We got climate change wrong says IPCC - global warming estimates revised down; Global temperatures less sensitive to atmospheric carbon dioxide than previously thought
In between these ranges it will still take thousands of years for the icecaps to melt.
Not if the methane trapped in the tundra and the seabed is released. It has a global warming effect 80 times that of CO2 in the short term and there is twice as much trapped up there as there is CO2 in the atmosphere. They call that release (it is occuring already) an unintended consequence of global warming which can lead to runaway feedback loops.
The hotter it gets, the faster it gets hotter. And the hotter it gets, the faster it gets hotter faster. This process goes on faster and faster until something runs out. No more methane to release, no more boreal forests left to burn or no more ice to melt so that there is no more sunlight absorption feedback.
Of course this is just a science based climate model and may not occur. But it is a recognised possibiity. To put that in perspective the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant meltdown which is polluting the sea north of japan and spreading across to the continental US was not recognised as a possibility. If it had been they would never had built the reactors with such poor safeguards.
I've been trying to find a good spot in this video to start from, really the whole documentary is great, but I think I've gotten it down to the most informative bit about what may be in the future for us...
It first aired on the ABC in March of 2007...
But apparently timestamps don't work. The bit about greenhouse effects starts around 50 minutes in.
"If man is to survive, he will have learned to take a delight in the essential differences between men and between cultures. He will learn that differences in ideas and attitudes are a delight, part of life's exciting variety, not something to fear." - Gene Roddenberry
"Balloon animals are a great way to teach children that the things they love dearly, may spontaneously explode" -- Lee Camp
Good luck translating that block of ice into any sort of meaningful data on what the climate was doing over the span of a few decades, half a million years ago.
The climate, until very recently, has only every changed significantly over the span of thousands and millions of years. Error bars of a thousand years or so are insignificant when the temperature trends on the scale of millennia.
The only reason we measure the actual temperature in years now is because the change is happening so rapidly.
If it had been they would never had built the reactors with such poor safeguards.
That's not the problem. The problem is due to economic considerations (aka greed), those plants were kept in operation past their use by date. Safe nuclear power is possible, the problem is Homer Simpson is in the works and for the sake of profit they take short cuts that undermine safety. Eventually fossil fuels will be uneconomic in a few centuries and humanity will depend on nuclear power for large scale supplies. The same holds true for raw materials, eventual all they will such be low grade they will be uneconomic.
The climate, until very recently, has only every changed significantly over the span of thousands and millions of years. Error bars of a thousand years or so are insignificant when the temperature trends on the scale of millennia.
No... we don't know that.
We don't have accurate enough data to determine how significantly and rapidly the temperature changed thousands of years ago, never mind millions of years ago.
If you can put up some data proving there were no rapid/significant changes between say 100,000BC and 100,050BC, then I'd be interested to see it.
Quote:
The only reason we measure the actual temperature in years now is because the change is happening so rapidly.
No... we measure the temperature in years now because we have the ability to do so.
Actually, we measure it in days, or even continually in many locations. Modern equipment allows us to do this.
Even if change wasn't happening rapidly now, we would still take just as many measurements, because we can.
If we had the ability to measure the temperature millions of years ago to a more granular level, then we would.
But there's only so much granularity you can get from 500,000 year-old blocks of ice. Check out some of the links I posted earlier.
You are still obsessed with protecting you're 30 year maximum call in your earlier post, which was ill-informed, wrong. Here is one and a half millenia of records, but you insist we need millions of years? Based on what? You didn't even know ice cores could be used to determine sea ice extent before I told you shadow, you haven't got a clue about the subject at hand so your assertions of what is needed are meaningless and discussing it any further with you is pointless.
Come back in a year or two when you have learnt the basics.
Shadow
8 Nov 2013, 10:14 AM
goldbug
8 Nov 2013, 10:09 AM
Then there is the ice core data scientists have collected.
Ice cores don't tell us about the extent of sea ice coverage.
You didn't even know ice cores could be used to determine sea ice extent before I told you shadow
They can't. Your article says they used a combination of ice cores, tree-rings and lake sediments to estimate (not determine, not measure, but estimate) 'arctic conditions' for the last two thousand years, and their margin of error for sea ice extent, extrapolated from those estimates, is ~2 million square kilometers. In other words, they're guessing. Think about this logically... how can they hope to measure the extent of something that melted away thousands of years ago. There is no record of it ever having existed. Taking a core from existing ice can't possibly tell you about the extent of other ice, miles away from that ice core, that melted away thousands of years ago. It's gone. There is no trace of it. It became part of the sea and then evaporated thousands of years ago.
As I said at the beginning we have records (actual records, not estimates) going back for a few decades. Anything beyond that is guesswork. We really have no idea whether or not recent changes in sea ice (or temperatures) are unusual compared to changes that happened thousands, never mind millions of years ago.
You might like to try reading the content of the articles you link to (rather than just reading the title).
Also, you should probably look up the difference between a 'record' (or measurement) and an 'estimate'. They are very different things.
