Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
Gingy is all proud because he knows elephants are too big to wear your pajamas. Maybe you're just really big boned?
Earth Gains A Record Amount Of Sea Ice In 2013
- Thread starter tryingtogrow89
- Start date
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
if it wasnt for that darned global warming, the arctic sea would have those nations fully surrounded with ice. if only we could bring back the weather of 1979, then everything would be perfect again.
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
but i sleep in the nude!
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
No how ever cold it is the artic sea will always stay in the same place...
Polar ice cap tho...
Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
That's one way to take back the night. But didn't you shoot him?but i sleep in the nude!
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
Slightly better labelled map for those that need it
VTMi'kmaq
Well-Known Member
lol, got to 32 degrees here last night burrrrrr!
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
Depends on the quality of the soil and the rainfall but possible
However the trade off you risk losing farmland much further south
if you lose the high quality soil/farmland from your breadbasket states and gain low quality soil/farmland up north (of same area)
Then your not going to think its a good thing...
The thing about the "if" ​​is ​what the future rainfall and weather patterns are going to be is much much harder to predict than the warming is
Doer
Well-Known Member
It is .98 day per degree of orbit times the major/minor axis wobble period summed with the polar axis precession/ 360. On top of that is a 3rd wobble, the planar wobble of the orbit like a old 78 rpm record left in the sun, remember those? But, it is double period and mostly averages....mostly. That accounts for the long term graph of, NOT THE SHIFT OF THE SEASONS, it is the proportional length changing.
21000 years / 360 degrees = degree of summed precession per year x .98, to cook out the leap year or 57.2 years for 1 DAY. earlier for the NON-CALENDAR SHIFT. We are talking about the climate change that happens constantly within a lifetime.
70 days, I found last night is if you don't sum the first two wobbles.
This has nothing to do with calender time, as that article said. We are talking, not arguing about the Milankovitch cycle. Here is a deeper dive in to the science of it.
http://www.soes.soton.ac.uk/staff/ejr/DarkMed/ch5.html
We have now arrived at a point where the logical next question is: Were the monsoonal maximum and the associated eastern Mediterranean anoxic event of 9,500 to 6,000 years BP unique events in earths history? As the reader will have deduced from my various references to such events in the more distant past, the answer to this question is NO. In fact, sapropel formation has been occurring on a regular basis since about 3 million years ago, and intermittently even since 9 million years BP.
Climate is sensitive to both the total amount, and the latitudinal and seasonal distribution, of solar radiation onto the earths surface. Three astronomical cycles are of relevance to these aspects: the eccentricity cycle, the obliquity cycle, and the precession cycle (note 8). The Serbian engineer Milutin Milankovitch was the first to calculate in detail the temporal fluctuations in the intensity and distribution of solar radiation onto the earths surface.
orbit.
21000 years / 360 degrees = degree of summed precession per year x .98, to cook out the leap year or 57.2 years for 1 DAY. earlier for the NON-CALENDAR SHIFT. We are talking about the climate change that happens constantly within a lifetime.
70 days, I found last night is if you don't sum the first two wobbles.
This has nothing to do with calender time, as that article said. We are talking, not arguing about the Milankovitch cycle. Here is a deeper dive in to the science of it.
http://www.soes.soton.ac.uk/staff/ejr/DarkMed/ch5.html
We have now arrived at a point where the logical next question is: Were the monsoonal maximum and the associated eastern Mediterranean anoxic event of 9,500 to 6,000 years BP unique events in earths history? As the reader will have deduced from my various references to such events in the more distant past, the answer to this question is NO. In fact, sapropel formation has been occurring on a regular basis since about 3 million years ago, and intermittently even since 9 million years BP.
Climate is sensitive to both the total amount, and the latitudinal and seasonal distribution, of solar radiation onto the earths surface. Three astronomical cycles are of relevance to these aspects: the eccentricity cycle, the obliquity cycle, and the precession cycle (note 8). The Serbian engineer Milutin Milankovitch was the first to calculate in detail the temporal fluctuations in the intensity and distribution of solar radiation onto the earths surface.
orbit.
Balzac89
Undercover Mod
The release of mass amounts of locked up methane. Methane is far more potent than CO2
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
thank you for the math
But can you please point me to somewhere that agrees that you need to do it?
I have tried googling many variations of calender accuracy, 57.2 and other factors and come up with nothing
If it is a day shift then it wouldn't be climate change it would be a slight season shift
Were atm seeing spring arrive earlier than just a day's worth
I'm not sure why you added the marine part in what part are you saying is the deeper science?This has nothing to do with calender time, as that article said. We are talking, not arguing about the Milankovitch cycle. Here is a deeper dive in to the science of it.
http://www.soes.soton.ac.uk/staff/ejr/DarkMed/ch5.html
We have now arrived at a point where the logical next question is: “Were the monsoonal maximum and the associated eastern Mediterranean anoxic event of 9,500 to 6,000 years BP unique events in earth’s history?” As the reader will have deduced from my various references to such events in the more distant past, the answer to this question is NO. In fact, sapropel formation has been occurring on a regular basis since about 3 million years ago, and intermittently even since 9 million years BP.
Climate is sensitive to both the total amount, and the latitudinal and seasonal distribution, of solar radiation onto the earth’s surface. Three astronomical cycles are of relevance to these aspects: the eccentricity cycle, the obliquity cycle, and the precession cycle (note 8). The Serbian engineer Milutin Milankovitch was the first to calculate in detail the temporal fluctuations in the intensity and distribution of solar radiation onto the earth’s surface.
orbit.
heckler73
Well-Known Member
For what it's worth (which may not be much)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2420783/Global-warming-just-HALF-said-Worlds-climate-scientists-admit-computers-got-effects-greenhouse-gases-wrong.html
As Buck says, "presented without comment".
