It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Rapidly Warming Oceans Set to Release Heat Into the Atmosphere

page: 2
28
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 31 2014 @ 11:18 PM
link   
Let's assume for a moment that rising co2 levels have an effect on climate. Let's also assume that man is the primary culprit of said rising levels of co2.

What are you going to do about it? What solution do you propose?

Are you going to mandate billions of people on earth simply stop using fossil fuels altogether?

No.

How about placing a carbon tax on people? Possibly, but will that solve the issue? No, rising temperatures means the threshold has already been crossed, and any attempts to reduce co2 emissions are useless if the net result is not a reduction in co2 levels each year.

Ok, so what are some other solutions that are being attempted?

Geoengineering, it's pretty obvious regardless of intent, that massive air traffic produces contrails, which NASA calls the most visible anthropogenic weather phenomenon. What do these contrails do? They do not solve anything, they simply mask a process that is occurring whether natural or man-made through radiative forcing. This means the days are cooler than they should be, and nights are warmer than they should be. It doesn't solve the problem, it masks the affects and creates a larger problem later.

So, what solutions, because it's one thing to point out something, and then unscientifically say it is bad. I thought change was good, life will adapt to the changes, those unfit will die out and life will go on.

No, that's not the PC thing, to just let the fossil fuel age run it's coarse naturally. I find this akin to one day a medieval kingdom suddenly is declared a republic, without any forethought or planning involved into a transitional process.

What solutions do the climate changers propose, that would actually reverse the process of increased co2? They all claim that some magical technology will suddenly appear and we'll simply all switch to that. There is no other form of energy that is as effective for the war machines of nations than fossil fuels, and in this age of technology, having the biggest and best war machines is paramount to survival of nations. Because the world is not united, and everyone will not be on board with any energy shift to be 'sustainable'.

On the topic of sustainability, the newer sustainable energies are not sustainable, they are more efficient. The net result is still more co2. That's like instead of filling a cup already full with a gallon jug, using a quarter gallon jug. The threshold is already reached. Climate change happens with or without people, if people are forcing climate change, people are still apart of nature and still beholden to the laws of nature. If our impact is so great, people and the organisms people depend on to survive will be reduced, to the point where the problem is solved naturally.

No, I see this whole climate change movement as a ploy. It's a ploy for only a select few individuals to have access to high technologies, while the rest of the masses are subjected to a thousand years of serfdom.

You want a real solution to climate change? Modern society is what has brought upon the fossil fuel age, so the solution is simple, get rid of modern society. Send us back into the dark ages, we can all ride around on horses and cut each others heads off, for the good of the planet, right?

I don't care what people believe about climate change, I believe it is real and I also believe that man has impacted that. I also understand that fossil fuels are a limited resource, and the impact will eventually end. If that's not what you believe, than I would suggest start funding projects for space exploration/colonization to other planets, because with 7+ billion people in the world, and hundreds of nations, there is no way you can change this process since not everyone will be on board.

Rising sea levels is bad? Really? The majority of human populations are near coastal regions. The seas rise, and wash away a huge part of the supposed problem. Nature solves the problem, life goes on, and if people are deserving we will not go extinct.




posted on Dec, 31 2014 @ 11:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: CaticusMaximus

originally posted by: lostbook

What says ATS?


I think Ive been on ATS long enough to sum up the things 99% of it will say, in one form or another, in generally descending order of both... ahem... "ignorance", would be the nice way to put it... and commonality:

Anyway...

This is why every estimate is being revised upwards constantly. Scientists, though knowledgeable and some, even intelligent, as they may be, are not likely to be any more well equipped to think in exponential terms than an ordinary person would be. Their projections are linear projections, and the system being modeled is in full on exponential

The situation is not reversible at this point though. So many positive feedbacks have been triggered, that its pretty much over. Even with a global concerted effort, with a 100% immediate reduction to all emissions, its still too late because some of those emissions (sulfates) are actually keeping the planet cooler than it should be, and dont last long in the atmosphere (days). Stop emissions, the planet warms past 2C immediately. Keep the emissions going, and the planet is on course for catastrophic warming (upwards of 10C) in just a few decades.

All I can say now to people really, is to make peace with death while you still have time. If you are relatively healthy and under... 75, you probably have a good chance of seeing the full blown effects of whats to come. At least the earnest beginnings of them. And when that happens, you will most likely die before your natural expiration date due to either starvation, or violence over resources at some level, local or national.



Awesome news! Thanks for that. I look forward to the challenge, and the warmth. Especially the warmth, it too freaking cold.

