Interactive Open Discussion

Lowrider · **Joined:** Wed Dec 09, 2009 12:36 pm **Posts:** 2

Start a thread and discuss

This area is open to all guests and members.

Lowrider · **Joined:** Wed Dec 09, 2009 12:36 pm **Posts:** 2

see http://www.physorg.com/news179159979.html

Quote:

While temperature readings in North America dropped back to about the level of 1996 last year,

it would have been even colder without the underlying effects of human-induced climate warming,

said co-author Martin Hoerling of the Earth System Research Laboratory of the government's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

and

http://www.livescience.com/environment/091202-fast-ice-age.html

Quote:

In the film, "The Day After Tomorrow," the world gets gripped in ice within the span of just a few weeks. Research now suggests an eerily similar event might indeed have occurred in the past.

Looking ahead to the future, there is no reason why such a freeze shouldn't happen again, and in ironic fashion it could be precipitated if ongoing changes in climate force the Greenland ice sheet to suddenly melt, scientists say. (North Atlantic "conveyer belt" shutdown)

Y'all soon might get pumping massive amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere.. LOL

the problem is...if the cause is not what established opinion/conjecture thinks it is

then the climate will not be remediated

and things could/will get far far more dire

Until the science model/understanding fits all data, all observations...... doing "something" can be fatal

Remember a slight drop in temperature of few degrees could send civilisation back to the dark ages... or even (if a snowball Earth results) bring on complete extinction of life on the planet

Playing know all..... rushing 'political' science.... eyeing the money.... misinterpreting the signs/data... grandstanding in Copenhagen..... hiding data by deceitful intent (BigOil)
is just keeping the eyes off the ball... self first, and y'all fall down

Science is collecting data... but it is also interpreting/formulating theories.... and opinions/theories can be multiple... but which one is correct ?

re Hanson on cap'n'trade
http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2009/12/07/2764523.htm

and http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/12/09/2765792.htm

Quote:

The Copenhagen climate talks have been rocked by the leak of a draft final agreement
The document abandons the Kyoto Protocol, sidelines the United Nations in future climate change negotiations, and hands most of the power to rich countries.
The leaked agreement not only brings the developing world into the frame, it allows rich countries to emit twice as much carbon as poor countries.

Quote:

Could increased CO2 levels be the result of global warming

AGW is a load, and what I have written below is what BigOil does not want you to know... BigOil has tried to blame everything/ or create confusion via sceptics, so all eyes are off the greasy oil ball

Processes elucidated via Physical Chemistry

CO2 lags warming... seas expel CO2 when the sea becomes heated... a well researched fact

The seas are warming, measured.

Normally in a climate cycle, the seas become heated because they become too salty..(too much ice on land) .... then the sea can't evaporate sea water to lose heat.... so skies clear, which heat the ice packs which then melt and release fresh water into the sea...diluting the sea so sea water evaporation starts/increases again to produce land ice packs again generated from massive cloud banks...

The Earth experiences cyclic ice ages with interglacial periods; these have been observed to occur over millions of years in geological time.

Enter man-made petroleum oil. This oil is covering the sea surface in a generally invisible membrane.. the oil layer has been measured, identified and is ubiquitous/found north and south..everywhere.

Marine micro-layer biologists documented this knowledge over eighty years ago. And yet Climate Scientists do not know this fact ?

What has happened is the petroleum oil that man has placed on the seas has lead to the equivalent of a too salty sea, in that it has caused the same/greater reduction in sea water evaporation ----> Ice Age trigger... started by ice melt

Normally the climate cycle is an equilibrium oscillation between sea salinity and fresh water land ice.

Man has forced the equilibrium too far towards the equivalent of extreme saltiness.

The tipping point for the new ice Age was past three+ years ago as heralded by the current proliferation of Ice Clouds.

Zarkov · **Posted:** Wed Dec 09, 2009 6:09 pm

message to Tony Abbott MHR

Quote:

FOR YOUR INFORMATION

Why or is the Global Climate changing ?

Carbon Dioxide laging warming has been the case all throughout the Earth's history,... seas expel CO2 as the sea becomes heated

Normally the seas become heated because they become too salty..they can't evaporate seawater to lose heat.... then skies clear of clouds, no rain, drought and this weather heats the ice packs which then release fresh water into the sea...freshening the seawater, and then seawater evaporation increases to again produce ice packs...

Cyclic ice ages and interglacial periods are the norm

What has happened in this age, is the petroleum oil that man has placed on the seas is the equivalent of a too salty sea in that it has caused the same reduction in seawater evaporation ----> Ice Age... This is started by ice melt

The cycle is an equilibrium oscillation between salinity and fresh water ice.

The spillage of petroleum oil onto the sea has forced the equilibrium too far towards the equivalent of increased seawater saltiness.

World Oil Consumption barrels/day
Total: 85,085,664 bbl/day

The amount of petroleum products ending up in the ocean is estimated at 0.25% of world production = 212,714 barrels per day,
or 77,640,668 barrels per year barrels per year.

or almost a day's production polluting the ocean's environment every year

The resident time for oil in the environment is measured in decades.

Global Climate Change is serious and can lead to the extinction of life on this planet

or at the least destruction of civilisation.

yours sincerely
John Caley
scientist

Zarkov · **Posted:** Sun Dec 13, 2009 9:08 am

The whole AGW is a BigOil scam..... but that then implies WHY ?

Global Climate Change is happening... so don't go away thinking everything is ok

The problem is BigOil, it is criminally negligent... and the governments have been unwitting accomplices (tax from petrol)... and the public love their cars !!

much like BigTobacco and its addictive/negative health effects that BigTobacco tried to hide in a criminal manner (also using corrupt scientists, falsefied data etc) .... and the government went along for the money ride (and still is)

BigOil has been successfully diverting blame towards coal.. oh soooooooooooo dirty and polluting

CLASSIC QUOTES FROM CLIMATE SCIENTISTS (personal contact)

Quote:

Oil on the sea... I don't know of any oil on the sea !
If you think there is oil on the sea, you go out and do the research and save the world

Quote:

Oil on the sea.... yes, but its only a very thin layer

I am appalled..if the fate of this world hangs upon insane earthlings... end.

Quote:

The paper covers some results of laboratory and nature experiments on studying the effect of oil films on water evaporation rate and oxygen concentration in sea water.

It is demonstrated that oil films on the sea surface reduce the rate of water evaporation by 15 to 33% due to diffusion resistance of the oil film as well as the energy resistance of a monolayer of surface active substances at the marine film-water interface.

Large oil spots may cause, in areas oversaturated with oxygen, increase of oxygen concentration in sea water under the oil spot due to decrease of gas exchange rate at the sea-atmosphere interface.>>>
http://www.springerlink.com/content/v1n51112t0470m58/

NASA, US Coast Guard and many others can attest to the fact... and yet Climate Scientists know nothing. (The oil membrane was first identified back in the 1930's by marine micro-layer biologists)

Oil Consumption barrels/day
Total: 85,085,664 bbl/day

The amount of petroleum products ending up in the ocean is estimated at 0.25% of world production = 212,500 barrels per day,

or oil pollution = 77,640,668 barrels per year onto the oceans

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ene_o...onsumption

Zarkov · **Posted:** Sun Dec 13, 2009 11:43 am

The problem re the rate of seawater evaporation is complicated by the dynamics of the ocean/atmosphere

however the problem re Global Climate Change is not one of how much the water evaporation rate is reduced by the oil film

it is that the water evaporation rate IS reduced below what the natural rate would be.

The oceanic hydrological system is normally equilibrated according to the salinity of the seawater.... (cyclic glacial and interglacial periodic oscillations, due to more or less saltiness of the seas versus the amount of fresh water land/sea ice ratios)
these aspects are dynamic... just another complication for researchers

An ice age cycle is precipitated naturally when there is a tipping point reached with ocean salinity... too salty..the too much land/sea ice is then melted

at this point, the ice melts diluting the sea,,, leads to renewed evaporation... (interglacial period) ... all cyclic with a period usually of hundreds of thousands of years ----> Ice Age again

let Fresh water have an evaporation rate of X ml/min (this rate is also dynamic depending upon the water content of the atmosphere)

NOW TODAY we have a sea that would have a natural evaporation rate of say Y ml/min (not polluted)

The unresolved scientific question is

if our oil polluted seawater has reduced the evaporation rate by Z ml/min
(The Armageddon factor is [X-Y-Z] ml/min, if this value is too low ---->Ice Age)
then the outstanding question is..

