Moderated Global Warming Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
lomiller said:
The Gulf Stream is untimely a wind driven phenomenon so as long as continents are laid out as they are and the earth keeps spinning it will not go away. Salinity changes in the arctic could have an impact on where it sinks into the deep ocean which could have climate implications for parts of North-western Europe, but AFAIK there is no real evidence of this happening in the near future.
Click to expand...
OK, thanks; mildly reassuring for the UK...
 
CapelDodger said:
There's your misunderstanding. Muller started mouthing off about the problems he'd discovered on WattsUpMyButt and in the stolen CRU emails which "in his mind" made him doubt the integrity of the climate science field. This was three years ago and, like others, he discovered how this stance raised his public profile and tickled his ego. Naturally he started to hang out where he felt the right strokes.

Being an actual scientist he noticed that in that environment data was something to be demanded via FoI or gathered and shuffled out of sight (Surface Stations, the funniest thing ever before BEST) but not something to use, and it struck him that he could be the first to do it - to huge fanfares (and something nice for his daughter, I can respect that). And so it came to be, with Koch money even. What could possibly go wrong?

It couldn't go wrong for Muller. He either proves that Watts's obsession with the UHI effect is actually justified (quite accidentally, since it was never based on any data, but it did make Watts famous) or he'd find otherwise; either way his public profile was going to be boosted.

What does this amount to in the end? Damn-all in scientific terms. In other terms, it amounts to Muller being a media-whore who deserves no respect as a person, let alone as a scientist.



Muller is wrong for the wrong reasons, and doesn't really care. He's out there pitching crap still, not apologising for anything, and getting his ego stroked. That's the world we live in, but it was ever thus ...
Click to expand...

Do you know Muller has changed his mind and now agrees climate change is human caused ?
 
BenBurch said:
I think there is still some waffling there. But I applaud him for being willing to piss off the Heartland folks.
Click to expand...

His (BEST) data seems good, at least what little of it I've actually spent any time seriously looking at, but I consider him an unreliable source given past histories of leaping to conclusions and making erroneous public assertions regarding science in the absence of examining data and possiessing actual understanding in those particular fields.
 
BenBurch said:
I think there is still some waffling there. But I applaud him for being willing to piss off the Heartland folks.
Click to expand...

Some waffling. I wonder how deniers are taking the news ? I think i'll do a search on it.

This podcast goes into more depth than the article. It's an interview with Muller.
NPR's Science Friday
Changing Views About a Changing Climate

http://www.sciencefriday.com/segment/08/03/2012/changing-views-about-a-changing-climate.html

Adding to the hilarity of denialism I found this blog with plenty of links leading to what the deniers are saying.
http://watchingthedeniers.wordpress...y-the-sceptic-response-to-mullers-best-paper/
 
Last edited:
dlorde said:
OK, thanks; mildly reassuring for the UK...
Click to expand...

As far as the UK's concerned only Scotland (a country far away, of which we know little) would be much affected were the Gulf Stream to shut down, and only in winter. There is no cause for alarm :). Keep calm and carry on. Worse things happen at sea. And so on ...
 
Steve001 said:
Do you know Muller has changed his mind and now agrees climate change is human caused ?
Click to expand...

Trust me, I've been following the BEST story with rapt attention since its inception. It had train-wreck written all over it, especially when the likes of Watts nailed his flag to the mast (only to foreswear himself when the inevitable happened). Marvellous stuff.
 
Makes no difference whether GW is man made or entirely from cow farts.
Humans are the only thing on the planet that can intentionaly change their behavior and we have an obligation to do so
 
kedo1981 said:
Makes no difference whether GW is man made or entirely from cow farts.
Humans are the only thing on the planet that can intentionaly change their behavior and we have an obligation to do so
Click to expand...

Not a great example, as 99% of cow farts are from cattle domesticated by man for milk or beef production.

But I totally agree with you regarding your second sentence :-)
 
There are two posts by Finn McR pointing out that a version of the graph posted cut off some of the data (5440 and 5441) so the moderators certainly allowed that point to be made. It is indeed bad practice, which is why I reposted the link to the Met Office graph of the same data that displayed it correctly.
 
Last edited:
Soooooo.....

I trust the folks here (rational ones anyway) to provide a somewhat balanced reply to a few things I am wondering about.

- I know we are in uncharted territory here so no one really knows the actual answers to my question below.

- I know the basics, more sever weather patterns, drought, changes in growing patterns and arable land, sea level rises etc.

- There will continue to be very little progress made on actually cutting green house gas emissions (and it is probably too late to do anything other than soften the landing after the fall).

I think it is pretty clear that we are heading the cliff and we don't have the political will or financial resources to apply the breaks.

So that said, while sticking to the realm of science, what can we expect over what time frame? Again, knowing we are in uncharted waters here, what types of events can we expect going forward knowing the course we are on? No Chicken Little or head buried in the sand answers, just the best guess we have from science.

Thanks
 
not_so_new said:
Soooooo.....

I trust the folks here (rational ones anyway) to provide a somewhat balanced reply to a few things I am wondering about.

- I know we are in uncharted territory here so no one really knows the actual answers to my question below.

- I know the basics, more sever weather patterns, drought, changes in growing patterns and arable land, sea level rises etc.

- There will continue to be very little progress made on actually cutting green house gas emissions (and it is probably too late to do anything other than soften the landing after the fall).

I think it is pretty clear that we are heading the cliff and we don't have the political will or financial resources to apply the breaks.