And hey, we are way past due for a population culling anyway, right? I think that's the ultimate agenda here, screw us for money, or you die. I'm good either way, I have no money and I'm not afraid of death.



posted on Dec, 31 2014 @ 11:37 PM
link   
a reply to: GodEmperor

Unfortunately the climate crazies are not interested in your facts. They are more into the agenda.



posted on Jan, 1 2015 @ 12:02 AM
link   
a reply to: CaticusMaximus




Heat will, and has, come out of the ocean in large quantities very quickly. Typically those years are called "el nino" years. Its when a lot of heat stored in the ocean is dumped back out into the atmosphere.


So, when is the next El Nino happening? Does it happen at regular intervals or is it an irregular event?



posted on Jan, 1 2015 @ 12:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: pheonix358
a reply to: Greven

No.

CO2 increases lag behind temperature increases.

That is, the increased temperatures cause CO2 to increase.

P

Funny story:

You're wrong. Or at least, you're imprecise. Temperature lags behind CO2 increase in the Northern Hemisphere.

It's a pretty basic science experiment to add CO2 to an atmosphere, say, in a bottle. Guess what happens if you take two containers, one with CO2 added and one without, and stick them in the sun? The one with the added CO2 ends up hotter.
edit on 0Thu, 01 Jan 2015 00:20:37 -0600America/ChicagovAmerica/Chicago1 by Greven because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 1 2015 @ 12:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Greven




You're wrong. Or at least, you're imprecise. Temperature lags behind CO2 increase in the Northern Hemisphere.


The chart I put up is for the Northern Hemisphere. It clearly shows the opposite.

You know, you are the first person I have seen, come up with that tid bit.

P



posted on Jan, 1 2015 @ 12:33 AM
link   
a reply to: pheonix358

The Vostok ice cores - which is what that chart you posted claims to use - are from Antarctica, so what are you talking about?

And if you haven't heard that CO2 leads temperature in the Northern Hemisphere before, you need to look harder.



posted on Jan, 1 2015 @ 12:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Greven
a reply to: pheonix358

The Vostok ice cores - which is what that chart you posted claims to use - are from Antarctica, so what are you talking about?

And if you haven't heard that CO2 leads temperature in the Northern Hemisphere before, you need to look harder.
What happened to the southern hemisphere? CO2 doesn't like spicy food?



posted on Jan, 1 2015 @ 01:01 AM
link   



posted on Jan, 1 2015 @ 01:33 AM
link   
So many people are still in denial of the current phenomenon of acute climate and weather change.
Atmospheric conditions on Earth have become irreversibly violent.
It is very evident that this has reached a state of critical mass, here, now, on Earth.

Too much CO2 emitted by the presence and activities of humans on this planet.
CO2 gets absorbed by the oceans.
Oceans get warmer as a result.
Heat rises into the atmosphere and causes atmospheric turbulance.
Turbulance causes intense electric storms.
Severe stormy weather causes mayhem on earth.
Flash floods, mudslides, rockslides on LAND.
Planes falling out of the SKY.
Icebergs melting into the SEA.
Sea level rising that submerges much of the planet's continental coastlines.
Hot and cold ocean currents reversing.
Polar fronts reaching closer to the equator.

It's all connected, guys!

As the human infestation of the planet increases in volume, so does its effect devastate the equalibrium of Nature.
Nature is a closed system...just like an aquarium.
Upset the temperature and chemistry of the tank...and the fish die.

There is only one way to solve this problem and reverse this destructive trend that will eventually decimate all of life on Earth: Spay and neuter the entire human population. Let the animals take over.
Without this solution, all of Nature on this Planet loses. Humans will destroy life on the planet.
It won't be the first time for a planet to become sterile.


Are you still in denial?



posted on Jan, 1 2015 @ 01:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Greven

Sorry, my mistake, I put the wrong graph up.



Here you go.

The Northern Hemisphere is not so special, it is part of the same world wide eco system.

P



posted on Jan, 1 2015 @ 01:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bilk22
Gee who-da-thought? SHOCK STUDY: Carbon dioxide emissions help rainforests GROW FASTER...




...But not if we keep cutting them down!
No trees, no absorption.



posted on Jan, 1 2015 @ 01:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Starling




So many people are still in denial of the current phenomenon of acute climate and weather change.



Are you still in denial?


Yes the weather is changing.

It has been for the entire history of this planet.

However, to blame it on modern man is just a bit silly.

We are heading for another ice age. It stands to reason that the weather will change.

History shows that it will change no matter what we do. Mother nature is the boss, we are just a little infestation.

