Drought, Fire, Flood: In the News

By: Dr. Ricky Rood , 5:22 AM GMT on July 12, 2011

Share this Blog
2
+

Drought, Fire, Flood: In the News

I have been writing about a variety of issues that I know are of interest to only a small number of people – U.S. science organizations, climate model software, and validation of climate models. I am going to move away from that arcane set of subjects for a while and spend a little more time in the climate mainstream. In this entry I want to touch on several subjects – starting with my garden.

My garden is in the flat land that is the western edge of the Great Plains, just east of Boulder, Colorado. Weather wise, it is a complex and difficult environment: more than 5000 feet above sea level, reliant upon water from the winter snow pack in the mountains, huge swings of hot and cold. In terms of climate types, I have seen region defined as both arid and semiarid. In the last week, we have had three or more inches of rain – hard driving rain with much lightning. There is water standing between the rows in the garden. The week of July 4 it was so dry there was a fire ban, and many firework fires.

Last summer in Boulder we had the Fourmile Fire, which burned thousands of acres and dozens of houses. With this rain, we have mudslides, rock slides and flash floods (Longmont Times Call). It all makes you appreciate the importance of the weather and the climate. Wet and dry. Hot and cold. ( 485 Billion Dollar Impact of Weather)

Boulder is a microcosm of what is going on in the U.S. There have been overwhelming fires in Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas. (Texas Fires). Dangerous drought and heat is spreading all across the southern half of the U.S. The dust storm last week in Arizona was reminiscent of pictures of the Dust Bowl. (more here). We were overwhelmed not long ago by the Mississippi River flooding. I have almost forgotten about the Missouri River flooding.



Figure 1: From KFAB Omaha News Radio. Photo Credit AP: Missouri River flood of Calhoun Nuclear Power Plant.

We see here the persistence of weather, climate, snow cover, drought, floods - one extreme after another. Jeff Master’s wrote an excellent summary of 2010-2011 as being a year of the most extreme events since 1816 – the year of Mount Tambora, a definitive and understood climate anomaly. Jeff writes that June 2011 continues the run. July 2011 is looking strong. It has been more than 300 months since there was a “below average” mean temperature. That’s a little compelling.

We are being handed one case study after another, where we see the impact that weather and climate have on us. And what is that impact? We see vulnerable people losing their homes, their crops. But where is the real threat? What does it mean that 213 counties in Texas are primary disaster areas?

Energy, economy, population – markets. We all know that the weather affects our economy. We rely on a stable climate. We see here and now an interconnected world, where extreme heat kills thousands and destroys crops and send food prices soaring. We see multiple billion dollar liens placed on our economy by floods, droughts, and tornadoes. These costs come at a time when economies all around the world are weak. There is a debt crisis, and the weather is demanding more loans. Right here and now the world is providing one climate disaster after another. The weather and climate are showing the need for more planning, for building resilience and recovery strategies. The weather and climate are revealing our vulnerabilities. While there is the obvious, the family fleeing the flood, the destroyed Joplin, Missouri hospital, there is also the accumulated impact felt through markets, higher food prices, emergency relief, things that will not be fixed, people relocating.

We are being offered lessons. I have written this far and not strung together the words “climate change” or mentioned “global warming.” This is the weather in our warming climate. The take away message from climate models, Be Prepared.

r

Rood on To the Point

Open Climate Modeling:

Greening of the Desert

Stickiness and Climate Models

Open Source Communities, What are the Problems?

A Culture of Checking


Organizing U.S. Climate Modeling:

Something New in the Past Decade?

The Scientific Organization

A Science-Organized Community

Validation and the Scientific Organization

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 265 - 215

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12Blog Index

Looks like more of that global cooling is about to kick in:
...Massive Heat Wave Expected Next Week...

Published: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 08:47:09 EDT

The stage is being set for a massive heat wave to develop into next week as a large area of high pressure is anticipated to circulate hot and humid air over much of the central and eastern U.S. Maximum heat index values of at least 100.F are likely across much of this area by the middle of next week, with heat index values in excess of 110.F possible over portions of these areas. Details...

