Science Forums
Advanced search
User Name
Password

Science Social Network
home    members    help/rules    who is online    contact   

Go Back   Science Forums > Physical Sciences Forums > Environmental Studies
Become a science forums sponsor today
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-13-2008   #21 (permalink)
InfiniteNow's Avatar
Suspended


 



Re: Nasa Arctic Ice "GONE" By 2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by C1ay View Post
Take a look at this for an idea of man's contribution to the problem...
C1ay, there are many sources I'd trust far more than "mysite.verizon.net/mhieb...." for information on anthropgenic contributions.
Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2008   #22 (permalink)
freeztar's Avatar
Married man

Hypography Staff Member
Moderator
Editor
Silver Subscription
Sponsor

Latest blog entry:
Pics
 
freeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond repute
 



Re: Good news about the North Atlantic Current?

Quote:
Originally Posted by C1ay View Post
Considering how fast the Earth has warmed during past ice ages I wonder why the current rate would be unexpected....
Are you referring to the graph at the bottom of that page? If so, then I'd like to point out that the Y-axis is undefined (or at a minimum, vaguely defined by period). How can we determine the rate from this graph? Are you referring to something else?


----------------
Hypography Science Forums Moderator
---
"There are no passengers on Spaceship Earth. We are all crew." - Marshall McLuhan

"We must not forget that when radium was discovered no one knew that it would prove useful in hospitals. The work was one of pure science. And this is a proof that scientific work must not be considered from the point of view of the direct usefulness of it." - Marie Curie
Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2008   #23 (permalink)
C1ay's Avatar
¿42?

Hypography Staff Member
Administrator
Senior Editor
Editor

 



Re: Good news about the North Atlantic Current?

Quote:
Originally Posted by freeztar View Post
Are you referring to the graph at the bottom of that page? If so, then I'd like to point out that the Y-axis is undefined (or at a minimum, vaguely defined by period). How can we determine the rate from this graph?
Periods are well defined on the Geologic Time-Scale...


----------------
Clay

Editor and Forum Administrator
stego anyone?
Add yourself to Hypography's Frappr.
"There are only 10 kinds of people in the world --
.....Those who understand binary, and those who don't."
"Draw no conclusions before their time."
Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2008   #24 (permalink)
freeztar's Avatar
Married man

Hypography Staff Member
Moderator
Editor
Silver Subscription
Sponsor

Latest blog entry:
Pics
 
freeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond repute
 



Re: Good news about the North Atlantic Current?

Quote:
Originally Posted by C1ay View Post
Periods are well defined on the Geologic Time-Scale...
I'm well aware of this, but the curves on the graph are not well defined. How can we quantify the rate from that graph? Did the "switch" happen over a period of 500 years, 5000 years, or 500,000 years?
It's not clear from the graph.


----------------
Hypography Science Forums Moderator
---
"There are no passengers on Spaceship Earth. We are all crew." - Marshall McLuhan

"We must not forget that when radium was discovered no one knew that it would prove useful in hospitals. The work was one of pure science. And this is a proof that scientific work must not be considered from the point of view of the direct usefulness of it." - Marie Curie
Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2008   #25 (permalink)
C1ay's Avatar
¿42?

Hypography Staff Member
Administrator
Senior Editor
Editor

 



Re: Nasa Arctic Ice "GONE" By 2013

Look at the dip in the average global temperature that occurred around the middle of the Ordovician period that recovered back to the maximum by the first quarter of the Silurian period.

The Ordovician period spanned from 488 - 444 Mya and the Silurian from 444 - 416 Mya. By this it looks like it was approximately 29 Mya. There was an impact at Jämtland, central Sweden dated at approximately 455 Mya that could explain the sudden drop in temperature.

More importantly though you should notice that we just had an ice age in the Pleistocene period that brought the average global temperature down to 12°C and the planet is still in a warming phase from that. The Earth Policy Institute reports the average global temperature in 2007 was 14.73°C, still lower than the 17° average of the last 2 billion years. Notice also that each time the Earth has dropped down in global average temperature, because of an impact, volcanic eruption or other atmospheric event, it rebounds to around 22°C. Judging from the history of the planet we are headed back to that average.


----------------
Clay

Editor and Forum Administrator
stego anyone?
Add yourself to Hypography's Frappr.
"There are only 10 kinds of people in the world --
.....Those who understand binary, and those who don't."
"Draw no conclusions before their time."
Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2008   #26 (permalink)
freeztar's Avatar
Married man

Hypography Staff Member
Moderator
Editor
Silver Subscription
Sponsor

Latest blog entry:
Pics
 
freeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond reputefreeztar has a reputation beyond repute
 



Re: Nasa Arctic Ice "GONE" By 2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by C1ay View Post
Look at the dip in the average global temperature that occurred around the middle of the Ordovician period that recovered back to the maximum by the first quarter of the Silurian period.

The Ordovician period spanned from 488 - 444 Mya and the Silurian from 444 - 416 Mya. By this it looks like it was approximately 29 Mya. There was an impact at Jämtland, central Sweden dated at approximately 455 Mya that could explain the sudden drop in temperature.

