More data that it's the Sun that does it

24

Comments

  • dreesdrees Posts: 481Solar Expert ✭✭✭
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it
    mike90045 wrote: »
    What started the warming trend after the last ice age? It sure wasn't mankind burning fossil fuels. Woolly mammoth farts ?

    Climates change. Maybe we effect them, maybe not.
    From: What does past climate change tell us about global warming?
    Natural climate change in the past proves that climate is sensitive to an energy imbalance. If the planet accumulates heat, global temperatures will go up. Currently, CO2 is imposing an energy imbalance due to the enhanced greenhouse effect. Past climate change actually provides evidence for our climate's sensitivity to CO2.
    mike90045 wrote: »
    Just don't tax me to support the UN redistribution of wealth.
    So if it doesn't cost you any money, you're OK with whatever happens? I don't suppose you realize how much money the effects of global warming could cause if we ignored it?

    The fact is that the most effective and direct way of dealing with CO2 emissions is to put a price on it. Right now pollution is not reflected in the price of goods. If you've got a better plan to effectively make the market pay the price of pollution, let's hear it.
  • AntronXAntronX Posts: 462Solar Expert ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it
    mike90045 wrote: »
    What started the warming trend after the last ice age?

    Milankovitch cycles.
    Earth's orbit, tilt and precession oscillate, and combined effect triggers ice ages to come and go every 100 thousand years or so. We were on track to another ice age in about 60 - 80 K years. But now, that's not gonna happen, because extra CO2 that we emitted overpowers any cooling effect from orbital cycles. More info at IPCC's FAQ site.

    Edit: By 60-80K years I meant the peak of ice age. Judging by temperature data derived from ice sheets, previous interglacial period - the Eemian, lasted 16K years. Ours, the Holocene, is already 12K years old. The next ice age would be on it's way in about 4000 years if greenhouse gases manage to fall to pre-industrial levels.
  • KamalaKamala Posts: 452Solar Expert
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it
    AntronX wrote: »
    ... But now, that's not gonna happen ...

    Ah.... We don't know that.
  • AntronXAntronX Posts: 462Solar Expert ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it
    Kamala wrote: »
    Ah.... We don't know that.

    Lets see, the Milankovitch cycle causes solar radiation to vary by 0.235 W/m2 at 65 deg. north latitude. Us the humans are already cooking the earth at 1.5W/m2 with no end in sight. And it's gonna get really fun when various self-reinforcing climate feedbacks kick in.
  • russruss Posts: 593Solar Expert
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it

    This week at the climate talks (preparation for Cancun) The third worlders have decided the 100 billion promised at Copenhagen is not enough - they want more!

    I agree with Mike - keep the UN's hands out of peoples pockets.
  • bryanlbryanl Posts: 175Solar Expert ✭✭✭✭✭
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it

    re: "Yeah - the primary reason being that they are adjusting for sensors that have been relocated from roof tops and parking lots to grassy areas." -- this one is right up there with the media being in the pockets of the 'denialists.'

    The fact is that the trend is towards automated stations and that means airports or places where they can use a short lead for data collection. That may be related to cost issues that are also causing a significant reduction in the number of stations, especially in remote places.

    I also note the denigration of the surfacestations.org project and its manner. When those denigrations rise to the integrity and honesty of the project under attack, I will provide them higher credence. For now, the haughty dismissal that is ignorant on its face is getting to be a hallmark of the climate alarmist POV and, IMHO, that tends to support Prof J Curry's conclusion regarding the response to her comments.

    That is also seen in where this thread has taken the OP. Rather than sun having an impact with the questions being 'how much?' and 'in what ways?,' the trend has gone to the defense of AGW as if anthropogenic were the only source of climate change.
  • dreesdrees Posts: 481Solar Expert ✭✭✭
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it
    bryanl wrote: »
    re: "Yeah - the primary reason being that they are adjusting for sensors that have been relocated from roof tops and parking lots to grassy areas." -- this one is right up there with the media being in the pockets of the 'denialists.'
    If you actually looked at the data/research, you will see that yes, indeed the reference thermometers have been moved to avoid the affects of micro-climate.
    bryanl wrote: »
    The fact is that the trend is towards automated stations and that means airports or places where they can use a short lead for data collection. That may be related to cost issues that are also causing a significant reduction in the number of stations, especially in remote places.
    And the fact is again - even with using the data from those affected stations - it does not significantly alter the temperature trends!
    bryanl wrote: »
    That is also seen in where this thread has taken the OP. Rather than sun having an impact with the questions being 'how much?' and 'in what ways?,' the trend has gone to the defense of AGW as if anthropogenic were the only source of climate change.
    Just about everyone agrees that the climate changes and that there are multiple non-human causes of climate change.

