Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

I want to sue the republican party for willful denial of scientific evidence about climate change.

Mad Mike

By Mad Mike
in The Tailgate

 Share

Recommended Posts

twa

twa

Posted
Posted
51 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

Let me guess... glooooooooobal waaaaarming (finger parentheses). Its probably something simple and innocent... like Cthulhu.

 

I would go with the earths core, but Cthulhu seems as reasonable as some 

 

Quote

 

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2116536-molten-iron-river-discovered-speeding-beneath-russia-and-canada/

The vast jet stream some 420 kilometres wide has trebled in speed since 2000, and is now circulating westwards at between 40 and 45 kilometres per year deep under Siberia and heading towards beneath Europe (see diagram, below). That is three times faster than typical speeds of liquid in the outer core.

 

 

No one knows yet why the jet has got faster, but the team that discovered the accelerating jet thinks it is a natural phenomenon that dates back as much as a billion years, and can help us understand the formation of Earth’s magnetic fields that keeps us safe from solar winds

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
twa

twa

Posted
Posted
41 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

More likely the other way around as climate change has electromagentic affects from tides, ocean current effects, and ocean content.

 

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2017GL073683/abstract

 

Could be... there are also some studies showing relation between the core,magnetic field and climate change(as well as solar winds and such)

 

We only know what we know,just like ice melting from previously unknown volcanic activity.

https://www.livescience.com/60885-antarctica-map-river-water-melt-magma.html

 

world is a interesting place

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PeterMP

PeterMP

Posted
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, twa said:

 

Could be... there are also some studies showing relation between the core,magnetic field and climate change(as well as solar winds and such)

 

We only know what we know,just like ice melting from previously unknown volcanic activity.

https://www.livescience.com/60885-antarctica-map-river-water-melt-magma.html

 

world is a interesting place

 

We also know for the last 30+ years from satellites that less solar energy is escaping just as we'd expect from increases in green house gases.  We also know that green house gas levels are going up.  We also know that humans are releasing green house gases that have been buried under the Earth for millions and billions of years (in different forms), while reducing available sinks for green house gases (e.g. deforestation).

 

We are beyond correlations.  We have an expected physical mechanism.  We have data that supports that mechanism, and we have supporting effects.

 

Solar output is down.  We're in a solar minimum and solar cycles have been trending down since 1980.  Based on sun spots, we just got done the 3rd weakest solar cycle since 1755, and we're in a minimum for that solar cycle.  We're about as low as you can get right now.

 

But despite that temperatures are up (2017 year was the warmest non-El Nino year on record), sea levels are up (and accelerating), sea ice total, and essentially in the Arctic and Antarctica are at lows (last year was lower for Antarctica, but this year is the 2nd lowest ever).

 

Solar behavior is moving in the OPPOSITE direction as what we are seeing here on Earth.

 

People have known about volcanoes underneath Antarctica for along time.  We are better and better understanding where they are and what they are doing.  There is ZERO evidence that there have been changes in them that would cause changes in Antarctica melting, and they certainly don't explain the general warming of the world or the rate of sea level increase, etc.

Edited by PeterMP
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
twa

twa

Posted
Posted

We didn't know how much heat was escaping our bubble, quite a bit off there

Are we accurate in gauging the interplay between solar winds and cosmic rays?

 

Knowing about volcanoes is different than knowing the impacts, just as super volcanoes differ from normal ones. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PeterMP

PeterMP

Posted
Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, twa said:

We didn't know how much heat was escaping our bubble, quite a bit off there

Are we accurate in gauging the interplay between solar winds and cosmic rays?

 

Knowing about volcanoes is different than knowing the impacts, just as super volcanoes differ from normal ones. 

 

I'm not quite sure what you mean by the first sentence.  The first satellite to measure the Earth's radiation budget (including heat) was launched from a Space Shuttle in the mid-1990s.

 

**EDIT**

People are actually piecing together Earth radiation budgets from different satellite even going back further.

