Global Climate Status Report

Red

Well-Known Member
Nobody has any causitive research on human impacts specific to any event, because events like we are seeing now have also happened before we learned about fire, and our CO2 generation is still small compared to natural cyclical events. We just haven't been collecting data long enough to differentiate this current cycle from other cycles without human contributions.

 

babe

Well-Known Member
Such assertions are impossible to make on evidence. They are absolutely unscientific.

So here's a list of the unknowns...... or unknowables...... in our data over the past 30 years and the less reliable information/data of the past 100, and the even less evidenced last 200 years.

We do not know what causes interglacial warms, or the variations characterisristic within those warms, which are of comparable magnitude with our current excursion. Any "Scientist" who does not begin the discussion with this caveat is a blowhard ******* so far as scientific qualifications can go.

The current climate in the research community is more pressured than "Science".

Look, I know you musta be a paid staooge posting political activist ****;, because you so rarely respond in an even thoughtful way to considerations which don't support the political agenda of using climatge alarmism to support political objectives like the fabled virtues of world Fascism.

But I'm willing to look at the data, reserving my skepticism about what it means while accepting actual data.

Like I said above, Artic meltoffs happen, and repeatedly.

Every interglacial warm achieves that several times before the sudden and dramatic return to the more usual temperature regimes of Ice Ages. Our current melfoff is not out of the league with others we have have evidence of. There's a reason the wooly mammoths have been caught unprepared in the Arctic. There was lots of feed there, and it was pretty warm to boot. We don't have that up there yet in this event.
 

babe

Well-Known Member
Such assertions are impossible to make on evidence. They are absolutely unscientific.

So here's a list of the unknowns...... or unknowables...... in our data over the past 30 years and the less reliable information/data of the past 100, and the even less evidenced last 200 years.

We do not know what causes interglacial warms, or the variations characterisristic within those warms, which are of comparable magnitude with our current excursion. Any "Scientist" who does not begin the discussion with this caveat is a blowhard ******* so far as scientific qualifications can go.

The current climate in the research community is more pressured than "Science".

Look, I know you musta be a paid staooge posting political activist ****;, because you so rarely respond in an even thoughtful way to considerations which don't support the political agenda of using climatge alarmism to support political objectives like the fabled virtues of world Fascism.

But I'm willing to look at the data, reserving my skepticism about what it means while accepting actual data.

Like I said above, Artic meltoffs happen, and repeatedly.

Every interglacial warm achieves that several times before the sudden and dramatic return to the more usual temperature regimes of Ice Ages. Our current melfoff is not out of the league with others we have have evidence of. There's a reason the wooly mammoths have been caught unprepared in the Arctic. There was lots of feed there, and it was pretty warm to boot. We don't have that up there yet in this event.
Continuing the checklist........ Part One..... Known Cycles in Nature

(1) Galactic rotation of the Milky Way around some center of clustered galaxies..... Brings us into varying densities of space dust and hydrogen "clouds", and maybe variations in proximate "dark matter" phenomena.

Could cause variations in solar cycles and other less extensive cycles in nature susceptible to impacts of changing space environment...... magnetism, upper atmospheric order, intensification of solar processes(or waning). We have no knowledge of how incoming materical being collected by the Sun may alter radiance or internal nuclear processes.

(2)Milky Way rotation, about 65 Million years....... moving us through nonuniform space resulting in some but likely lesser variations in space context.

(3) Solar system variants in relation to other planets. No astrology here, just recognition of asteroids and other debris we encounter, and the probably slight effects of interplanetary events.

(4) Solar cycles......

The 22 year cycles has had some observational research, but there is little we can now know about longer-term cycles, at present.

Inside our planetary space.....

(5) Atmospheric cyclic variations........fluxes in the qualitative/quantitative character of what's above us. Possibly related to disturbances caused without, or within the various layers being considered. Variations in magnetism both outside the earth space, and from within the earth's core.

(4) Variations in surface and lower atmospheric dynamics...... now being studied with appreciable funding.....but still relatively new and without long term data. We have a short list of "Oscillations" with speculative interrelations now being used to predict "weather".

(5) Variations of internal Earth processes.

A little volcanism can have severe impacts on short term climate, an age of volcanism as we have in geohistory would have as much as a million years or even 50 million years duration. Such an event would take current greenhouse gas contributions from an order of magnitude presently dwarfing human emissions to excursion of and order or two in magnitude greater still. We have no data on worldwide volcanic emissions. A lot of this happens undersea, or under hotspots like the Anarctic. A signal possibly related to shifts in volcanism would include an unexpected, otherwise unexplained, change in oceanic carbon dioxide outgassing (or other gases like SO2)

A recent professional peer reviewed article reported such outgassing and called for some second thoughts about the ability of anthropogenic carbon diosice emissions in relation to recent atmospheric increases. The article has been ignored. Not political useful.

