Can Science Help Solve the Economic Crisis?

[c1ue]

Re: Can Science Help Solve the Economic Crisis?

Chris,

The problem is anecdotal evidence doesn't mean CO2 is either the cause or that the effect you are seeing is going to continue.

As England has a pretty long history of recorded evidence - what of the mini Ice Age? What was that caused by? And what ended it?

For that matter global cooling was all the rage merely 30 years ago. What happened to completely flip the switch?

I repeat: if even the events of the past 500 years cannot be modeled, how then can the events in the future be modeled?

GIGO

[Chris Coles]

Re: Can Science Help Solve the Economic Crisis?

Chris,

The problem is anecdotal evidence doesn't mean CO2 is either the cause or that the effect you are seeing is going to continue.

As England has a pretty long history of recorded evidence - what of the mini Ice Age? What was that caused by? And what ended it?

For that matter global cooling was all the rage merely 30 years ago. What happened to completely flip the switch?

I repeat: if even the events of the past 500 years cannot be modeled, how then can the events in the future be modeled?

GIGO

Taken from Comparison of Atmospheric Temperature with CO2
Over The Last 400,000 Years http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/last_400k_yrs.html

But that was the year 2000. This is the most up to date data from NOAA



http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/

[c1ue]

Re: Can Science Help Solve the Economic Crisis?

Ah yes, the famous temperature logs from Hansen - this one from 2004.

Yes, 5 years is a good time scale for something which may well be dependent on millenia scale cycles of cosmological phenomena.

And a rehash of the old - well if CO2 is high, and temperatures are high, then therefore CO2 caused the high temperatures.

Well, here's another scale:

globaltemp.jpg

Notice where our so called warm era is on the big picture.

[KGW]

The Gods of the Copybook Headings

---

The Gods of the Copybook Headings

---

AS I PASS through my incarnations in every age and race,
I make my proper prostrations to the Gods of the Market Place.
Peering through reverent fingers I watch them flourish and fall,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings, I notice, outlast them all.

We were living in trees when they met us. They showed us each in turn
That Water would certainly wet us, as Fire would certainly burn:
But we found them lacking in Uplift, Vision and Breadth of Mind,
So we left them to teach the Gorillas while we followed the March of Mankind.

We moved as the Spirit listed. They never altered their pace,
Being neither cloud nor wind-borne like the Gods of the Market Place,
But they always caught up with our progress, and presently word would come
That a tribe had been wiped off its icefield, or the lights had gone out in Rome.

With the Hopes that our World is built on they were utterly out of touch,
They denied that the Moon was Stilton; they denied she was even Dutch;
They denied that Wishes were Horses; they denied that a Pig had Wings;
So we worshipped the Gods of the Market Who promised these beautiful things.

When the Cambrian measures were forming, They promised perpetual peace.
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
But when we disarmed They sold us and delivered us bound to our foe,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "Stick to the Devil you know."

On the first Feminian Sandstones we were promised the Fuller Life
(Which started by loving our neighbour and ended by loving his wife)
Till our women had no more children and the men lost reason and faith,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "The Wages of Sin is Death."

In the Carboniferous Epoch we were promised abundance for all,
By robbing selected Peter to pay for collective Paul;
But, though we had plenty of money, there was nothing our money could buy,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "If you don't work you die."

Then the Gods of the Market tumbled, and their smooth-tongued wizards withdrew
And the hearts of the meanest were humbled and began to believe it was true
That All is not Gold that Glitters, and Two and Two make Four
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings limped up to explain it once more.

As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;

And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!


http://www.kipling.org.uk/poems_copybook.htm

[we_are_toast]

Re: Can Science Help Solve the Economic Crisis?

Ah yes, the famous temperature logs from Hansen - this one from 2004.

Yes, 5 years is a good time scale for something which may well be dependent on millenia scale cycles of cosmological phenomena.

And a rehash of the old - well if CO2 is high, and temperatures are high, then therefore CO2 caused the high temperatures.

Well, here's another scale:

Notice where our so called warm era is on the big picture.

