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.

 

A Meteorologist Explains Why the Extreme Heat is Way Worse Than You Think

page: 3
21
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 8 2018 @ 03:13 AM
link   
In past research articles, solar activity was suggested to be responsible for 63 to 72% of the earths temperature increase (past 150 per a Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics article)

Then there are the volcano's under Antarctica that are melting the permafrost and everything trapped in it.

Sure man has caused some issues because of fossil fuels, but nature is doing more damage.

Isn't methane more damaging than Co2? And that is a byproduct of landfills and cows......




posted on Jul, 8 2018 @ 03:17 AM
link   
a reply to: CraigMon


Isn't methane more damaging than Co2? And that is a byproduct of landfills and cows......

You're right. I'm trying desperately to help by eating the cows, but one man can only eat so many hamburgers... everyone else is crying about carbon dioxide and going vegan it seems...



TheRedneck



posted on Jul, 8 2018 @ 03:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lumenari
a reply to: FyreByrd


Notes: Mother Jones is a politically progressive American magazine reporting on politics, the environment, human rights, and culture.


I stopped there.

Every other sane person did too.




I didn't make it past this :



I found this article in Mother Jones



posted on Jul, 8 2018 @ 04:11 AM
link   
a reply to: CraigMon


Isn't methane more damaging than Co2? And that is a byproduct of landfills and cows......


There have been found fissures on the ocean floor spewing methane into the water, contributing to the rise in water temp.

===========
Climate change is part o fthe natural cycle, we are having an effect on that natural cycle, the debate should be how much of an effect are we having?

Then very quickly after how much of an effect are we having we should be saying how can we adjust to the changing climate and survive!

Because while we may be able to change how much we change the climate, we cannot stop the natural cycle of the earth so it will get warmer and it will get colder even if all of humanity was wiped away by the snap of your fingers.

So we can piss away trillions of dollars on the carbon credit scam, or we can pour that money into something more useful like how to get more usable water in areas the rains arent hitting as much, or how to use the ocean water in an efficent manner, how to better protect coastal cities you know useful engineering ideas that would have a direct impact on how people live their lives rather than feel good save the children rehtoric.



posted on Jul, 8 2018 @ 07:00 AM
link   
a reply to: FyreByrd

Can you explain why a heat wave in a part of the US is "Climate change", but a cold spell in the same area, isn't.



posted on Jul, 8 2018 @ 07:20 AM
link   
I believe that it is part of a very long, natural cycle.

When we talk about data, the only "recorded" data we have is for the last 250 years or so, which is not even a blip in the 4.5 billion years the earth's has been around. In her long life, the entire surface has been frozen twice and there were other climates than the one we know today.

Unfortunately the majority of the population are no longer wanderers and we have set our homes down on flood plains, places where there is coastal erosion, areas of long term drought, next to volcanoes and in earthquake zones. We have decimated forests which naturally filter water and soak it up. We are all dependant on businesses (where the goal is to make profit) to supply our food, water and energy.

In the 80s we had acid rain. In the 90s we had the hole in the ozone layer. Now in the 2000's global warming and now we have climate change. The "answers" to dealing with climate change are green taxes and carbon offsetting which tells me that the governments are not taking this seriously.

With films like Highlander 2 (solar shield) and The Knowing (solar flare destroys earth) to mention a few, you have to wonder if we are all being programmed (because isnt that what TV and films are really for?) Maybe our climate is getting out of control and we are heading for an ELE, but there is nothing that we can do about it. Disclosure would mean world-wide panic and chaos, so instead we are shown various scenarios including our own fate, told we are to blame and distracted with a solution.



posted on Jul, 8 2018 @ 07:27 AM
link   
And another thing.

The military have talked about tactical weather manipulation in the war theatre and. Patents on this and geoengineering have been around for decades. The technology is available to make it rain or not. If our weather is being deliberately manipulated in secret, then it gives another dimension to "man-made" climate change.
edit on 8/7/2018 by YarlanZey because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2018 @ 12:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: pheonix358



Prior to human-induced global warming, climate changes were relatively slow over the course of hundreds to thousands of years.


More of the same crap.

Climate change is due to the fact that the ice will soon start growing. It is just a natural cycle.

Is man speeding it up? Don't know. The last time this happened it was about 110,000 years ago.




It is just the earth's cycle.

P

You keep ignoring the little red line off to the right whenever you post this chart.


Reviewing that graph, why does the temperature (blue line) always seem to PRECEDE the red line (CO2) in both the elevations and falls?

I am sure that means something.....now what could that be?




posted on Jul, 8 2018 @ 12:06 PM
link   
a reply to: FyreByrd

I think I'll take the classic Dick Cheney quote to reply:


So?

--Dick Cheney



posted on Jul, 8 2018 @ 12:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: ClovenSky

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: pheonix358



Prior to human-induced global warming, climate changes were relatively slow over the course of hundreds to thousands of years.


