A Serious Question About Climate Change

[alang1216]

Yet climate has managed to change dramatically over time.

But it is more likely attributable to what?

Does it matter if it was natural or man-made? The was there and if if happened today a lot of NYers would be very unhappy.

 

[alang1216]

We came out of FOUR RECENT ICE AGES with a 15degC differential -- and the planet is STILL HERE.

The planet is here but where are the North American horses, sabertooth tigers, mastadons, etc. I think the extinction of a species is a serious matter, especially if the species is homo.

 

[flacaltenn]

No, but then there's no need for me to do so because tipping points are just that, points, not magnitudes.

But they have to be relevant in magnitude.

No fulcrum point is relevant if it can hold only 0.001% of the total weight.

The way the CATASTROPHIC theory elements are offered, this 2deg tipping point leverages itself to higher magnitude by a series of all positive feedbacks. Like -- increasing the melting of tundra permafrost that then releases a holocaust of ADDITIONAL GHouse gases. Which is proffered as an exponential ACCELERATION of warming.

So it's NOT just the magnitude of the tipping point energy. It's a "non-linear" trigger to bigger events.

Several problems with that. One is that the warming power of CO2 is increasingly limited as the concentration in the atmos increases.. Takes TWICE as much to get the NEXT degree increase as it did the last time. So -- THAT is a huge NEGATIVE feedback.

Second, when the earth came out of each Glacial Period of 4 consecutive Ice Ages -- that trigger was exceeded by FAR each time. And EACH TIME, there was no "runaway" global warming. EVEN THO -- the permafrost was melting at horrendous rates and the mile thick glaciers in Indiana melted to expose the GH Gas laden ground beneath them. Those FEEDBACKS STOPPED each time. After melting and exposing the MAJORITY of planet.

What's left to expose TODAY --- is a minute FRACTION of what was buried during all 4 of those Ice Age cycles.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Does it matter if it was natural or man-made? .

It does when it comes to policy decisions in response to it.

Jury is still out on whether NY under 300 feet of ice is a bad thing.

 

[flacaltenn]

We came out of FOUR RECENT ICE AGES with a 15degC differential -- and the planet is STILL HERE.

The planet is here but where are the North American horses, sabertooth tigers, mastadons, etc. I think the extinction of a species is a serious matter, especially if the species is homo.

That's what happens in drastic climate change periods like repetitive Ice Ages. What do you expect? I DOUBT you're gonna see massive extinctions based on a couple degrees of average temp. NOT -- when those species exist and thrive in climate that varies by 100 degrees every yearly cycle.

 

[JimBowie1958]

where are the North American horses, sabertooth tigers, mastadons, etc.

they evolved into different species. When a species evolves into another species, the old species is extinct, but where is the harm? It is a better adaptation.

I think the extinction of a species is a serious matter, especially if the species is homo.

The gheys have always been able to take care of themselves.

I wouldnt worry.

 

[usmbguest5318]

No, but then there's no need for me to do so because tipping points are just that, points, not magnitudes.

But they have to be relevant in magnitude.

No fulcrum point is relevant if it can hold only 0.001% of the total weight.

??? What? Surely you don't truly ascribe to that notion?

The relevance of all tipping points is where they be not their size/magnitude. All points on a continuum have the same size.

• Limits intro

To wit, if, say a container holds exactly eight ounces of fluid, the tipping point at which it overflows is any quantity fluid greater than eight ounces, recognizing that "overflowing" and "spilling," in the example, are not the same things. (The quantity of fluid needed to effect spilling is eight ounces plus whatever quantity of fluid cannot be contained by the distance/surface of the container's rim.)

 

[JimBowie1958]

The relevance of all tipping points is where they be not their size/magnitude. All points on a continuum have the same size.

• Limits intro

To wit, if, say a container holds exactly eight ounces of fluid, the tipping point at which it overflows is any quantity fluid greater than eight ounces, recognizing that "overflowing" and "spilling," in the example, are not the same things. (The quantity of fluid needed to effect spilling is eight ounces plus whatever quantity of fluid cannot be contained by the distance/surface of the container's rim.)

Meh, you are speaking in the abstract, I am speaking real world tipping points, i.e. fulcrums usually.

The energy, potential and otherwise has to be within a reasonable range of the total system or the fulcrum just gets blown through.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yet climate has managed to change dramatically over time.

Dramatically? Please expand

Take the island of Manhattan for instance, it used to be under a glacier 100's of feet of thick. I'd say that is dramatically different than today.

I blame Fred Flintstone!!!!

 

[alang1216]

Does it matter if it was natural or man-made? .

It does when it comes to policy decisions in response to it.

Jury is still out on whether NY under 300 feet of ice is a bad thing.

Why would policy be different?

I've been to Fredricksburg and let me tell you, more people would miss NY than would miss Fredricksburg. And I'm just talking about people who live in Fredricksburg.

 

[usmbguest5318]

The relevance of all tipping points is where they be not their size/magnitude. All points on a continuum have the same size.

• Limits intro

To wit, if, say a container holds exactly eight ounces of fluid, the tipping point at which it overflows is any quantity fluid greater than eight ounces, recognizing that "overflowing" and "spilling," in the example, are not the same things. (The quantity of fluid needed to effect spilling is eight ounces plus whatever quantity of fluid cannot be contained by the distance/surface of the container's rim.)

Meh, you are speaking in the abstract, I am speaking real world tipping points, i.e. fulcrums usually.