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2420783/Global-warming-just-HALF-said-Worlds-climate-scientists-admit-computers-got-effects-greenhouse-gases-wrong.html
As Buck says, "presented without comment".
Doer
Well-Known Member
Mean 70 years there of course, but can't edit today. Need to add more than 10 characters. Weird.
And Ginga, do you just play at it? The math is right there. And how many times can you ignore what is the crux?
NOT CALENDAR.
What do mean, NEED IT? Why do we need to understand precession, and lifetime period climate change?
No one needs it. If the mental head is in the sand, why need facts?
And Ginga, do you just play at it? The math is right there. And how many times can you ignore what is the crux?
NOT CALENDAR.
What do mean, NEED IT? Why do we need to understand precession, and lifetime period climate change?
No one needs it. If the mental head is in the sand, why need facts?
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
To my knowledge all pressecion does is move the position of the Sunrise/set slightly on solstice's (easiest to measure on solstice)
Now you could have picked any arbitrary value and do the same calculation ala any numerologist for no seeming reason
Until I can find a reference to what your talking about I'm staying reserved as I do not want to commit bad knowledge to memory
facts are very important
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
Well it's daily mail for a bad start science they can't do well
The green graph does not say which models he's using and I cannot find (yet) a link to anywhere that lists which models he's showing. That's not good
As to the supposed leaked IPCC report?
I'm not going to take daily mails word or opinion on what it says I'm going to wait till it's released in just over a week
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
heckler73
Well-Known Member
That's why I gave it the Buck tag.
Daily Mail is notorious for their weak efforts at fact checking (as potholer on YT has shown MANY MANY times). But, I agree, let's just wait for this "executive summary" and the 2000+ page tome, then we can all dig into it together.
Doer
Well-Known Member
Well, look, I know you don't believe it but I am an actual scientist....it happens to be, Computer Science, is what pays, but I have been deeply trained over 40 years of my career in Method. And of course, I was highly educated before that.
So, when we are reasonable together we can come to understanding. And Mr. E can tell us, even a jerk like me can change his mind based on evidence. And that still does not mean I chose a side.
So, I synthesize, from my own, not too small skills. That is why I can't provide just a single link to parrot. I am out beyond that. I research. No brag, just facts. I did the math when I discovered these precession data. I remembered my Dad's stories. It has nothing to do with Sunrise and Sunset or the calendar days of Solstice.
It is why we throw in the Leap Year.... It is why I used .98 days instead....my goodness. Simple logic. If you don't have that, you are lost in Politics.
Like the Cloud effect we argued about last year, well you argued, it is not a DONE DEAL. We are studying. But, like Cloud Effect, the Milutin Milankovitch cycle has been discounted for the politics and that is why you have trouble.
If you are honest with yourself, you have made up your mind, right? I have not. I dig deeper and it is not so Pat. It is not so cut and dried. Cloud Effect on ice and reflection (albedo) is not factored in to the current Myth. And the M-cycle is not accounted for either, in the DONE DEAL, of AGW.
So, can we even measure the warming? Yes, I guess. But, I read the Berkeley study differently and I've read the entire thing. Have you? It is still a toss up as to what is next, meaning 500 years. And it seems pretty sure, that 1) based on Exa-joules of Global energy exchanged, vs how much we are retaining and 2) the EJ output of mankind, we are not directly contributing. We represent the drop in the bucket.
So, again, this is not taking sides in a political debate. It is the discussion of variables the One Side, that is pushing this, ignores.
Finally, what difference can it make? We don't really know if man contributes indirectly even, the Carbon butterfly sneeze. But we do know Al Gore is getting rich.
So, the entire thing is false to me. It is a collision of the oil economy with the new Age thinkers, with few facts.
It has nothing to do with the Climate Change, that is just smoke screen, imo. The AGW Agenda is after Big Oil.
Do you admit it?
So, when we are reasonable together we can come to understanding. And Mr. E can tell us, even a jerk like me can change his mind based on evidence. And that still does not mean I chose a side.
So, I synthesize, from my own, not too small skills. That is why I can't provide just a single link to parrot. I am out beyond that. I research. No brag, just facts. I did the math when I discovered these precession data. I remembered my Dad's stories. It has nothing to do with Sunrise and Sunset or the calendar days of Solstice.
It is why we throw in the Leap Year.... It is why I used .98 days instead....my goodness. Simple logic. If you don't have that, you are lost in Politics.
Like the Cloud effect we argued about last year, well you argued, it is not a DONE DEAL. We are studying. But, like Cloud Effect, the Milutin Milankovitch cycle has been discounted for the politics and that is why you have trouble.
If you are honest with yourself, you have made up your mind, right? I have not. I dig deeper and it is not so Pat. It is not so cut and dried. Cloud Effect on ice and reflection (albedo) is not factored in to the current Myth. And the M-cycle is not accounted for either, in the DONE DEAL, of AGW.
So, can we even measure the warming? Yes, I guess. But, I read the Berkeley study differently and I've read the entire thing. Have you? It is still a toss up as to what is next, meaning 500 years. And it seems pretty sure, that 1) based on Exa-joules of Global energy exchanged, vs how much we are retaining and 2) the EJ output of mankind, we are not directly contributing. We represent the drop in the bucket.
So, again, this is not taking sides in a political debate. It is the discussion of variables the One Side, that is pushing this, ignores.
Finally, what difference can it make? We don't really know if man contributes indirectly even, the Carbon butterfly sneeze. But we do know Al Gore is getting rich.
So, the entire thing is false to me. It is a collision of the oil economy with the new Age thinkers, with few facts.
It has nothing to do with the Climate Change, that is just smoke screen, imo. The AGW Agenda is after Big Oil.
Do you admit it?