Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Hurricanes and climate change

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
    You might get a bit frustrated when I say, but that article was talking specifically and exclusively about Greenland. I know there's another line in there talking about 'the variability of Earth's climate', but at no point in the article did it talk about the global temperature going up. It was only a discussion about an entirely local phenomenon, and local phenomonens like this are harder to understand because they depend on upon understanding weather. The global average temperature isn't as affected by weather as some local part is, but by is determined by the total energy content of the atmosphere, and the total content can't just disappear somewhere else.
    That isn't quite right:

    in ice cores recovered from Greenland glaciers. Each successively deeper ice layer represents a snapshot of Earth's climate history from the past, and together, the oxygen isotope record told a story of abrupt, millennial-scale climate shifts in air temperatures over Greenland between extremely cold stadial conditions and relatively mild interstadial periods during the last ice age (Figure 1) (Alley 2000, Alley et al. 2003). There are twenty-five of these distinct warming-cooling oscillations (Dansgaard 1984) which are now commonly referred to as Dansgaard-Oeschger cycles, or D-O cycles. One of the most surprising findings was that the shifts from cold stadials to the warm interstadial intervals occurred in a matter of decades, with air temperatures over Greenland rapidly warming 8 to 15°C (Huber et al. 2006). Furthermore, the cooling occurred much more gradually, giving these events a saw-tooth shape in climate records from most of the Northern Hemisphere
    They are claiming, not me, that Greenland represents a snapshot of Earth's climate history.

    There are cycle that explain the Ice Age. There's a big one about the wobble of the Earth's rotation which is more than ten thousand year long called the Milankovich Cycle. It explains a very slow, periodic temperature variation. It can't however explain the sudden rise in temperature since the seventies. CO2 driving a greenhouse effect can however.
    No Leonhard, evidence for these D-O climate cycles have been found world wide according to the link, and they can not explain them at this point.
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Leonhard View Post

      Check this graph of CO2, notice the yearly oscilations? But notice how its all trending upwards. We're the cause of that.
      And how much has the earth's temperature risen from 1955 to present with all this extra CO2?
      Last edited by seer; 09-13-2017, 07:32 AM.
      Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by seer View Post
        Did you read my quote? Obviously we have had greater fluctuations, greater rise in heat, in less time, that what we see today.
        I've read your quote. It describes the fluctuations as being "abrupt, millennial-scale climate shifts". That's in more time than we're seeing today, not less time.
        Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

        MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
        MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

        seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by seer View Post
          And how much has the earth's temperature risen from 1955 to present with all this extra CO2?
          With the water-vapor feedback, the extra heat trapped by a doubling of CO2 is 5.37 W/m^2, which translates roughly to 3C per doubling of CO2. The relationship between partial pressure and temperature increase is logarithmic, so going from 310ppm to 400ppm represents just about 1C as per the models, which is exactly what we find.



          In other words, the temperature increase is mostly driven by the increase of CO2, which is mostly caused by us.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by seer View Post
            And how much has the earth's temperature risen from 1955 to present with all this extra CO2?
            This was the average summer temperature in Hawaii in 1955:


            ec23fc9d0a48d1178e1200eb1064e360--hurley-south-wales.jpg

            and today:

            hula-girl.jpg

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Roy View Post
              I've read your quote. It describes the fluctuations as being "abrupt, millennial-scale climate shifts". That's in more time than we're seeing today, not less time.
              That was from the Greenland sample: One of the most surprising findings was that the shifts from cold stadials to the warm interstadial intervals occurred in a matter of decades, with air temperatures over Greenland rapidly warming 8 to 15°C (Huber et al. 2006).

              And they claim:Each successively deeper ice layer (in Greenland) represents a snapshot of Earth's climate history from the past...
              Last edited by seer; 09-13-2017, 07:59 AM.
              Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                OK... and? Nobody is saying that CO2 doesn't exist in our atmosphere. What we are saying, and what credible peer-reviewed studies have shown, is that it has a negligible affect on the global climate.
                Could you point to a credible peer reviewed study? The NIPCC is an aggregator of other studies, so wouldn't actually count even if it were credible.