 

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2014GL060962/abstract

 

"Combining satellite data, atmospheric reanalyses, and climate model simulations, variability in the net downward radiative flux imbalance at the top of Earth's atmosphere (N) is reconstructed and linked to recent climate change. Over the 1985–1999 period mean N (0.34 ± 0.67 Wm−2) is lower than for the 2000–2012 period (0.62 ± 0.43 Wm−2, uncertainties at 90% confidence level) despite the slower rate of surface temperature rise since 2000. "

 

**/EDIT**

 

From there, we don't completely gauge the interplay between every possible thing in any system.  In basic physics, the interactions/relationship between gravity and quantum phenomenon are still unclear, but by and large, airplanes and helicopters fly, we can still do things like sling shots around planets to accelerate space ships to their final destinations, and we can land things on the moon and on Mars.

 

The interplay between drug pairs and drugs with a every biological molecule are largely not described or well known, but in general, the we do pretty well in using drugs to treat diseases. 

 

Putting numbers on small things is very hard to do.

 

With respect to specifically cosmic rays and solar winds, the thought is they COULD do the same thing, which is increase clouds by creating charged species for them to nucleate from.  From there, in practicality there are a couple of issues:

 

1.  Lots of possible nucleation points are created through other mean, both human emissions and trees, but also solar UV.

 

2.  The actual effect of clouds on temperature, while we think of clouds as providing shading and therefore cooling their real affect with respect to the total temperature is less clear.  First, they absorb a lot of radiation and keep it in the general system.  Normally, over land some of what they absorb would hit the surface and be reflected back into space.  With clouds as much is no longer reaching the surface, but it also escaping into space.  Over land clouds absorb and keep both in going and out going (reflected) heat in the system (longer).  The net effect is that clouds have a complicated effect on temperatures and depends on where the clouds are (over water vs. land (water absorbs even more in coming radiation than clouds, but doesn't have the impact on out going just in coming), high vs. low) and when they exist (night vs. day).

 

An early push by AGW-deniers was that higher solar output had warmed the Earth, but changes in solar output through the 20th century was not equivalent to the amount the Earth had warmed so they needed an amplification.  The proposed amplification was clouds where the logic was that clouds would cause cooling.  Solar out put is correlated to the sun's electromagnetic field, which is inversely correlated with the cosmic rays coming to Earth (the sun's electromagnetic field protects us from cosmic rays).  Then high solar output would cause warming itself, fewer cosmic rays to reach our atmosphere, driving down clouds and cloud induced cooling.

 

So from there, you get a couple of things:

1.  People studied clouds, it isn't at all clear the net effect of clouds is cooling.   The effect of clouds is complex enough and small enough that we can't even put a sign on it at this point in time.

 

2.  People studied cloud formation, and all sorts of variables are correlated with cloud formation, and the strongest correlation are internal weather patterns (e.g. the AMO).  GCR's play a smaller role, and things like UV (ozone hole) from the sun play an important role.  And again, the nature of the clouds matter.  GCR's don't affect the formation of all clouds the same.  Even warming is causing changes in clouds (which might induce more warming).

 

https://www.edf.org/blog/2016/08/24/climate-change-messing-clouds-and-its-really-big-deal

 

(Note, this is another prediction that climate models have made that has been shown to be correct.)

 

The last important thing to point out that solar wind isn't really well correlated with solar output.

 

And again, lucky for us, the sun has helped us do these experiments for us.  Solar wind dropped quickly and drastically in 2002, and then came back up (more slowly).  Cosmic rays decrease and increase with the normal solar cycle and as I said the solar cycles have been trending down since the 1980.  The 2002/2003 temperature are not anomalously high or low like you'd expect if solar winds were an important driver of global temperatures (and I'll point out that you do see with things like El Nino and large volcanic eruptions anomalously high (El Nino) and low (volcanoes) temperature changes), and again, we've seen continued warming in the face of the drop in solar output.

 

The net effect is there does appear to be a role for GCR's and solar wind in cloud formation.  They aren't the primary or even major driver of cloud formation, and the net effect of clouds isn't even overly large and is small enough that the effect of clouds on temperature is still unclear.


While we can't put a clear number on the role of GCR's and solar wind on temperature, the sum of the effects (they have relatively weak affects on clouds as other factors also play important roles, which then have relative weak affects on temperature) is almost certainly small.  In any complex system, nailing down the small numbers is very hard to do.

