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 theory on how the Earth balances climate.

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 09:40 PM
link   
A theory of mine on how the Earth may self regulate its climate. I just threw this together from a bunch of different sources. If there is any interest I could try to flesh it out better. Nature rules!

Atmospheric carbon results in the greenhouse effect.
Prolonged greenhouse effect leads to global warming.
Global warming results in melting of polar ice caps and reduction or shutdown of warm water ocean circulations.
Previously glacier covered land rebounds leading to increased seismicity.
Increased seismicity leads to more active volcanoes possibly including a super volcano.
Massive injection of material into the upper atmosphere results in blocking some of the light and energy of the sun therefore cooling the earth and leading to new "ice age" of non specified intensity.




posted on May, 2 2008 @ 09:39 PM
link   
I question the amount of increased seismicity and whether it's enough to make volcanoes active enough to create a 'super volcano'.

Are you hoping that the ice age would be enough to wipe out all the humans? I'm curious as to what your views of an utopian ice age would be.



posted on May, 2 2008 @ 09:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by nattykoo
I question the amount of increased seismicity and whether it's enough to make volcanoes active enough to create a 'super volcano'.

Are you hoping that the ice age would be enough to wipe out all the humans? I'm curious as to what your views of an utopian ice age would be.


My utopian ice age would be me living to a ripe old age with friends, family and community with clean water and healthy food probably grown under greenhouse like conditions. I hadnt really considered it.

I would hope everyone 100% questions the validity of what I postulated. It's just a bunch of dots that I connected thinking about the way life and ecosystems have evolved. The seismic connection to glacier retreat has been in the back of my mind for a bit and I have only recently seen something approaching a scientific paper on the topic. I will have to look around for it and then I will post it.

Actually it was one of those anti-Gore/(Gore = environmentalists) posters that was teasing about global warming causing earthquakes that got me started down this path.

Every cloud has a silver lining I guess.



posted on May, 2 2008 @ 10:03 PM
link   
I definitely question your theory. I honestly doubt it will ever happen but it's a creative nonetheless.

The possibility of an ice age due to climate change has been brought quite frequently. Though, I really don't think something that dramatic can occur but who knows?



posted on May, 2 2008 @ 10:06 PM
link   

Atmospheric carbon results in the greenhouse effect.

To some degree, although I think the presently accepted amount of contribution is overrated (see below).


Prolonged greenhouse effect leads to global warming.

Reasonable assumption.


Global warming results in melting of polar ice caps and reduction or shutdown of warm water ocean circulations.

Another reasonable assumption.


Previously glacier covered land rebounds leading to increased seismicity.

Possible, I guess, but I know of no such present advocates of this. Can you provide a source?


Increased seismicity leads to more active volcanoes possibly including a super volcano.

I guess if the afore-mentioned scenario is accurate, this would be a logical continuation.


Massive injection of material into the upper atmosphere results in blocking some of the light and energy of the sun therefore cooling the earth and leading to new "ice age" of non specified intensity.

This is called the 'nuclear winter' scenario, and should enough pollution be introduced via nuclear war or volcanic activity, I can see it as being possible.

The big problem I see with this is the assumption that carbon dioxide is not self-correcting. Flora use CO2 and emit O2, which we in turn breathe. Flora growth is determined by heat level, humidity, and CO2 levels, so an increase in CO2 leads to increased plant growth which in turn uses more of the available CO2.

As evidence, I submit to you the very same charts used by Al Gore in the movie "An Inconvenient Truth". A closer examination of the data he uses shows that the average temperature rises prior to the increase in CO2 levels. Also, from 1998 to 2007 there was no change in global average temperature, although CO2 levels have been slowly rising. In 2008, NOAA is suggesting a global average temperature drop.

I submit that the rise in CO2 levels accompanying historic climate warmings is due to the decrease of HCO3- levels in seawater, as warmer water will stimulate the equation HCO3- ---> OH- + CO2. Therefore, the concept of CO2 levels directly causing warmer temperatures as stated is false. I am sure there is some level of atmospheric CO2 which would lead to such an effect, but I believe it to be much greater than 0.0385% (present level).

Increased air temperatures increase the amount of water the air can hold (humidity), thereby cooling the surface of bodies of water by evaporation. This will serve to offset the warming by the amount of heat required to vaporize the additional atmospheric water vapor, resulting in another self-correcting mechanism. There are other such mechanisms, but I believe you get my point.

In summary, while the scenario you outlined is possible, it appears to me it would require very high CO2 levels and would still not be as drastic as some would believe.

TheRedneck



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join