Global cooling?

[Dr Mordrid]

Hmmm.....ever consider that in many cases things are frequently not equal? I've seen a lot of people get into trouble making your assumption.

Dr. Mordrid

[Brian Ellis]

Bottom line: our environment has far more factors involved than any current warming model.

To some extent, that is true, but I can assure you that cloud albedo and thermal retention for clouds of all levels ARE in the models, which are remarkably accurate when run on known history. Obviously, these are run on global averages not on local data. Where there are problems is long-term extrapolation, mainly because we don't know how homo sapiens will react.

What is now clearly demonstrated, and all but a few (ie about 6 in 5,000) qualified atmospheric scientists agree, is that man, pumping about 15 billion tonnes (conservative figure, based on 7 billion tonnes of carbon) of fossil CO2, each and every year, is doing much harm to the atmosphere which we live in, no matter how nature tries to correct our folly. Even worse, we have more than doubled the methane content of the atmosphere over the natural base level. Whether you pooh-pooh these facts or not is not going to make any difference, the important thing is that man, as a whole, does recognise them and acts accordingly. Fortunately, there are signs that he is beginning to do so, even if he has a long way to go before there are concrete improvements. Just to maintain today's level of CO2 at a tad short of 400 ppm (up from 280 ppm), we have to cut our fossil fuel consumption by about 57%. To actually reduce it to 350 ppm, we could reduce our consumption by 70% and it would take a couple of centuries or so. To get back to 280 ppm would require 100% reduction of fossil fuels and 300 years.

If we act now and as rapidly as possible, we may possibly avert the worst scenario without any reduction in our general standard of living, although we may have to change some details. See My Credo

[Nowhere]

Doc, some time ago we had here -27C top daytime temperature. Doesn't change that much...just a weather (last time like that in 1978).

[Umfriend]

If we act now and as rapidly as possible, we may possibly avert the worst scenario without any reduction in our general standard of living, although we may have to change some details. See My Credo

Having studied a small tidbit of economics, I wonder how you would define "standard of living" so that I may see whether it is a statement I can debate about with you or not.

[TransformX]

I've seen something today on Discovery channel. They spoke of the magnetic field around the earth, which protects us from cosmic rays etc that would other wise fry us. Apparently, that field strength has decreased by 10% due to an expected 'flip' in the magnetic poles of the earth.

[Nowhere]

I don't think they've meant "frying" literally...

[TransformX]

Well, they did mention that we don't use campuses anymore but instead use GPS. Then they said that once the magnetic shield weakens, these high energy radiations coming from the sun would literally fry all the satelites.

[Nowhere]

But I think not by temperature but by destroying of electronics by high energy paricles (yeah, technically that's extremelly high temperature...but only technically)

[Wombat]

Nope, as the magnetosphere weakens, the surface of the earth will be bombarded by lots of high-energy particles. It would be a bad idea to stand outside in that.

[Nowhere]

OK, I can imagine...but because of heat? I don't think so somehow... (DNA/etc. destruction comes to mind)

[Brian Ellis]

Having studied a small tidbit of economics, I wonder how you would define "standard of living" so that I may see whether it is a statement I can debate about with you or not.

This would be a very long answer to detail it. What I meant to imply is that you, and everyone else, would have adequate energy, food, housing, heating and transport to support everyday life in pretty much the manner to which you are accustomed. However, there will be changes: instead of an SUV, you will have a smaller, lighter, vehicle. You will have less convenience food and more real food. You will drink quality tap water, in preference to Evian or Contrexeville. Your house will be better insulated and this would cut your heating kJ by 2/3, while maintaining your living rooms at 19-20°C and your bedrooms at 17-18°C, with very little extra energy than that consumed by your appliances. You would travel more by public transport. You would recycle your resources more. Your holidays would no longer be spent in Thailand or New Zealand.

Shall I tell you something? I have already lived through a severe energy crisis, the 39-45 war, when all kinds of food and energy were rationed or simply unavailable. I didn't see an orange or a banana for 6 years. There was always a debate whether we needed an extra lump of coal on the fire or put on an extra layer of clothing. Private cars were laid up on blocks of wood "for the duration". We dug up our gardens to grow our own veggies (which today would be labelled "organic"). There was no obesity, but we had adequate rations and we were basically living a more healthy life - and breathing better air - than today.

By the savings we could make with such a programme (and, preferably, stopping conflict!), we could then export this notion to the second and third worlds. I was watching a doc on TV last night on large parasites in Africa (ascarides, hookworms, tape worms and those causing leishmanosis, river blindness, elephantiasis, bilharzia and other diseases). Estimations are 500 million persons affected, causing many deaths and disabilities and - worse - reducing natural resistance to malaria, TB and even AIDS. It would cost $0.50/person/year over 10 years to virtually eradicate these diseases and, where this has been done, the standard of living has risen considerably. What is $250 million, compared with the annual cost of armed conflict in the world? Homo sapiens is far from sapiens we are little better than the homo erectus who first discovered that hurling a rock at his rival would give him an advantage over his 25 year life span.

[KvHagedorn]

Speak for yourself, Brian.. a homo might erect you but they don't really do it for me.

[Dr Mordrid]

Brian;

First of all it's not necessary to make a vehicle small to make it light, which is the critical factor in designing a high mileage vehicle. Since many will demand it expect to see fairly large, but light, SUV's with alternative power systems (ex: E85 hybrids). GM, Ford etc. already have 'em in road tests. Saw the Ford prototype tooling around in Dearborn just the other day. Cousin **** whispers that DCX is also preparing a horse for that race.

During those WWII days the lack of food quantity meant people ate a reduced quality food, very often at a detriment to their health in terms of obesity etc. As such saying catagorically that there was no obesity at that time is just wrong.

Also: calculations may well be in the models to compensate for thermal properties, but I doubt if they've been run yet using the data that just came out last month. I'll also bet they don't fully take into account the effect the effect of GRB's and fluctuations in cosmic ray flux.

Dr. Mordrid

[TransformX]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1573245/posts

ST. PETERSBURG, February 6 (RIA Novosti) - Low solar activity could trigger a global freeze in the middle of the 21st century, a Russian astronomer said Monday.

Khabibullo Abdusamatov of the Pulkovo Astronomic Observatory said temperatures would begin falling six or seven years from now, when global warming caused by increased solar activity in the 20th century reached its peak, and that the coldest period would occur 15-20 years after a major solar output decline in 2035-2045.

Abdusamatov said dramatic changes in the earth's surface temperatures were an ordinary phenomenon, not an anomaly, and resulted from variations in the Sun's energy output and ultraviolet radiation.

The Northern Hemisphere's most recent cool-down period of 1645-1705, known as the Little Ice Age, left canals in Holland frozen solid and forced people in Greenland to abandon their houses to glaciers, the scientist said.

[Brian Ellis]

Astronomers may be excellent at star-gazing but they know bugger-all about atmospheric science. It is true that solar cycling may cause a drop of global temperatures of a fraction of a degree, but the "little ice age" in N. Europe coincided with hotter weather in the south. The cycles are already incorporated in the models.