atmosphere Growth rates and CO2 depletions shrinking.... all that stuff.
Last edited: