No Winter for Europe

  • Thread starter Thread starter nydas
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
vern_humphrey said:
Hint #1. The Martian ice caps are not receeding because Mars is getting colder.

Hint #2. The energy source is the Sun.😉
Click to expand...
Hint # 3 don’t be pedantic 😉

The Martian polar caps, like the Earth’s, wax and wane with the seasons

The link provided above did not say that they were receding permanently

If you have a reference that says they are please provide.
vern_humphrey said:
English translationi, “Plugging in the energy factor derived from the melting of the Martian polar caps would destroy my fond illusions.”
Click to expand...
I’m under no illusions
vern_humphrey said:
….So tell me how this caused the Martial polar ice caps to recede?
Click to expand...
Did I say that it did?
 
hoosiertoo said:
Some info here.
Click to expand...
You’re kidding me right?

Observations over 2 seasons indicate a trend? :confused:
I’ve seen some folks on this board dismiss long-term global and regional studies on Earth because they thought there wasn’t sufficient data to compensate for natural variations.

It would be nice if they provided the dates of those photos to give the reader a little confidence that they were taken at similar times in the Marian year.
 
steveandersen said:
You’re kidding me right?

Observations over 2 seasons indicate a trend? :confused:
I’ve seen some folks on this board dismiss long-term global and regional studies on Earth because they thought there wasn’t sufficient data to compensate for natural variations.

It would be nice if they provided the dates of those photos to give the reader a little confidence that they were taken at similar times in the Marian year.
Click to expand...
You asked for a corroborative link. I provided one I’d run across and saved earlier from another site called gortbusters.org. A strange bunch, btw.

It’s just a link; I didn’t make any claim at all.
 
a_priori said:
Ya gotta have data? Interesting. I just thought that millions of exhaust pipes pumping the products of combustion into the same air we breathe probably was a negative thing. What was I thinking?
Click to expand...
It’s not that your not thinking, it’s just that you’re looking at the earth itself with a somewhat narrowed vision.

The earth is HUGE.

And while the byproducts of the combustion engine aren’t a “+”, they don’t effect the earth as a whole nearly as much as you give it credit.

I heard a scinetist speaking a few days ago on the radio about the United Nations, and he said the UN is DOWN ranking industrial emissions AGAIN as a cause of the earth’s warming.

Interesting Note
  • If a single volcano were to erupt, it would produce more gases than mankind would produce for an entire year.
An entire year …
  • On a list of what effects the earth’s warming, mankind is listed as number 8. Gases emitted from animals was like number 4 or 5.
Maybe we should get rid of the cows …
 
The Telegraph
Dr Gareth Jones, a climate researcher at the Met Office, said that Dr Solanki’s (Max Planjck Institute) findings were inconclusive because the study had not incorporated other potential climate change factors.
Click to expand...
“The Sun’s radiance may well have an impact on climate change but it needs to be looked at in conjunction with other factors such as greenhouse gases, sulphate aerosols and volcano activity,” he said. The research adds weight to the views of David Bellamy, the conservationist. “Global warming - at least the modern nightmare version - is a myth,” he said. "I am sure of it and so are a growing number of scientists. But what is really worrying is that the world’s politicians and policy-makers are not.
Click to expand...
“Instead, they have an unshakeable faith in what has, unfortunately, become one of the central credos of the environmental movement: humans burn fossil fuels, which release increased levels of carbon dioxide - the principal so-called greenhouse gas - into the atmosphere, causing the atmosphere to heat up. They say this is global warming: I say this is poppycock.”
Click to expand...
CO2 increases lag behind temperature increases. The ocean is a CO2 sink. The increased solar activity could have caused evaporation. Evaporation could be at least a partial cause of the CO2 increase. Evaporation is also the cause of water vapor which is a much better greenhouse gas than CO2.

This is not to say that humans and bovine flatulence (one wonders how much greenhouse gas 6 billion + humans and several meals of healthy legumes can produce…) don’t contribute to greenhouse gases, but is it the main factor? And how much can we realistically reduce CO2 emissions?