Is enough water evaporated into the atmosphere to service all land life requirements if the seawater evaporation rate is Y-Z ml/min

where X > Y > Z

Complicated research.

One way to determine the outcome is to observe the hydrology of the ecosystem... and drought and loss of clouds are indicative... as is the Ice Cloud proliferation... and of course land ice melt

Another method, which does take into account all of the dynamic variables is a determination of seawater temperatures.
Water when heated usually increases water evaporation and thereby removes the added heat... unless there is a semi-permeable membranous cover... or the seawater is too salty..in either case the sea will heat until a new hydrological/thermal equilibrium is again attained

It is a highly buffered system... and the thermal mass of seawater is enormous. Normally the temperature of the ocean should remain constant ( or a slow drift upwards or downwards depending of the stage of the glaciation cycle)

Today the seas are markedly heating, and yet the land ecology is drying. The saltiness has not markedly changed.

What is being observed today in the seas is totally unprecedented... unnatural... and can only be attributed to anthropogenic oil pollution on the seas.

This oil pollution has in effect increased the saltiness of the sea (ie created a similar evaporation rate) that has caused a tipping point into an ice age stage.

Alter one global variable (hydrological/thermal) and the unintended consequences can be enormous...even fatal to LIFE.

Zarkov · **Posted:** Mon Dec 14, 2009 9:10 am

Quote:

So how much is from natural oil seepage, John?

the figures quoted are just anthropogenic petroleum oilâ€¦ analysed and identified

Natural seeps occur in places in the world.. see Arabian Gulf and the Gulf of Mexico and others, but they are small.

It could be that previous natural Ice Ages have been initiated by meteor hits cracking open oil deposits and spilling them into the surface environmentâ€¦ see Younger Dryas

The problem is the oil has a long resident timeâ€¦ and with all the tanker sinkings, burning of Kuwait, WW1 and WW11, and more
the potential for EXTRA future pollution is extreme, even if all oil was declared noxious and treated as a dangerous substance.

The oil membrane on the sea can not be removed.

Now, natural oil fractions are a problemâ€¦but if the source was stoppered they would be remediated by micro-organisms given time, maybe 20 to 30 years
(BUT this is the true time bomb, if the oil was removed, the heating oceans diluted by ice melt would result in an almost instant Ice Age through massive cloud banks)

However man in all his wisdom is now manufacturing oil that ain't oils, they are designed NOT TO BREAKDOWN.

How this is going to turn out is very difficult to determine, but rest assured the cause of Global Climate Change is NOT CO2, it is far more serious.

Quote:

While temperature readings in North America dropped back to about the level of 1996 last year,

it would have been even colder without the underlying effects of human-induced climate warming,

said co-author Martin Hoerling of the Earth System Research Laboratory of the government's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Meanwhile

Quote:

According to the Hadley figures, the world grew warmer by 0.07 degrees Celsius from 1999 to 2008 and not by the 0.2 degrees Celsius assumed by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. And, say the British experts, when their figure is adjusted for two naturally occurring climate phenomena, El NiÃ±o and La NiÃ±a, the resulting temperature trend is reduced to 0.0 degrees Celsius

The quote I posted earlier re acknowledgement of an oiled sea, show the woeful state of knowledge by the proponents of AGW.

To undo what has been done will take some very careful measures. it is not as simple as I have outlined.

A dry dying Earth or an Ice Age. these are the options. and ultimately an Ice Age.

Goodbye civilisation,,,, goodbye LIFE welcome extinction.

Zarkov · **Posted:** Mon Dec 14, 2009 9:22 am

It could be that some previous natural Ice Ages have been initiated by meteor hits cracking open oil deposits and spilling them into the surface environment: see Younger Dryas

http://www.physorg.com/news179489405.html

>> An international team of scientists led by researchers at the University of Hawaii at Manoa have found no evidence supporting an [MAJOR] extraterrestrial impact event at the onset of the Younger Dryas ~13000 years ago.