Click for interactive map:
Uh-oh

Click for interactive map:
Uh-oh



National Weather Service Article...
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13597
Neapolitan- Point 1 temperatures Isle Royale Link certainly these temps are not hot enough for ticks. Point 2 ticks in winter Link so I guess ticks do tick. Point 3 Lake superior rarely ices over hence the massive amounts of lake effect snow in the upper peninsula of Michigan. I agree the surface temp has increased. Point 4 whether the temperature is 69 F or 72 F both are plenty warm for ticks Point 5 Because it is an island the tick would need to hitch ride more than likely from an animal crossing the lake, which happens infrequently
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
Quoting BackwoodsTN:
Precisely. I am not a climate expert. Then are you a climate expert? Don't be bashful to share your credentials with us. Please enlighten me.

Oh, I'm no climate expert, and I've never claimed to be. But I can both read and visit sites other than WUWT, or Bastardi's blog, or the one written by the non-existent "Steven Goddard". Can you do at least that much?

I've said it before, and it bears repeating: no amount of anti-science blather will ever change the fact that the planet is warming rapidly, and that's mostly (if not wholly) because of our insanely prolific burning of fossil fuels.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13597
I realize most of you are neither insect nor climate experts, so I can see how, in your knee-jerk rush to deny any and all things scientific, you could make simple mistakes of logic and fact; your confusion is certainly understandable. I'm going to, then, try to impart a little knowledge that will possibly help clear up your confusion.

1) Isle Royale is, as the name suggests, an island. That island sits at the northwestern part of Lake Superior, which, as the name suggests, is the farthest north of the Great lakes. Lake Superior is cold, so any island in it is, even in the heart of summer, cooler than the mainland around it. This coolness has, up until recently, kept deer ticks at bay, since deer ticks don't, as a general rule, like hanging out where it's cool.

2) Deer ticks certainly exist where it gets cold in winter. Even very cold. But as anyone who has an an ounce of common sense can tell you, insects aren't out doing their thing in mid-winter. Flies don't fly when it's -25. Bees don't buzz. And ticks don't tick. All of the creatures lay low during winter, and come to life when spring has sprung. So it doesn't matter if it gets to -30 or -50 or -100 in the winter; if it's warm enough during the summer, insects will be around.

3) The article to which I linked stated, "Water temperatures in Lake Superior have increased 4.5 degrees between 1979 and 2006, twice the rate of land temperatures, the report found. Between the 1970s and 2009, winter ice cover over the lakes shrunk 15 percent."

4) Since that water has warmed so much, an island in the middle of that water will have warmed, too.

5) Now, if you take off those heavy-duty denialist science-blockers, you'll note that #1 + #2 + #3 + #4 = a better deer tick environment on Isle Royale. Thus, deer ticks where they weren't before, as the study found.

Not really that difficult, now, was it? ;-)
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13597
Here is also more proof about how much we know about the Earth Link and another one Link and one more Link I thought we had this climate thing figured out as smart as humans are we don't know jack____
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
Quoting nymore:
Concerning deer ticks and temperature. The record low temperature for Minnesota is officially -60 F at Tower, unofficially -64 at Embarrass both in north eastern Minnesota set in 1996 . The official record low temp for Isle Royale Michigan is -43 F also set in 1996. I would also like to introduce this from Q Health regarding Lyme disease from the deer tick and here is the statement word for word. In Minnesota, black legged ticks are most common in wooded areas of nothern, eastern and south eastern oounties. which makes sense because areas of western and south western minnesota is farm land and not heavily wooded. In conclusion the article from the enviro groups concerning deer tisks is a load of ______ you fill in the blank. I can also speak from direct experience having had a residence in northern Minnesota for over 25 years.

Yeah, I saw that article and it appears nothing more than a wild guess from inaccurate observations.

It's true only the northern third of the state is a blend of spruce, elm/ash/cottonwood, and birch forests; whereas the Twin Cities south and westward is cleared out prairie land.

A very inaccurate article having no scientific rational whatsoever.
Member Since: June 19, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 32
Concerning deer ticks and temperature. The record low temperature for Minnesota is officially -60 F at Tower, unofficially -64 at Embarrass both in north eastern Minnesota set in 1996 . The official record low temp for Isle Royale Michigan is -43 F also set in 1996. I would also like to introduce this from Q Health regarding Lyme disease from the deer tick and here is the statement word for word. In Minnesota, black legged ticks are most common in wooded areas of nothern, eastern and south eastern oounties. which makes sense because areas of western and south western Minnesota is farm land and not heavily wooded. In conclusion the article from the enviro groups concerning deer ticks is a load of ______ you fill in the blank. I can also speak from direct experience having had a residence in northern Minnesota for over 25 years. It is also not unusual for the temperature to reach - 35 or more in northern Minnesota. This last thing is just for you Neapolitan ;-)
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
How could you be up front when you can't come up with proof man is responsible for global climate change.