Really.

I mean "Wow". This fact discredits the objectivity of the whole climate change alarmist "established consensus Science"

The obvious first explanation for the increased outgassing is warming oceans. Some scientists have been saying the increased CO2 recently is a lagging indicator of climate change, not a leading one. Climate change perhaps more attributable to heat inputs from the seafloor than from the surface.

We know the Antarctic is a geologic hotspot, with massive heat anomalies coming from the core. Not enough to melt the ice entirely, but forming underice lakes and rivers which help ice flows out to the sea.

We have learned recently, that only half of the heat being provided to the surface of the earth by the core is residual from the molten past. We now know that about 2 billion years ago, there has been an increasing nuclear generation of heat within the core. Nuclear reaction rates are highly dependent on location and concentration of reactive nucleii. We can imagine that at the outset of our planet, there could have been a rather uniform or dispersed state, and that with solidification and the establishment of a gravitational center, we have heavy atoms settling downward....

But the more important reaction now appears to be due to the iron core providing a crystalographic site for deuterium fusion under heat and pressure.
 

babe

Well-Known Member
Continuing the checklist........ Part One..... Known Cycles in Nature

(1) Galactic rotation of the Milky Way around some center of clustered galaxies..... Brings us into varying densities of space dust and hydrogen "clouds", and maybe variations in proximate "dark matter" phenomena.

Could cause variations in solar cycles and other less extensive cycles in nature susceptible to impacts of changing space environment...... magnetism, upper atmospheric order, intensification of solar processes(or waning). We have no knowledge of how incoming materical being collected by the Sun may alter radiance or internal nuclear processes.

(2)Milky Way rotation, about 65 Million years....... moving us through nonuniform space resulting in some but likely lesser variations in space context.

(3) Solar system variants in relation to other planets. No astrology here, just recognition of asteroids and other debris we encounter, and the probably slight effects of interplanetary events.

(4) Solar cycles......

The 22 year cycles has had some observational research, but there is little we can now know about longer-term cycles, at present.

Inside our planetary space.....

(5) Atmospheric cyclic variations........fluxes in the qualitative/quantitative character of what's above us. Possibly related to disturbances caused without, or within the various layers being considered. Variations in magnetism both outside the earth space, and from within the earth's core.

(4) Variations in surface and lower atmospheric dynamics...... now being studied with appreciable funding.....but still relatively new and without long term data. We have a short list of "Oscillations" with speculative interrelations now being used to predict "weather".

(5) Variations of internal Earth processes.

A little volcanism can have severe impacts on short term climate, an age of volcanism as we have in geohistory would have as much as a million years or even 50 million years duration. Such an event would take current greenhouse gas contributions from an order of magnitude presently dwarfing human emissions to excursion of and order or two in magnitude greater still. We have no data on worldwide volcanic emissions. A lot of this happens undersea, or under hotspots like the Anarctic. A signal possibly related to shifts in volcanism would include an unexpected, otherwise unexplained, change in oceanic carbon dioxide outgassing (or other gases like SO2)

A recent professional peer reviewed article reported such outgassing and called for some second thoughts about the ability of anthropogenic carbon diosice emissions in relation to recent atmospheric increases. The article has been ignored. Not political useful.

Really.

I mean "Wow". This fact discredits the objectivity of the whole climate change alarmist "established consensus Science"

The obvious first explanation for the increased outgassing is warming oceans. Some scientists have been saying the increased CO2 recently is a lagging indicator of climate change, not a leading one. Climate change perhaps more attributable to heat inputs from the seafloor than from the surface.

We know the Antarctic is a geologic hotspot, with massive heat anomalies coming from the core. Not enough to melt the ice entirely, but forming underice lakes and rivers which help ice flows out to the sea.

We have learned recently, that only half of the heat being provided to the surface of the earth by the core is residual from the molten past. We now know that about 2 billion years ago, there has been an increasing nuclear generation of heat within the core. Nuclear reaction rates are highly dependent on location and concentration of reactive nucleii. We can imagine that at the outset of our planet, there could have been a rather uniform or dispersed state, and that with solidification and the establishment of a gravitational center, we have heavy atoms settling downward....

But the more important reaction now appears to be due to the iron core providing a crystalographic site for deuterium fusion under heat and pressure.

