‘Arctic April’ is Breaking Hundreds Of Cold Records in America

[ding]

The Nature article was from July 2023. That idiotic graph is from 28 years prior. Do you actually think they had better data back then? And why would you use a graph covering 11,000 years to see events at 400 and 250 years back?

Ocean currents establish climate.
The ocean is the largest collector of solar energy.
The ocean stores the majority of the planet's heat.
The ocean is the largest feature of the planet.
The mass of the ocean is 300 times the mass of the atmosphere.
The ocean contains 1000 times more heat than the ocean.
The ocean heats the atmosphere.
The atmosphere does not heat the ocean.
Physical evidence shows that when ocean currents change, the climate changes.
Physical evidence shows ocean currents are responsible for northern hemisphere glaciation.
Physical evidence shows ocean currents are responsible for the initiation of the Little Ice Age.
Physical evidence shows ocean currents are responsible for the end of the Little Ice Age.
The current warming trend began 250 years before the industrial revolution.
The geologic record is littered with examples of naturally caused warming and cooling trends.
Empirical climate evidence shows the planet cooled for millions of years with >600 ppm of CO2.
The last interglacial period was 2C warmer with 26ft higher seas and 120ppm less CO2 than today.

 

[ding]

The Nature article was from July 2023. That idiotic graph is from 28 years prior. Do you actually think they had better data back then? And why would you use a graph covering 11,000 years to see events at 400 and 250 years back?

Deep Atlantic Circulation During the Last Glacial Maximum and Deglaciation​

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/PA005i004p00469

Collapse and rapid resumption of Atlantic meridional circulation linked to deglacial climate changes - Nature​

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2010PA002032

 

[Crick]

Deep Atlantic Circulation During the Last Glacial Maximum and Deglaciation​

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/PA005i004p00469

Collapse and rapid resumption of Atlantic meridional circulation linked to deglacial climate changes - Nature​

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2010PA002032

As has been the case in every paper you've posted on this topic, these all describe changes to ocean currents and patterns brought about by the glacial-interglacial cycle. No where in any of these papers does it suggest that the causality goes in the other direction. If you disagree, let's see a quote.

Meanwhile, here are some quotes from comments in your first article:

"The first field program to systematically measure physical and chemical properties of all the world's deep oceans took place from 1973–1978. Subsequent measurements revealed that properties of deep water in key regions vary from decade to decade, and that these changes are linked to oscillations in surface climate (Dickson et al. 1996, Zhang 2007)" [ie, changes in ocean circulation and chemistry are caused by changes in surface climate]

---

---

Abrupt Changes in Ocean Circulation During the Last Glacial-to-Interglacial Transition​

The melting of the vast continental ice sheets, which began ~20,000 years ago due to gradual changes in the seasonal and spatial distribution of the Sun's energy (Broecker & Von Donk 1970 ["Abstract: A detailed curve of ice volume versus time is needed in order to test the validity of the hypothesis that changes in the earth's orbital parameters are the cause of oscillations in Pleistocene climate."]), was interrupted by several abrupt cold climate events. The two largest deglacial events in the North Atlantic — known as Heinrich Stadial 1 and the Younger Dryas — occurred approximately 17,500–14,600 and 13,000–11,500 years ago respectively (Figure 6) (Heinrich 1988, Bond et al. 1992, Grootes et al. 1993).

 

[ding]

As has been the case in every paper you've posted on this topic, these all describe changes to ocean currents and patterns brought about by the glacial-interglacial cycle. No where in any of these papers does it suggest that the causality goes in the other direction. If you disagree, let's see a quote.

Then you never read them.

Collapse and rapid resumption of Atlantic meridional circulation linked to deglacial climate changes​

But doesn't it make sense to you that if heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic gets disrupted and it leads to colder temperatures, that when heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic gets restored, it would lead to warmer temperatures?

 

[zaangalewa]

Empirical climate evidence shows the planet cooled for millions of years with >600 ppm of CO2.

...

First of all: As far as I can see are some information wrong which you gave. And in general: What you say about the oceans is only a very very little part of the problem how intergalactic and interstellar radiation, the radiation from the sun, the planets in the solar system and other components, the atmosphere, the oceans and all the powers under our our feet - vulcans for example - take care for a climate which was very stable during the whole evolution of mankind. The level of CO2 was in this time always ~200 ppm CO2. Now we have much more (more than 400 ppm). This had happened in the last 150 years! Take a look at the diagram in post #15 here and explain the "spike" in which we currently live with an unequivocal evidence and not with some empty phrases of lazybones.

