Where Is The “Climate Emergency”?

[jc456]

Surely you can see the huge change in our own very short lifetime.

are you suggesting there were submarines manufactured back before 1958 that would have had any opportunity to do what was done? That proves absolutely nothing. It proves technology advantages which allowed it. Also, I know that Chicago was once under ice, and now it isn't. Arctic ice melt would remain consistent with a declining ice age. However, I would say, within the last decade the northern hemisphere has cooled.

 

[jc456]

I guess your point is that you'll be dead so who cares? I have grandchildren to think about, in addition to everyone else on the planet.

no, the point is you can't connect any dots and are purely acting on someone's wet dream.

 

[Rigby5]

we know fking nothing. What we've seen is CO2 trails temperature increase. Plenty of history to show that. Not one piece of data where an increase of CO2 caused any warming of temperatures. And as I and others in here have asked is to see where anyone has done any experiments to test adding 120 PPM of CO2. Why, that again is the lingering escalation into forced CO2 control. With absolutely no evidence.

Here is wiki on greenhouse experiments/
{...
The existence of the greenhouse effect, while not named as such, was proposed by Joseph Fourier in 1824.[7] The argument and the evidence were further strengthened by Claude Pouillet in 1827 and 1838. John Tyndall was the first to measure the infrared absorption and emission of various gases and vapors. From 1859 onwards, he showed that the effect was due to a very small proportion of the atmosphere, with the main gases having no effect, and was largely due to water vapor, though small percentages of hydrocarbons and carbon dioxide had a significant effect.[8] The effect was more fully quantified by Svante Arrhenius in 1896, who made the first quantitative prediction of global warming due to a hypothetical doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide.[9] However, the term "greenhouse" was not used to refer to this effect by any of these scientists; the term was first used in this way by Nils Gustaf Ekholm in 1901.[10][11]
...}

Greenhouse effect - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It is NASA has done the greenhouse gas research, and it has been well verified.

{...
Atmospheric gases only absorb some wavelengths of energy but are transparent to others. The absorption patterns of water vapor (blue peaks) and carbon dioxide (pink peaks) overlap in some wavelengths. Carbon dioxide is not as strong a greenhouse gas as water vapor, but it absorbs energy in longer wavelengths (12–15 micrometers) that water vapor does not, partially closing the "window" through which heat radiated by the surface would normally escape to space. (Illustration NASA, Robert Rohde)[22]
...}

 

[ding]

Polar ocean currents have nothing at all to do with whether or not the planet is warming or cooling.
Nor is the Antarctic continent at all isolated from global ocean currents.
Your graph shows a current circling the Antarctic land mass, but it is in constant contact and mixing with 3 other major currents shown even in your diagram.
In no way could there be significant polar isolation. Air currents move much too quickly for that due to convection, and water is not going to allow extreme differences due to conduction. The constant rotation of the earth is going to force movement of both wind and water to reduce extremes.
Nor would it matter if I was wrong about polar isolation, because plate tectonics have not changed much in millions of years.
The ice age cycles of 110,000 years can not be due to plate tectonics.

Ok, I'll play along. Why did the earth transition from a greenhouse planet to an icehouse planet ~3 million years ago.

Feel free to use the oxygen isotope curve to explain your answer.

 

[jc456]

Here is wiki on greenhouse experiments/
{...
The existence of the greenhouse effect, while not named as such, was proposed by Joseph Fourier in 1824.[7] The argument and the evidence were further strengthened by Claude Pouillet in 1827 and 1838. John Tyndall was the first to measure the infrared absorption and emission of various gases and vapors. From 1859 onwards, he showed that the effect was due to a very small proportion of the atmosphere, with the main gases having no effect, and was largely due to water vapor, though small percentages of hydrocarbons and carbon dioxide had a significant effect.[8] The effect was more fully quantified by Svante Arrhenius in 1896, who made the first quantitative prediction of global warming due to a hypothetical doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide.[9] However, the term "greenhouse" was not used to refer to this effect by any of these scientists; the term was first used in this way by Nils Gustaf Ekholm in 1901.[10][11]
...}

Greenhouse effect - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It is NASA has done the greenhouse gas research, and it has been well verified.

{...
Atmospheric gases only absorb some wavelengths of energy but are transparent to others. The absorption patterns of water vapor (blue peaks) and carbon dioxide (pink peaks) overlap in some wavelengths. Carbon dioxide is not as strong a greenhouse gas as water vapor, but it absorbs energy in longer wavelengths (12–15 micrometers) that water vapor does not, partially closing the "window" through which heat radiated by the surface would normally escape to space. (Illustration NASA, Robert Rohde)[22]
...}

where is the point that the finds show an increase in temperature.