So that said, while sticking to the realm of science, what can we expect over what time frame? Again, knowing we are in uncharted waters here, what types of events can we expect going forward knowing the course we are on? No Chicken Little or head buried in the sand answers, just the best guess we have from science.

Thanks
Click to expand...

Much depends upon the issue of tipping points/positive feedbacks. The further away these are the more likely we are to far exceed levels that prove merely inconvenient and the less likely there will be anything we can do to minimize the ultimate end-point warming.

Not sure what you are looking for. Currently, our civilization's emission levels are increasing at an accelerating rate and we are already at overall emission levels that seem geologically unique. Much lower rates of increase seem to have resulted in major climate shifts over fairly short time frames in the fairly recent past (last few interglacial periods). we might expect that the current accelerating rate and high levels of emissions would yeild faster and more intense climate shifts, but as they seem unique, it is really hard to say exactly how things will play out.
 
not_so_new said:
, just the best guess we have from science.
Click to expand...

I have seen a number of aquatic areas die off due to pollution and heat stress. Once you have seen large areas collapse you will have a better idea of how fragile natural systems are.

I watched Lake Ontario transition from being a nice lake to swim in to having various species of fish die off a few years in a row and then the algae started growing along the shoreline. The algae finally got so thick it was nearly impossible to swim through it and it extended 20 feet offshore. Manufacturers removed the phosphates from the laundry soaps and the algae went away.

When I moved to Hawaii I saw areas die off from raw sewage being pumped in injection wells near the shoreline. I have video of a guy scooping up algae mats underwater that were three feet thick. Seeing that footage I decided to shoot the beauty of another pristine reef area to do environmental education. It turned out that only .014 ppm. of nutrients would harm the reef.

After a few years of shooting underwater golf courses were built adjacent to the reefs that I have been diving since 1985. Some weeks I would dive the same reefs six days as there was so much biodiversity. Then the algae blooms started. I documented the before and after images of the damage that the algae was doing. 18,000 gallons of water a day was now being applied to an area that was desert, and tons of fertilizers were being used. So much fertilizer was being applied that the excess that was flying onto the road would make small drifts against the curbs sometimes when it was windy.

Then along came the 1998 El-Nino event. I took one of my best friends out on a night dive and the water was hotter than I had ever felt it before. I remember coming up from the dive and saying to my friend that global warming was really happening and that the reefs were ruined.

Reports came in from around the world about the coral bleaching happening in Asia due to the warmer waters. It was the first time that I had witnessed climate change effecting natural systems on a global scale. It only takes a 1.5 degree Celsius increase in temperature for the coral to bleach.

I shot the footage of the changes to the reefs and used to show it to people but very few people were interested or concerned.

Given that climate change would eventually kill coral reefs in many areas I changed my focus from nutrient related issues to trying to find solutions to climate change on a global scale.

The reefs that I dove on six days a week never recovered with the amazing biodiversity that they had before the algae problems and heat problems. After some research I learned that the reefs I dove on were located at a sea surface temperature hot spot, due to water circulation patterns.

I am rebreather certified and my dives in 1998 were often five and a half to six hours long and having my own boat and diving alone I spent thousands of hours underwater and documented a lot on video.

The 1998 El-Nino event changed my life. I knew the reefs I loved would never recover so I left Hawaii.

Since then I have been hiking in Utah and have seen all the dead stands of trees that were killed by the bark beetles. When I drove up to Alberta, Canada I was amazed that the bark beetle infestations reached that far north. Millions of acres of pine trees have died in the Western US and Canada.

Now looking at all the recent heat waves, many new record temperatures, droughts, increasing natural disasters on a global scale, these recent and very rapid onset of changes lead me to believe that a link in a food chain will collapse soon. Again it only takes a 1.5 degree Celsius increase in sea temperature and only a .014 ppm increase in nutrients to damage and kill coral reefs. Who knows what threshold small organisms have to changes in acidity?

In some areas oyster farms can no longer be seeded in the ocean as the water is too acidic. Plankton also have similar types of shells and coral reef structures ( calcium carbonate ) also dissolve in acidic waters.

Given that a rise of 1.5 degrees Celsius causes coral mortality and bleaching, we will start to see more reefs being effected. There are still reports of coral bleaching but not as often as during the 1998 El-Nino event. The increasing power and frequency of storms also knocks down stony corals and the loose pieces then wash back and forth breaking other coral heads off. Although this is natural, time is needed between storms for the coral to grow back and the rarest of species are not prevalent enough to repopulate the reefs quickly.

I'm watching to see what factors are in play that will cause the next large scale coral reef bleaching and die off.

There are all kinds of things that will change but these are the two that I think will play out soon. Droughts and sever weather causing crop losses is also huge.

Many people will disagree but watch what happens in the oceans.
 
Last edited:
Warmer1 said:
(apologies for the massive snip of very moving testimony) ... I'm watching to see what factors are in play that will cause the next large scale coral reef bleaching and die off.

There are all kinds of things that will change but these are the two that I think will play out soon. Droughts and sever weather causing crop losses is also huge.

Many people will disagree but watch what happens in the oceans.
Click to expand...

Very disturbing. Moreso, the changes have been globally documented and quantified, so we aren't just talking about subjective individual impressions but rather compelling evidences of changes. Yes, pollution of various sources and types exasperate climate change issues. The fact, however, that humanity has failed to adequately control its despoilment of the environment with some pollutions (fertilizers) is not a good argument (IMO) that we shouldn't try to control human emissions of other pollutants (CO2).
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom