|
|
Post by blustnmtn on Sept 8, 2021 18:37:02 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Sept 9, 2021 22:44:52 GMT
I have been thinking about a bit of stuff that I read many years ago and then recently also.
To get to the core of it, when people talk about the impact of CO2 they define the relationship between CO2 concentration and temperature. The hypothesis lives on the assumption that the climate sensitivity is something like 1.3C/2X for the CO2 Being logarithmic a halving would yield the same impact but negative.
Given that this was and still is insufficient to scare the processed food from within us, they apply a sensitivity multiplier to this so the current factor of choice is 3X. So 4C/2X CO2.
Again this would have to apply if CO2 were to decrease. I think that's fair and logical.
When you read about the depths of the ice-ages and very specifically the period between the Eemian and the Holocene inter-glacial the ice cores indicate a CO2 level down to 190ppm less that half now. This they believe was driven by arid desert drive high Fe dust seeding ocean fertility and sequestration of the CO2 in the marine mud's of the planet.
I was initially uncomfortable about this as it sort built the narrative surrounding the CO2 emissions and climate change.
This is in fact not the case as I have begun to realize. If it were the case then snowball earth would have been achieved sometime in the last 2.6 Million years of Ice ages and it did not, so my deduction of this is that the sensitivity is constrained by the feed backs being largely negative. Will Happers paper on the impact of CO2 and radiation looks solid and the feedback being negative is the only way that the earth remains habitable as a consequence.
|
|
|
|
Post by glennkoks on Sept 10, 2021 0:49:35 GMT
Its strange that much of what we were taught in school as fact has changed over time. For example, I remember in grade school being taught that the ice age came about slowly over thousands of years. We now know that our geologic history is full of abrupt changes caused in as little as a year by volcanic eruptions and meteor impacts. I was also taught in school that the chief cause of the dust bowl was our agricultural practices. It just never seemed logical to me that with the equipment of the time that we could change the climate on a micro scale. I'm not saying that our agricultural practices had nothing to do with it just not as much as we were taught to believe. More recent studies have shown that a cooling of the Pacific in concert with a warming of the Atlantic was most likely the culprit. Our sun is not static, the Gulf Stream is not static and the Jet Stream is not static. Almost everything on earth is constantly warming or cooling. www.scientificamerican.com/article/forces-behind-devastating/ |
|
|
|
Post by txfarmer on Sept 10, 2021 3:53:16 GMT
Its strange that much of what we were taught in school as fact has changed over time. For example, I remember in grade school being taught that the ice age came about slowly over thousands of years. We now know that our geologic history is full of abrupt changes caused in as little as a year by volcanic eruptions and meteor impacts. I was also taught in school that the chief cause of the dust bowl was our agricultural practices. It just never seemed logical to me that with the equipment of the time that we could change the climate on a micro scale. I'm not saying that our agricultural practices had nothing to do with it just not as much as we were taught to believe. More recent studies have shown that a cooling of the Pacific in concert with a warming of the Atlantic was most likely the culprit. Our sun is not static, the Gulf Stream is not static and the Jet Stream is not static. Almost everything on earth is constantly warming or cooling. www.scientificamerican.com/article/forces-behind-devastating/The biggest thing or possibly about the only thing the agricultural practices contributed to at the time of the dust bowl were larger dust storms. The drought still would have been the drought, but the dirt being worked up over large parts of the Midwest meant the wind could blow the soil as it wished. It was the way things happened at the time. Nobody knew any better at that point in time. They were just trying to grow crops the way they knew how and tried to make a living for their families and feed the world. A lot of people would blame the farmers, but people still need to eat, then and now. |
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Oct 26, 2021 14:37:30 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by glennkoks on Oct 26, 2021 23:04:47 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by ratty on Oct 27, 2021 11:45:02 GMT
A thing of the past, a rare and exciting event?  |
|
|
|
Post by glennkoks on Oct 29, 2021 14:28:00 GMT
 I enjoy reading about historical weather and one of the standards is the book "Historic Storms of New England" by Sidney Perley. Published in 1891 it chronicles historic storms from 1635 to 1890. Which coincides with the heart of the Little Ice Age. Storms that were well documented in history and not subject to "adjustment" like the temperature readings of today. Weather events like the Storm of 1804 which happened on October 9th of that year. It was the first time in recorded history that a Hurricane produced a snowstorm. Very similar to hurricane Sandy in 2012. Often used as an example of of an unprecedented storm and a direct result of climate change Sandy caused about 70 billion in 2012 dollars. It was this book that helped open my mind and get me really questioning the narrative behind AGW. Despite the media hype Sandy was not unprecedented. Since the Pilgrims landed on the shores of North America there have been not one, not two, not three but 4 hurricanes that brought snow to New England. The old adage that those who do not learn from history is especially true when bombarded by propaganda from the modern media. www.newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/great-snow-hurricane-1804/ |
|
|
|
Post by Sigurdur on Oct 29, 2021 14:51:25 GMT
I enjoy reading about historical weather and one of the standards is the book "Historic Storms of New England" by Sidney Perley. Published in 1891 it chronicles historic storms from 1635 to 1890. Which coincides with the heart of the Little Ice Age. Storms that were well documented in history and not subject to "adjustment" like the temperature readings of today. Weather events like the Storm of 1804 which happened on October 9th of that year. It was the first time in recorded history that a Hurricane produced a snowstorm. Very similar to hurricane Sandy in 2012. Often used as an example of of an unprecedented storm and a direct result of climate change Sandy caused about 70 billion in 2012 dollars. It was this book that helped open my mind and get me really questioning the narrative behind AGW. Despite the media hype Sandy was not unprecedented. Since the Pilgrims landed on the shores of North America there have been not one, not two, not three but 4 hurricanes that brought snow to New England. The old adage that those who do not learn from history is especially true when bombarded by propaganda from the modern media. www.newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/great-snow-hurricane-1804/Thank you for sharing that book Mr. Glenn!!! Will be put on my reading list!! |