More of the same crap.

Climate change is due to the fact that the ice will soon start growing. It is just a natural cycle.

Is man speeding it up? Don't know. The last time this happened it was about 110,000 years ago.




It is just the earth's cycle.

P

You keep ignoring the little red line off to the right whenever you post this chart.


Reviewing that graph, why does the temperature (blue line) always seem to PRECEDE the red line (CO2) in both the elevations and falls?

I am sure that means something.....now what could that be?


Natural cycles as compared with human-induced change today.

The CO2 line at the far right is higher now than any point on that graph. Current CO2 concentration is 410ppm. The maximum on that graph is 380.



posted on Jul, 8 2018 @ 12:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: YarlanZey
I believe that it is part of a very long, natural cycle.



The operative words being "a very long, natural cycle".

Meaning over hundreds and thousands of years. This 'warming' has taken place with the past hundred years - a very short anc compressed timespan.

So no it is not a 'natural' (meaning it would happen without human actions as well) is factually incorrect.



posted on Jul, 8 2018 @ 01:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Greven

What was observed through the graph was the CO2 cycle FOLLOWING the temperature cycle for thousands of years. CO2 does not cause a rise in temperatures but appears the CO2 increases because of higher temperatures.

How else would you interpret the graphs?



posted on Jul, 8 2018 @ 03:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: ClovenSky
a reply to: Greven

What was observed through the graph was the CO2 cycle FOLLOWING the temperature cycle for thousands of years. CO2 does not cause a rise in temperatures but appears the CO2 increases because of higher temperatures.

How else would you interpret the graphs?

What is missing from that graph is the margin of error, and a bit of knowledge.

CO2 does not naturally freeze on Earth. One old, and correct, skeptic argument is that dating CO2 concentrations can be inaccurate due to the fact that CO2 bubbles can move. Given that CO2 gas is less dense than H2O ice, it tends to filter upwards.

The graph in question is from a 2012 study:

Because solar cycles and the relationship between CO2 and temperature are both involved, the precise pattern of global temperature fluctuations is complex. During warming parts of the record, the rise in temperature leads that of CO2 by about 800 years.

One reason this occurs is because when Croll/Milankovitch warming is initiated, the oceans take several enturies to respond fully and only as they warm is CO2 released which, in turn, warms the rest of the Earth. In such a complex coupled atmosphere–ocean –land system, it is to be expected that there will be leads and lags between different components and feedback effects amplifying or suppressing changes. Finally, the ice core records demonstrate that September 2011 levels of CO2 (389 ppmv; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 2011) are higher than in previous interglacials.


However, this study doesn't mention the large uncertainty, which depending on the data set used, may be larger than the lag that appears on the graph. The other issue is that this graph is of Antarctica; while it may be useful, it is not necessarily indicative of the world.



posted on Jul, 8 2018 @ 04:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: YarlanZey
I believe that it is part of a very long, natural cycle.

When we talk about data, the only "recorded" data we have is for the last 250 years or so, which is not even a blip in the 4.5 billion years the earth's has been around. In her long life, the entire surface has been frozen twice and there were other climates than the one we know today.

Unfortunately the majority of the population are no longer wanderers and we have set our homes down on flood plains, places where there is coastal erosion, areas of long term drought, next to volcanoes and in earthquake zones. We have decimated forests which naturally filter water and soak it up. We are all dependant on businesses (where the goal is to make profit) to supply our food, water and energy.

In the 80s we had acid rain. In the 90s we had the hole in the ozone layer. Now in the 2000's global warming and now we have climate change. The "answers" to dealing with climate change are green taxes and carbon offsetting which tells me that the governments are not taking this seriously.

With films like Highlander 2 (solar shield) and The Knowing (solar flare destroys earth) to mention a few, you have to wonder if we are all being programmed (because isnt that what TV and films are really for?) Maybe our climate is getting out of control and we are heading for an ELE, but there is nothing that we can do about it. Disclosure would mean world-wide panic and chaos, so instead we are shown various scenarios including our own fate, told we are to blame and distracted with a solution.



Acid rain was related to the iron, steel and coal plants in Eastern Europe. The soot from those plants would act as a condensation nucleii for snow in the UK. Once they were shut down or had more improved pollution controls, the UK had less snow. It could also be that UK cities have become larger so that the heat island affect now acts as force fields blocking bands of cold weather. I see the weather satellite pictures of cloud and the bands of snow and rain are forced in between Birmingham and London. Flying from the air, I'd see open fields covered in snow while the local towns and villages are snow free.

The amount of sunlight reaching our planet is constant. The amount of strong sunlight reaching the warm equatorial regions is the same. Same with the North and South poles. What changes is the way the two interact through ocean currents and the jet stream. It's thought the AMOC (Atlantic Meridional overturning circulation) ocean current is slowing down.

www.npr.org...



posted on Jul, 8 2018 @ 06:49 PM
link   
a reply to: FyreByrd



Factual Reporting: HIGH 
Notes: Mother Jones is a politically progressive American magazine reporting on politics, the environment, human rights, and culture. 


