|
Post by shaggy on Sept 16, 2014 15:51:46 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Sept 16, 2014 16:35:15 GMT
The idea of melting ice releasing heat is interesting, perhaps they could use that method to boil drinks, just drop a few ice cubes in and as they melt voila hot drinks..... Do these people really ever consider what they are saying?
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Sept 16, 2014 17:37:41 GMT
The idea of melting ice releasing heat is interesting, perhaps they could use that method to boil drinks, just drop a few ice cubes in and as they melt voila hot drinks..... Do these people really ever consider what they are saying? Mail: Premise 1 "Warm water melts the ice, and this causes warm air to be released" This is a fact. I argued at length with Andrew on this but the science is clear. Melting ice releases 80calories of heat (the same number of calories it takes to warm the water from this ice from 0 to 80C). Its not going to boil water though as that would mean the warm air being released would be able to warm something warmer than itself. Mail: Premise 2 "Warm air destabilises polar air, sending cold blasts into the atmosphere" Somebody needs to descibe how warm air becomes cold blasts through this destabilization process. Somehow I am skeptical that this can be adequately explained. Mail: Conclusion: "As global warming continues to heats oceans, freezing winters will increase" Hmmm, have to wait to see if there is anything to premise number 2. What this all sounds like is a bunch of global warming scientists met at a cocktail party and commiserated over the freezing winters we have been experiencing and the lack of any actual global warming going on and one of them got drunk enough to believe they had the answer.
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Sept 16, 2014 18:13:08 GMT
I think increasing ice slows cooling of the oceans allowing them to warm anomalously this warming in turn warms the land regions between 80degN and 80degS. Putting ice on the oceans is like clogging the heat exhaust. Eventually that accumulated heat melts the ice and cooling accelerates eventually cooling the oceans and cooling the land and allowing ice to accumulate once again.
If this is an important factor, its likely the oceans are cooled from the bottom up via the falling of cold saline water in high latitude zones where ice was once abundant. If so it should be manifested ahead of more general cooling at the surface by more cold upwelling in cold upwelling zones that will bring that cold to the surface faster than via conduction through an average of a 3000 meter layer of water.
I claim we are seeing that already. We are seeing a stronger upwelling cycle for quite a few years now. It has been noticed in fewer and or weaker El Ninos, stronger and more frequent La Ninas, and in ice accumulating around Antarctica which is a major upwelling zone for thermohaline currents.
The antarctic zone also contributes to down welling but the balance of change is in the Arctic due mostly to the Gulf Stream and the lack of a large land mass on the pole.
Indeed the north pole is warmer than a few years ago. But for something to cool faster it must be warmer. Where we can doubt the data is in the model reconstructions of more distant past arctic temperatures, with the range of error increasing rapidly prior to the 1990's.
The result of that cooling may not be felt at the surface for an extended period of time via becoming sequestered in the bottom of the ocean but it should send those earlier messages noted above as they are on a fast track from the ocean bottom. Eventually perhaps measurable ocean cooling occurs. That assumes its not already happening, but that may because of teams of scientist continuing to look for expected heat instead. Evidence of that bias was seen in the early NOAA report on ocean temperatures that showed the ocean was cooling until rather poorly supported adjustments were made to make the data fit other indices.
