The Taboo Of Not Subscribing To Anthropological Global Warming

[Devonian]

Did you read this paper WS.

Scientists at San Diego's Scripps Institution of Oceanography and other authors published a study showing how much the pH level (measuring alkalinity versus acidity) varies naturally between parts of the ocean and at different times of the day, month and year.

Human beings have indeed placed marine ecosystems under terrible pressure, but the chief culprits are overfishing and pollution. By comparison, a very slow reduction in the alkalinity of the oceans, well within the range of natural variation, is a modest threat, and it certainly does not merit apocalyptic headlines.

http://www.thegwpf.o...in-of-salt.html

It's dire stuff. He quotes this:

"On both a monthly and annual scale, even the most stable open ocean sites see pH changes many times larger than the annual rate of acidification,"

Well, yes, but to make anything of that is like saying "Tonight the temperature will fall by more than 5C so it can't be the case an ice age can happen with a 5C fall". Oh really....Ridley then goes on to say (get this!) "The noise is greater than the signal." Yes! Noise is like that, just like my temperature example.

And then Ridly quote this "in many freshwater lakes, pH changes that are orders of magnitude greater than those projected for the 22nd-century oceans can occur over periods of hours" huh! What has the noise of fresh water acidity data point measurements got to do with average salt water acidity over a century?

Edited January 12, 2012 by Devonian

[Gowon]

I don't keep blaming CO² but the concensus of papers I've read on the subject lean towards the Marine Carbonate System being more affected by increased Atmospheric carbon. Obviously overfishing and pollution have a part to play but they are human induced as well.

Im not debating the overfishing and polluting part, I understand that. Im talking about how CO2 affect the alkalinity of the oceans, the paper clearly states that it's well within the range of natural variation, but you say that atmospheric CO2 is changing the system.

[knocker]

Im not debating the overfishing and polluting part, I understand that. Im talking about how CO2 affect the alkalinity of the oceans, the paper clearly states that it's well within the range of natural variation, but you say that atmospheric CO2 is changing the system.

But you are quoting one paper and I'm not. Shall we go around for the third time?

[Devonian]

Im not debating the overfishing and polluting part, I understand that. Im talking about how CO2 affect the alkalinity of the oceans, the paper clearly states that it's well within the range of natural variation, but you say that atmospheric CO2 is changing the system.

The press release from 'Scripps' and a link to the actual paper.

Edited January 12, 2012 by Devonian

[knocker]

The press release from 'Scripps' and a link to the actual paper.

Thanks for posting the link Devonian, I think it was one of a number I posted a wee while ago but useful to have it again. I'm a bit surprised with Ridley as the couple of books of his I have are quite good.

[knocker]

I may have posted some of these links before so apologies.

http://www.eurekaler...s-oai031604.php

http://www.eurekaler...a-orf020410.php

http://www.eurekaler...e-aow101607.php

http://www.eurekaler...a-rog030807.php

http://www.eurekaler...u-cch021308.php

http://www.eurekaler...f-esc051810.php

http://www.eurekaler...f-oac122010.php

http://www.eurekaler...--aoc071211.php

So, no apologies, I lean........................

Edited January 12, 2012 by weather ship

[knocker]

Blimey I'm beginning to bore myself. Not for the first time.

[Gowon]

The press release from 'Scripps' and a link to the actual paper.

Thanks for the link but I have to admit, I'm really bored now with all the CO2 is evil...reeeaally bored!!

And surprise, surprise after a more detailed study they find that marine life to be more resilient then they originaly thought.

While these data suggest that marine organisms may be more adapted to fluctuations in pH than previously thought much more research is needed to determine how individual species will respond over time.

Blimey I'm beginning to bore myself. Not for the first time.

LOL!

I fell a sleep in my chair reading that paper!

[knocker]

I fell a sleep in my chair reading that paper!

Thank god for that, I can know sleep easy and dream of Ann Widdicombe knowing that another bulverist is tucked up out of harms way.

[Gowon]

Thank god for that, I can know sleep easy and dream of Ann Widdicombe knowing that another bulverist is tucked up out of harms way.

I'll take that parting shot on the chin!

It's better to be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. :winky:

[Devonian]

Thanks for the link but I have to admit, I'm really bored now with all the CO2 is evil...reeeaally bored!!

And surprise, surprise after a more detailed study they find that marine life to be more resilient then they originaly thought.

While these data suggest that marine organisms may be more adapted to fluctuations in pH than previously thought much more research is needed to determine how individual species will respond over time.

LOL!

I fell a sleep in my chair reading that paper!

And surprise, surprise after a more detailed study they find that marine life to be more resilient then they originaly thought. But they don't find that...it's 'suggested'. The thing is scientists are more cautious than their critics suggest state.

[VillagePlank]

... and yet again, I spend time in my life trawling (pun!) through the same old dogma from both sides. I wonder if, on my death bed, I will wish to reclaim such lost hours ..... ???

[Devonian]

... and yet again, I spend time in my life trawling (pun!) through the same old dogma from both sides. I wonder if, on my death bed, I will wish to reclaim such lost hours ..... ???

Can you point to some dogma of mine? If there is one thing I don't want to be it's dogmatic - given (here's a thing) the allusions to religion it implies...

[Village]

I don't see much point in continuing this discussion as I'm well aware of the research regarding clouds but just to comment on this.

Can you point out where myself, or anyone else, has said all changes are due to mankind. This would be absolute nonsense. Yours is a typical Bulverist stance. Which in case you don't know is a method of argument that avoids the need to prove that someone is wrong and then explaining why the person could hold such a fallacious view.

You say; there is not much point in continuing this discussion with you as you state above ; you know everything about the research on clouds already. I will wait to see what the research turns up before I make my mind up.

Its a shame that we cant continue to discuss subjects that are ongoing.

Edited January 13, 2012 by Village

[Methuselah]

Aye. The kind of rhetorical chicanery used in a courtroom doesn't work in science. Unless, of course, one side or both are not really that interested in science?

[Village]

There is something else that is happening to our planet which very little is known about and which could be having some effect on the climate in a subtle way.

It's a major change which started in earnest during the latter part of the last century and that is Pole reversal. The magnetosphere of our planet is already well into the process of change. During this change, where the north and south polarity reverse, all of life on this planet could become exposed by dangerous amounts of high energy gama radiation which will reach the Earth's surface. Its not clear yet where and when or what the exposure will be, but it is vitally important that science spends more time on this issue.

Billions of dollars in funding have been diverted to study our star purely because of the threat from the short wave energy of the spectrum. As we know, there does seem to be a link between cosmic radiation and clouds here on Earth and so much more needs to be done to study the effects of how our atmosphere may change when exposure to radiation alters. The aviation industry has moved fast in recent years to change to satelite navigation systems to avoid the problems which have been caused with the erratic movement of the Magnetic North Pole. During the last decade the Magnetic North Pole was darting around all over the place and causing a huge headache for navigation

I really hope that we do see much more funding in this area for research. I have held my own theory about climate change for a decade now, but cant get enough new reports to help me determine if I am right.

I beleive that climate change is driven by the long term variability of rainfall. The variability in any particular region is subtle, however, over many years this shows itself and will change the climate in a region. Rainfall patern follows general rules due to the Hadley cell synoptic set. However, further north I believe that the subtle changes of the distribution and positioning of High pressure cells determine where atmospheric moisture will be enhanced or rarified. I also believe that this affects the density or rarification of condensation nuclie which are important to the production and volume of precip in any particular locality.

High Pressure distribution in the mid and high latitudes is also governed by the temperature of the Stratosphere which changes due to Solar input variability.

So you see the Solar input I believe has been greatly underestimated until now because scientists have assumed for too long that the Infra-red part of the spectrum is the main driver of climate. My view is that the solar winds and the high energy Gamma end of the spectrum is an equally important driver for the reasons I have stated above.

Watch out for new developments in this area. I am sure there will be some surprises to come very soon which could very well turn current theory on its head and bury the theory that man's tiny contribution to the few parts per million variance in CO2 at the bottom of the can where I think it should be.

Edited January 13, 2012 by Village

[jethro]

Magnetic decline.....now you're talking my language Village, it's a subject which fascinates me, done hours of research. There was a thread on here quite a while ago, if I get time and remember, I'll have a trawl and see if I can find it in the archives.

There's little sign of a reversal though, having said that, there's even less certainty that it would be detectable long in advance.

[Village]

Hey Jethro, yeah would love to see it.

I really think that this plays a tremendous role with rainfall. Got loads of ideas and thoughts.

To give you a flavour of where I am coming from on this. I learned from the Health service stats fifteen years ago that they get inundated with people with breathing problems during thundery weather. They used to blame a buildup of polution. But as you and I and meteorologists know only too well this will only really become a problem under intense atmospheric inversions. this of course is quite the opposite to what one looks for in thundery conditions where much of the depth of the atmosphere becomes unstable. This set me off thinking. I believe that the charge at the base of the cloud by inducing an opposite charge at the surface actually electrostatically charges dust, pollen and other airborn particles so that they are repelled by the Earth. These particles wont stick to the ground and are encouraged to become airborne. With so many particles airborne its this that causes the asthma and breathing problems.

I dont think it stops there....these particles get caught up in the updraughts and this again is another reason for the ease at which rain can condense out from seemingly harmless looking cumulus during thundery weather. It also provides a possible answer as to why some conditions of extremely unstable airmasses never produce lightning but on other days electrical discharges are flashing all over the place.

I really do believe that the magnetospheric variation give rise to more or less airborne charged particulates in any particular location which play their part as condensation nuclie. I am pretty certain that the intensity of cloud charge is primarily driven by the solar wind conditions and the Earth's variable magnetosphere at any one location and at any one particular time. Long term variability paterns can provide enhansed rainfall or the reverse at the surface. This alters climate.