    The debate centers around whether or not the climate has actually changed recently - how much it has changed and how fast it is changing - and if it has changed, what is the primary cause of the change.
  • bryanlbryanl Posts: 175Solar Expert ✭✭✭✭✭
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it
    If you actually looked at the data/research
    the classic putdown ... why not address the points raised rather than speculate on the persons who made them?

    The facts stand. There are fewer stations used for climate data now than twenty years ago, most of the reduction is in stations at high altitudes and higher latitudes, and the stations in use tend to be established for air traffic reasons or for the convenience of data collection rather rather than climate reasons.

    From what I can tell, most of the 'microclimate' compensation is in the form of data adjustments post measure and that suffers from an apparent bias as well as secret algorithms.

    re: "even with using the data from those affected stations - it does not significantly alter the temperature trends!" -- This is a diversion attempt. The issue isn't the modern temperature readings but rather their significance in terms of historical trends and current impact as well as their support for climate models.
    Just about everyone agrees that the climate changes and that there are multiple non-human causes of climate change.
    Then why all the defensiveness, ad hominem, logical fallacies, data hiding, and so on?
  • AntronXAntronX Posts: 462Solar Expert ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it
    bryanl wrote: »
    The facts stand...
    I still haven't seen any citations for your "facts".
  • bryanlbryanl Posts: 175Solar Expert ✭✭✭✭✭
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it
    I still haven't seen any citations for your "facts".
    scare quotes. challenges. how nice ...

    See GHCN or surface stations.org or station data will do to get a basis for what is used for climate research.

    whiteboard has a nifty graphic showing changes over time. McKitrick on GHCN has a review of a paper on the subject.

    Most of these links have already been denigrated and dismissed without qualification just because of their POV but it should be noted that they are just starting points. One of the interesting contrasts between the alarmist advocates and the skeptics is that the skeptics are rather more open with their data and analyses and provide citation so you can follow their reasoning and sources all the way back to the fundamental sources. The alarmists seem to prefer to hide things, obfuscate, challenge, and impugn. That contrast speaks to me.
  • AntronXAntronX Posts: 462Solar Expert ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it
    bryanl wrote: »
    ...The alarmists seem to prefer to hide things, obfuscate, challenge, and impugn...
    Give me proof of that as well. I will take a look at your sources later, got few other things to do for now.
  • russruss Posts: 593Solar Expert
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it

    Someone that is doing a study of the temperature data - Dave Summers also known as Heading Out - http://bittooth.blogspot.com/2010/08/utah-and-tobs-temperatures.html

    He is looking at the data state by state in detail.

    His reporting on the gulf oil spill was quite interesting as well.

    He has a lot of posts regarding the history of coal mining as well.

    All in all, an interesting guy whether one agrees with all conclusions is up to the individual.
  • CorbinKaleCorbinKale Posts: 21Registered Users
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it

    I remember the 70's when the science of 'global cooling' was indisputable. We were definitely heading for another ice age. Later, we are faced with 'global warming', and the science is REALLY sound this time. Then it morphs into 'climate change'. Does anyone really think we can achieve 'global just rightness'? 'Climate stagnation'? I would not be surprised to see that in a headline within the next decade.

    I am all for a reduction in pollution and energy conservation, but not because some 'climate expert' tells me to believe that. The climate scare tactics are nothing more than political tools.
  • bryanlbryanl Posts: 175Solar Expert ✭✭✭✭✭
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it

    re: "Give me proof of that as well." -- go read the CRU release (theft, whatever) that created all the brouhaha. Even the whitewash efforts have had to conclude that non compliance with FOIA requests and related reluctance to be open in research data and method were problematical.

    I note the word use of the word "proof" in this context as well ... that is better used in the context of formal logic. It's use in terms of behavioral observations is something to be considered in regards to approach and mental state.
  • dreesdrees Posts: 481Solar Expert ✭✭✭
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it
    CorbinKale wrote: »
    I remember the 70's when the science of 'global cooling' was indisputable.
    Actually, there was a few vocal scientists who happened to get some widespread media coverage related to "global cooling" - there was no consensus at all at the time that another ice-age was imminent. In fact, the vast majority of papers published in the 70s were predicting global warming, not cooling.

    http://www.skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s.htm
  • CorbinKaleCorbinKale Posts: 21Registered Users
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it
    drees wrote: »
    Actually, there was a few vocal scientists who happened to get some widespread media coverage related to "global cooling" - there was no consensus at all at the time that another ice-age was imminent. In fact, the vast majority of papers published in the 70s were predicting global warming, not cooling.

    I don't mean the numerical count of papers. I am talking about the public hype. Back then, global cooling was the public issue. Two years ago it was global warming. Now it is climate change, to account for the warming being not quite as global as predicted.

    Climate change is a fact of life on this planet. It has ALWAYS changed, and is nothing to be scared of. The day we stop climate change, will be the day we kill the planet.
  • dreesdrees Posts: 481Solar Expert ✭✭✭
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it
    CorbinKale wrote: »
    I don't mean the numerical count of papers. I am talking about the public hype. Back then, global cooling was the public issue.
    So are you suggesting that we should ignore the scientists this time around because the media is also hyping it?
    CorbinKale wrote: »
    Two years ago it was global warming. Now it is climate change, to account for the warming being not quite as global as predicted.
    It was never predicted that the entire globe would warm evenly. Climate change was introduced to more accurately describe some of the possible short-term effects of global warming - such as increased snowfall in some areas which would lead to short-term cooler temperatures.
    CorbinKale wrote: »
    Climate change is a fact of life on this planet. It has ALWAYS changed, and is nothing to be scared of. The day we stop climate change, will be the day we kill the planet.
    The danger isn't the fact that the climate is changing - it's the RATE at which it is changing and the rate at which it's changing environment and the fact that humans are causing it while ignoring all effects that will cause significant impact to the globe as we know it for at least the next century if we don't take steps to mitigate our emissions.

    We've got two options:

    1. Reduce our global warming emissions (primarily CO2, also methane and black carbon) and shift our economy to clean, renewable power sources like solar and wind.
    2. Wait until we burn all the oil, coal and natural gas we can get to until it becomes cost prohibitive to mine. By then (by the end of the century), CO2 levels will be much, much higher and the world will be a very different place to live in.
  • dwhdwh Posts: 1,341Solar Expert ✭✭✭
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it

    In "State of Fear" Michael Crighton noted that one particular scientist (can't remember his name and don't have the book anymore) originally started the global warming thing in 1988. Then, in 1998 (after 10 years of being beat up by other scientists for the lack of provable data in his original report) was saying that "there isn't enough data to be sure".
  • AntronXAntronX Posts: 462Solar Expert ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it
    dwh wrote: »
    In "State of Fear" Michael Crighton...

    You do realize that's an action-thriller novel, right? :roll:
  • dreesdrees Posts: 481Solar Expert ✭✭✭
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it
    dwh wrote: »
    In "State of Fear" Michael Crighton noted that one particular scientist (can't remember his name and don't have the book anymore) originally started the global warming thing in 1988.
    Did you know that global warming due to industrial CO2 emissions had it's origins before 1900? Global warming theory has been around for a long time.
  • Chuck46Chuck46 Posts: 95Solar Expert
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it

    Back in the "70s http://www.denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htmit was global cooling now its global warming same groups new leaders same mistakes on both sides. Polution is real climate changes regardles what we do. Anyone can selectivly pick information to prove a point or dis prove it

    Here arew some more just for a yuk,
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling
    http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/globalwarming/2008-02-20-global-cooling_N.htm
    http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/01/11/years-global-cooling-coming-say-leading-scientists/

    The point is articles are written all the time about stuff this does not mean they are right or wrong. It should give rise to thought and your personal response or commiitment. Mine is a off grid home and recylcling what I can, trying to reduce my personal carcon foot print makes $$$$ Sense to me.
    Oh by the way, I dont belive anyone who spouts goverment sponsered studies as their source, and if they get money from a goverment directly or indirectly they will feed the need to stay in the loop.
    Chuck
  • AntronXAntronX Posts: 462Solar Expert ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it

    Sigh... this what happens when you teach [come-on--Please don't go there.-Bill B. Moderator] instead of science at school.
  • BB.BB. Posts: 27,227Super Moderators admin
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it

    And we would avoid this if we taught science, engineering, and statistics to PhD's in schools:

    The No-Dendro Illusion

    -Bill
    Near San Francisco California: 3.5kWatt Grid Tied Solar power system+small backup genset
  • AntronXAntronX Posts: 462Solar Expert ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it
    AntronX wrote: »
    [come-on--Please don't go there.-Bill B. Moderator]

    Haha, I have touched the nerve, didn't I?

    you should be directing your energy at the subject matter and not at anybody as is evidenced by your concern if you touched a nerve.-niel
  • BB.BB. Posts: 27,227Super Moderators admin
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it

    Actually no--I don't go to church and I was raised to question religious authority by my parents...