 

[westwall]

I guess your point is that you'll be dead so who cares? I have grandchildren to think about, in addition to everyone else on the planet.

It won't matter till your great, great, great, great, great, great, great grandkids come along. Do you honestly think that technology won't be developed to handle whatever issues come up?

 

[Rigby5]

are you suggesting there were submarines manufactured back before 1958 that would have had any opportunity to do what was done? That proves absolutely nothing. It proves technology advantages which allowed it. Also, I know that Chicago was once under ice, and now it isn't. Arctic ice melt would remain consistent with a declining ice age. However, I would say, within the last decade the northern hemisphere has cooled.

That does not make any sense.
The point is that we can tell the Arctic Ocean has not been open water for tens of thousands of year, by checking the age of the floating ice.
We know it was never open water in the Arctic until 1997.
So clearly we have visual confirmation of global warming, on a huge scale.

Why in the world would you claim the northern hemisphere has at all cooled, when clearly it is recording temperatures much higher than every before?
Greenland has rivers of melt off water flowing into the ocean, that never existed before.

If you mean the northern hemisphere has had some colder weather, that is because with global warming, Arctic weather has more energy and is able to blow further south than it could before. But that is weather, not global temperature.

 

[jc456]

That does not make any sense.
The point is that we can tell the Arctic Ocean has not been open water for tens of thousands of year, by checking the age of the floating ice.
We know it was never open water in the Arctic until 1997.
So clearly we have visual confirmation of global warming, on a huge scale.

Why in the world would you claim the northern hemisphere has at all cooled, when clearly it is recording temperatures much higher than every before?
Greenland has rivers of melt off water flowing into the ocean, that never existed before.

If you mean the northern hemisphere has had some colder weather, that is because with global warming, Arctic weather has more energy and is able to blow further south than it could before. But that is weather, not global temperature.

again, technology didn't allow traversing the arctic until the year it was done. I have read where Vikings had homes on Greenland. They got there by ship.

 

[westwall]

That does not make any sense.
The point is that we can tell the Arctic Ocean has not been open water for tens of thousands of year, by checking the age of the floating ice.
We know it was never open water in the Arctic until 1997.
So clearly we have visual confirmation of global warming, on a huge scale.

Why in the world would you claim the northern hemisphere has at all cooled, when clearly it is recording temperatures much higher than every before?
Greenland has rivers of melt off water flowing into the ocean, that never existed before.

If you mean the northern hemisphere has had some colder weather, that is because with global warming, Arctic weather has more energy and is able to blow further south than it could before. But that is weather, not global temperature.

That is patently false. The Arctic has been ice free many times.

 

[Rigby5]

where is the point that the finds show an increase in temperature.

What do you want in particular?
Here is the general explanation from NASA.

Global Warming

Global warming is happening now, and scientists are confident that greenhouse gases are responsible. To understand what this means for humanity, it is necessary to understand what global warming is, how scientists know it's happening, and how they predict future climate.

earthobservatory.nasa.gov

Here is the BIG scale image of global temperatures.
It shows we are at a peak and should next be greatly reducing.

But this is the ZOOMED in small scale of recent temperatures, showing an additional, unexpected, and totally inappropriate warming.

What makes this so risky and alarming is that high greenhouse gases do not instantly produce high temperatures because they just retain heat, not create heat.
So the final effect of the heat retention is not experienced yet.
The mount of CO2 we have already added, may cause much higher temperatures from heat retention for a long time to come.
What I am saying is that the harm is delayed and will slowly happen over time.
So by the time it is deadly, it will be way to late to do anything about it.

 

[toobfreak]

An RLC circuit is an electrical circuit consisting of a resistor (R), an inductor (L), and a capacitor (C)

AARGH! STOP IT! Do you have any idea that I used to design global telecom equipment? I don't need told how a capacitor works nor what an RCL circuit does. Geez.

 

[Rigby5]

again, technology didn't allow traversing the arctic until the year it was done. I have read where Vikings had homes on Greenland. They got there by ship.

What are you talking about?
Greenland is not the pole.
Greenland is partially warmed by the Gulf Stream.
The Vikings never went near to the pole.
The pole is the fabled Northwest Passage, which never in the last 20,000 years existed, until 1997, when the Arctic Ocean melted for the very first time in at least 20,000 years.