Bottom line is the science above might be noting a real effect that the loss of seaice has on the atmosphere. But its a big reach to blame it on "continuing" global warming, when in fact it may in fact be evidence of global cooling.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Sept 16, 2014 19:12:19 GMT
The idea of melting ice releasing heat is interesting, perhaps they could use that method to boil drinks, just drop a few ice cubes in and as they melt voila hot drinks..... Do these people really ever consider what they are saying? Mail: Premise 1 "Warm water melts the ice, and this causes warm air to be released" This is a fact. I argued at length with Andrew on this but the science is clear. Melting ice releases 80calories of heat (the same number of calories it takes to warm the water from this ice from 0 to 80C). Its not going to boil water though as that would mean the warm air being released would be able to warm something warmer than itself. Mail: Premise 2 "Warm air destabilises polar air, sending cold blasts into the atmosphere" Somebody needs to descibe how warm air becomes cold blasts through this destabilization process. Somehow I am skeptical that this can be adequately explained. Mail: Conclusion: "As global warming continues to heats oceans, freezing winters will increase" Hmmm, have to wait to see if there is anything to premise number 2. What this all sounds like is a bunch of global warming scientists met at a cocktail party and commiserated over the freezing winters we have been experiencing and the lack of any actual global warming going on and one of them got drunk enough to believe they had the answer. I think you have your signs reversed Premise 1 To melt ice the ice has to take up the latent heat of fusion (the vibrational movement of the molecules needs to be sufficient to break the lattice structure of the ice). So melting ice absorbs heat changes state but the water remains at the same temperature as it is latent heat. The warm water will actually cool - which is why people put ice in their drinks. Premise 2 Given premise 1 (corrected) there is no warm air released the ice changed state and absorbed heat the water it absorbed the heat from got cooler
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Sept 16, 2014 20:06:31 GMT
It could also be that the world temperature is not increasing, and we are witnessing fluctuating weather as per the last umpteen years.
CO2 may be heavily buffered by negative feedback and we are seeing largely normal semi-cyclical weather patterns.
In reality the poles have only been watched daily in the last 30 or 40 years so what is being recorded may well be very normal fluctuations. May people here and elsewhere talk of reports from the past huge levels of ice and low levels of ice, again we know that the ice on one side of a pole can be high while the other side low, so the stories are interesting and illustrate fluctuations but little more. All will become clear so long as the book burning and indoctrination is halted.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Sept 16, 2014 21:06:04 GMT
When it comes to ice, AGW folks only want to talk about the LAST 30 years. Put the ice into longer term perspective, and their eyes roll back, and their brain explodes.
|
|
|
Post by shaggy on Sept 16, 2014 22:27:21 GMT
The thing with 'global warming' as i see it is that if we were alive 10000 years ago at the end of the last ice age, and we witnessed the ice sheets retreating we would, using the hype and current black magic, be saying that we are at fault of the ice sheets retreating and must do something about it.
Our life on this rock is compared the that of the mayfly. We see only a small portion of the big picture and assume it is wrong. The world is in constant flux with so many variable from solar influence, the planets gravitational influence etc. that no computer model can predict the future of weather.
To throw billions into something that we have little control over is madness. Hurrican data at record lows, tornado data at record lows, artic and antartic ice growing. And yet this is global warming.....really?
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Sept 21, 2014 0:29:09 GMT
The thing with 'global warming' as i see it is that if we were alive 10000 years ago at the end of the last ice age, and we witnessed the ice sheets retreating we would, using the hype and current black magic, be saying that we are at fault of the ice sheets retreating and must do something about it. Our life on this rock is compared the that of the mayfly. We see only a small portion of the big picture and assume it is wrong. The world is in constant flux with so many variable from solar influence, the planets gravitational influence etc. that no computer model can predict the future of weather. To throw billions into something that we have little control over is madness. Hurrican data at record lows, tornado data at record lows, artic and antartic ice growing. And yet this is global warming.....really? Well it was in the early 19th century that the human race was given the species name homo sapiens essentially for Man the wise one. Probably a bit premature. Seems "homo worrier" would have been more appropriate.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Sept 21, 2014 14:20:46 GMT
code: Will happily send you all the snow we normally get in winter.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Sept 21, 2014 15:39:12 GMT
Thanks Sig. I think this season we will need it. Say how's that new tractor? What did you get? Got an old 986, which is a slightly newer model than the 966 that I use for small farm chores and cutting edible beans. So far it is working well. Need to replace the heat sender on the block as it shorts out. Haven't put a lot of hours on it yet, 15 or so, but I think it will hold together to get the bean cutting done. Will fix the 966 this winter, spiff it up and sell either of them as I don't need two of the same tractors.