Edited by PeterMP
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
China

China

Posted
Posted

Arnold Schwarzenegger says he's going to sue oil companies for murder

 

Former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger plans to sue oil companies for murder, he said on a Politico podcast episode published Monday.

 

Schwarzenegger likened oil companies to tobacco companies continuing to sell cigarettes after becoming aware of their deleterious effects on users' health. "The oil companies knew from 1959 on — they did their own study that there would be global warming happening because of fossil fuels, and on top of it that it would be risky for people's lives, that it would kill," he said. "If you walk into a room and you know you're going to kill someone, it's first-degree murder; I think it's the same thing with the oil companies."

 

The goal of the suit is to mandate health warning labels analogous to those on cigarette boxes. To "me it's absolutely irresponsible to know that your product is killing people and not have a warning label on it, like tobacco," Schwarzenegger said. "Every gas station on it, every car should have a warning label on it; every product that has fossil fuels should have a warning label on it."

 

Click on the link for the full article

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
Sacks 'n' Stuff

Sacks 'n' Stuff

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, thinwhiteduke said:

There is no global warming or what ever it's called.If there is,so what? What's the point in talking about? You'll be able  to do anything about it anyway.

 It's just another thing govt. Made up,like the hollow threat of a nuclear war.

 

There was a story on the news yesterday about a pitbull that attacked a chihuahua at the local dog park. I was SCREAMING at the tv "There was no pit bull attack! This is on tv so I know it's made up!!!" They even showed a video which, I assume, was CGI. My mom (who's house I still live in since I'm incapable of keeping a job) was all like, "what's your problem? We know the family that this happened to!" I tried to explain to her how I had just blown her mind and presented an inarguable truth about her fake reality that she had never been confronted with before. Also, how her "friends" were just crisis actors who had been living in that house down the street for 30 years just to set this up so the government can sell more leashes.

 

It briefly occurred to me that I suck at life... That I contribute nothing to society and that I'm dumb as ****. Fortunately that passed quickly and I realized that I'm actually the smartest person in the world and that my ****ty life is everyone else's fault but my own. Good thing or else i might have had to deal with all of my ****ed up issues and I really don't want to go through the discomfort. Anyway... back to smoking weed, masturbating, and living a life devoid of purpose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thinwhiteduke

thinwhiteduke

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

There was a story on the news yesterday about a pitbull that attacked a chihuahua at the local dog park. I was SCREAMING at the tv "There was no pit bull attack! This is on tv so I know it's made up!!!" They even showed a video which, I assume, was CGI. My mom (who's house I still live in since I'm incapable of keeping a job) was all like, "what's your problem? We know the family that this happened to!" I tried to explain to her how I had just blown her mind and presented an inarguable truth about her fake reality that she had never been confronted with before. Also, how her "friends" were just crisis actors who had been living in that house down the street for 30 years just to set this up so the government can sell more leashes.

 

It briefly occurred to me that I suck at life... That I contribute nothing to society and that I'm dumb as ****. Fortunately that passed quickly and I realized that I'm actually the smartest person in the world and that my ****ty life is everyone else's fault but my own. Good thing or else i might have had to deal with all of my ****ed up issues and I really don't want to go through the discomfort. Anyway... back to smoking weed, masturbating, and living a life devoid of purpose.

 

real things happen, prove that fake things dont? nope, you are wrong again. Making fun of someones social status is irrelevant to the pursuit of truth.

  one person is worth more than other just because he runs on the rat wheel at a job every day? nope, another social construct. Not one single thing you said proves or solves anything about global warming. Just wasting time. which is exactly what govt wants you to do.
 

Quote


That I contribute nothing to society and that I'm dumb as ****.

 

you slave at a job and are too tired to think for yourself when you get home..and do the same stupid **** the next day.

 all those productive citizen = slave robot to the system, on the rat wheel of a life, constructed for you.

lol you really need to think this through before smarting off lol you little snacky-poo , you  :).

 

it has nothing to do with anyones fault. the question is- are you actually free? no, youve never been free one single day of your life. your social security number and ID are exactly the same as a product bar code or a prison shirt number

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...