What REALLY terrifies climate scientists: "Feedback"

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Climate scientists have confidence in a few things, for instance: the minimum amount of warming the climate will experience in the next 100 years, the primary driver of the observed, rapid warming, and the fact that the oceans are acidifying.

But, what terrifies scientists is not "the known", but rather, "the unknown". Scientists are worried that there exist certain thresholds, past which there will be runaway effects. This is related to the idea of "feedback loops". For instance, as more land and sea ice disappears, the climate will warm more quickly, causing even faster disappearance of land and sea ice... and so on.

Now that scientists have had more time to study our warming climate, they are starting to find these feedback loops in action. They are discovering, slowly but surely, that "albedo feedback" is causing an acceleration in the loss of arctic sea ice: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/09/170906103622.htm

Now, scientists have always postulated this would be the case, but they have needed time to build the evidence that this is true. They now have it.

There are other feedback loops to consider, such as melting tundra and ocean acidification. While the major economies of the world dither to preserve short-term growth, the scientists of the world are banging pots and pans and sounding the sirens that, by the time they can convince even the most scientifically illiterate person of the dangers of inaction on climate change, it will be too late.

Climate science scientists have been worried and anxiety ridden for 25 years.........always in a state of angst. Understandable...........when you rely on computer models that are wrong all the time. duh


http://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/essays-and-commentaries/the-models-are-wrong/

"Climate science scientists have been worried and anxiety ridden for 25 years......"

And even more so, as not only their predictions are confirmed, but the planet warms and the ocean acidifies faster than they thought it would. Meanwhile, people like you think saying "Nuh-uh!" represents an actual challenge to well-founded scientific theories. Talk about two worlds...

 

[CrusaderFrank]

An acid that dissolves instantly upon contact with water is acidifying the oceans. More likely the Warmers are dropping acid

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Military Shows Concern Over Climate Change
09/06/2017 by Brad Rich

Military Shows Concern Over Climate Change | Coastal Review Online

"...
Algae, another area of expertise for Paerl, can be terribly bad for estuaries, as it robs the water of oxygen when it decomposes, sometimes leading to fish kills. But, Paerl quipped, “I don’t think storms are really a good way to clean up our estuaries.”

At any rate, it sets up what Paerl said is a classic feedback loop.

“The more storms we have, then (based on the research) the more emissions we get,” he said. “And the more emissions we get, the more unstable the climate is likely to become, which means more storms. You have to wonder where it ends. Are we eventually to going to end up with 10 times more storms?”..."

 

[Old Rocks]

Or the geniuses that crafted this HSchool math page of "Space Math" didn't sync up the PHASE of the sinewave included in the fit to model the annual variation to actual calendar seasons..

If you place many of the cycles on a graph, the times the earth has major changes is generally when these cycles all go high or low at the same time..

WE know so little its funny as hell to watch these people make predictions and then look confused when their predictions fail. Is it due to arrogance or ignorance?

There's a section of math called Fourier Analysis. It's vital to my specialty of image/signal processing. The gist is that any waveform or data series can be either decomposed (or synthesized) by a series of cyclical sinewaves (or various other repeating "basis functions") with specific amplitude/phase/frequency. You can take a ramp -- like the temperature forcing function we've all stared out -- and find a combo of periodic sine -- like functions that will be EXACTLY that ramp when added together.

So it's not a matter of "going all high or low at the same time". Rather it's the probability that enough cyclical "natural events" will align in the right amplitude/phase/frequency to create a "a linear ramp". Or a "ragged" linear ramp -- or a "step function".. Or any OTHER shape.

So with enough AMOs, PDOs, solar max/min, planetary alignment, arctic oscillations, ice age causing orbital cyclics, you can expect a lot of different "forcing function" shapes to appear over time. Ponder that over your next martini or doobie.

LOL You do realize that you are explaining Fourier Analysis to someone claiming to be an atmospheric physicist? LOL

 

[flacaltenn]

So why don't you do a Fourier decomposition of the S&P stock index, and then use that to predict the future of the stock market?

When you answer why you don't do that, you'll have answered why it's also foolish to try it with climate.

Again, the problem is that you're ASSuming cyclic behavior exists that matches the periodicity of the very short-term measurements, even though such an ASSumption has no basis in fact. Finding a short-term oscillation means nothing, because they always exist, even in random noise. That's why ASSuming that they mean something is mathturbation, and why competent scientists don't do it.

Trust me -- that's old news. Been done. And made folks wealthy over finding new periodic perturbations. But ONLY FOR events that are quasi-periodic. Doesn't work on news trends, fear and dread or bad karma.

You have no idea of what what periodic means if you think a temporary run of statistics in noise is a periodic event.

I've found whole IMAGES in what other folks consider noise. Built systems to find ocean acoustics that no one has ever heard before. Discovered and "cracked" covert, encoded, encrypted, spread spectrum signals that nobody saw before. Designed about a 1/2 dozen life saving medical instruments based on image/signal processing principles.