Let's see, the challenge is for Global Warming deniers to come up with one piece of legitimate scientific data that would contradict the mountains of data that shows that man made global warming is occurring now and has been for about the last 100 or so years since we increased atmospheric CO2 through the burning of fossil fuels.

Your answer to that challenge is to show a temperature graph that covers somewhere around a BILLION or more years. The width of the lines on the graph are wider than the time period of concern.

You're joking, right?

[c1ue]

Re: Can Science Help Solve the Economic Crisis?

Toast,

So you believe the graph is false? That the Earth has NOT been warmer than it is today in the historical record?

That the Earth returned from these high temperatures not once but many times?

That these high temperatures were certainly NOT caused by fossil fuel burning creating high levels of CO2? Perhaps caused instead by Dinosaur farts?

That this time there will be a tipping point where Gaia is stripped to a global desert, but all those previous times it was different?

Well. Ok then.

[Chris Coles]

Re: Can Science Help Solve the Economic Crisis?

Toast,

So you believe the graph is false? That the Earth has NOT been warmer than it is today in the historical record?

That the Earth returned from these high temperatures not once but many times?

That these high temperatures were certainly NOT caused by fossil fuel burning creating high levels of CO2? Perhaps caused instead by Dinosaur farts?

That this time there will be a tipping point where Gaia is stripped to a global desert, but all those previous times it was different?

Well. Ok then.

There is only one small snag with your graph. The last time temperatures were as high as the high point, the largest animal that was able to survive on the North American Continent was the size of a small dog.

I guess you are slightly larger and in which case, I would worry about that if I were you.

[we_are_toast]

Re: Can Science Help Solve the Economic Crisis?

Toast,

So you believe the graph is false? That the Earth has NOT been warmer than it is today in the historical record?

That the Earth returned from these high temperatures not once but many times?

That these high temperatures were certainly NOT caused by fossil fuel burning creating high levels of CO2? Perhaps caused instead by Dinosaur farts?

That this time there will be a tipping point where Gaia is stripped to a global desert, but all those previous times it was different?

Well. Ok then.

Sorry c1ue, but the graph does absolutely nothing to counter the evidence that the current global warming is man made. Of course, no one disputes that the earth's temperature has varied over the past 4.5 billion years. It's equivalent to saying that because there was an economic bubble in the past caused by Tulip speculation, that the current bubble and all future bubbles, must be caused by Tulip speculation.

The logic you are using, is that because there was a previous rise in global temperatures, all subsequent rises, and all future rises, must be caused by the same or similar conditions, and therefore all the evidence of man made global warming should simply be dismissed. The argument negates the possibility of independent and unique causes of temperature changes without presenting any supportive evidence.

The concern is not that the planet is warming, or that it is warming beyond anything the planet has experienced in the past, the concern is the RATE of warming. The rate is far faster than anything we have data for, going back millions of years. The concern is that many species of plants and animals do not have the evolutionary history to survive this rapid change. The concern is that the rate of warming will most certainly change weather patterns, and may change them in such a way as to cause the large scale failure of human food crops. The concern is that humanity does not have the capacity to adjust to the rate of change in it's surrounding environment without a significant decline in standard of living or population level.

The graph is interesting, but it does nothing to counter the evidence of the current rapid warming trend being man made.

[c1ue]

Re: Can Science Help Solve the Economic Crisis?

You clearly failed to read what I am pointing out:

1) CO2 - even if it functions as advertised - only serves to add extra heat energy to the Earth thus raising global mean temperature. CO2 is thus a possible mechanism only, one of many.

That the rise of global mean temperature exists - I have never disputed. Indeed I repeatedly point out that there seems to be little disagreement that there is some warming going on.

Whether it is CO2 or something else, that is still debatable in my view.

2) Whatever the cause of the likely warming, the next step in the catastrophists' argument is that there will be a point of no return. That beyond some CO2 induced temperature level, the Earth and everything on it is screwed.