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Sept 27, 2014 23:51:57 GMT
It could also be that the world temperature is not increasing, and we are witnessing fluctuating weather as per the last umpteen years. CO2 may be heavily buffered by negative feedback and we are seeing largely normal semi-cyclical weather patterns. In reality the poles have only been watched daily in the last 30 or 40 years so what is being recorded may well be very normal fluctuations. May people here and elsewhere talk of reports from the past huge levels of ice and low levels of ice, again we know that the ice on one side of a pole can be high while the other side low, so the stories are interesting and illustrate fluctuations but little more. All will become clear so long as the book burning and indoctrination is halted. Global temperatures have been decreasing since 2001, and that's a fact. Despite all the 'man-made warming' hyperbole, lies and careerism along with the political lies on the evils of 'global warming,' the fact of the matter is that the Earth is heading towards global cooling - like it or not. As my forecast on the trending to global cooling has said, it will continue, toward the official start of global cooling, according to my Astromet calculation, to begin in mid-December 2017. We do have at least one 'warm' year to come, and that is 2015, according to my forecast. It will be warmer than normal next year and then turn warm and dry during the first half of 2016, then warm and wet during the second half of 2016, then cold and dry into 2017 and then cold and wet afterward leading to the official new climate regime of global cooling in mid-December 2017. At this time, in the second half of solar year 2014, and with no 'super El Nino' in sight to break the California drought that I also forecast, the trending to global cooling in regions of the United States this solar year has been quite evident: What you are looking at are 1,695 Low Max temperature records that have been entirely broken or tied during the period from September 11 to September 20th. According to NOAA, at least one temperature record was broken by 25 degrees Fahrenheit. Essentially, what is called a 'low max' means that the maximum temperatures for the day were the lowest it has ever been. This obviously proves that there has been cooling during daylight hours. Al Gore, the United Nations' IPCC, the Obama White House and all of the 'climate change man-made global warming' alarmists are freaking out and panicking because Mother Nature (that's the laws of physics) has been exposing the man-made global warming hoax with a vengeance. They want to 'carbon tax' the entire human population before everyone wakes up to the fact that the world is getting colder - not warmer. Record temperature lows were set during last winter and of course, the Arctic and Antarctic sea ice extents are growing and thickening at an alarming rate. Moreover, with the unusually cool summer in many American states, it is obvious to anyone with a brain that the world is trending to a colder climate. That will become official in mid-December 2017 and then that will be that - global cooling will be here for real.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Sept 28, 2014 19:29:58 GMT
In other words he floated a trial balloon for some way to further raise revenue?
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Sept 29, 2014 14:54:37 GMT
In other words he floated a trial balloon for some way to further raise revenue? The sole purpose of the entire AGW and Agenda21 activities is to raise more tax, and to take control of the population by regulating their energy usage. It has led to thousands of deaths per winter month in the UK caused by fuel poverty and the cold. In Germany hundreds of thousands of homes are 'off grid' as they cannot afford the energy prices. It is all about control.
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Sept 29, 2014 18:25:27 GMT
Remember the actual tax paid in the long term is the governments spend. We to often view tax rates as the spend but forget that a large deficit is simply a delayed tax. On the $1 per gallon tax I travel in the US and Europe a lot both areas are easy to travel in with rental cars. The difference is that fuel in Europe is double the cost of the US but the cars tend to use about half the fuel. I believe the strategic value of this policy is massive. A similar fleet of fuel efficient cars in the US would consume some 5 million barrels per day less. Much cheaper than invading Iraq etc. and it makes the hidden cost of the military spend look like poor economics. I personally do not buy into peak oil or CAGW but energy is a strategic element of any economy. Ask Europe how pleased they are to be dependent on Russian gas?
|
|