I’ve have yet to see a workable proposal - and don’t trot out Kyoto; it’s a bad joke.

I’ll bet the Stone Age had much lower levels of CO2. If I recall my history, it was also much colder. At one time, the land that my home sits on was under a GLACIER! At another time, it was under a shallow sea.

Climate is always changing. Life adapts, overcomes and survives.

In the last 38000 years, the planet has gotten warmer and humans have proliferated!
 
steveandersen said:
You didn’t
but the folks at that web site did.
Click to expand...
Yep. They claimed that from 1999-2001 the southern ice cap lost some ice and speculated that global warming caused by solar activity may be a cause.

So?

The Max Planck Institute also has data supporting solar activity as a contributing cause of GW - rather more recent and covering 60 years, I might add.
 
hoosiertoo said:
Y…The Max Planck Institute also has data supporting solar activity as a contributing cause of GW - rather more recent and covering 60 years, I might add.
Click to expand...
I have no doubt the sun is another contributing cause.

looks like we picked a bad time to start an industrial revolution
 
hoosiertoo said:
The Telegraph

CO2 increases lag behind temperature increases. The ocean is a CO2 sink. The increased solar activity could have caused evaporation. Evaporation could be at least a partial cause of the CO2 increase. Evaporation is also the cause of water vapor which is a much better greenhouse gas than CO2.

This is not to say that humans and bovine flatulence (one wonders how much greenhouse gas 6 billion + humans and several meals of healthy legumes can produce…) don’t contribute to greenhouse gases, but is it the main factor? And how much can we realistically reduce CO2 emissions?

I’ve have yet to see a workable proposal - and don’t trot out Kyoto; it’s a bad joke.

I’ll bet the Stone Age had much lower levels of CO2. If I recall my history, it was also much colder. At one time, the land that my home sits on was under a GLACIER! At another time, it was under a shallow sea.

Climate is always changing. Life adapts, overcomes and survives.

In the last 38000 years, the planet has gotten warmer and humans have proliferated!
Click to expand...
You are one of the few people who have commented on the time lag … that the temp goes up BEFORE the CO2 increase.

The source of ocean heating is unknown. Which is surprising since humans think they are so smart.

No one knows how many undersea volcanoes (and seeps) there are. I did a Google search and found “guesstimates” of as many as 20,000 undersea volcanoes. The earth’s temperature (below the 30 mile thick surface shell) is up around 4000 degrees. ONE volcanic eruption of the land-based variety pumps as much ash and gas into the atmosphere as all of the man-made sources combined. Mount St. Helens alone was, by one estimate, generating as much “stuff” as one nuke a second (or some such estimate).

We know almost nothing about the earth’s undersea geology. A lot of folks don’t factor in such things as El Nino.

There are a lot of complicated factors that contribute to climate change and even to weather.
 
Have you seen the argument that Mt. St. Helens was not a major contributor to particulates and greenhouse gasses due to it’s high latitude and the fact that the explosion was horizontal rather than vertical?

I’m not sure of the specifics.
 
steveandersen said:
:confused:
that is not what that article says at all
it says the southern ice cap was shrinking at the time the article was written because it was summer there.

I’m not sure where you got the 10-50 ft a year figure either

do you have a link that confirms?
Click to expand...
I’m digging up the 50ft link, here’s one that shows 10ft per year

space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/mars_snow_011206-2.html

And a few others, including some of the actual research that shows a warming trend on Mars that is melting the ‘dry ice’ parts of the polar icecaps, revealing the water ice below.

mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mgs/msss/camera/images/CO2_Science_rel/index.html

mos.org/cst-archive/article/80/9.html

And then there is the Russian scientist (from the Russian Sciences Academy no less!) who has mapped out a Solar warming\cooling cycle and states that we can expect a general cooling starting in 2014

mosnews.com/news/2006/02/06/globalcold.shtml
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top