Just to be clear.....

Data to me suggests our oceans are warming up, at least 1C overall. We don't really have good data on depth profiles yet, but most data suggests most of the volume of our oceans is the 4C dense water. Salinity at depth is not known well, I mean...... who has ever lowered a sample tube to 20K depth......

It would be likely that isotopic enrichment of deuterium oxide figures in, along with saline gradients which somehow don't just form crystals and settle to the bottom.

All of these issues increase the weight of the argument, as well as the water, and the value of heat contained in the water overall. We have reports of anomalous saline flows and other disturbances of what we'd suppose should be perfect uniformity of content. The most obvious is the saline pump that drives convection currents. Local withdrawals of evaporation over vast oceanic "desert" regions resulting in higher surface salinity, and local inputs of rivers and melting ice. We have no measurement of the Antarctic rivers which flow out under ice cover, but expect them to be something like the Amazon in size. A lot of large rivers flow into the Arctic Ocean, and we may be assured that all that fresh water supports flows into the Atlantic and Pacific, and figure importantly in known weather system oscillations like the ENSO which is the best known.

If I am correct about increasing geothermal heat outflows from our planet's deeper materials, due to fusion and fission reactions which are credibly expect to increase over the coming millions of years, it is certain we will have climate changes.

Overall, I support nuclear energy as better than carbon-based energy period. We have plenty of good ways to use oil. Nuclear energy would enable us to economically produce lighter planes and cars and trucks and trains, moving away from iron and steel towards aluminum, magnesious, and lithium alloys. Titanium, about the ninth most abundant element is as a metal half the density of steel and twice the strength. Nuclear power would make Titanium and the other alloys of metals i've mentioned much cheaper.

We are going to have climate change. We should not do economic transformation to failed systems like socialism, communism, or the current UN new world order Fascism. It is Fascist because it is the destruction of real democracies and real republican forms of governance, displacing human societal hopes with business wet dreams that just crap all over all the people of the world.

We can deal with climate change if we are as nations, states, local government units, and people, more free to make our own adjustments.
 

Red

Well-Known Member
Look, I know you musta be a paid staooge posting political activist ****;, because you so rarely respond in an even thoughtful way to considerations which don't support the political agenda of using climatge alarmism to support political objectives like the fabled virtues of world Fascism.
Boy, I really give you a workout, don’t I? You sound like one of the goodfellas I grew up around, hey I musta be! Chill, goombah!
 

babe

Well-Known Member
Boy, I really give you a workout, don’t I? You sound like one of the goodfellas I grew up around, hey I musta be! Chill, goombah!
when I was growing up there was maybe one real commie in southern Utah, the founder of SUWA...... The Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance. He looked outta place and hardly dared talk to anyone he met on the street. But he woulda run if he knew who I was. lol. He had I think a Subaru that was 15 years old and covered with stickers abaout whales, and the one with "Peace" symbol merged withs the Arm and Hammer and Sycle, and the Chinese star I think, along with the Islamic crescent and the UN /Star Wars wreath. But I think there were more stickers about Yosemite, Arches, Bryce and Cedar Breaks Moab hadn't been discovered yet.

You give me a sort of imaginary audience...... and you don't just run...... so it's all good.
 

babe

Well-Known Member
when I was growing up there was maybe one real commie in southern Utah, the founder of SUWA...... The Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance. He looked outta place and hardly dared talk to anyone he met on the street. But he woulda run if he knew who I was. lol. He had I think a Subaru that was 15 years old and covered with stickers abaout whales, and the one with "Peace" symbol merged withs the Arm and Hammer and Sycle, and the Chinese star I think, along with the Islamic crescent and the UN /Star Wars wreath. But I think there were more stickers about Yosemite, Arches, Bryce and Cedar Breaks Moab hadn't been discovered yet.

You give me a sort of imaginary audience...... and you don't just run...... so it's all good.
So, here's the scoop.

Hawaii rarely gets hurricanes hitting directly, most go by a bit south. Warmer ocean in the mid-Pacific.


Note the huge deviation (+) in the North Pacific. This is likely related to the warmer Arctic currently. Hudson Bay also has a warm SW sector, as well as the north Atlantic. We are in a sort of ENSO negative/La Nina pattern in the Subtropical northern Pacific, which means less than the normal hurricanes there,and more in the Atlantic.

Overall, just using the visual data, think we have a global SST around +1C, maybe a little more, which is not enough for a significant shift in Climate from our current regime of interglacial warm.
 
Top