Quote:
before I told you shadow
Actually, what you 'told me' before was some nonsense about the British Navy. I asked you for a link to your alleged British Navy data which you claim goes way back much further. Can you post that link to the British Navy data for me?
"If man is to survive, he will have learned to take a delight in the essential differences between men and between cultures. He will learn that differences in ideas and attitudes are a delight, part of life's exciting variety, not something to fear." - Gene Roddenberry
"Balloon animals are a great way to teach children that the things they love dearly, may spontaneously explode" -- Lee Camp
I'm really surprised no one has jumped up and down about this. People are usually rather quick to disabuse me of the differences.
"If man is to survive, he will have learned to take a delight in the essential differences between men and between cultures. He will learn that differences in ideas and attitudes are a delight, part of life's exciting variety, not something to fear." - Gene Roddenberry
"Balloon animals are a great way to teach children that the things they love dearly, may spontaneously explode" -- Lee Camp
You didn't even know ice cores could be used to determine sea ice extent before I told you shadow
They can't. Your article says they used a combination of ice cores, tree-rings and lake sediments to estimate (not determine, not measure, but estimate)
Ha Ha, get proved to be an idiot so plan B is you resort semantics. You're such a tool shadow. This is why you will lose in life btw, no mater what happens to syd property short term. You have a total inability to admit when you are wrong and that is fatal to anyone trying to make a living out off of invesntments. Don't give up your day job young fella
Shadow was hopelessly wrong about the Gold Bull Market. What else is he wrong about?
Australian Property Forum is an economics and finance forum dedicated to discussion of Australian and global real estate markets and macroeconomics, including house prices, housing affordability, and the likelihood of a property crash. Is there an Australian housing bubble? Will house prices crash, boom or stagnate? Is the Australian property market a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme? Can house prices really rise forever? These are the questions we address on Australian Property Forum, the premier real estate site for property bears, bulls, investors, and speculators. Members may also discuss matters related to finance, modern monetary theory (MMT), debt deflation, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin Ethereum and Ripple, property investing, landlords, tenants, debt consolidation, reverse home equity loans, the housing shortage, negative gearing, capital gains tax, land tax and macro prudential regulation.
Forum Rules:
The main forum may be used to discuss property, politics, economics and finance, precious metals, crypto currency, debt management, generational divides, climate change, sustainability, alternative energy, environmental topics, human rights or social justice issues, and other topics on a case by case basis. Topics unsuitable for the main forum may be discussed in the lounge. You agree you won't use this forum to post material that is illegal, private, defamatory, pornographic, excessively abusive or profane, threatening, or invasive of another forum member's privacy. Don't post NSFW content. Racist or ethnic slurs and homophobic comments aren't tolerated. Accusing forum members of serious crimes is not permitted. Accusations, attacks, abuse or threats, litigious or otherwise, directed against the forum or forum administrators aren't tolerated and will result in immediate suspension of your account for a number of days depending on the severity of the attack. No spamming or advertising in the main forum. Spamming includes repeating the same message over and over again within a short period of time. Don't post ALL CAPS thread titles. The Advertising and Promotion Subforum may be used to promote your Australian property related business or service. Active members of the forum who contribute regularly to main forum discussions may also include a link to their product or service in their signature block. Members are limited to one actively posting account each. A secondary account may be used solely for the purpose of maintaining a blog as long as that account no longer posts in threads. Any member who believes another member has violated these rules may report the offending post using the report button.
Australian Property Forum complies with ASIC Regulatory Guide 162 regarding Internet Discussion Sites. Australian Property Forum is not a provider of financial advice. Australian Property Forum does not in any way endorse the views and opinions of its members, nor does it vouch for for the accuracy or authenticity of their posts. It is not permitted for any Australian Property Forum member to post in the role of a licensed financial advisor or to post as the representative of a financial advisor. It is not permitted for Australian Property Forum members to ask for or offer specific buy, sell or hold recommendations on particular stocks, as a response to a request of this nature may be considered the provision of financial advice.
Views expressed on this forum are not representative of the forum owners. The forum owners are not liable or responsible for comments posted. Information posted does not constitute financial or legal advice. The forum owners accept no liability for information posted, nor for consequences of actions taken on the basis of that information. By visiting or using this forum, members and guests agree to be bound by the Zetaboards Terms of Use.
This site may contain copyright material (i.e. attributed snippets from online news reports), the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such content is posted to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues. This constitutes 'fair use' of such copyright material as provided for in section 107 of US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed for research and educational purposes only. If you wish to use this material for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Such material is credited to the true owner or licensee. We will remove from the forum any such material upon the request of the owners of the copyright of said material, as we claim no credit for such material.
Privacy Policy: Australian Property Forum uses third party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our site. These third party advertising companies may collect and use information about your visits to Australian Property Forum as well as other web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here: Google Advertising Privacy FAQ
Australian Property Forum is hosted by Zetaboards. Please refer also to the Zetaboards Privacy Policy