Global Climate Status Report

So, is the consistent rise in SST due to human activity, or other factors? When unbalanced regions are generally showing "warmer" SSTs, it's not just vertical sea currents, upwelling cooler water or lack of it. The most powerful explanation is deeper ocean temp changes....increased heat coming up from underneath. Sun radiation can be a factor, but unless we're measuring deviations in solar radiance, the scientists are viewing the run radiance as a virtual "constant".

The observed 11y or 22y sunspot cycles are in magnitude, about 0.1%.... The Milankovich cycles are thousands of years, related to changes in the earth's shape, precession, and astronomical rotation/environment. These cycles are verified by geological sampling and analysis.

Nothing we have found correlates with the most impressive earth climate cycle of all..... The Ice Ages...... a one hundred thousand year cycle give or take ten thousand years.

Changes in the earth's thermal flux are generally believed to be declining functions of heat being lost forever, but some scientists talk about heat of crystallization as the earth solidifies, and fission reactions generally believed to be declining like all bodies of materials containing fissionable nucleides.

But a recent Nature article, and another very recent publication, discuss how known fission and cooling processes account for only half of the Earth's heat flux, and postulate LENR reactions as supplying the balance. The LENR reactions have a likely pattern of increasing output, Thought to have begun just 2.2 million years ago, and dependent on some "loading" of a crystalline metal under the temperatures and pressures within the Earth.

So it is possible that net heat flux can be on the rise.....

And far more important to Earth climate than Man.

babe said:

Again, @Red , the fact is there is political bias in current reports generally, and Nature is part of the crime. Even forty years ago, I could see the bias in Nature.

Click to expand...

babe said:

Possibly, @Red and @One Brow will indulge in the time it takes to deal with this......

https://www.nature.com/articles/srep37740

Click to expand...

babe said:

Looking at the Nature report I linked above,

Click to expand...

babe said:

But a recent Nature article, and another very recent publication, discuss how known fission and cooling processes account for only half of the Earth's heat flux, and postulate LENR reactions as supplying the balance.

Click to expand...

I take it the journal Nature is just fine when it suits you, and "part of the crime" when it doesn't suit you.....

Red said:

I take it the journal Nature is just fine when it suits you, and "part of the crime" when it doesn't suit you.....

Click to expand...

lol

If that's how it works for you, I guess that explains your resistance to different ideas. For me, my resistance to say political trends and propaganda usually is focused on the lying that goes with it.

I'm not impressed so much with the authority of Nature generally. I don't hesitate to cite it or any other report for what it's worth in terms of the ideas or the value of the reports, but I don't doubt the institution has its prejudices and proclivities.

Very high pressures and very high temps are not exactly "cold fusion" in some respects, but for the idea that there can be actual materials rather than plasma conditions where the reaction can be facilitated.

So most scientists and maybe most minimally educated folks have the idea that the various elements are formed in stars like the sun or some other site where conditions permit. The idea of "cold fusion" got such a beating in our lying Press, nobody really wanted to argue the term, so it was convenient to re-brand it as "Low Energy Nuclear Reactions". Over the decades since then, a number of researchers have been pursuing the basic idea one way or another, with pretty good science. Helium and excess heat not just statistically marginal data have now been confirmed. Lots of problems to work out how to do it commercially to produce power. A recent project in France failed. Others are being planned.

But "mainstream" scientists have lost some of their reticence about it, at least so far as temps and pressures in the core of the Earth are concerned, a core that is deemed solid because of the pressure.

hydrogen, as well as its isotopes, have long been studied in terms of how much hydrogen can be incorporated into the metal crystal structures. Metals conduct electrons including the electron of a hydrogen atom or molecule, so H becomes merely a positive "electron" known as a proton. Still, even such protons have a significant repulsive force preventing nuclear reactions generally. So the LENR concept basically consists of structural environments which create a path for the reaction, a sort of catalytic event.

Nature probably never will admit it is cold fusion they are talking about.....

The thermodynamic equation for the reaction indicates 10 exp -74 probability of happening at 300K.

Assuming, ....usually a pretty poor approximation tool..... that rates double every 15K and every doubling of Pressure.... and allowing for the extremely hot scientific debates about what the temp of the core really is, or the pressure.....

give or take a 1000 K or a million atm.....

3300K, would make it 10 exp -44. 6000K would make it hotter than the sun, but some say it's so... with a rate 10 exp -27. 3 M atm would make it 10 exp -33, to 10 exp -. In short, it won't happen without something else going on to move it forward. Hydrogen fusion under plasma conditions like the Sun more than overwhelm the 10 exp -6.

The Sun gets it done because of hydrogen concentration, temp, and pressure factors. One day, that concentration will fall below the critical values required. I don't know what the composition of a Red Giant will be.

In an electrode with extreme hydrogen(deuterium) loading, such as a loading time of 30 days as some experimenters have postulated, the rate calculated in terms of just concentration effects, and positioning effects like catalysts usually do, can make it possible as well.

So, now, Science has published an astonishing new, revolutionary assessment of planet Earth.....

hey, I was about to settle for "Settled Science" as the future premier Journal of Political Truth. ha ha.

https://www.livescience.com/29054-earth-core-hotter.html

I doubt there are any really good mathematicians on the Science peer-review committee that approved this report. I mean, I know some more reports have come out with significant, higher, estimates of earth's core to surface heat flux.

But in my graduate level math courses I used to do the differential equations for heat flux given the differentials in temp between two points. If you're going to postulate that much higher a core temp, you have to postulate a similar, in terms of orders of magnitude, different resistance factor to get the same surface flux.

nah..... Science is good. It's just hard for anyone to think of everything......

There might be a cool little group of political activists managing Science, but if they do decide to change the publication name to the more fashionable and politically correct name Settled Science, it will be a long time before people really quit learning stuff they didn't know before.

I don't think the debate on global warming will last 20 years, and it will die out for the sheer imbecility of its proponents. People will be laughing at the hoax the government honchos ran on us. But can it ever be a thing people just won't want more government????

And it'll be a thousand years.... or when Jesus comes again....before globalism can again be considered cool. Hell, HItler will look good compared to our honchos. Gored will be a term. Hillaried will be a term. Xi'd will be a term.

Trumped has been a term for quite a while already.

Hate speech epithets so bad we can't cry or howl, so we'll laugh.

But really, Reagan was right. We can never be more than one generation away from totalitarian governance. You just can't really teach the kids what you know. They insist, and will, learn the lessons all over again for themselves.

Today's American Resistance fighters, if they win, will be the first dupes rounded up and dispensed with in the next generation of government prisons and work camps. Why??? Why???

because if you give anyone the power, the first idea in the mind of the Honcho is the fear that the people who made him the Honcho can just as easily make someone the next Honcho.

Rockefeller, Oprah, Gates, Soros today working together.... even Xi or Putin.... all smiles..... today.

Tomorrow will be different, if anyone really does get the power.

The only possible stable form of governance is limited governance no one can really use.

Heathme said:

Click to expand...

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-environment-poll-republicans-idUSKCN1VJ17V

The new report by Glocalities, which canvassed views worldwide, showed the number of U.S. Republicans who said they “agreed” or “strongly agreed” with the statement “I worry about the damage humans cause the planet” rose by 11 percentage points to 58% between 2014 and 2019.

The number of Republican voters aged 18-34 who are worried about the issue rose by 18 percentage points to 67%, said the poll, which also showed a 10 percentage point increase among all U.S. Republicans who said they tried “to live eco-consciously”.

“When looking deeper into the data it becomes clear that the highest rise in environmental concern (worldwide) is visible among younger Republicans,” said Glocalities pollster Martijn Lampert, who predicted that shifting views on the environment would influence the next U.S. election in 2020.

“If Donald Trump keeps on denying climate change and refrains from standing up for the environment he won’t be able to increase support among the young and be heavily reliant on older generations of Republican voters for winning again,” Lampert said.

“It will be very hard for him to broaden his base.”

babe said:

lol

Click to expand...

babe said:

If that's how it works for you, I guess that explains your resistance to different ideas. For me, my resistance to say political trends and propaganda usually is focused on the lying that goes with it.

Click to expand...

Yeah, OK, but I'm not buying this. You basically pegged the journal Nature as part of the would be evil empire of climate scientists and other elites hell bent on controlling humanity.
If you really think they're "part of the crime", logic would dictate you would not direct your readers to that journal at all, for any reason. Yet you repeatedly cited Nature. So I'll just stand by my observation...

Climate change is real and climate change is scary. End of story.

The question is, can clean energies compete with hydrocarbons on cost, energy intensity, and dependability? So far, the transitions have been gradual.

Heathme said:

Click to expand...