Left Wing Fear Mongering Reporting: EXTREME



posted on Jul, 8 2018 @ 09:00 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

You people are fing ridiculous. Anytime anyone brings up anomalous cold periods and it's weather not climate. Then when there's some localised hot periods it's further proof of global warming. You people wouldn't know logic if it weighed 500 lbs, crawled on your head and wiggled.

Jaden



posted on Jul, 8 2018 @ 09:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Wide-Eyes

They skipped over the part where it said politically progressive, which might as well said completely biased.

Jaden



posted on Jul, 8 2018 @ 10:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: stormcell

originally posted by: YarlanZey
I believe that it is part of a very long, natural cycle.

When we talk about data, the only "recorded" data we have is for the last 250 years or so, which is not even a blip in the 4.5 billion years the earth's has been around. In her long life, the entire surface has been frozen twice and there were other climates than the one we know today.

Unfortunately the majority of the population are no longer wanderers and we have set our homes down on flood plains, places where there is coastal erosion, areas of long term drought, next to volcanoes and in earthquake zones. We have decimated forests which naturally filter water and soak it up. We are all dependant on businesses (where the goal is to make profit) to supply our food, water and energy.

In the 80s we had acid rain. In the 90s we had the hole in the ozone layer. Now in the 2000's global warming and now we have climate change. The "answers" to dealing with climate change are green taxes and carbon offsetting which tells me that the governments are not taking this seriously.

With films like Highlander 2 (solar shield) and The Knowing (solar flare destroys earth) to mention a few, you have to wonder if we are all being programmed (because isnt that what TV and films are really for?) Maybe our climate is getting out of control and we are heading for an ELE, but there is nothing that we can do about it. Disclosure would mean world-wide panic and chaos, so instead we are shown various scenarios including our own fate, told we are to blame and distracted with a solution.



Acid rain was related to the iron, steel and coal plants in Eastern Europe. The soot from those plants would act as a condensation nucleii for snow in the UK. Once they were shut down or had more improved pollution controls, the UK had less snow. It could also be that UK cities have become larger so that the heat island affect now acts as force fields blocking bands of cold weather. I see the weather satellite pictures of cloud and the bands of snow and rain are forced in between Birmingham and London. Flying from the air, I'd see open fields covered in snow while the local towns and villages are snow free.

The amount of sunlight reaching our planet is constant. The amount of strong sunlight reaching the warm equatorial regions is the same. Same with the North and South poles. What changes is the way the two interact through ocean currents and the jet stream. It's thought the AMOC (Atlantic Meridional overturning circulation) ocean current is slowing down.

www.npr.org...


a bit on Global Dimming (Athropogenic of course):


Measurements from the 1960s to the early 1990s, backed up by a wide range of data and a number of independent studies, showed there were substantial declines in the amount of the sun's energy reaching the Earth's surface.

This reduction is known as "global dimming".

The observed "dimming" has strong regional differences across the globe. While the southern hemisphere saw modest dimming in the period 1961–90 (which has continued to date), the northern hemisphere saw much more significant declines (reductions of 4–8%).

Since then some parts of the world, such as Europe and North America, have seen partial recovery (known as "brightening"), while other regions (most notably China and India) have seen further although regionally mixed declines.

Global dimming is not thought to be due to changes in the sun's luminosity, as these have been too small to explain the magnitude of dimming observed.

Instead, air pollution from human activity is thought to be the major contributor. Aerosols which form from pollution can directly reflect and absorb radiation before it reaches the planet's surface and make clouds brighter and longer lasting, meaning they reflect more sunlight.


Good Commie Propoganda: www.theguardian.com...



posted on Jul, 8 2018 @ 11:23 PM
link   
a reply to: FyreByrd


Measurements from the 1960s to the early 1990s, backed up by a wide range of data and a number of independent studies, showed there were substantial declines in the amount of the sun's energy reaching the Earth's surface.

So your source says that Global Warming has prevented an Ice Age?

Cool! We need to burn more coal!


TheRedneck



posted on Jul, 9 2018 @ 12:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Irishhaf


There have been found fissures on the ocean floor spewing methane into the water, contributing to the rise in water temp.

That's interesting because the only reason we measure any global warming at all is because we combine ocean temp measurements with land temp measurements. Land temps alone show now real indication of warming but if you add ocean temps there is a clear upward trend, which they try to say it due to humans. This is completely ridiculous not only for the fact that the amount of energy we would have to displace into the ocean to make the temp rise that much is extremely huge and far beyond what we could do as a species, but also because it's extremely difficult to measure the overall temp of the ocean because it's massive and you need a huge amount of measuring devices, yet I believe they use more on the land, which makes sense because land measurements are more important.




top topics



 
21
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join