Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet
Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals
Educated" opinions on climate change - Part 5 11
- Thread starter jmw
- Start date
- Status
GregLocock
Automotive
East coats of Australia.
Average annual sea level change since last ice age 12mm pa
IPCC prediction for next century 6mm pa (oh woe is us)
Actual measurement for last decade 2 mm pa
Cheers
Greg Locock
SIG
lease see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.
Average annual sea level change since last ice age 12mm pa
IPCC prediction for next century 6mm pa (oh woe is us)
Actual measurement for last decade 2 mm pa
Cheers
Greg Locock
SIG
lease see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.
mauricestoker
Mechanical
If educated people stop having children, we won't have to worry about global warming. The movie "Idiocracy" covers the matter quite thoroughly.
- Thread starter
- #166
I am beginning to get a bit concerned.
Not about warming, or "abrupt change" or athropogenic CO2, but about solar activity, or rather, the lack of confirmed science and the difficulties of prediction.
It seems we are in SC24 and the scientists were finding it hard to predict when it would bottom out.
Now if you believe in Anthropogenic Global warming and that CO2 is a killer, this won't concern you, but if you think there might just be a chance that the sun has something to do with the earths climate maybe you ought to worry a little bit too.
It appears the last solar cycle (SC23) was pretty near average but that SC24 was thought, like Moby Dick, to be going to sound deep and long.
As deep as cycles SC15 and SC17.
However, the duration is somewhat uncertain. It was projected as going to be longer and now some say it will be the shortest ever.
The scientists don't know how to predict this cycle.
It appears they don't actually know for sure when it started or if we have passed the peak or not, nor when it will end.
But it has been well below max.
None the less there has been a past correlation between sunspot activity and climate, if no casual link.
So if that correlation holds good, we are in a cooling period but don't know how long or how severe it will be.
Short and sharp? long and sharp?
A maunder minimum was being projected as a possible outcome.
Wow! uncertainty in forecasting and the different models and prediction methods show the usual uncertainties of prediction but it seems that SC24 is being a bit of a pig to predict. I hope that isn't a portent.
If, as some scientists (Prof. Henrik Svensmark: effects of cosmic rays on cloud formation) theorise, there is a causal link between solar particles and cloud formation and between cloud formation and the POD currents (which have recently changed over and for which some scientists point out a "coincidence" of a possible link between the Pacific Ocean Decadal currents and solar activity) then we could be in for a fairly cold spell, more cold than usual perhaps and maybe not just the 10-20years the AGW camp are allowing as a temporary respite from AGW.
As I have suggested (and others too), we'll look right Charlies shivering away with all our money invested in wind farms and carbon sequestration and cap and trade but with not two pennies to pay toward some heating or food, which will be in short supply; how short dependent on how cold and how much food production has been given over to biodiesel production.
On the other hand, if we get a really cold spell, it will probably cure our over-population problem.
These guys think (Nov 2009) very short:
The Jannsens is an October 2009 paper and the predictions are discussed here:
Now I have to say that fundamentally, despite there being no causal relationship established, I personally suspect (and I only say this to declare my own opinion, I am not reporting fact or other people's opinions) there has to be some kind of link between that great big orange thing in the sky that just happens to always seem to be there when I feel warm and not there when I feel colder.
I've noticed this especially as part of the day night cycles and I tend to suspect some kind of link between warm summers when it is there for longer in each day and colder winters when its not.
I've also noted the effect of clouds on how warm I feel.
So I kind of suspect that if it has this pronounced an influence over day to day weather, maybe, just maybe there is some kind of link between the Sun and climate.
But maybe this sort of thinking is some kind of hang over to pagan religious thing? to Ra and Egypt even?
JMW
Not about warming, or "abrupt change" or athropogenic CO2, but about solar activity, or rather, the lack of confirmed science and the difficulties of prediction.
It seems we are in SC24 and the scientists were finding it hard to predict when it would bottom out.
Now if you believe in Anthropogenic Global warming and that CO2 is a killer, this won't concern you, but if you think there might just be a chance that the sun has something to do with the earths climate maybe you ought to worry a little bit too.
It appears the last solar cycle (SC23) was pretty near average but that SC24 was thought, like Moby Dick, to be going to sound deep and long.
As deep as cycles SC15 and SC17.
However, the duration is somewhat uncertain. It was projected as going to be longer and now some say it will be the shortest ever.
The scientists don't know how to predict this cycle.
It appears they don't actually know for sure when it started or if we have passed the peak or not, nor when it will end.
But it has been well below max.
None the less there has been a past correlation between sunspot activity and climate, if no casual link.
So if that correlation holds good, we are in a cooling period but don't know how long or how severe it will be.