And even if human beings had nothing to do with this "spike" - what's not plausible - what would change this? The CO2 emissions are too high and we have to reduce it. Reason: If this will not happen then we will get not any idea in which new level the atmosphere will find a new equilibrium. Example: Take a look at the Venus and the atmsospher of this planet which contains a lot of CO2. On the floor of Venus you can accidentally step into a puddle of molten lead and the seas - if they ever existed at all - are vaporised in the atmosphere.

Give me please any concrete argument why the CO2 level of planet Earth should not be reduced to ~200 ppm as it was during the evolution of all mankind in the last 20 million years. What for heavens sake could be a problem to do so? In the last 20 years my family and I reduced our personal CO2 emissions around 90%. So we produce now only about 10% of the CO2 which we had produced 20 years ago. This means for us on the other side not any loss of quality of life. But I have to say we always had a moderate lifestyle.

 

[ding]

Give me please any concrete argument why the CO2 level of planet Earth should not be reduced to ~200 ppm

The only way to accomplish that would be to cool the atmosphere ~8C so that the ocean was able to absorb more CO2. Can't get anymore concrete than that.

 

[ding]

What for heavens sake could be a problem to do so?

Thousands of feet thick ice sheets over all of Canada, NE US, Midwest US, northern Europe and northern Asia displacing at least 250 million people and destroying untold trillions of dollars of property.

Which will probably happen anyway but may not be as severe with elevated levels of atmospheric CO2.

 

[Crick]

Which will probably happen anyway but may not be as severe with elevated levels of atmospheric CO2.

You seem to be accepting the greenhouse effect.

 

[zaangalewa]

The only way to accomplish that would be to cool the atmosphere ~8C so that the ocean was able to absorb more CO2. Can't get anymore concrete than that.

View attachment 991998

No idea what you like to say.

heute = today (2016)
höchster historischer Wert = highest historical value
tausend Jahre = thousand years

 

[zaangalewa]

Thousands of feet thick ice sheets over all of Canada, NE US, Midwest US, northern Europe and northern Asia displacing at least 250 million people and destroying untold trillions of dollars of property.

Which will probably happen anyway but may not be as severe with elevated levels of atmospheric CO2.

What do you like to say to me?

 

[Crick]

What do you like to say to me?

I presume English is not your native tongue. Can you try to state your question in a different way?

 

[zaangalewa]

I presume English is not your native tongue. Can you try to state your question in a different way?

"What do you want to say to me?" is the same as "What do you like to say to me?". Both is English. What is your mother tongue? (=What is your native language?) Or whyelse do you ask?

 

[Crick]

"What do you want to say to me?" is the same as "What do you like to say to me?". Both is English. What is your mother tongue? (=What is your native language?) Or whyelse do you ask?

I don't understand why you would ask either question. I speak American English. I took German in high school and college but that was a long time ago. I ask because I wanted to help you get an answer to whatever question you were trying to ask.

 

[ding]

You seem to be accepting the greenhouse effect.

Do you need for me to use the quote feature to show you all the times I explained the GHG effect of CO2 to you? It's probably been at least a dozen times. The theoretical incremental surface temperature of a doubling of CO2 is 1C. Does that ring a bell?

 

[ding]

No idea what you like to say.

heute = today (2016)
höchster historischer Wert = highest historical value
tausend Jahre = thousand years

Yes, the historic relationship between temperature and CO2 was broken after the industrial revolution. Prior to that, atmospheric CO2 was a function of temperature due to the solubility of CO2 in water versus temperature.

 

[ding]

What do you like to say to me?

That you don't understand what you are talking about.

 

[zaangalewa]

Yes, the historic relationship between temperature and CO2 was broken after the industrial revolution. Prior to that, atmospheric CO2 was a function of temperature due to the solubility of CO2 in water versus temperature.

That you don't understand what you are talking about.

So you think I should increase my CO2 emissions tenfold again. Why not? I will be soon dead so it plays not a big role any longer, because after my death people who will follow your lazy role model will define the future of our planet. To live like you costs no psychic energy.

 

[ding]

So you think I should increase my CO2 emissions tenfold again.

I think your carbon footprint isn't any different than any other person in western civilization.

 

[Crick]

Yes, the historic relationship between temperature and CO2 was broken after the industrial revolution. Prior to that, atmospheric CO2 was a function of temperature due to the solubility of CO2 in water versus temperature.

How? Did the laws of physics change?

 

[zaangalewa]

I don't understand why you would ask either question. I speak American English.

Aha. So you did not ¿like to? understand the question "What do you like to say to me?" which I asked someone else.

I took German in high school and college but that was a long time ago. I ask because I wanted to help you get an answer to whatever question you were trying to ask.

I do not think anyone - except an artificial stupidity - is able to understand how ding sets empty bubbles into something what most people call an instrument of communication ... or language.