So True!

:)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Severe erosion along the West Coast during the winter of 2009-2010 offers a look at, and lessons for, a warming world with rising sea levels, a new study finds.

A natural El Nino cycle that warms the Pacific Ocean produced those severe conditions, but computer models suggest that similar damage could come from sea level rise tied to human-caused greenhouse gases."If these trends continue," U.S. government and academic experts wrote in their study, "the combination of large waves and higher water levels, particularly when enhanced by El Ninos, can be expected to be more frequent in the future, resulting in greater risk of coastal erosion, flooding, and cliff failures."

Lead author Patrick Barnard, a coastal geologist with the U.S. Geological Survey, told msnbc.com that the study serves as a platform "to understand the broad coastal impact of conditions we are likely to experience more frequently in the future."

In California, the researchers found that winter wave energy



Link



Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20404
Quoting cyclonebuster:


How much Tax money will be made taxing carbon?


Irrelavent, the scheme is ponzi based and serves no
purpose other than wealth redistribution which was
called communism in my youth and has been found to
fail every time it is tried.

Otherwise it is a great idea for someone else.
Member Since: January 27, 2009 Posts: 24 Comments: 1080
Quoting PurpleDrank:
but there is no obvious correlation between atmospheric CO2 and planetary temperature over the last 600 million years, so why would such relatively tiny amounts suddenly become a critical factor now?

I know!

Cow 'emissions' more damaging to planet than CO2 from cars

By Geoffrey Lean, Environment Editor

Sunday, 10 December 2006
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate- change/cow-emissions-more-damaging-to-planet-than- cosub2sub-from-cars-427843.html



Link
Member Since: January 27, 2009 Posts: 24 Comments: 1080
Quoting BullShoalsAR:

I think he might be too busy minusing other's posts that aren't on par with his radical political ideology.Of course that did more harm to him than good cuz it looked like karma drove him into visual obscurity! LOL

Then you think wrong, my friend. There's a reason my karma (and that of a few other proponents of the overwhelming science supporting the theory of AGWT) is so low, and it has nothing to do with any minusing I've done. The truth behind that statement will be revealed shortly.

At any rate, the planet doesn't care about baseless and false accusations of a "radical political ideology"; all it knows is that the unimpeded burning of fossil fuels is causing it to get warmer, and warmer, and warmer...
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13597
Quoting nymore:
Neapolitan if by unoriginal and lame you mean this ;-) and by lame I mean 12 year old girl.

Umm---what?
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13597
Quoting JBastardi:


I suppose your logic surprised him. Neapolitan posted later, but ignored your reassertion.

Then you suppose wrong. SM posted something he'd seen on JB's site yesterday (and that the entire denialopshere was as usual predictably excited about) that purported to be a defense against assertions by some that the current drought is one of the worst ever. I pointed out the fact that the comparison used was deeply flawed on multiple points and therefore entirely invalid. SM's response was basically, "So what if they used bad data and an erroneous methodology to reach the wrong assumption? I still believe them!"

At that point, nothing further need be said.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13597
Quoting nymore:
Neapolitan your story is garbage I live in northern minnesota and deer ticks have been here as long as I can remember. It still gets plenty cold, if 35 or 40 below won't kill them not sure what will. I am guessing it is not because of temps. The story by the enviro folks is a pants on fire lie.

Oh, darn! Another long-term study involving dozens of scientists and hundreds of months of observation and thousands of data points invalidated! I've written the study's principles and passed along your astute commentary; they've agreed that your calling it "garbage" and "a pants on fire lie" was as thorough a scientific rebuttal as anything any of them have ever seen, so they plan to retract the entire report tomorrow in deference to you.

:-\
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13597
Quoting sirmaelstrom:
№ 208


The graph is part of testimony to Congress, as I linked, where within it lists NCDC as a source. It was first linked here by JBastardi, a commenter here who may be but most likely isn't Bastardi himself. Steven Goddard simply posted it on his blog, I linked the original source, which renders one of your "strikes" moot.

Even in the map from the NYTimes there doesn't seem to be significant difference between the amount of the country under "moderate to exceptional" drought and "extreme to exceptional". Anyway, why include the moderate drought area if it's not included in the graph to the left? I bet it is.