The graph shows both that:

a) Global mean temperatures have been higher than before...WHATEVER the cause.

b) If the cause occurred several times in the past, then why could that as yet unknown cause not be what is going on now? When we are quite certain it wasn't fossil fuel derived CO2 levels, and are fairly sure it wasn't CO2 at all.

c) Even disregarding the cause, the global mean temperatures being so high in the past did not cause global catastrophe - we are living proof of that. So why is a rising temperature now a likely cause of global catastrophe?

d) If rising temperatures are not necessarily CO2 caused, nor are high global mean temperatures having any evidence of 'runaway' global warming in many examplees in the past, nor are existing models able to model past behavior much less the exceptionalist 'runaway' scenario, why again must massive societal changes occur?

Why is it different this time?

And for those saying million year old past behavior doesn't mean squat, what about the mini-Ice Age a mere 600 years ago? Certainly it had nothing to do with CO2 then.

The mini-Ice Age lasted at least 400 years and ended only 150 years ago.

It wasn't fossil fuels that did it.

Nor CO2.

Why then is this 400 year data range outweighed by the last 20 years of data?

Why are these sophisticated models unable to combine present global warming with past global cooling?

[santafe2]

Re: Can Science Help Solve the Economic Crisis?

The graph shows both that:

a) Global mean temperatures have been higher than before...WHATEVER the cause.

b) If the cause occurred several times in the past, then why could that as yet unknown cause not be what is going on now? When we are quite certain it wasn't fossil fuel derived CO2 levels, and are fairly sure it wasn't CO2 at all.

c) Even disregarding the cause, the global mean temperatures being so high in the past did not cause global catastrophe - we are living proof of that. So why is a rising temperature now a likely cause of global catastrophe?

d) If rising temperatures are not necessarily CO2 caused, nor are high global mean temperatures having any evidence of 'runaway' global warming in many examplees in the past, nor are existing models able to model past behavior much less the exceptionalist 'runaway' scenario, why again must massive societal changes occur?

Why is it different this time?

c1ue - Let me first say that I've enjoyed this discussion and appreciate you, Toast, Chris and GRG taking the time to support your views. I'm sure it's only served to cement all our opinions on this issue. Unfortunately, it's not an issue any of us can settle unless one or more of the scientists studying the effects of carbon dioxide can prove with near certainty, a particular outcome.

I tend to be very conservative. When I see that a green house gas has increased by almost 40% over an instant in geologic time, and I'm sure we can tie that increase back to human activity, I also think we can assess almost certain causality.

When we then begin to experience climate change consistent with that increase in GHG, to my mind, it's not something we can't ignore. This is likely where our path's part.

My takeaway from your graph of the earth's geologic periods was first a reenforcement of the idea that we humans have been around for a very short time and second that we've never been in existance when the earth was warm. Personally, I'd rather keep it cool than continue to throw the CO2 dice.

[Chris Coles]

Re: Can Science Help Solve the Economic Crisis?

c) Even disregarding the cause, the global mean temperatures being so high in the past did not cause global catastrophe - we are living proof of that. So why is a rising temperature now a likely cause of global catastrophe?

This gets very easy. Some years ago the Southampton Archaeological Society discovered that Southampton Water had identifiable evidence of several beach lines above the existing water level; as much as 165 feet above existing sea levels.

Scientific American no less, about a year ago published the possibility of a sudden sea level rise of anywhere between 20 and 170 feet caused by ice sheets on Antarctica and Greenland suddenly sliding, no, not melting, suddenly sliding into the sea.

That is in part based upon the very recent discovery that the ice on Antarctica is afloat on a bed of melt water.

Let us take a simple scenario and assume we get a sudden sea level rise of a mere 20 feet. The minimum.

That would inundate every major city that lies at the sea edge. London, New York, Boston, San Francisco, I could make a list as long as my arm. Yes, there would be areas not inundated, but if you look at the simple effect of displacing say, one third of the populations onto the rural environment with NO possibility of any return, certainly within their lifetimes, you have a global catastrophe.

No working sea port anywhere on the planet.

All your food comes and goes via fixed equipment on a fixed dockside.

A sudden rise of say 50 feet would bring our entire civilisation to an abrupt end.

[c1ue]

Re: Can Science Help Solve the Economic Crisis?

