[quote who="Turchany" reply="117" id="3424466"]Basically African countries are still colonies[/quote] Interesting statement. During the crisis in Portugal, many Portugese went overseas to their former colony of Angola, where they could find jobs... in Portugal there was no work. Go figure. I think the gap between rich and poor countries is slowly disappearing. Also note, that the number of ultra-low-wage countries is shrinking. At some point, thi
[quote who="Ekko_Tek" reply="1476" id="3424380"]which led to more GHG release which amplifies temperature increases in turn - positive feedback loops.[/quote] I seriously doubt that the ocean plays a significant role in this. There's less solubility at higher temperatures, but when significant amounts of CO2 are released then the partial pressure of CO2 in the atmosphere rises, which prevents further loss of CO2 from the oceans. And since partial pressure dominates th
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="1471" id="3424340"]As for extinction events, they have nothing whatsoever with CO2. We've had a number of different extinction events ranging from snowball earth to cosmic collisions to the mass production of O2 via Cyanobacteria.[/quote] Sure there are also a few extinction events that are not linked to a climate change. But most of them (especially minor but also a few major ones) seem to be very closely linked to climate. [quote who
[quote who="Daiwa" reply="1465" id="3424271"]Quoting GeomanNL, reply 1461But why would the temperature be rising for the past 100 years if it isn't CO2? Has it?[/quote] This looks like a more reliable comparison: http://tamino.wordpress.com/2010/12/16/comparing-temperature-data-sets/ It uses year-averages (instead of only octobers) and it also explains how to compare dat
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="1462" id="3424214"]Everything you just posted simply indicated that CO2 levels rise and fall with temperature. I subscribe to that belief. Warm temperatures release carbon. There's nothing you posted that indicated that co2 is the driver of warmer temperatures.[/quote] Well actually I was trying to tell you that it's a nice convenient relationship which explains how events in the past related to each other. You haven't given a new m
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="1462" id="3424214"]Warm temperatures release carbon[/quote] I've run the equation from Henrey's law because I was curious. I thought, let's see what happens if a temperature change of 1 degree (20 ->21 degrees) would hypothetically change the CO2 content of the atmosphere from 400 ppm to about 453 ppm, if temperature alone would be responsible (I keep partial pressure at 400 ppm). You can calculate that from Henrey's law
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="1460" id="3424121"] 3. Ice-core data. Even in its rawest form, ice-core CO2/T data show a very very good correlation - and whether T comes first or not doesn't matter, what matters is that T never rises independently of CO2 - and that means that T depends on CO2. If CO2 wouldn't have any influence on temperature, then the T and CO2 wouldn't have such a close correlation. (bolded for emphasis) WHAT? What do you mean it doesn't ma
If you look at events like the Azolla event, you'll see that it requires very speficic circumstances before life can act like a significant carbon sink. Life cannot do that by itself, it can only do that if the geology is favourable to permanent burial. Carbon sinks are determined by: - anoxia in the deep oceans. This can occur in isolated warm waters, or in general in very hot oceans (like 40 degrees). In the latter case we're already well into a major extinction even
[quote who="Raiddinn" reply="1452" id="3424036"]If the world has been moving along just fine for billions of years (or whatever) why hasn't one extreme or the other killed us by now?[/quote] Because we are descendants of the lucky ones who survived everything that our dear earth has thrown at us. [quote who="Raiddinn" reply="1452" id="3424036"]My prediction for 50 generations into the future (approx 3000 AD) is that the temperature on Earth will be almost exactly what
It's december already ... perhaps it's time to make predictions for the new year! I predict a winter that is warmer than average in the Netherlands :) Maybe 1 month with some snow and mild frost. I also predict that next summer will be ranked in the top 10 of warmest summers on record. I also predict that the CO2 content of the atmosphere will rise by about 2.5 ppm. I also predict that a new massive iceberg will be rel
Drone + smart bomb = deliveries go through the roof. But seriously ... it might be nice for an express-packet like a contract or an important letter. But seriously ... I think lots of naughty children would place fake orders, wait for it to land at their door, then grab it and then use it for whatever purpose they can think of. Like smashing it against the wall. Or throwing it into a pond. Or just jump on it. Or put a fire cracker in it. Or try to hit it wi
[quote who="Dr Guy" reply="1440" id="3423547"]Joe Bastardi also predicted an over active season. And he bit the bullet and admitted he was wrong and how. It was an excellent read. I will try to find it for you.[/quote] Yes funny, but everyone deserves a break now and then, even the people in the US. There's nothing wrong with that. This is also interesting, when I was looking about permafrost. <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2
[quote who="Daiwa" reply="1436" id="3423512"] Within broad timelines, we're probably pretty close. But there's a helluva lot more we don't know than we do know.[/quote] Well... as far as physical processes go, we have direct observations from our own time. We can use those observations to understand/model how carbon was captured a long time ago. Therefore I think that you're to negative about it, there's a lot we know about biology and phy
[quote who="ZombiesRus5" reply="1434" id="3423489"]Will you also arrest people that install natural gas generators, diesel generators, burn fires to keep warm, burn oil for light or heat? I'm assuming this will be a capital offence in your utopian world. [/quote] Nah, future generations will probably hang the people who burn oil or gas.
[quote who="Daiwa" reply="1432" id="3423470"]Which hasn't worked out real well in climatology over the past 15-20 years.[/quote] Which is pure sarcasm that masks significant progress made in the last 20 years. Actually I think that the paleo-data set is fairly good, because there are many different data (each with their own problems) but it looks like they are reasonably well in agreement. It's not perfect of course. That's not possible for millio
They were all enjoyable, they weren't bad... even the last one is ok, even though I think it has a dumb detective-like story. Sometimes it looks like all movies are off track, merging together into one type of general movie: less humour, less colours, and a bland story. No excentric enemies anymore. I'm talking about ... James Bond, Star Trek, Superman. I hope Star Wars won't suffer this fate!
[quote who="Daiwa" reply="1430" id="3423400"]A bunch of sophisticated mathematics is impressive & sciency but when applied to a bunch of assumptions the results depend entirely on the assumptions.[/quote] This article showed that one of those assumptions was wrong, made observations and showed a better assumption. That's advancement of knowledge. And as far as the assumptions go: those go into the error-bars of the measumerement. But that's a tricky
[quote who="Daiwa" reply="1424" id="3423314"] Quoting GeomanNL, reply 1411Did we read the same article ??? Yep[/quote] Ok, then why do you ridicule it? [quote who="myfist0" reply="1425" id="3423317"]Yes, useless facts are quickly forgotten, but indoctrination lasts a lifetime.[/quote] I think that the only indoctrination on schools comes from one child to the next, at least here in the Netherlands, and that the rest is just technobabble
[quote who="Kantok" reply="1421" id="3423306"]You take multi-paragraph, carefully crafted expressions of skepticism (or other reasons for not wanting to jump feet first into the AGW bus) and pretend that it all boils down to this so you don't have to actually address the concerns. It's soapboxing, not discussion. [/quote] I have replied to lots of people in a fair amount of detail. And whenever I find other interesting things, I add it to this discussion. And
Yeah whatever. I think it's up to the next generation, this one is too much in the grip of power money and the desire for luxury. I'm enjoying this life too while I can. Fuck the world! All power to the individual. But what I think is really surprising here, is the general mistrust in science and scientists. Where does that come from?
Well... what can I say, some people are just playing stubborn. It's just that, the article I found was a bit disturbing. If ancient hot climates where "hot" at levels of 1,000 ppm CO2 giving minor extinction events, and if major extinction events would already occur at say 2,000 ppm CO2, then we're in a much worse situation than I thought earlier.
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="1404" id="3423002"]Has there ever been an example in the past where CO2 rising preceded an increase in temperature? It seems like before we start yelling about CO2 being a threat (it's what? 0.4% of the atmosphere) that we would have examples of thus. But we don't. CO2 always goes up after temperatures go up. [/quote] Well it doesn't... 1. we observe it right now. 2. if you want to now about the link of CO2/temperature ev