There's probably some differences in the specific indices used, but seriously, you think it's going to somehow going lower the 50% values in the long-term graph down to the 20% value in the NYTimes graph? Seriously? You may have to provide some corroborating evidence for such a wild claim.

Edited


I suppose your logic surprised him. Neapolitan posted later, but ignored your reassertion.
Member Since: July 5, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 403
Neapolitan if by unoriginal and lame you mean this ;-) and by lame I mean 12 year old girl.
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
Quoting RustyShackleford:


Now that is an attack.

tisk tisk tisk.

Of course it is on par with your norm.

#winning
#noproof
#.039
#disrespectful
#excuses



Of course he is the last horse in the race staring at the asses of the other horses in front of him. How could you be up front when you can't come up with proof man is responsible for global climate change.I think he might be too busy minusing other's posts that aren't on par with his radical political ideology.Of course that did more harm to him than good cuz it looked like karma drove him into visual obscurity! LOL
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Neapolitan your story is garbage I live in northern minnesota and deer ticks have been here as long as I can remember. It still gets plenty cold, if 35 or 40 below won't kill them not sure what will. I am guessing it is not because of temps. The story by the enviro folks is a pants on fire lie.
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
Quoting Neapolitan:
No, of course Sheen didn't invent hashtags--but he popularized their use in countless inane Twitter posts last year, and unoriginal folks have been copying the lame practice ever since in an attempt to look cool.


Now that is an attack.

tisk tisk tisk.

Of course it is on par with your norm.

#winning
#noproof
#.039
#disrespectful
#excuses
Member Since: May 10, 2011 Posts: 15 Comments: 1297

Global Warming indicator #7,107:

Climate change already altering Great Lakes, report says

Isle Royale in Lake Superior used to be too cold for deer ticks. But not anymore.

The ticks, which carry Lyme disease, have been found for the first time on the island off the coast of northern Minnesota. And by the end of the century, nesting loons may disappear altogether from most of the Great Lakes.

Those are some of the findings of a new report on the impact of climate change on the Great Lakes' five largest national parks made public Wednesday by two environmental groups, the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Rocky Mountain Climate Organization.

It was the latest in a series of studies they have conducted on the current and future effects of a warming global climate on national parks from California to Virginia.

The report, the authors said, provides an early look at what's to come if the Republican-led Congress continues to thwart federal efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions. Republicans this week tried and failed to repeal new standards for more energy efficient light bulbs, and are resisting the new federal rules regulating greenhouse gas emissions expected later this summer. They say the rules are unnecessary intrusions on freedom, and job killers.

"We have an increasing partisan divide on this," said Stephen Saunders, president of the Rocky Mountain Climate Organization and a former national parks official with the Department of the Interior. "If people pay attention to how the places they know and love respond to climate change, I hope that makes people aware of what we should be doing differently."

The authors analyzed a century's worth of temperature trends for the great lakes area drawn from two weather stations on Lake Michigan, and found that both show more rapid change than the global averages. The one near the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, near Chicago, showed that in the last decade average temperatures have increased by 1.6 degrees, and the one near Picture Rocks National Lakeshore in Michigan showed an average increase of 2.7 degrees.

Lee Frelich, a University of Minnesota researcher who studies the impact of climate change in the upper Midwest, said the analysis used widely accepted climate models and data, and the findings are right on the mark.

"Climate changes are more extreme in the mid continents," said Frelich, who was not involved in the report. "If you are fairly far north you will see bigger magnitudes of climate change than other places."

Water temperatures in Lake Superior have increased 4.5 degrees between 1979 and 2006, twice the rate of land temperatures, the report found. Between the 1970s and 2009, winter ice cover over the lakes shrunk 15 percent.
The report also documented a 31 percent increase in rain falling during big storms, and a 12 percent increase in wind speeds. Combined with less ice during the winter, those changes lead to faster erosion along the shores, putting fragile landscapes like the Sleeping Bear Sand Dunes in Michigan at risk.

Miami Herald Article...
Quoting RustyShackleford:
Sheen didn't make up hashtags like you said.

Or you think Sheen is the only one to do it.

He's not...