I believe @Heathme is in a minority, backing junk science to the bitter end....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/09/13/trumps-climate-change-denial-is-political-loser/

"President Trump and his fellow Republican climate-change deniers are wildly out of step with Americans, according to a poll conducted by The Post and the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF). “The poll finds that a strong majority of Americans — about 8 in 10 — say that human activity is fueling climate change, and roughly half believe action is urgently needed within the next decade if humanity is to avert its worst effects.” It is difficult to get 8 out of 10 Americans to agree on anything (other than background checks for firearms purchases, which Trump also opposes). In addition, “Nearly 4 in 10 now say climate change is a ‘crisis,’ up from less than a quarter five years ago."

The president is not even in step with his own party. “Though Democrats and independents are more likely to think climate change is caused by human activity, a majority of Republicans — 60 percent — say they, too, believe that, The Post-KFF survey finds.” In addition, “23 percent of Republicans say they disapprove of how Trump is handling the issue, compared with just 9 percent of Republicans who disapprove of his job performance overall.”

Red said:

I believe @Heathme is in a minority, backing junk science to the bitter end....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/09/13/trumps-climate-change-denial-is-political-loser/

"President Trump and his fellow Republican climate-change deniers are wildly out of step with Americans, according to a poll conducted by The Post and the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF). “The poll finds that a strong majority of Americans — about 8 in 10 — say that human activity is fueling climate change, and roughly half believe action is urgently needed within the next decade if humanity is to avert its worst effects.” It is difficult to get 8 out of 10 Americans to agree on anything (other than background checks for firearms purchases, which Trump also opposes). In addition, “Nearly 4 in 10 now say climate change is a ‘crisis,’ up from less than a quarter five years ago."

The president is not even in step with his own party. “Though Democrats and independents are more likely to think climate change is caused by human activity, a majority of Republicans — 60 percent — say they, too, believe that, The Post-KFF survey finds.” In addition, “23 percent of Republicans say they disapprove of how Trump is handling the issue, compared with just 9 percent of Republicans who disapprove of his job performance overall.”

Click to expand...

I think you're over the top on this.

And @Heathme Please don't spam this thread with political crap. I wanted a place to actually collect information and discuss the facts.

I recently attended a conference literally run by Trump with panelists discussing various topics.

yes, there was some rhetorical disbelief in the Climate Crisis, but mostly it was about socialism having no relevance to what we should do about it. Well, practically speaking, which is the language of Trump.

I think part of the Trade deal with China will be actual reduction in pollution. It's seen as a giveaway that China's producers can pollute with impunity. If we are going to have regulations, they need to be the same for everyone.

So back to the Climate Change Report.....

Just following the recent weather satellites and SST data.....

It looks to me like the pattern of last year with respect to SSTs still exists, even though the weak El Nino has weakened. There is still quite a lot of "warm" areas over the oceans worldwide. The Indian Ocean and Southern Ocean are about a half degree cooler than last year, as is the North Pacific and North Atlantic.... and since there is less ice in the Arctic, it shows 2 C warmer than "average". I don't believe this is as significant for Climate as some say. The Arctic is shallow, and determined by yearly ice melt. All the large rivers of Siberia and North America that flow into it, and set up currents into the Pacific and North Atlantic. Very strongly follows the solar cycle and on large scale the rotational precession, both of which are believed to be long term "cooling" for the North.

Pretty impressive tropical moisture flows moving into the northern jet stream, predictive of lots of snow in the higher latitudes this year.

All supportive of a theory that warmer oceans, both surface and at depth, will restore the Arctic ice pack pretty soon.

In other words, @Red , good reason for not being overboard on the alarmism or the politics. And good reason to question the alarmist "science".

Here's the latest global map prepared by the establishment scientists.....

https://www.ospo.noaa.gov/data/sst/anomaly/2019/anomnight.9.12.2019.gif

And here's the same product from one year ago....

https://www.ospo.noaa.gov/data/sst/anomaly/2018/anomnight.9.13.2018.gif

and here's the prediction of the solar short cycle...

https://www.weather.gov/news/190504-sun-activity-in-solar-cycle

The "experts" hope that the trend to weakening of the solar cycle will begin to trend up after this cycle, rather than sink lower into a Maunder minimum sort of regime...... but there is absolutely no basis for the hope any better than a casino slot player hoping his "luck" will change.

The internal solar processes, reaction rates and underlying causes, are entirely outside of our capacity to measure anything.

We now have a measure of internal earth radioactive decay, and can track that in real time, if we will choose to dedicate our technical capacities to that.... whcih we won't....

We would need to build a system to detect certain sub-nuclear emissions from the Sun to begin to collect data on what is happening there in real time.