Chris,

Sure, all the North/South poles' ice melting is probably not a good thing.

But of course, we don't know exactly what that means.

Because in the past global temperatures were much higher - thus polar ice levels must have been lower.

Were the seas much higher then? Was the climate much different then? What caused the shift back down?

My point is very simple: if you postulate that a possible catastrophe should be averted at all costs, then why is global warming the only one?

Why aren't we spending billions building an anti-meteor defense?

Why aren't we spending billions more removing trace chemicals and metals from the environment?

How about disease? Why are we sitting around hoping avian flu or what not doesn't mutate when we can absolutely eradicate its base cause? Whack all the ducks!

In my mind, it is quite straightforward: while MMGW is a possibility, the only reason it has its present level of awareness is that it is being used as a lever to accumulate political power because it taps into so many of the 'green' ethos.

And that is why I continue to closely scrutinize the so called consensus and ostensible research.

As for your specific concerns about a 20 feet rise in sea level destroying the cities - well - Amsterdam is 13 feet below sea level. New Orleans is 10 feet below sea level.

Both cities have existed despite periodic flooding for centuries.

If there was a need, 20 feet could also be handled - assuming it wasn't a tidal wave.

50 feet would be a problem, sure, but again the question is time scale.

A rise of that magnitude involves 140 quadrillion cubic feet (give or take) of water. (361M square kilometers earth surface area * 0.71 ocean coverage / 2.59 km-sq/miles-sq * 27.9M sq. feet/ miles-sq * 50 foot rise)

This basically requires 10% of the antarctic ice to melt - Antarctic ice being 90% of all the ice in the world. (Antarctic surface area = 5.4M square miles, depth of ice 7000 feet: 5.4M * 27.9M * 7000 = 1054 quadrillion cubic feet).

Well, the temperature there is -37 C. A rise of global mean temperatures of even 10 degrees isn't very likely to significantly impact 10% of Antarctica's land mass.

Even the IPCC only estimated 0.6 meters of sea level rise, with a more recent report saying 2.0 meters.

So again, the postulated asymptotic runaway is needed for a true catastrophe to occur.

So again I ask - where's the urgency?

And another tangent on the topic of droughts and sea level changes induced by global warming:

Rainfall occurs due to evaporation. Evaporation at higher temperatures ought to be higher. Sure, there will be shifts in rain patterns due to air current shifts and what not, but the evaporated water is still going to fall somewhere. If anything, it is very possible that ice levels might rise overall worldwide with so much more water in the air coming down into cold regions. So sea levels might actually fall.

[Chris Coles]

Re: Can Science Help Solve the Economic Crisis?

A rise of that magnitude involves 140 quadrillion cubic feet (give or take) of water. (361M square kilometers earth surface area * 0.71 ocean coverage / 2.59 km-sq/miles-sq * 27.9M sq. feet/ miles-sq * 50 foot rise)

This basically requires 10% of the antarctic ice to melt - Antarctic ice being 90% of all the ice in the world. (Antarctic surface area = 5.4M square miles, depth of ice 7000 feet: 5.4M * 27.9M * 7000 = 1054 quadrillion cubic feet).

It does not require the ice to melt. In fact Scientific American deliberately illustrated that with two drink glasses, one half full of water and the other filled with ice cubes showing how the water level can come up without any melting at all. That is the point, we do not have to wait for melting. The scientific study and present concentration upon the ice shelves is again a part of this. The general perception is the ice shelves are holding back the land based ice and the shelves are disappearing rapidly.

This time next year we could be right in among it with no way out.

[c1ue]

Re: Can Science Help Solve the Economic Crisis?

Well, its a date.

Let's see what happens next year

You're on an island, an I'm in a coastal city, so there won't be much reporting lag.

Of course I made sure to get a place on the 9th floor...

[Chris Coles]

Re: Can Science Help Solve the Economic Crisis?

Well, its a date.

Let's see what happens next year

You're on an island, an I'm in a coastal city, so there won't be much reporting lag.

Of course I made sure to get a place on the 9th floor...

And I am in the highest village in East Hampshire, 700ft above sea level....