No, of course Sheen didn't invent hashtags--but he popularized their use in countless inane Twitter posts last year, and unoriginal folks have been copying the lame practice ever since in an attempt to look cool.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13597
Quoting nymore:
That's nothing I once built a bridge with popsicle sticks. Now we can build a bridge from New York to the United Kingdom just need larger sticks.


They can do that with a tunnel also.Although it is much larger than mine.

SEE TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL.

Link

Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20404
That's nothing I once built a bridge with popsicle sticks. Now we can build a bridge from New York to the United Kingdom just need larger sticks.
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
Quoting Beachshell:
i can read thesheapard's post before i log in and not yours. you need to adjust your filter settings....
How you do that?
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20404
Quoting cyclonebuster:

So now I am idiot for discovering something.LOL!
Build one yourself and test it if you don't believe it it cost me about 15 bucks.
i can read thesheapard's post before i log in and not yours. you need to adjust your filter settings....
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting theshepherd:
232. cyclonebuster

You're an idiot.

You can blow that up somebody else's skirt, but you're not blowing it up mine.

Seariously Buster...YOU NEED TO CHANGE YOUR MEDICATION.


So now I am idiot for discovering something.LOL!
Build one yourself and test it if you don't believe it.It cost me about 15 bucks.
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20404
158. right, i'm the troll! LOL! That's why when i come to this site before i log in, my 1 lonely post is readable, and your is grayed out. been busy flying out,,, got the 411 that a grayed out post gets that way from readers minusing them. it's no wonder with the name calling and inability to make a salable counter-argument. i bet during the winter when all the record lows were taking place, you were also posting those, weren't you. yeah right!! [chuckle]

what's your next point, that a small group of people who disagree with you are out to get you. Oh no,,,the boogeyman!! LOL
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting PurpleDrank:


The good lord indeed

indeed



Correct. That is why he made us during a cold period because he knew we would not survive a warmer period such as those on the graph. We can not afford warming our planet with GHGs or we may become extinct like all those other creatures before us. That is why I made my weather machine to keep us cool like the good lord wants.
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20404
Quoting theshepherd:


You're waisting your time on this fraud that doesn't even realize that "πr²" means when you double a diameter the area increase is a geometric progression not arithmetic.

That being said:
Care to compare the paultry flow of the Gulf Stream to the high tech deep well submersible pump that would be required to push water up 1000'???

That being said:
Care to do the math on the forces that the weight of a 200' diameter pipe on a 1000' fulcrum placed in a 6mph current would exert on the attachment supporting that puppy??? Go for it. It's astronomical. You'd have about as much luck building a glass stair case to the moon.


This is what happens when ambition escapes facillity.








Since the tube is round in the middle section those forces would be lower. If the forces are to high then we make smaller ones but more of them. No pumps are needed to force the water upwards because Force1 at the inlet is greater than Force2 at the discharge. I already proved that here: img src="">
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20404
Quoting cyclonebuster:


Correct. Why do you think the good lord put us there in a cold climate?


The good lord indeed

indeed

Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Two special conditions of terrestrial landmass distribution, when they exist concurrently, appear as a sort of common denominator for the occurrence of very long-term simultaneous declines in both global temperature and atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2):

1) the existence of a continuous continental landmass stretching from pole to pole, restricting free circulation of polar and tropical waters, and

2) the existence of a large (south) polar landmass capable of supporting thick glacial ice accumulations.


Image credit: Department of Environmental and Geophysical Sciences
Manchester Metropolitan University
Manchester, UK



These special conditions existed during the Carboniferous Period, as they do today in our present Quaternary Period.

Climate change during the Carboniferous Period was dominated by the great Carboniferous Ice Age. As the Earth alternately cooled then warmed, great sheets of glacial ice thousands of feet thick accumulated, then melted, then reaccumulated in synchronous cycles.

Vast glaciers up to 8,000 feet thick existed at the south pole then, moving from higher elevations to lower, driven by gravity and their tremendous weight. These colossal slow-motion tidal waves of ice destroyed and pulverized everything in their path, scraping the landscape to bare bedrock-- altering mountains, valleys, and river courses. Ancient bedrock in Africa, Australia, India and South America show scratches and gouges from this glaciation.

Earth's continents during the Carboniferous Period were arranged differently than they are today. South America, Africa, India, Australia, Antarctica, and a few minor pieces were joined together near the south pole to comprise the supercontinent known as Gondwanaland.

Gondwanaland was a formidable polar landmass. While ice caps and glaciers can't grow large over open oceans, they can and do attain great thickness over polar continents-- like Gondwanaland.