    I am trying to keep the thread civil and avoiding insulting (to anyone) posts.

    -Bill
    Near San Francisco California: 3.5kWatt Grid Tied Solar power system+small backup genset
  • AntronXAntronX Posts: 462Solar Expert ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it

    Ok, fair enough, I stepped out of the line. But I am not sorry for it. I will keep my energy on the subject matter now. ;)
  • dreesdrees Posts: 481Solar Expert ✭✭✭
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it
    Chuck46 wrote: »
    Back in the "70s http://www.denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htmit was global cooling now its global warming same groups new leaders same mistakes on both sides. Polution is real climate changes regardles what we do. Anyone can selectivly pick information to prove a point or dis prove it
    As I said before just a few posts ago, claims of global cooling in the 70s were the result of media hype and not substantiated by science or had any sort of scientific consensus. This is vastly different from the situation regarding global warming.

    How many times must I debunk this myth?
  • dwhdwh Posts: 1,341Solar Expert ✭✭✭
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it
    AntronX wrote: »
    You do realize that's an action-thriller novel, right? :roll:

    Actually, it is a contrived action-thriller novel which was created as a soapbox to present Crighton's anti-(global warming theory) position - as he stated in the author's notes in the book itself. According to the notes, all of the scientific data that he used in the book is real, and he provided the references. The plot was dodgy and the action lame...but the point was to get the scientific data across, so I suppose we can forgive the weaknesses in the fiction.

    He did get slammed by quite a few scientists (as expected) but certainly not all.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Fear

    "This novel received criticism from some climate scientists,[1][14][6] science journalists[15][16] and environmental groups[17][18] for inaccuracies and misleading information. Sixteen of 18 top U.S. climate scientists interviewed by Knight Ridder said the author was bending scientific data and distorting research.[6] One of those in disagreement was MIT meteorology professor Richard Lindzen, who stated "the science was handled intelligently and responsibly."[6]"


    "Crichton included a statement of his views on global climate change as an afterword. In the "Author's message", Crichton states that the cause, extent, and threat of climate change is largely unknown and unknowable. He finishes by endorsing the management of wilderness and the continuation of research into all aspects of the Earth's environment.

    In Appendix I, Crichton warns both sides of the global warming debate against the politicization of science. Here he provides two examples of the disastrous combination of pseudo-science and politics: the early 20th-century ideas of eugenics (which he directly cites as one of the theories that allowed for the Holocaust) and Lysenkoism.

    This appendix is followed by a bibliography of 172 books and journal articles that Crichton presents "...to assist those readers who would like to review my thinking and arrive at their own conclusions." (State of Fear, pp, 583)."




    Having read about 3,800 books so far (of which over 100 were college textbooks on all sorts of subjects), I think I've started to develop the ability to tell the difference between fiction and non-fiction. :D

    (I average about 100/year so I should pass 4k books in the next two years or so. I'm hoping to hit 5k before I die - and no, I'm not a speed-reader (everyone always asks me that).)
  • dwhdwh Posts: 1,341Solar Expert ✭✭✭
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it
    drees wrote: »
    Did you know that global warming due to industrial CO2 emissions had it's origins before 1900? Global warming theory has been around for a long time.

    Yes, I do have a passing familiarity with history.

    Again, as I said I don't have the book anymore, so I can't quote from it. As I recall, Crighton was specifically referring to a report that came out in 1988 which more or less ignited the current global warming (crisis/craze/scare/hoopla/awareness (take your pick)) and the scientist who authored that report. He was illustrating how that individual had more or less recanted under peer pressure from the scientific community (that was one of the real-world facts, not one of the parts of the fictional story).
  • Chuck46Chuck46 Posts: 95Solar Expert
    Re: More data that it's the Sun that does it

    Boy talk about missing the mark. My point is that there is no wining this discusion for any side. Both are going to stress their science is the best and only theirs is the truest and they are right. Regardless of how inteligent we all like to belive we are all of or thoughts are effected by or own bias. That is my point. When we can all reationally discuss a subjuct with out that bias or snide remarks then real intelects may join the discussion. Oh and thats not me.
    Chuck
    Dont forget it was proven science that the world was flat and the sun revolved around the earth. We might still be teaching that and other neat concepts if it wasnt for questioning minds.:D
Sign In or Register to comment.