Technology has allowed traversing the arctic by plane since around 1920 or so.
But we could always travers the Arctic ice by dog sled.
The North American natives must have crossed frozen over Bearing Straits in order to get to the Americas.

 

[toobfreak]

Greenhouse gas effects are not a guess or at all theoretical.
They can be substantiated with miniature lab experiments, because scale does not matter.

ROT. No one can create a model of the Earth's climate system in a computer nor as some miniature that is truly reliable as all of the effects and mechanisms are not well enough understood.

As a person who used to design experiments in a lab, I know all too well that the experiments all too easily just show us what we designed and intended them to, based on our own limited understanding.

 

[Flash]

ROT. No one can create a model of the Earth's climate system in a computer nor as some miniature that is truly reliable as all of the effects and mechanisms are not well enough understood.

As a person who used to design experiments in a lab, I know all too well that the experiments all too easily just show us what we designed and intended them to, based on our own limited understanding.

These Environmental Wackos have made a ton of money with the shit in shit out scam of computer climate models.

What we have found out with this AGW scam is that money can buy a scientist just like it can buy a politician.

 

[flacaltenn]

hat does not make any sense.
The point is that we can tell the Arctic Ocean has not been open water for tens of thousands of year, by checking the age of the floating ice.
We know it was never open water in the Arctic until 1997.
So clearly we have visual confirmation of global warming, on a huge scale.

You're doing great -- but dont be so SURE about "what we know". The ice is too recyclable (it's sea ice as opposed to Greenland/Antarctica) to leave great depths to look at ancient ice. It's melts -- it regrows. The OLDEST ice if you can find it is probably less then 20 years in any substantial patch.

You can look back at LAND ice for 10s of thousands. Greenland is MORE reliable for history because Antarctica is a virtual desert, and the yearly ice is extremely thin and you lose time resolution.

So -- 1st earth resource satellites about 1979 saw the ice in the Arctic Sea, We're sure of what happened after,

 

[Rigby5]

It won't matter till your great, great, great, great, great, great, great grandkids come along. Do you honestly think that technology won't be developed to handle whatever issues come up?

Wrong.
If you live in lowlands like Bangladesh, islands like Micronesia, or coasts like Alaska, then global warming has already raised ocean levels enough to force them to move.
The big disaster is not a thousand years away, but likely less than 200 years away.
Nor is there any technology capable of stopping it.
It is 5 trillion tons of carbon we add to the atmosphere every single year.
There can be no easy fix once we do that long enough.

 

[Rigby5]

AARGH! STOP IT! Do you have any idea that I used to design global telecom equipment? I don't need told how a capacitor works nor what an RCL circuit does. Geez.

They say more relevant things to indicate that.
You said, "used as a buffer to isolate and or store energy to maintain equanimity of some voltage rail", and that is a DC application of capacitors, not AC.
The oscillations of ice age and warming is clearly alternating, not direct.

 

[Rigby5]

again, technology didn't allow traversing the arctic until the year it was done. I have read where Vikings had homes on Greenland. They got there by ship.

Wrong.
People traversed the North Pole before 1958.
They did it by land and plane.
The Vikings never tried to get anywhere near to the north pole.

 

[Rigby5]

These Environmental Wackos have made a ton of money with the shit in shit out scam of computer climate models.

What we have found out with this AGW scam is that money can buy a scientist just like it can buy a politician.

And how could anyone possibly make any money of AGW?
There is no product to sell and no one to buy anything.

Gov research is free because the people are already on staff.

 

[Rigby5]

You're doing great -- but dont be so SURE about "what we know". The ice is too recyclable (it's sea ice as opposed to Greenland/Antarctica) to leave great depths to look at ancient ice. It's melts -- it regrows. The OLDEST ice if you can find it is probably less then 20 years in any substantial patch.

You can look back at LAND ice for 10s of thousands. Greenland is MORE reliable for history because Antarctica is a virtual desert, and the yearly ice is extremely thin and you lose time resolution.

So -- 1st earth resource satellites about 1979 saw the ice in the Arctic Sea, We're sure of what happened after,

Good point in that we can be pretty sure of Arctic ice during the cold part of the ice age cycle, but the warmest peak may have been about 10,000 years go, and it is hard to say if the Northwest Passage opened then or not.

But we know for certain the Northwest Passage has not been open since 1926.

{...
On May 9, 1926 Commander Richard Byrd announced that he had been the first to fly over the North Pole in his Fokker tri-motor airplane, the Josephine Ford. Byrd submitted his navigational records to the U.S. Navy and a committee of the National Geographic Society, who verified his claim.
...}