Short and sharp? long and sharp?
A maunder minimum was being projected as a possible outcome.
Wow! uncertainty in forecasting and the different models and prediction methods show the usual uncertainties of prediction but it seems that SC24 is being a bit of a pig to predict. I hope that isn't a portent.
If, as some scientists (Prof. Henrik Svensmark: effects of cosmic rays on cloud formation) theorise, there is a causal link between solar particles and cloud formation and between cloud formation and the POD currents (which have recently changed over and for which some scientists point out a "coincidence" of a possible link between the Pacific Ocean Decadal currents and solar activity) then we could be in for a fairly cold spell, more cold than usual perhaps and maybe not just the 10-20years the AGW camp are allowing as a temporary respite from AGW.
As I have suggested (and others too), we'll look right Charlies shivering away with all our money invested in wind farms and carbon sequestration and cap and trade but with not two pennies to pay toward some heating or food, which will be in short supply; how short dependent on how cold and how much food production has been given over to biodiesel production.
On the other hand, if we get a really cold spell, it will probably cure our over-population problem.
These guys think (Nov 2009) very short:
The Jannsens is an October 2009 paper and the predictions are discussed here:
Now I have to say that fundamentally, despite there being no causal relationship established, I personally suspect (and I only say this to declare my own opinion, I am not reporting fact or other people's opinions) there has to be some kind of link between that great big orange thing in the sky that just happens to always seem to be there when I feel warm and not there when I feel colder.
I've noticed this especially as part of the day night cycles and I tend to suspect some kind of link between warm summers when it is there for longer in each day and colder winters when its not.
I've also noted the effect of clouds on how warm I feel.
So I kind of suspect that if it has this pronounced an influence over day to day weather, maybe, just maybe there is some kind of link between the Sun and climate.
But maybe this sort of thinking is some kind of hang over to pagan religious thing? to Ra and Egypt even?
JMW
Take it with a grain of salt, but for a lesson about the sun and earth's magnetosphere, sunspots and 2012, this is an interesting read:
"Good to know you got shoes to wear when you find the floor." - [small]Robert Hunter[/small]
"Good to know you got shoes to wear when you find the floor." - [small]Robert Hunter[/small]
GregLocock
Automotive
Interesting news about the negative feedback loop for atmospheric CO2.
Note the funny spin he's had to put on it to preserve heterodoxy.
Here's an analysis, commentary, and some of the data (nice graph!)
Cheers
Greg Locock
SIGlease see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.
Note the funny spin he's had to put on it to preserve heterodoxy.
Here's an analysis, commentary, and some of the data (nice graph!)
Cheers
Greg Locock
SIG
lease see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.AGW must be real, EPA says so.
Posting guidelines faq731-376 (probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484
Kenat, CEI already filed a lawsuit before the end of the day on Dec 7, same day that EPA's announcement.
Try this on for size. Not sure if I should post it here or the other thread. Both have headed down the same path.
The Smoking Gun At Darwin Zero
Try this on for size. Not sure if I should post it here or the other thread. Both have headed down the same path.
The Smoking Gun At Darwin Zero
- Thread starter
- #171
This is from a paper here:
Interesting reading.
Also interesting is a paper on planetary resonance here:
Not to be confused with "The Jupiter Effect", what this does is demonstrate a set of correlations between solar activity and planetary resonance. This is of interest as is suggests a link between solar activity and planentary movements which could help us measure solar cycles more accurately that trying to guess when a new sunspot cycle is thought to begin and end, a somewhat arbitrary decision at the moment.
Sun spot cycles correlate very well with climate (Maunder Minimum and the Little Ice Age etc)and we have other strong correlations such as that between aurora activity and the Nile flooding - the Nile records are apparently very robust throughout the Egyptian era but the correlation comes from an 850 year sequence when there were also robust records of aurora activity.
The import of these empiracal data sets is that we ought to suspect a solar contribution to climate that goes beyond just the variation in irradiance, if irradiance does contribute enough to cliamte to be significant something else must be happening. The work at CERN (the cloud chamber experiment) suggests a mechanism that links with cloud formations and we do know water is one of the most significant greenhouse agents.
OK, so we really need to understand the mechanisms before we can say for sure. But if there is a strong correlation between climate and various types f solar activity we have to believe it isn't man influencing the solar activity, it just has to be the other way.
The case for anthropogenic warming is far too suspect for me and I'd like to see more weight given to solar research.
I'd also like to see the IPCC remit changed from
to something more realistic; I mean, with that remit we can hardly expect anything better from them but if their remit was to "investigate climate change" then we might have gained more sense from them.
JMW
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- News
- Locked
- Question