The energy, potential and otherwise has to be within a reasonable range of the total system or the fulcrum just gets blown through.

you are speaking in the abstract

I most certainly am not. What I've done is apply the idea of limits to the tolerance for change that Earth's climatic ecosystem, as humanity has experienced it for the whole of recorded history, possesses. That tolerance is defined by some discrete quantity of one or more factors. In other words, there is a limit to how much anthropogenically induced climate changes the planet can withstand before becoming irrevocably (in the span of human lifetimes) and dissatisfying altered. I don't know what be the exact "coordinates" of that limit, but I know it exists and that it does exist, regardless of whether we know precisely what be its "coordinates" is no abstraction.

 

[alang1216]

That's what happens in drastic climate change periods like repetitive Ice Ages. What do you expect? I DOUBT you're gonna see massive extinctions based on a couple degrees of average temp. NOT -- when those species exist and thrive in climate that varies by 100 degrees every yearly cycle.

Some like to gamble with the lives of their grandchildren, some are more cautious.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Does it matter if it was natural or man-made? .

It does when it comes to policy decisions in response to it.

Jury is still out on whether NY under 300 feet of ice is a bad thing.

Why would policy be different?

I've been to Fredricksburg and let me tell you, more people would miss NY than would miss Fredricksburg. And I'm just talking about people who live in Fredricksburg.

Bless both your hearts....

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Yet climate has managed to change dramatically over time.

Dramatically? Please expand

Take the island of Manhattan for instance, it used to be under a glacier 100's of feet of thick. I'd say that is dramatically different than today.

So mankind deglaciated North America.

Can you explain how that happened? Is the internal combustion engine 14,000 years old? I have my own favorite conspiracies and anomalies and usually have some evidence to back then up.

Here's a favorite: glass architecture on the Moon now captured by 2 separate missions by US and China

 

[alang1216]

So mankind deglaciated North America.

Can you explain how that happened? Is the internal combustion engine 14,000 years old? I have my own favorite conspiracies and anomalies and usually have some evidence to back then up.

Ummm, no. My point was it doesn't matter the cause of climate change, we still have to face the effects. Unless you feel that extinction is natural so we will die blameless or do you feel God would never renege on his gift of the earth.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So mankind deglaciated North America.

Can you explain how that happened? Is the internal combustion engine 14,000 years old? I have my own favorite conspiracies and anomalies and usually have some evidence to back then up.

Ummm, no. My point was it doesn't matter the cause of climate change, we still have to face the effects. Unless you feel that extinction is natural so we will die blameless or do you feel God would never renege on his gift of the earth.

According to the Bible, G-d has had second thoughts about his creation -- more than once.

There's not a thing we can do about true climate change and I will continue to fight against the EnviroMarxism known as AGW.

 

[alang1216]

There's not a thing we can do about true climate change

What is the basis for that statement? Science, religion, ignorance, or nihilism?

 

[Wyatt earp]

There's not a thing we can do about true climate change

What is the basis for that statement? Science, religion, ignorance, or nihilism?

True science narcissist

 

[flacaltenn]

The relevance of all tipping points is where they be not their size/magnitude. All points on a continuum have the same size.

• Limits intro

To wit, if, say a container holds exactly eight ounces of fluid, the tipping point at which it overflows is any quantity fluid greater than eight ounces, recognizing that "overflowing" and "spilling," in the example, are not the same things. (The quantity of fluid needed to effect spilling is eight ounces plus whatever quantity of fluid cannot be contained by the distance/surface of the container's rim.)

Meh, you are speaking in the abstract, I am speaking real world tipping points, i.e. fulcrums usually.

The energy, potential and otherwise has to be within a reasonable range of the total system or the fulcrum just gets blown through.

you are speaking in the abstract

I most certainly am not. What I've done is apply the idea of limits to the tolerance for change that Earth's climatic ecosystem, as humanity has experienced it for the whole of recorded history, possesses. That tolerance is defined by some discrete quantity of one or more factors. In other words, there is a limit to how much anthropogenically induced climate changes the planet can withstand before becoming irrevocably (in the span of human lifetimes) and dissatisfying altered. I don't know what be the exact "coordinates" of that limit, but I know it exists and that it does exist, regardless of whether we know precisely what be its "coordinates" is no abstraction.

A "tipping point" is not simply "saturating" the Carbon Cycle by man-made contributions of CO2. Even IF that was what is meant by tipping point. As I explained, it refers to a trigger point that sets off a NON - linear series of consequences that behave like an underdamped UNSTABLE system and causes the surface temps to "runaway" -- irreparably out of control ..

Your "spill-over" comparison is more like the general concept that the 30GTon of CO2 that MAN puts into the atmos every year causes the Carbon Cycle bottom line to go thru "zero balance". Where the source amounts are now incrementally larger than the Planet's natural ability to SINK CO2 back into short/long term sequestration.. But this "accounting" has SEVERAL problems. Not the least of which is --- that NATURE herself puts TWENTY TIMES what man does into the atmos every year. And nature SEEMS to sink MOST of that back into sequestration. Even sinks 1/2 or more of what "man puts up there"..

We also notice that the ACCOUNTING for what fraction is CHARGED to mankind is corrupt. A large part of "man's emissions" are literally domestic animals and farming. And YET -- before domestication of cattle, prairies were DARK with buffalo and woods filled with deer and smaller game. No "offset" is given there for replacement of buffalo with cows. NOR is it recognized that any farming that required deforestation might be fairly efficient at sinking CO2 itself. A corn field can completely clear it's volume in CO2 in a matter of hours for instance.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I've been to Fredricksburg and let me tell you, more people would miss NY than would miss Fredricksburg. And I'm just talking about people who live in Fredricksburg.

Well I havent been to New York while awake and the friends of mine who have would love to be able to miss it, but cannot because they some3times have assignments there, lol.

And Fredericksburg is infinitely better than poop-in-the-street New York