Love to see what you can dig up.

Cheers, Vill.

Edited January 13, 2012 by Village

[knocker]

Hey Jethro, yeah would love to see it.

To give you a flavour of where I am coming from on this. I learned from the Health service stats fifteen years ago that they get inundated with people with breathing problems during thundery weather. They used to blame a buildup of polution. But as you and I and meteorologists know only too well this will only really become a problem under intense atmospheric inversions. this of course is quite the opposite to what one looks for in thundery conditions where much of the depth of the atmosphere becomes unstable.

I question this simplistic statement. And the role of low level ozone is often underplayed in my opinion.

Asthma admissions and thunderstorms: a study of pollen, fungal spores, rainfall, and ozone

Asthma admissions have been reported to increase during thunderstorms. In some cases, this has been attributed to rises in pollen or fungal spore counts occurring alone or in combination with rainfall. We tested the hypothesis that thunderstorms in general are associated with asthma admissions, and investigated the possible roles of pollen, fungal spores, ozone, and other meteorological factors. We obtained data on multiple pollen and fungal spore counts, rainfall, temperature, ambient ozone concentrations, and asthma admissions for 32 dates when lightning strikes were recorded in the Cardiff/Newport area, and 64 matched dates in previous and subsequent years. Poisson regression models were used to investigate associations between admissions and proposed causative environmental factors. The number of asthma admissions was greater on days with thunderstorms than on control days (p<0.001). There were no associations or interactions between admissions and any pollen or fungal spore counts or rainfall. After adjusting for thunderstorms, there was an independent association between increasing ozone concentration, when temperature was included in the model, and increasing admissions (p=0.02). Asthma admissions are increased during thunderstorms. The effect is more marked in warmer weather, and is not explained by increases in grass pollen, total pollen or fungal spore counts, nor by an interaction between these and rainfall. There was an independent, positive association between ozone concentrations and asthma admissions.

http://qjmed.oxfordjournals.org/content/94/8/429.full

[PersianPaladin]

Why should it be a taboo?

I used to believe that man was having a big impact on the future of our climate. I now feel that I've been lied to, and that it's one of the biggest scientific scandals in history. It's a complete farce.

Enough already. Here's the latest fear-mongering from one of the "top scientists":-

http://www.indymedia.../01/491332.html

We have far bigger issues to talk about - such as the security of energy resources on the planet, the credit crisis, global instability,etc.

Edited January 21, 2012 by PersianPaladin

[laserguy]

I used to believe that man was having a big impact on the future of our climate. I now feel that I've been lied to, and that it's one of the biggest scientific scandals in history. It's a complete farce.

We have far bigger issues to talk about - such as the security of energy resources on the planet, the credit crisis, global instability,etc.

Good on you,PP. We need more folk to be totally honest with themselves and be big enough to admit that they've been well and truly shafted. Then maybe we can move on and concentrate the energies currently being horrendously squandered on CO2 "research" into stuff that actually matters,as you mention.

[Devonian]

Why should it be a taboo?

I used to believe that man was having a big impact on the future of our climate. I now feel that I've been lied to, and that it's one of the biggest scientific scandals in history. It's a complete farce.

Enough already. Here's the latest fear-mongering from one of the "top scientists":-

http://www.indymedia.../01/491332.html

We have far bigger issues to talk about - such as the security of energy resources on the planet, the credit crisis, global instability,etc.

This is the climate and environment section - why would our top priority be the credit crisis anymore than a financial forum would have climate change as it's focus? As to 'lied to' if I had a pound for every time such statements were made I'd be rich, but if I had a pound for every time such claims turned out to true I'd be penny less.

[laserguy]

This is the climate and environment section - why would our top priority be the credit crisis anymore than a financial forum would have climate change as it's focus?

Simple - because the things PP mentions (and there's plenty more) are inextricably linked to CO2 in one way or another. Why can't y'all get it? "Climate Change" and the notion of dealing with CO2 is a catch-all that the simple man can broadly grasp - though whether he cares or not is another matter. As the veil is lifted this thread will have to be re-titled "The Taboo Of Still Subscribing To AGW". And y'know of all the believers on here,I don't think it will be you who's the last man standing,Dev. Hmm,now who will it be?

[knocker]

And y'know of all the believers on here,I don't think it will be you who's the last man standing,Dev. Hmm,now who will it be?

Why not start a poll, they seem quite popular?

[knocker]

Simple - because the things PP mentions (and there's plenty more) are inextricably linked to CO2 in one way or another. Why can't y'all get it? "Climate Change" and the notion of dealing with CO2 is a catch-all that the simple man can broadly grasp - though whether he cares or not is another matter.

Being an extremely simple man what exactly does that mean? I ask because it comes across to me as a pointless rhetoric.

Edited January 21, 2012 by weather ship