I think I know what's periodic, quasi-periodic and what's not. What's NOT -- those things is a stochastic process (noise) that manifests RARELY AND RANDOMLY as a periodic event. That's far from the "mean" behavior of those processes.

 

[flacaltenn]

Military Shows Concern Over Climate Change
09/06/2017 by Brad Rich

Military Shows Concern Over Climate Change | Coastal Review Online

"...
Algae, another area of expertise for Paerl, can be terribly bad for estuaries, as it robs the water of oxygen when it decomposes, sometimes leading to fish kills. But, Paerl quipped, “I don’t think storms are really a good way to clean up our estuaries.”

At any rate, it sets up what Paerl said is a classic feedback loop.

“The more storms we have, then (based on the research) the more emissions we get,” he said. “And the more emissions we get, the more unstable the climate is likely to become, which means more storms. You have to wonder where it ends. Are we eventually to going to end up with 10 times more storms?”..."

The military was FUNDED and TASKED to make global warming a issue. They were politically directed to do so and spend money on it. Doesn't mean they endorse or even CARE about the science. They're just following orders.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Military Shows Concern Over Climate Change
09/06/2017 by Brad Rich

Military Shows Concern Over Climate Change | Coastal Review Online

"...
Algae, another area of expertise for Paerl, can be terribly bad for estuaries, as it robs the water of oxygen when it decomposes, sometimes leading to fish kills. But, Paerl quipped, “I don’t think storms are really a good way to clean up our estuaries.”

At any rate, it sets up what Paerl said is a classic feedback loop.

“The more storms we have, then (based on the research) the more emissions we get,” he said. “And the more emissions we get, the more unstable the climate is likely to become, which means more storms. You have to wonder where it ends. Are we eventually to going to end up with 10 times more storms?”..."

The military was FUNDED and TASKED to make global warming a issue. They were politically directed to do so and spend money on it. Doesn't mean they endorse or even CARE about the science. They're just following orders.

No, they were directed by people within the military, including scientists who are in the military. And they are listening to the global scientific community.

 

[flacaltenn]

Military Shows Concern Over Climate Change
09/06/2017 by Brad Rich

Military Shows Concern Over Climate Change | Coastal Review Online

"...
Algae, another area of expertise for Paerl, can be terribly bad for estuaries, as it robs the water of oxygen when it decomposes, sometimes leading to fish kills. But, Paerl quipped, “I don’t think storms are really a good way to clean up our estuaries.”

At any rate, it sets up what Paerl said is a classic feedback loop.

“The more storms we have, then (based on the research) the more emissions we get,” he said. “And the more emissions we get, the more unstable the climate is likely to become, which means more storms. You have to wonder where it ends. Are we eventually to going to end up with 10 times more storms?”..."

The military was FUNDED and TASKED to make global warming a issue. They were politically directed to do so and spend money on it. Doesn't mean they endorse or even CARE about the science. They're just following orders.

No, they were directed by people within the military, including scientists who are in the military. And they are listening to the global scientific community.

And the military was DIRECTED by the civilian govt to SHOW concern and spend the money..

Not their job to review climate science and INITIATE their OWN mitigations.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Reminder, consensus is a cult word, not a scientific word; the IPCC is on record that global warming is a scam to redistribute wealth

 

[Billo_Really]

Why is denying climate change so important to you?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Military Shows Concern Over Climate Change
09/06/2017 by Brad Rich

Military Shows Concern Over Climate Change | Coastal Review Online

"...
Algae, another area of expertise for Paerl, can be terribly bad for estuaries, as it robs the water of oxygen when it decomposes, sometimes leading to fish kills. But, Paerl quipped, “I don’t think storms are really a good way to clean up our estuaries.”

At any rate, it sets up what Paerl said is a classic feedback loop.

“The more storms we have, then (based on the research) the more emissions we get,” he said. “And the more emissions we get, the more unstable the climate is likely to become, which means more storms. You have to wonder where it ends. Are we eventually to going to end up with 10 times more storms?”..."

The military was FUNDED and TASKED to make global warming a issue. They were politically directed to do so and spend money on it. Doesn't mean they endorse or even CARE about the science. They're just following orders.

No, they were directed by people within the military, including scientists who are in the military. And they are listening to the global scientific community.

And the military was DIRECTED by the civilian govt to SHOW concern and spend the money..

Not their job to review climate science and INITIATE their OWN mitigations.

Of course, it is their job to deal with threats and changes to the theater. What's with all of these goofy fantasies? At some point you are just gping to have to come to terms with the fact that the science has passed you by and ypu are on the wrong side of history. Or don't. It won't change much , as people continue to side with the most

 

[Billy_Bob]

Climate scientists have confidence in a few things, for instance: the minimum amount of warming the climate will experience in the next 100 years, the primary driver of the observed, rapid warming, and the fact that the oceans are acidifying.