Although cycles of glaciation are believed to occur in response to solar input variations like the Milankovich Cycle and Precession of the Equinoxes, another important factor is the rearrangement of continental landmasses over geologic time by the processes of continental drift.

Throughout the Carboniferous Period, continental drift was rearranging most (but not all) of the Earth's landmasses into a single supercontinent stretching from the south polar region to the north polar region. Although the precise mechanisms involved are still a matter of debate this appears to cause regional humidity changes and redistribution of ocean currents which in turn promote ice accumulation and glacier formation over the earth's polar continents. These glacial ice caps grow larger during periods of reduced solar input, and because ice caps are very good solar reflectors this tended to accelerate and perpetuate cyclical relapses to global cooling.

Basically, Earth undergoes alternating periods of ice ages and warming whenever a continuous continental landmass extends from one polar region to the other while at the same time there exists a large polar continent capable of supporting thick ice accumulations. These conditions existed 300 million years ago during the Carboniferous Period as they do for the Earth today. However for most of geologic history the distribution of the continents across the globe did not satisfy this criteria. Continental drift continually rearranges the continents, moving at rates of only a few centimeters per year.

We are actually in an ice age climate today. However for the last 10,000 years or so we have enjoyed a warm but temporary interglacial vacation. We know from geological records like ocean sediments and ice cores from permanent glaciers that for at least the last 750,000 years interglacial periods happen at 100,000 year intervals, lasting about 15,000 to 20,000 years before returning to an icehouse climate. We are currently about 18,000 years into Earth's present interglacial cycle. These cycles have been occurring for at least the last 2-4 million years, although the Earth has been cooling gradually for the last 30 million years.


Over the past 750,000 years of Earth's history, Ice Ages have occurred at regular intervals, of approximately 100,000 years each.
Courtesy of Illinois State Museum



http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Carboniferous_c limate.html
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting PurpleDrank:




near the very edge of the graph in the current quaternary period would be where man is/was.



Correct. Why do you think the good lord put us there in a cold climate?
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20404
Quoting Ossqss:


OK, :)

http://ricochet.com/main-feed/Manmade-Global-Warm ing-The-Solution



" 0 " , it is not a viable solution and impossible to implement. Please focus on something realistic.

CUL8R >>>>>>


You're waisting your time on this fraud that doesn't even realize that "πr²" means when you double a diameter the area increase is a geometric progression not arithmetic.

That being said:
Care to compare the paultry flow of the Gulf Stream to the high tech deep well submersible pump that would be required to push water up 1000'???

That being said:
Care to do the math on the forces that the weight of a 200' diameter pipe on a 1000' fulcrum placed in a 6mph current would exert on the attachment supporting that puppy??? Go for it. It's astronomical. You'd have about as much luck building a glass stair case to the moon.


This is what happens when ambition escapes facillity.






Member Since: Posts: Comments:


Quoting cyclonebuster:


One big problem though where was man during all those periods?


near the very edge of the graph in the current quaternary period would be where man is/was.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting PurpleDrank:
Given that the late Ordovician suffered an ice age (with associated mass extinction) while atmospheric CO2 levels were more than 4,000ppm, higher than those of today (yes, that's a full order of magnitude higher), levels at which current 'guesstimations' of climate sensitivity to atmospheric CO2 suggest every last skerrick of ice should have been melted off the planet, we admit significant scepticism over simplistic claims of small increment in atmospheric CO2 equating to toasted planet. Granted, continental configuration now is nothing like it was then, Sol's irradiance differs, as do orbits, obliquity, etc., etc. but there is no obvious correlation between atmospheric CO2 and planetary temperature over the last 600 million years, so why would such relatively tiny amounts suddenly become a critical factor now?


Late Carboniferous to Early Permian time (315 mya -- 270 mya) is the only time period in the last 600 million years when both atmospheric CO2 and temperatures were as low as they are today (Quaternary Period ).



Average global temperatures in the Early Carboniferous Period were hot- approximately 22 C (72 F). However, cooling during the Middle Carboniferous reduced average global temperatures to about 12 C (54 F). As shown on the chart below, this is comparable to the average global temperature on Earth today!

Similarly, atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the Early Carboniferous Period were approximately 1500 ppm (parts per million), but by the Middle Carboniferous had declined to about 350 ppm -- comparable to average CO2 concentrations today!

