Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Answer for Tim
Topic Started: Feb 21 2012, 02:58 AM (567 Views)
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Quote:
 
A side question, if you both don't mind...

What explains the unusual activity on the sun, like solar storms as we had the last week, unusual amounts of sunspot activity, and other things of the like i've seen, which also contribute to the climate? Could they, not, be a part of the global climate problems, since any sunspot of solar storm activity could, also, create more radiational impact upon the earth and the entire sphere of the planet itself? Shouldn't these, too, also be taken into account as part of the problem, since any such activity does affect us?

Clarify and explain if either/both of you will, and why this couldn't, also, be part of the climate situation, as it most definitely does affect it from stories i've read from scientists in the global warming and climate sciences.

Thanks

Tim, I don't know if Solar Scientists know all the reasons for sunspots, etc., but I know they have satellites monitoring solar activity continuously.

And yes, they have worked out the maximum/minimum effect that Solar activity has on our weather.

It turns out that when the Sun is at its maximum activity, it adds about 0.2*C to the Earth's temperature versus the very minimum, so about plus or minus 0.1*C overall effect.

Since so far Human-caused Global Warming has added about 1*C above the long term average, and is climbing at about 0.14*C per decade, the best the Sun can do is delay/advance warming about a decade, and cannot account for any more than about 10% of our present warming.

There are many other natural forces that raise or lower temps as well, for instance, cycles like El Nino or La Nina, but these generally only make a difference of about 0.3*C, or about a third of a degree of what we've seen so far, and much less in the future. Beyond that, since they're cyclical, they have no long term net effect - this is why Climatologists say we should always look at at least a 15 year trend, so the cycles cancel out.

There are some more permanent forces as well, but most have far lesser effect than the Sun. Put them all together, and they do not total the warming we've seen so far, not to mention what is coming in the future.

I could add references, but I think you just wanted the basics.

Hope that covers it - if you have any more questions, I'd be glad to try to answer those as well.
Edited by Brewster, Feb 21 2012, 04:14 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tim from AL
No Avatar
Gold Star Member
[ * ]
Thanks. This does answer some of my questions. And, no, I won't ask for all those references and links. I've heard the same thing elsewhere, just wanted to see if it wasn't just one or two people here and there, who, mostly, are called crocks...lol

I do, however, think that the sun and it's activity, along with the forces within the universe itself may have more effect than can really be predicted. The science to measure those forces are mostly still in their infant state, as we really had no reason to look anywhere except putting someone on the moon or building a space station and such, which, as you might know, was done fairly hastily and without proper long term testing. But, with these advancements, i've heard that they have, also, had to look differently at the cause and effects of the sun and the universe as it pertains to the effects it has on such things as space travel or even just putting men inside a tube circling the earth like in the ISS.

Long term exposures to people within the ISS and during any interstellar space travel would have to be taken into account as how the human body would react, as would the vehicle and other equipment within. I don't think we really know how those effects would ascertain themselves within an enclosed environment like a space vehicle or the ISS in the long run. But, that is some of the scientific testing that is being made on the ISS as we speak, to prepare any future travel to what might be an effect.

So, I think that, just as those effects are being tested and analyzed now for space travel and the existence of humans within space for any prolonged time period, the same thing has to be taken into account for the earth, itself, which can, also, be considered a space vehicle within the cosmic expanse. And, I think they might find that the sun and the universe will have a more drastic effect than first thought, once there is plenty of tests done and time to evaluate them. It will just take time to grow the scientific field of study and to reach the answers to those questions. I don't think they have them quite yet, but maybe soon.

Someone I heard once said, "To test a hypothesis, one has to be willing to take a risk, even to one's life". And, I think NASA and all of the other space agencies and government systems involved collectively have pretty much just done a trial and error approach so far. No one knew what would happen when the first man was shot into orbit around the earth. Many even believed it would ignite the atmosphere and destroy the earth and all life on it if we did. Some even thought that no man could survive without gravity. There were many people who had doubts, but they tested anyway hoping all of the naysayers were wrong, and they were. The same thing when man first thought the earth was flat, until someone tested it, and found out it wasn't, despite the naysayers as to the ships falling off the earth. They risked everything, and found out they weren't wrong, but the naysayers were.

So, I think they might find out, in the long run, the same may apply with the science of climatology as it pertains to the earth within a solar sphere and a universal scale. No one knows what they may find, and there are many doubters and many theories. I've heard a theory that the sun controls the earth's climate over 20% overall, and i've heard it was less than 1%. But, until the science is tested and evaluated, I don't think there is really a way to know just yet. Therefore, I have to think that, maybe, man isn't the only problem to our climate and the earth.

You do know that the sun is ever changing, aging, and eventually, will destroy itself within a super nova or dwarf star, depending on which theory you subscribe to. So, I believe that it could be, within it's aging phase, changing more than just within itself since it does control the radiation levels we are bombarded with and solar activity our atmosphere is subjected to every second of the day. It's aging process could be subjecting the earth to radiation and levels far higher than first thought, and far more than is even tested or possible to test at this time. And, the same could be said with the universe itself and the ever present cosmic radiations we are hit with as the universe ages, expands, contracts, moves and reacts.