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Oct 29, 2021 15:54:14 GMT
Thank you for that Glenn Seems that 1804 produced other weather extremes. But now it is attributed to CO2. There are probably other examples much further back in human history. Then these events would likely have been blamed on the "anger of the Gods" ... and afterwards, people would run down to their local temple(s) and make offerings. Seems that so-called modern men have not changed much in that regard. Scientists see link between climate change and Europe’s floods
With or without the effect of climate change, it was a massive and very rare event, the scientists said. This amount of rain would fall on any single location in northwestern Europe on average once every four centuries, the study found. The Ahr River in Germany last reached a similar level in 1804.Merely a coincidence I presume. www.politico.eu/article/climate-change-europe-floods-germany-belgium-global-warming-world-weather-attribution-study/ |
|
|
|
Post by blustnmtn on Oct 31, 2021 18:42:10 GMT
Thank you for that Glenn Seems that 1804 produced other weather extremes. But now it is attributed to CO2. There are probably other examples much further back in human history. Then these events would likely have been blamed on the "anger of the Gods" ... and afterwards, people would run down to their local temple(s) and make offerings. Seems that so-called modern men have not changed much in that regard. Scientists see link between climate change and Europe’s floods
With or without the effect of climate change, it was a massive and very rare event, the scientists said. This amount of rain would fall on any single location in northwestern Europe on average once every four centuries, the study found. The Ahr River in Germany last reached a similar level in 1804.Merely a coincidence I presume. www.politico.eu/article/climate-change-europe-floods-germany-belgium-global-warming-world-weather-attribution-stud/Same basic time as the Lewis and Clark Expedition. The weather during the expedition is very well documented in their journals. The “summer” crossing the Rockies was exceptionally cold with snow. They didn’t have Goretex either. |
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Oct 31, 2021 23:37:20 GMT
Thank you for that Glenn Seems that 1804 produced other weather extremes. But now it is attributed to CO2. There are probably other examples much further back in human history. Then these events would likely have been blamed on the "anger of the Gods" ... and afterwards, people would run down to their local temple(s) and make offerings. Seems that so-called modern men have not changed much in that regard. Scientists see link between climate change and Europe’s floods
With or without the effect of climate change, it was a massive and very rare event, the scientists said. This amount of rain would fall on any single location in northwestern Europe on average once every four centuries, the study found. The Ahr River in Germany last reached a similar level in 1804.Merely a coincidence I presume. www.politico.eu/article/climate-change-europe-floods-germany-belgium-global-warming-world-weather-attribution-stud/Same basic time as the Lewis and Clark Expedition. The weather during the expedition is very well documented in their journals. The “summer” crossing the Rockies was exceptionally cold with snow. They didn’t have Goretex either.Just sheep with the insides scrapped out. |
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Nov 1, 2021 2:39:54 GMT
Thank you for that Glenn Seems that 1804 produced other weather extremes. But now it is attributed to CO2. There are probably other examples much further back in human history. Then these events would likely have been blamed on the "anger of the Gods" ... and afterwards, people would run down to their local temple(s) and make offerings. Seems that so-called modern men have not changed much in that regard. Scientists see link between climate change and Europe’s floods
With or without the effect of climate change, it was a massive and very rare event, the scientists said. This amount of rain would fall on any single location in northwestern Europe on average once every four centuries, the study found. The Ahr River in Germany last reached a similar level in 1804.Merely a coincidence I presume. www.politico.eu/article/climate-change-europe-floods-germany-belgium-global-warming-world-weather-attribution-stud/Same basic time as the Lewis and Clark Expedition. The weather during the expedition is very well documented in their journals. The “summer” crossing the Rockies was exceptionally cold with snow. They didn’t have Goretex either. In the mid-1970s I remember driving west to a summer job driving pea combines in the WA Palouse area. Camped out in the Yellowstone area and the snowbanks were still thick in early June. The biology student I was with, was gathering edible mushrooms along the edges of the banks. Don't know how this compares to recent time periods. But Central MO winters in the mid-1970s were pretty cold. |
|
|
|
Post by blustnmtn on Nov 1, 2021 22:57:20 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by glennkoks on Nov 5, 2021 2:17:18 GMT
I was doing some historical weather research for my area. According to NOAA the coldest winter in recorded history for Houston, TX was the winter of 1976. Records dating back to about 1885. Those of us older than say 50 remember the winters of the 1970's in the U.S. and how nasty they were.
I always look for cycles to explain these trends as most things in our natural world are somewhat cyclical. Could simply be chaos or a cold cycle amplified by chaos. But November that year was -10.3 degrees below normal. No year is even close statistically. It could be coincidence but it is also the year of the Great Pacific Climate Shift. Which leads me to believe that whatever flipped was a natural cyclical phenomenon and if it happened before it is likely to happen again. Only in reverse. The AMO is nearing the end of its cycle and back to back La Nina years would leave me to believe the Pacific may be starting a cooling phase as well.
If we flipped from a colder cycle to a warmer one in 1976 we most certainly could flip from a warmer cycle to a colder one in the near future. In addition according to NOAA La Nina years are supposed to be warmer for the Gulf Coast. Yet the three coldest polar outbreaks in my area were 1983, 1989 and 2021. All La Nina's.
When the AMO and the PDO flip to a colder stage look out...
|
|