P



posted on Jan, 1 2015 @ 01:58 AM
link   
I don't know what to think about climate change but I just worked out that this particular area has a deficit of 600mm of rain for 2014. The funny thing is that the official figures say that we got 200mm more than we actually did which means that they are trying to cover up the problem. In July 2012 the weather gods simply turned off the taps and things have gone haywire ever since. I think that certain people cover up this desertification process so they can continue to sell real estate in this now poverty stricken area. They say unemployment is around 12% but it is at least double that as there is not much money coming off the farms. I could go on but you get the picture.
edit on 1-1-2015 by grumpy64 because: because



posted on Jan, 1 2015 @ 11:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: lostbook
a reply to: CaticusMaximus




Heat will, and has, come out of the ocean in large quantities very quickly. Typically those years are called "el nino" years. Its when a lot of heat stored in the ocean is dumped back out into the atmosphere.


So, when is the next El Nino happening? Does it happen at regular intervals or is it an irregular event?


Its irregular and fairly unpredictable. Last year there was an 80% chance of an el nino predicted, but it did not materialize.

Theres no sure method of saying when it will happen, until after the fact that its already started. Its likely one will happen soon, however not certain.

a reply to: Eunuchorn

I appreciate your appreciation. Ill go several weeks without posting at times, because at points it seems meaningless to post here. ATS has become so mainstreamed over the years, all the topics are either common political # thats already posted and talked to death about all over the net (and indeed thats usually where it comes from), or any interesting ones usually get swamped by pseudo-skeptics, pseudo-intellectual obsessive debunkers, hecklers who dont know their ass from their elbow to begin with, let alone anything about the interesting topic, and everyone else just wants to toss in their own opinion because hey, thats what the topic was posted for, right? Hell, the whole internet was made for that, right? ...For them to toss in their irrelevant, contrary opinion into every thread they see, and pretend they, and their opinions, are actually important.

It just gets tiresome.


I even have trouble reading through online forums such as this one because people truly can never realize that "the future" doesn't exist, & that nonexistent future is literally a few mere years away.


A great point, and one I empathize with fully. My view is completely different from 99%+ of others, so much so that it makes it very difficult to associate with others, online, and in real life, because our understandings of reality, as is pertinent to our existence at the moment, is so opposed.

This opposition is usually in regards to climate, and spiritual topics. So basically, the most important thing in our physical existence, and the most important things after it.

I dont even try to talk to people about any of it anymore. People believe what they WANT to believe, and rarely do they want to believe the real truth, whatever that may be. Those who do want to believe the truth, seek it, and do not get hung up on details that go contrary their current working model of reality they have in their heads... they modify that model as new information is gathered. But most have their model of reality, and thats that, no matter what. Jesus is lord, or praise Allah, or "we are all one", or aliens, or some nonsensical loony reductionist materialism model where everything randomly exploded out of nothingness, doesnt matter really what it is... if the person is intellectually, and more so, emotionally vested in that idea in that they will feel dejected and to have "lost" if it happens they are not correct, they cannot be reasoned with, in anyway. They dont want the truth, after all... they want the feeling of "being right". Has nothing to do with logic nor reason, but with pride and ego (neither of which are inherently "bad", but for most people, those things have taken over and are running the show for them).

Its unfortunate... because the truth is better than any fantasy they could ever even hope to come up with.


edit on 1/1/2015 by CaticusMaximus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 1 2015 @ 12:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Greven




It's a pretty basic science experiment to add CO2 to an atmosphere, say, in a bottle.


There's just one wee little problem with your "basic science experiment":

The earth isn't in a closed bottle.

Hence the radiative forcing calculation will not compute the same way as it does in a closed, controlled "bottle" experiment... Hence the reason why the planet doesn't seem to be following this over-simplified equation (3.7 W/m^2) touted by climatologists.



posted on Jan, 1 2015 @ 12:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse
It's one degree below zero F here today. How long before this takes effect?


Here's a post by fellow ATS member CaticusMaximus:




I think Ive been on ATS long enough to sum up the things 99% of it will say, in one form or another, in generally descending order of both... ahem... "ignorance", would be the nice way to put it... and commonality:

1: "Herp derp, it was (something really low) temperature here today, hurr durrrrrr, sure be nice ifn that heat came over my way!"
2: "They dont know what they are talking about. Despite my non-existent credentials against their life-times of knowledge, something tells me they are wrong and I am right!"
3: "Its a hoax! Carbon tax! Koch Brothers!"
4: "Its natural, theres nothing to worry about!"
5: "Its happened before, nothing to worry about!"
6: "Its happening, but by god WE had absolutely nothing to do with it whatsoever! AGW is a hoax! Tax! KOCH!!!"
7: "The world is COOLING, We are actually going into an ice age!" (Ok thats actually the dumbest one, but its not very common)

The remaining 1% of ATS will try to inject some type of intelligence to the reply section, but will be heckled and attacked by a crowd from the above who dont realize just how foolish they actually look to people who understand the predicament we are in even on a rudimentary level.