Earth's atmosphere today contains about 370 ppm CO2 (0.037%). Compared to former geologic times, our present atmosphere, like the Late Carboniferous atmosphere, is CO2- impoverished! In the last 600 million years of Earth's history only the Carboniferous Period and our present age, the Quaternary Period, have witnessed CO2 levels less than 400 ppm.

There has historically been much more CO2 in our atmosphere than exists today. For example, during the Jurassic Period (200 mya), average CO2 concentrations were about 1800 ppm or about 4.8 times higher than today. The highest concentrations of CO2 during all of the Paleozoic Era occurred during the Cambrian Period, nearly 7000 ppm -- about 19 times higher than today.

The Carboniferous Period and the Ordovician Period were the only geological periods during the Paleozoic Era when global temperatures were as low as they are today. To the consternation of global warming proponents, the Late Ordovician Period was also an Ice Age while at the same time CO2 concentrations then were nearly 12 times higher than today-- 4400 ppm. According to greenhouse theory, Earth should have been exceedingly hot. Instead, global temperatures were no warmer than today. Clearly, other factors besides atmospheric carbon influence earth temperatures and global warming.



http://www.ff.org/centers/csspp/library/co2weekly /2005-08-18/dioxide.htm


One big problem though where was modern man during all those periods?
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20404
Given that the late Ordovician suffered an ice age (with associated mass extinction) while atmospheric CO2 levels were more than 4,000ppm, higher than those of today (yes, that's a full order of magnitude higher), levels at which current 'guesstimations' of climate sensitivity to atmospheric CO2 suggest every last skerrick of ice should have been melted off the planet, we admit significant scepticism over simplistic claims of small increment in atmospheric CO2 equating to toasted planet. Granted, continental configuration now is nothing like it was then, Sol's irradiance differs, as do orbits, obliquity, etc., etc. but there is no obvious correlation between atmospheric CO2 and planetary temperature over the last 600 million years, so why would such relatively tiny amounts suddenly become a critical factor now?


Late Carboniferous to Early Permian time (315 mya -- 270 mya) is the only time period in the last 600 million years when both atmospheric CO2 and temperatures were as low as they are today (Quaternary Period ).



Average global temperatures in the Early Carboniferous Period were hot- approximately 22° C (72° F). However, cooling during the Middle Carboniferous reduced average global temperatures to about 12° C (54° F). As shown on the chart below, this is comparable to the average global temperature on Earth today!

Similarly, atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the Early Carboniferous Period were approximately 1500 ppm (parts per million), but by the Middle Carboniferous had declined to about 350 ppm -- comparable to average CO2 concentrations today!

Earth's atmosphere today contains about 370 ppm CO2 (0.037%). Compared to former geologic times, our present atmosphere, like the Late Carboniferous atmosphere, is CO2- impoverished! In the last 600 million years of Earth's history only the Carboniferous Period and our present age, the Quaternary Period, have witnessed CO2 levels less than 400 ppm.

There has historically been much more CO2 in our atmosphere than exists today. For example, during the Jurassic Period (200 mya), average CO2 concentrations were about 1800 ppm or about 4.8 times higher than today. The highest concentrations of CO2 during all of the Paleozoic Era occurred during the Cambrian Period, nearly 7000 ppm -- about 19 times higher than today.

The Carboniferous Period and the Ordovician Period were the only geological periods during the Paleozoic Era when global temperatures were as low as they are today. To the consternation of global warming proponents, the Late Ordovician Period was also an Ice Age while at the same time CO2 concentrations then were nearly 12 times higher than today-- 4400 ppm. According to greenhouse theory, Earth should have been exceedingly hot. Instead, global temperatures were no warmer than today. Clearly, other factors besides atmospheric carbon influence earth temperatures and global warming.



http://www.ff.org/centers/csspp/library/co2weekly /2005-08-18/dioxide.htm
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Question?

Aren't we just coming out of an ice age?

Aren't temps supposed to rise?



Also Nea Sheen didn't make up hashtags like you said.

Or you think Sheen is the only one to do it.

He's not...
Member Since: May 10, 2011 Posts: 15 Comments: 1297
Quoting cyclonebuster:


It would be cool to see the data daily as it comes in like like NSIDC does. Why don't they do that?