                Also: the fact that these wavelengths don't make it through the atmosphere means that all the energy in those wavelengths is being retained in the atmosphere. That's not a negligible effect. And is quite impressive for a gas you keep dismissing as "trace."


                Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                Could it have an effect? Sure, it's possible. But whatever impact it has is impossible to separate from the much more significant sources causing climatic fluctuations. The fact that the planets in the solar system are warming and cooling more or less in sync with the earth should tell you that it's not the CO2. This suggests that the sun is the biggest contributor to climate change.
                One, that's false. Two, even if it were true, it wouldn't be very informative. The outer planets aren't heated significantly by the sun; their climates are dominated by the residual heat of their gravitational collapse. Venus' carbon dioxide rich atmosphere has caused a runaway greenhouse that keeps it at a near constant temperature (there's no day/night difference). So, the only places solar radiation matters significantly are the daytime side of Mercury, Earth, and Mars.

                EDITED: clarified a point.
                Last edited by TheLurch; 09-13-2017, 08:43 AM.
                "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by seer View Post
                  They are claiming, not me, that Greenland represents a snapshot of Earth's climate history.
                  You're treating that quote as if it definitively says that the data from Greenland is representative of the entire earth. To do so, you have to interpret "snapshot" as capturing a complete picture of everything relevant. It doesn't mean that.

                  If you're going to get bogged down in semantics, try to make sure your semantics are right.
                  "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                    This was the average summer temperature in Hawaii in 1955:


                    [ATTACH=CONFIG]24029[/ATTACH]

                    and today:

                    [ATTACH=CONFIG]24030[/ATTACH]
                    Conclusion? We're all idiots for not living in Hawaii.
                    "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by TheLurch View Post
                      You're treating that quote as if it definitively says that the data from Greenland is representative of the entire earth. To do so, you have to interpret "snapshot" as capturing a complete picture of everything relevant. It doesn't mean that.

                      If you're going to get bogged down in semantics, try to make sure your semantics are right.
                      Hey it wasn't me who said that Greenland represents a snapshot of Earth's climate history. And they also said that they had global evidence of these D-O cycles, with some pretty significant warming. And the fact that at this point we really don't know what caused them.
                      Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by seer View Post
                        Well in the past, when the earth was much warmer, was that because it was all out of balance? And was the continual warming from the ice age on caused by Co2 imbalance?
                        The warming from the ice age has not been continual. As the graph i posted earlier showed, global temperatures had been declining for over 4,000 years prior to their recent turn upwards. That said, CO2 was involved. As Sparko noted, orbital changes control the entry/exit from glacial periods. But the changes in incoming sunlight aren't enough to cause the large swings of temperature we see. That comes about because the solar changes cause a feedback in CO2 levels that enhances the trend. So yes, CO2 contributed to the warming from the last ice age.

                        As for the earth having been warmer in the past, plate tectonics helps set the overall CO2 levels in the atmosphere. It just happens on incredibly long timescales - long enough to be irrelevant to our planning and infrastructure.
                        "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by seer View Post
                          Hey it wasn't me who said that Greenland represents a snapshot of Earth's climate history.
                          Right, but you're using that quote to repeatedly argue that what we see in Greenland means that they were significant globally. The quote doesn't mean that.
                          "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by TheLurch View Post
                            Could you point to a credible peer reviewed study? The NIPCC is an aggregator of other studies, so wouldn't actually count even if it were credible.
                            A while back, spurred on by discussions elsewhere, I went to the trouble of reading through the NIPCC reports. They are relatively credible in the narrow range they define for themselves. But that range deliberately, and quite openly, excludes the majority of climate science. Says so in the forewords and prefaces. The NIPCC is a response to the IPCC featuring studies excluded by the IPCC. It's not an overall assessment, or an independent assessment, and doesn't pretend to be.

                            Before the Heartland Institute added their funding for this latest NIPCC report, and even since to a large extent, they were concentrating on publicizing a remarkably unprofessional document, switching authors and endorsers between versions. Yes, the papers, if it's fair to call them that, like the NIPCC reports themselves, began with a list of endorsers. They also looked to have been put together in Word before being converted to PDF so poorly that footnotes bled over onto the tops of following pages, though that was fixed in the last version I've seen.