More importantly though you should notice that we just had an ice age in the Pleistocene period that brought the average global temperature down to 12°C and the planet is still in a warming phase from that. The Earth Policy Institute reports the average global temperature in 2007 was 14.73°C, still lower than the 17° average of the last 2 billion years. Notice also that each time the Earth has dropped down in global average temperature, because of an impact, volcanic eruption or other atmospheric event, it rebounds to around 22°C. Judging from the history of the planet we are headed back to that average.
Ok, I see what you are saying, C1ay, but 29 Mya is a VERY long time compared to what we are able to record "real-time" in a few generations.

Likewise, an average temp of 17 degrees over the last 2 Bil. years is hardly a metric with which to judge climate variability over a timespan of 150 years. Recent trends have a much higher temperature *increase rate* than has been seen in paleoclimatic records as far as I'm aware of. (not to discount solar variability and Milankovitch cycles)

Does anyone know of any data related to the prehistoric rate of ice cap disappearance? If so, this might help fill the gaps.


----------------
Hypography Science Forums Moderator
---
"There are no passengers on Spaceship Earth. We are all crew." - Marshall McLuhan

"We must not forget that when radium was discovered no one knew that it would prove useful in hospitals. The work was one of pure science. And this is a proof that scientific work must not be considered from the point of view of the direct usefulness of it." - Marie Curie
Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2008   #27 (permalink)
Chris C's Avatar
Thinking


 



Re: Nasa Arctic Ice "GONE" By 2013

there is no ice age termination over the ice core record involving a 0.8 C rise in 100 years or so . D-O events are the only thing comparable in rate, but not like today in terms of global scale effects. The rate of change is consideraly rapid on a global and decadal scale, and Milankovitch cycles operate on thousand-of-year timescales, while CO2 and methane feedbacks from warmer temperatures in the glacial-interglacial cycles take hundreds of years as well.
Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2008   #28 (permalink)
Chris C's Avatar
Thinking


 



Re: Nasa Arctic Ice "GONE" By 2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by freeztar View Post
Ok, I see what you are saying, C1ay, but 29 Mya is a VERY long time compared to what we are able to record "real-time" in a few generations.

Likewise, an average temp of 17 degrees over the last 2 Bil. years is hardly a metric with which to judge climate variability over a timespan of 150 years. Recent trends have a much higher temperature *increase rate* than has been seen in paleoclimatic records as far as I'm aware of. (not to discount solar variability and Milankovitch cycles)

Does anyone know of any data related to the prehistoric rate of ice cap disappearance? If so, this might help fill the gaps.
You are correct. I'm not very familiar with climates before the ice core record, but neither do the paleo records have time resolution of <100 years. Plate tectonics and the evolution of the air and sea (like plants and cyanobacteria giving oxygen) take a very long time to operate. You need landmass at the poles for glacial periods. I do not know of any time where ice melted at the poles on a decadal to century timescale, but if it happend it must have involved a clear external forcing on the climate system which had an abrupt effect. The glacial to interglacial cycles over the ice core record are fairly clearly slower than today, with much higher CO2 levels today as well.
Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2008   #29 (permalink)
cyclonebuster's Avatar
Questioning


 



Re: Good news about the North Atlantic Current?

Quote:
Originally Posted by freeztar View Post
Are you referring to the graph at the bottom of that page? If so, then I'd like to point out that the Y-axis is undefined (or at a minimum, vaguely defined by period). How can we determine the rate from this graph? Are you referring to something else?
Scary thought when looking at that graph. Modern man only exists in the very top portion of (TODAY) when the climate is cool. Perhaps, when the climate warms up more like in the past we fail to exist at all.
Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2008   #30 (permalink)
C1ay's Avatar
¿42?

Hypography Staff Member
Administrator
Senior Editor
Editor

 



Re: Nasa Arctic Ice "GONE" By 2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by freeztar View Post
Likewise, an average temp of 17 degrees over the last 2 Bil. years is hardly a metric with which to judge climate variability over a timespan of 150 years. Recent trends have a much higher temperature *increase rate* than has been seen in paleoclimatic records as far as I'm aware of. (not to discount solar variability and Milankovitch cycles)
I think we can see that natural warming cycles are unpredictable, sometimes they are rapid and others are slow. We are facing a warmer future either way and we should adapt. There's nothing wrong with trying to reduce the pollution we create that contributes but it's not going to stop the Earth from warming up.


----------------
Clay

Editor and Forum Administrator
stego anyone?
Add yourself to Hypography's Frappr.
"There are only 10 kinds of people in the world --
.....Those who understand binary, and those who don't."
"Draw no conclusions before their time."
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Corruption at NASA Michaelangelica Space 18 04-27-2007 03:27 AM
Arctic summer ice anomaly shocks scientists Tormod General Science News 20 09-23-2006 01:43 AM
Cassini Finds Lakes on Titan's Arctic Region C1ay Astronomy news 2 07-31-2006 09:20 AM
Arctic, Antarctic, Mars Turtle Space News 4 07-02-2006 01:05 AM
Huge 2004 stratospheric ozone loss tied to solar storms, Arctic winds C1ay General Science News 0 03-01-2005 07:02 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:53 PM.

Hypography?

Hypography [n.]: A combination of "hyperlink" and "bibliography" - ie, a list of links to electronic documents. Comparable to discography and bibliography, but not cartography.

We have been online since May 2000, and aim to be the best place to find and share science-related content of all kinds.

Share the love!

Please add more science to your life. Use our RSS feeds on your blog, your portal, or your favorite feedreader!

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0 ©2008, Crawlability, Inc. Copyright © 2000-2008 Hypography
Part of the Hypography - Science for Everyone Network