I wonder that myself. It's also curious that it took so long to get the Jan/Feb data. I would guess it took a while to calibrate data to known measurements; it may still be that possible some further calibration is needed. Hopefully the data will eventually be a bit more timely.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting sirmaelstrom:
%u2116 218


Here are the values that I got...

From PIOMAS, I used a volume estimate of 18000 km%uFFFD.

From IARC-JAXA I used an area extimate of 12x10%u2076 km%uFFFD

Dividing yields an average of 1.5 metre ice thickness. The Cryosat-2 data seems to suggest a thickness greater than that. I wonder which is closer. It will be interesting to see what future Cryosat-2 data shows. I wonder how often we will get data from Cryosat-2.

Perhaps I was a little testy in %u2116 216; if so, I apologize, Cyclonebuster.


It would be cool to see the data daily as it comes in like NSIDC does. Why don't they do that? I didn't see anything testy.
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20404
№ 218
Quoting cyclonebuster:


Why not share the information here. I too would like to compare and see if there are any differences.


Here are the values that I got...

From PIOMAS, I used a volume estimate of 18000 km³.

From IARC-JAXA I used an area extimate of 12x10⁶ km²

Dividing yields an average of 1.5 metre ice thickness. The Cryosat-2 data seems to suggest a thickness greater than that. I wonder which is closer. It will be interesting to see what future Cryosat-2 data shows. I wonder how often we will get data from Cryosat-2.

Perhaps I was a little testy in № 216; if so, I apologize, Cyclonebuster.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting iceagecoming:

No, he was only created by the last ice age from
Irish Brown Bears. Where you been.

So it would be only logical that the odds are against
them surviving the next climatic shift. Mastadon, Cave
Bear, Saber tooth, etc.


by way of the neanderthal eh?

our species might not either
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting PurpleDrank:
what happens in 100 milloin years when Alaska is where Ecuador is today?

Does the Polar Bear become Equator Bear?


No, he was only created by the last ice age from
Irish Brown Bears. Where you been.

So it would be only logical that the odds are against
them surviving the next climatic shift. Mastadon, Cave
Bear, Saber tooth, etc.
Member Since: January 27, 2009 Posts: 24 Comments: 1080
Quoting sirmaelstrom:
№ 212


What does PIOMAS estimate the arctic ice thickness to be over the same Jan/Feb 2011 time period? You could take the PIOMAS volume estimates and divide it by IARC-JAXA (or NSDIC) values for area during the same time period and get an answer. It would be interesting.

I know the answer as I already did this some time ago, but perhaps you would like to do it yourself. I guess you could also use Bing (or Google, I suppose) and look up "sirmaelstrom" and "cryosat-2" and get the results. It was pretty interesting.

I'm kind of surprised that there has been very little mention of the Cryosat data, both here and on other climate sites. There was certainly more discussion concerning it before the results were released.


Why not share the information here. I too would like to compare and see if there are any differences.
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20404
what happens in 100 milloin years when Alaska is where Ecuador is today?

Does the Polar Bear become Equator Bear?

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
№ 212
Quoting cyclonebuster:
Cryosat-2









Link











What does PIOMAS estimate the arctic ice thickness to be over the same Jan/Feb 2011 time period? You could take the PIOMAS volume estimates and divide it by IARC-JAXA (or NSDIC) values for area during the same time period and get an answer. It would be interesting.

I know the answer as I already did this some time ago, but perhaps you would like to do it yourself. I guess you could also use Bing (or Google, I suppose) and look up "sirmaelstrom" and "cryosat-2" and get the results. It was pretty interesting.

I'm kind of surprised that there has been very little mention of the Cryosat data, both here and on other climate sites. There was certainly more discussion concerning it before the results were released.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
the real comedy of today's climate debate is from all of the extreme droughts in history past, whether they reoccur in a pattern or not, are still being evaluated thousands of years after the last glacial maximum, but the last 3 decades have a definitive cause and effect..AGW through means of burning fossil fuel.

how about man redirecting rivers
constructing dams
removing forests to build structures
stopping fires prematurely and not letting nature take its course
lunar cycles
solar activity
plate tectonics
water and land displacement
mountain formation
ocean current fluctuations

nope, its the oil and coal companies, denialist





Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 265 - 215

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12Blog Index

Top of Page

About RickyRood

I'm a professor at U Michigan and lead a course on climate change problem solving. These articles often come from and contribute to the course.

Local Weather

Mostly Cloudy
54 °F
Mostly Cloudy