Anyway...

The situation is dire. No... in fact it is now irreversible, which I dont think "dire" describes very well. "Dire" implies there might be some chance to turn things around, but the momentum of the system is nigh incomprehensible. Humans are looking at something that they are not physiologically very capable of comprehending: exponential functions. Humans are mentally designed to think in linear terms. When a system becomes non-linear, as in exponential, the human mind does not cope well with it on it a fundamental level.

This is why every estimate is being revised upwards constantly. Scientists, though knowledgeable and some, even intelligent, as they may be, are not likely to be any more well equipped to think in exponential terms than an ordinary person would be. Their projections are linear projections, and the system being modeled is in full on exponential mode.

Heat will, and has, come out of the ocean in large quantities very quickly. Typically those years are called "el nino" years. Its when a lot of heat stored in the ocean is dumped back out into the atmosphere. Its why the atmosphere appeared to somewhat plateau in 98... that was an el nino year with a large spike in temperature; but the Earth did not stop warming... the heat simply went into the oceans.

The situation is not reversible at this point though. So many positive feedbacks have been triggered, that its pretty much over. Even with a global concerted effort, with a 100% immediate reduction to all emissions, its still too late because some of those emissions (sulfates) are actually keeping the planet cooler than it should be, and dont last long in the atmosphere (days). Stop emissions, the planet warms past 2C immediately. Keep the emissions going, and the planet is on course for catastrophic warming (upwards of 10C) in just a few decades.

I wont explain why thats bad to anyone who doesnt know. Look it up yourself. Its extremely bad for the ecology of the planet.

All I can say now to people really, is to make peace with death while you still have time. If you are relatively healthy and under... 75, you probably have a good chance of seeing the full blown effects of whats to come. At least the earnest beginnings of them. And when that happens, you will most likely die before your natural expiration date due to either starvation, or violence over resources at some level, local or national.


This sounds about right, to me.


edit on 1-1-2015 by lostbook because: word change



posted on Jan, 1 2015 @ 12:26 PM
link   
a reply to: CaticusMaximus

Thank you for your response. I appreciate your input.



posted on Jan, 1 2015 @ 12:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: pheonix358
a reply to: Greven

Sorry, my mistake, I put the wrong graph up.



Here you go.

The Northern Hemisphere is not so special, it is part of the same world wide eco system.

P

This appears to be from this paper by Ahn & Brook. As you can see from the graph, Ahn & Brook do not measure anything in Greenland, but Siple Dome in Antarctica. They are synchronizing data with measurements from other sources in Greenland:

Our CO2 record from the Siple Dome core is synchronized with NGRIP (North Greenland Ice Core Project) ice ages on the Greenland Ice Core Chronology 2005 (GICC05) timescale using abrupt CH4 changes that are near synchronous with abrupt Greenlandic climate change. We used updated CH4 records to make better synchronization. The CH4 data resolution is 82 and 232 years for 23.5–42.3 and 42.3–46.9 ka, respectively.


There could be problems with this synchronization.

However, it is newer than the Shakun et al. paper, which is where I got the claim that northern hemisphere temperature lags CO2. This is a critique of that paper, mostly about other things than that particular claim. Other research has narrowed the lag in Antarctica to below 200 years.



posted on Jan, 1 2015 @ 12:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: CranialSponge
There's just one wee little problem with your "basic science experiment":

The earth isn't in a closed bottle.

Hence the radiative forcing calculation will not compute the same way as it does in a closed, controlled "bottle" experiment... Hence the reason why the planet doesn't seem to be following this over-simplified equation (3.7 W/m^2) touted by climatologists.


It is simplified, yes. You might recall that there are two planets in the solar system closer to the Sun than Earth - Venus and Mercury. Mercury is extremely close, but it is cooler than Venus. Why? No atmosphere - and no greenhouse gasses. Life would not exist on Earth without greenhouse gases - primarily water vapor, here. Venus has both a much thicker atmosphere and a much different atmospheric composition - mostly CO2, but also a number of various other molecules.

Do go on, though: a simple YES or NO, no hand wringing over exact figures on radiative forcing. Does CO2 do absolutely nothing?



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join