But, what terrifies scientists is not "the known", but rather, "the unknown". Scientists are worried that there exist certain thresholds, past which there will be runaway effects. This is related to the idea of "feedback loops". For instance, as more land and sea ice disappears, the climate will warm more quickly, causing even faster disappearance of land and sea ice... and so on.

Now that scientists have had more time to study our warming climate, they are starting to find these feedback loops in action. They are discovering, slowly but surely, that "albedo feedback" is causing an acceleration in the loss of arctic sea ice: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/09/170906103622.htm

Now, scientists have always postulated this would be the case, but they have needed time to build the evidence that this is true. They now have it.

There are other feedback loops to consider, such as melting tundra and ocean acidification. While the major economies of the world dither to preserve short-term growth, the scientists of the world are banging pots and pans and sounding the sirens that, by the time they can convince even the most scientifically illiterate person of the dangers of inaction on climate change, it will be too late.

Many climate scientist are driven by the money they can make by believing in AGW religion.

Which, of course, you just completely made up, and is bizarre and absurd on every level. man, the duuuuumb shit people will convince themselves of, when the facts do not uphold their superstitions...

Solyndra was wonderful example of the fleecing of the US taxpayer. Where did that 1.5 trillion go? 864 billion found its way back into DEMOCRAT political campaign coffers...

 

[Billy_Bob]

Why is denying climate change so important to you?

Why is lying about it so important to you? Are you a member of the Socialist political class who will be living high on the hog while the majority fight for your table scraps..?

 

[Billy_Bob]

Military Shows Concern Over Climate Change
09/06/2017 by Brad Rich

Military Shows Concern Over Climate Change | Coastal Review Online

"...
Algae, another area of expertise for Paerl, can be terribly bad for estuaries, as it robs the water of oxygen when it decomposes, sometimes leading to fish kills. But, Paerl quipped, “I don’t think storms are really a good way to clean up our estuaries.”

At any rate, it sets up what Paerl said is a classic feedback loop.

“The more storms we have, then (based on the research) the more emissions we get,” he said. “And the more emissions we get, the more unstable the climate is likely to become, which means more storms. You have to wonder where it ends. Are we eventually to going to end up with 10 times more storms?”..."

The military was FUNDED and TASKED to make global warming a issue. They were politically directed to do so and spend money on it. Doesn't mean they endorse or even CARE about the science. They're just following orders.

No, they were directed by people within the military, including scientists who are in the military. And they are listening to the global scientific community.

I guess you don't know about Force Readiness and the need to calculate all potential threats. They assess even the most remote tin foil hat theory and assess our ability to react if it comes true.. CAGW is one that they want because we can deal with it more easily than cold. Survival rates skyrocket with warming.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Informative NASA module which touches on feedback:
Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: Engage: Warming Arctic

 

[ding]

Climate scientists have confidence in a few things, for instance: the minimum amount of warming the climate will experience in the next 100 years, the primary driver of the observed, rapid warming, and the fact that the oceans are acidifying.

But, what terrifies scientists is not "the known", but rather, "the unknown". Scientists are worried that there exist certain thresholds, past which there will be runaway effects. This is related to the idea of "feedback loops". For instance, as more land and sea ice disappears, the climate will warm more quickly, causing even faster disappearance of land and sea ice... and so on.

Now that scientists have had more time to study our warming climate, they are starting to find these feedback loops in action. They are discovering, slowly but surely, that "albedo feedback" is causing an acceleration in the loss of arctic sea ice: Unraveling a major cause of sea ice retreat in the Arctic Ocean

Now, scientists have always postulated this would be the case, but they have needed time to build the evidence that this is true. They now have it.

There are other feedback loops to consider, such as melting tundra and ocean acidification. While the major economies of the world dither to preserve short-term growth, the scientists of the world are banging pots and pans and sounding the sirens that, by the time they can convince even the most scientifically illiterate person of the dangers of inaction on climate change, it will be too late.

The models used for the IPCC reports amplify the theoretical surface temperature of CO2 by 3.5 times. What evidence exists for this feedback?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The models used for the IPCC reports amplify the theoretical surface temperature of CO2 by 3.5 times. What evidence exists for this feedback?

Why are you asking nonscientists on a message board?

Just kidding, we all know why.

 

[ding]

Why are you asking nonscientists on a message board?

Mainly to show that you have blind dogmatic beliefs like a religious fanatic.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Mainly to show that you have blind dogmatic beliefs like a religious fanatic.

Which of course is stupid trolling.

But when you are done nipping at my ankles, I will provide you the email address of someone on the research team.

And another email address I own, to copy on all the emails.

Then you can show us your stuff.

Deal?

 

[ding]

Which of course is stupid trolling.

Is it? Or is what you do trolling? You've already admitted you don't know anything about it.