16-11-2016, 03:22 AM
31
Re: Global Warming
Originally Posted by Bruce
->
Interesting edition of Catalyst last night called The Anthropocene. If you can overcome geo blocking it is available on iView.Basically says that after viewing data from 1750s from ice cores, sediment samples and other similar evidence there is a massive rise in all the base line figures for just about everything they measured from the 1950s. I can't remember all the samples but they included things like CO2, Nitrous Oxide, Fly ash.
The researchers had expected a steady but relentless increased what they found was a steady increase until the 1950s but then a sudden and dramatic increase in the rate of increase since then in every sample measured.
The main driver seems to be consumerism and it is affecting the planet to the point that some scientists are saying this might be the start of a new epoch (hard to tell of course) but we might be at the end of the Holocene.
16-11-2016, 04:16 AM
32
Re: Global Warming
Originally Posted by OldGreyFox
->
Far from derogatory Pummie, did you miss Rehab's 'Apparently' inserted before the statement suggesting that it was someone else's opinion ....
But I also saw his somewhat sarky
"But there again you are all climate change experts ... "
which I thought justified my comment.
16-11-2016, 07:06 AM
33
Re: Global Warming
Originally Posted by Purwell
->
Hmmm, so what is the next epoch to be called, the Plasticine?
16-11-2016, 09:56 AM
34
Re: Global Warming
It makes you wonder if humans were supposed to live here at all when you consider that most other dry land dwellers that live on this planet are either covered in Fur or Feathers with few exceptions.Good piece by the way Bruce....
Just one point though, I would have thought that there would have been massive deposits of ash and CO2 in the Ice cores around 1883 when Krakatoa erupted and sent shock waves three times around the world and depositing enough ash in the atmosphere to block out the sun for two years and cause a false winter.
And of course, everything that goes up must come down. It has been suggested that there was more CO2 and pollution deposited in the atmosphere than fifty years of industrial pollution since. And that in just one natural event!
16-11-2016, 11:14 AM
35
Re: Global Warming
Originally Posted by Rehab44
->
Apparently you are all talking a load of cock.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/eart...ndal-ever.html
But there again you are all climate change experts so what the hell do I know eh?
The Internet is a wonderous thing, it can also be a load of tosh.
Christopher Booker, the author of the piece in the link has no scientific qualifications at all..
He does not believe in Evolution and has claimed that asbestos is not dangerous. neither is passive smoking or BSE.
He has co authored with Dr Richard North,, an EHO whose area of expertise is Food Poisoning.
Hardly a pair with any scientific expertise on Climate Change at all, who believe in Creationism and who dismiss Asbestos, Passive Smoking and BSE as scare stories.
16-11-2016, 11:57 AM
36
Re: Global Warming
Originally Posted by OldGreyFox
->
Just one point though, I would have thought that there would have been massive deposits of ash and CO2 in the Ice cores around 1883 when Krakatoa erupted and sent shock waves three times around the world and depositing enough ash in the atmosphere to block out the sun for two years and cause a false winter.
And of course, everything that goes up must come down. It has been suggested that there was more CO2 and pollution deposited in the atmosphere than fifty years of industrial pollution since. And that in just one natural event!
It is gasses from volcanoes that encircle the planet not the dust because the latter is much heavier and even when thrown high into the atmosphere falls out within thousands if not hundreds of kms. Again that is my memory of it
16-11-2016, 12:20 PM
37
Re: Global Warming
Originally Posted by Bruce
->
I thought the temperature drop attributed to Krakatoa was caused by Sulphur Dioxide being thrown into high atmosphere mixing with water to form sulphuric acid and reflecting sunlight until it eventually all disappeared falling as acid rain (one of the old effects of burning coal but in a more localised area). I seem to remember being taught that the Krakatoa eruption was unusually rich in sulphur dioxideIt is gasses from volcanoes that encircle the planet not the dust because the latter is much heavier and even when thrown high into the atmosphere falls out within thousands if not hundreds of kms. Again that is my memory of it
16-11-2016, 09:06 PM
38
Re: Global Warming
One can find slightly different figures for the Volcano versus Human CO2 issue depending on the study and when it was done. But in general now it is believed that Humans put out about a hundred times as much. https://www.skepticalscience.com/vol...al-warming.htmThe human population is growing by about 80 million per year so it is getting more difficult for nature to outdo it and what they are putting out is also increasing per capita. http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/
The U.S. Geological Survey is also interesting reading on the topic:
"A short time ago (geologically speaking) the question "Which produces more CO2, volcanic or human activity?" would have been answered differently. Volcanoes would have tipped the scale. Now, human presence, activity, and the resultant production of CO2, through the burning of fossil fuels, have all climbed at an ever-increasing rate. On the other hand, looking back through the comparatively short duration of human history, volcanic activity has, with a few notable disturbances, remained relatively steady." http://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/volcanowatch/.../07_02_15.html
16-11-2016, 09:14 PM
39
Re: Global Warming
Originally Posted by Shadowman
->
And even without a belief in human caused global warming, there are plenty of other incentives to reduce the use of coal ranging from the mining to the burning: Reduction in life expectancy (particulates, sulfur dioxide, ozone, heavy metals, benzene, radionuclides, etc.)Respiratory hospital admissions (particulates, ozone, sulfur dioxide)
Black lung from coal dust
Congestive heart failure (particulates and carbon monoxide)
Non-fatal cancer, osteroporosia, ataxia, renal dysfunction (benzene, radionuclides, heavy metals, etc.)
Chronic bronchitis, asthma attacks, etc. (particulates, ozone)
Loss of IQ from air and water pollution and nervous system damage (mercury)
Degradation and soiling of buildings that can effect human health (sulfur dioxide, acid deposition, particulates)
Global warming (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide)
Ecosystem loss and degradation, with negative effects on health and quality of life.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...ffects_of_coal
Want a better cleaner world? Then stop buying and consuming...easy eh?
16-11-2016, 10:28 PM
40
Re: Global Warming
The Earth is a closed system in which every action has an equal and opposite reaction. The Earth will survive anything that humanity throws at it, even nuclear war. All it takes is time and the planet has an infinite amount of that.What the climatologists seldom talk about is the fact that the entire solar system, the sun, planets etc are all travelling around a central point in the galaxy. Just as the Earth has its seasons because it travels around the sun and is sometimes closer and sometimes further away, so too the entire solar system must be impacted by it's journey around the galaxy, presumably sometimes being close to that central point and other times further away. There must therefore be "solar seasons" though no-one tells us about them.
When you consider the enormous size of some of the stars out there, you have to conclude that at times those giants must have some impact to us.
Here are some pictures to show the scale.
First our planets in relation to the Sun, no shocks here:
Now look at the scale of our "huge" Sun compared to other key stars out there, look at how huge Arcturus is compared to our tiny Sun and note that Jupiter is 1 pixel here and the Earth is invisible at this scale:
Now look at even more super stars out there. See how huge Antares is compared to Arcturus and note that our tiny Sun is 1 pixel here and Jupiter is invisible at this scale:
If our Sun, infinitesimally small as it is, can exert so much impact to our planets, how much impact must there be whenever our solar system travels close to super stars like these?!
The Mayans and other ancient civilisations knew something of this galactic cycle. One orbit of our solar system around the galactic centre of our galaxy (The Milky Way) takes approx. 250 million terrestrial years. The Mayans predicted that great calamity/disaster happens routinely at a certain point. Perhaps that happens when we come closer to some of these enormous super suns and they exert their gravity and heat and radiation ? Who knows.
|
|