We just don't truly know to what extent all of these have on the earth just yet. So, we could be part of the problem, stop our contributions with vital and drastic changes, and still the sun, universe, and cosmos itself could keep it's course and continued increases, and we find there is no change happening no matter how we try. And, I hope that, if we do, the science has studied and take into account for all off this. Otherwise, no matter how much we change, we may need to know how the rest of the universe causes and contributes so that we may be able to find a way to counter act those, as well.

I don't think they need to just say it's all man made. They need to say it's all part of the big picture, or at least keep looking at everything, man made as well as universal. But, what i'm reading and seeing is all finger pointing at man as the major and even only cause. And, if they keep doing this and don't look at all aspects, they might find they've been looking down a rabbit hole while the rabbit still eats the garden up behind them. So, I hope they don't give up and just say it's all man made and let it fall there. We need to look at the entire picture or all we'll do is change the clothing on the models but the photo will still crumble to ashes.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Those arguments are exactly why Climatologists say Human caused Warming is "Highly Likely" instead of certain.

As I recall, "Highly Likely" translates to better than 95% sure.

If you went to the doctor, and he told you that it was "Highly Likely" that you have Cancer and will die within a year if you don't have an operation, and the operation is "Highly Likely" to prolong your life at least 10 years, would you avoid the surgery and wait around on that less than 5% chance that you'd survive a year and a half?
Edited by Brewster, Feb 21 2012, 05:36 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Oh, and by the way, no scientist I know of has quit looking at other sources - but every study they do points even more strongly to us.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tim from AL
No Avatar
Gold Star Member
[ * ]
OK. I understand that. But, as long as it's not just one answer they find and quit, it's OK. But, I still have this nagging suspicion that the sun and the cosmos has more to do with our world than first thought, or our currently thinking.

It's a universe of vastness where we, the earth, are as but a grain of sand in a desert. And, a single drop of rain may not affect that one grain specifically unless it falls directly upon it. But, the universe is more than a drop of rain, but more like a rainstorm, and man is but a simple umbrella trying to keep the rain off of just one spot. Although, I think that man also has the umbrella made of poisonous materials that allow the water falling to pollute where the water falls upon the ground. And, he's spreading in numbers of people with more umbrellas, thus covering more ground and poisoning more.

I look at it this way....Nature has a way of balancing out the forces and effects. A single deer in a 100 acre grass field may not affect the area, but man spreads out like a huge herd. Eventually, I believe, nature will use man's errors to strike an equality again, either with extinction or with mutations to allow for him to live more within his means and without ruining his environment, or making him no longer a viable, top of the food chain member.

Who knows really. If you get in your time machine and go 100, 200, or whatever into the future, i'd suspect you'd find we are still here, although we may all live underground or have 3 legs, or are able to breathe the CO2 gases we've produced. Nature will equal out the mess eventually. After all...it knew the dinosaurs wouldn't be a viable lifeform in our world today, and eliminated them to straighten things out....by one means or another.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Thumper
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Much of the Sun observations are made from a facility in the Sacramento Mountains near Cloud Croft New Mexico. The sight is called Sun Spot. It is a huge telescope that has the mirrors about 100 feet underground. I am surprised that space born telescopes are also being used.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tim from AL
No Avatar
Gold Star Member
[ * ]
Well, you have to look at all the pictures in HD format or the tv screens won't show them...lol
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Tim, it is possible that some extrasolar force will upset the balance, or the Sun might suddenly change (Athough it's been pretty much constant for several billion years, just very gradually warming.) but the chances it will change significantly in the next billion years or so are pretty remote.

Or maybe some space aliens will come along and show us another way (or eat us.)

But those are not the smart bets, and beyond that, those things are beyond our control anyway.

CO2 production is far, far more likely, probably more dangerous, and we CAN fix that.
Edited by Brewster, Feb 21 2012, 10:56 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jackd
No Avatar
Sr. Member
[ * ]
How much CO2 would last year world wide oil production would generate:

Quote:
 
The world consumes approximately 1.1 cubic mile of oil annually

(Roughly a shoe box mesuring 6000ft long X 6000ft wide X 6000ft high)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
jackd
Feb 21 2012, 11:12 PM
How much CO2 would last year world wide oil production would generate:

Quote:
 
The world consumes approximately 1.1 cubic mile of oil annually

(Roughly a shoe box mesuring 6000ft long X 6000ft wide X 6000ft high)
Jack, Humans throw a trillion pounds of CO2 into the Earth's atmosphere every six days, of which about half is from oil.

So if you wanted to know how much CO2 is sprayed into the atmosphere per year, the math is this:

1,000,000,000,000/2 *365/6 = 30,400,000,000,000 pounds per year, from oil alone.

Add in Coal and Natural Gas, change it to Tons, and we're poisoning our planet to the tune of over 30 Billion tons of CO2 every year, and Lord Knows how much other Crap.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Fire And Ice General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Website Traffic Analysis