It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: pheonix358
Tough. Climate is complex and people should want to know the details. That way maybe we can have less derpy discussions about it.
The thermosphere ranges in altitude from 90 km to 600+ km. It is a realm of meteors, auroras and satellites, which skim through the thermosphere as they circle Earth.
For instance, trends in global climate could alter the composition of the thermosphere, changing its thermal properties and the way it responds to external stimuli. The overall sensitivity of the thermosphere to solar radiation could actually be increasing.
"The density anomalies," they wrote, "may signify that an as-yet-unidentified climatological tipping point involving energy balance and chemistry feedbacks has been reached."
originally posted by: charlyv
Our sensors all show that something wacky is happening. For backup, we have the ice cores and trapped gasses in rocks, the solar minimum upon us, increased CO2 and a great deal of minutia. However, what is obviously lacking is adequate and accurate historical record to correlate what the aftermath will be. If we had 50k or so years of accurate world climate data, then it probably would be much easier.
We rely heavily on models of what-if's, based upon what we have put into the simulations.
Our current level of understanding still cannot tell us exactly what to expect.
originally posted by: Rezlooper
Hail does not confirm cooling, if anything it is the opposite. It shows the intense energy of a storm. Hail means that the intense storm had enough updraft to blow the rain droplets up high enough into the atmosphere where it is freezing. Hail has nothing to do with surface temperatures.
originally posted by: ANNED
The climate is always changing.
The only difference now is the chicken little's that are trying to make something out of it and the scammers that are trying to make big money from it.
In this case i believe from my research that man is only causing 5 to 10% of the change and the rest is natural.
originally posted by: Justoneman
For me, this better explains what is happening than the CO2 hoax being perpetuated on the people for greedy people with agendas.
What is the physical mechanism of the natural change, and how is it diagnosed in the data in contrast to increased greenhouse effect from global warming?
How do you address the existing large set of observations supporting the current consensus?