                            Working through the papers, I found they could be summarized quite easily as an attempt to discredit thermometer data in favor of satellite data, disregarding the need to calibrate the latter with the former. The original version was a response to fuel economy regulations put in by the Obama administration following the 2008 economic crisis, seven or so years after they were put in place, and, hence, the same number of years after submissions were closed.

                            It was still useful in a sense. I learned a lot about the satellite constellations measuring climate today. But I had to do all the work myself because it was clear the NIPCC folks were engaged in the academic equivalent of phoning it in.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Found this as an ok explanation for the global relationship between hurricanes and global warming that I previously described.

                              There is a reasonable table in the article that describes the differences in the relationship of the hurricanes in the different regions.

                              Source: https://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/global-warming-and-21st-century-hurricanes/


                              Global Warming Projections and Hurricanes Activity

                              How hurricane (or more generally “tropical cyclone”) activity will respond to human-induced global warming is a topic of much popular interest and scientific debate. Recent studies (cf. Tom Knutson’s “Hurricanes and Global Warming Page”) suggest that global warming may act to increase tropical cyclone activity due to a rise in ocean surface temperatures. However, there are a number of environmental factors besides ocean surface temperature which also influence the development and intensification of hurricanes, such as upper atmospheric temperature, relative humidity, and wind shear (see below).

                              The study of Vecchi and Soden (2007) explored changes in these environmental factors in a set of 18 ‘state-of-the-art’ coupled climate models simulations for the 21st Century (PCMDI). These climate model simulations were performed by research laboratories all over the world in support of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (IPCC AR4)

                              These models combine our best understanding of the physical processes controlling the climate system (atmosphere, ocean, land surface and sea ice), with estimates of possible concentrations of greenhouse gases over the coming century, to provide projections of future climate changes. The models are not perfect, with uncertainties arising from our inability to fully represent certain physical processes and imperfect knowledge of future emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols. However, climate models have proved skillful in reproducing many aspects of past climate change and are essential to making projections of future climate change.

                              A key finding of this study is the projected increase in wind shear over the tropical Atlantic and eastern Pacific ocean basins during the next century. Wind shear results from a change in direction or speed of winds between the lower and upper levels of the atmosphere and is widely recognized to inhibit the development and intensification of tropical cyclones. The models also project a decrease in Central and West Pacific wind shear in the 21st Century (see below or Vecchi and Soden (2007))

                              The increased Atlantic and East Pacific shear is a common feature of climate model projections for the 21st Century and is tied to an overall weakening of the tropical “Walker circulation” – a vast loop of winds that influences climate across much of the globe, and varies in concert with naturally-occuring El Nińo and La Nińa oscillations.

                              Because current climate models do not resolve tropical cyclones explicitly, the study focused on the models’ projections of changes in large-scale environmental parameters associated with tropical cyclone activity and intensity, and NOT on simulations of tropical cyclones themselves. The net effect of increased wind shear, warmer oceans, and other environmental changes on the number and intensity of tropical cyclones will require further investigation with more detailed models. However, the current study does point out the presence of other key environmental changes over the Atlantic and eastern Pacific that are comparable in magnitude to the impact of warming oceans, but with an opposing effect on tropical cyclone activity.

                              © Copyright Original Source

                              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                              go with the flow the river knows . . .

                              Frank

                              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                The following highly technical summary of research primarily addressing the trends of Atlantic hurricanes concludes that there is no measurable influence of Global Warming on the intensity and frequency. It does address the possible influence of Global Warming on West Pacific Hurricanes.

                                https://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/global-war...nd-hurricanes/
                                Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                                Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                                But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                                go with the flow the river knows . . .

                                Frank

                                I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-18-2024, 12:15 PM
                                48 responses
                                135 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Sparko
                                by Sparko
                                 
                                Started by Sparko, 03-07-2024, 08:52 AM
                                16 responses
                                74 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by rogue06, 02-28-2024, 11:06 AM
                                6 responses
                                48 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Working...
                                X