The Younger Dryas is an abrupt cooling event in Earth's history. It coincided with the extinction of many large mammals including the woolly mammoth, the saber toothed jaguar and many sloths. This cooling period is generally considered to be the result of the complex global climate system, possibly spurred on by a reduction or slowdown of the thermohaline circulation in North America. This paradigm was challenged two years ago by a group of researchers that reported finding high iridium concentrations in terrestrial sediments dated during this time period, which led them to theorise that an impact event was instead the instigator of this climate shift.

A team led by FranÃ§ois Paquay, a Doctoral graduate student in the Department of Geology and Geophysics at the University of Hawaii at Manoa (UHM) decided to also investigate this theory, to add more evidence to what they considered a conceptually appealing theory.

However, not only were they unable to replicate the results found by the other researchers, but additional lines of evidence failed to support an impact theory for the onset of the Younger Dryas. Their results will be published in the December 7th early online edition of the prestigious journal the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The idea that an impact event may have been the instigator for this cooling period was appealing because of several alleged impact markers, especially the high iridium concentrations that the previous team reported. However, it is difficult for proponents of this theory to explain why no impact crater of this age is known.

"There is a black mat [CARBON] layer across North America which is correlated to the Younger Dryas climatic shift seen in Greenland ice cores dated at 13 thousand years ago by radio carbon," explains Paquay. "Initially I thought this type of layer could be associated with an impact event because concentration in the proxies of widespread wildfires are sky high. That plus very high levels of iridium (which is one indicator used to indicate extraterrestrial impact events).

So the theory was conceptually appealing, but because of the missing impact site, the idea of one or multiple airburst arose."

To corroborate the theory, Paquay and his colleagues decided to take a three-pronged approach. The first was to replicate the original researchers data, the second step was to look for other tracers, specifically osmium isotopes, of extraterrestrial matter in those rocks, and the third step was to look for these concentrations in other settings. "Because there are so many aspects to the impact theory, we decided to just focus on geochemical evidence that was associated with it, like the concentration of iridium and other platinum group elements, and the osmium isotopes," says Paquay. "We also decided to look in very high resolution sediment cores across North America, and yet we could find nothing in our data to support their theory."

The team includes American, Belgian and Canadian researchers. Analysis of the sediments was done both at UHM and in Belgium, using the same sediments from the same interval and indepedently did the analysis work and got similar results. Both the marine and terrestrial sediment records do not indicate that an impact event was the trigger for the transition into the Younger Dryas cold period. "The marine and terrestrial record both complement each other to support this finding," concludes Paquay. "That's what makes the beauty of this study." >>

>> Report about the Late Paleocene Thermal Maximum (LPTM), which occurred around 55 million years ago and lasted about 100,000 years. Large undersea methane caused explosions and mass extinctions. (Global warming up 13 degrees Fahrenheit )

http://www.sciencedaily.com/re leases/2001/12/011210163439.html
This explores the controversial paper published by Northwestern University's Gregory Ryskin. His thesis: the oceans periodically produce massive eruptions of explosive methane gas.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =25BE42PzZZc&feature=player_embedded

larryp7639 · **Joined:** Mon Jun 28, 2010 11:59 am **Posts:** 1

Zarkov wrote:

It could be that some previous â€œnatural Ice Agesâ€ have been initiated by meteor hits cracking open oil deposits and spilling them into the surface environmentâ€¦ see Younger Dryas

http://www.physorg.com/news179489405.html

>> An international team of scientists led by researchers at the University of Hawaii at Manoa have found no evidence supporting an [MAJOR] extraterrestrial impact event at the onset of the Younger Dryas ~13000 years ago.

The Younger Dryas is an abrupt cooling event in Earth's history. It coincided with the extinction of many large mammals including the woolly mammoth, the saber toothed jaguar and many sloths. This cooling period is generally considered to be the result of the complex global climate system, possibly spurred on by a reduction or slowdown of the thermohaline circulation in North America. This paradigm was challenged two years ago by a group of researchers that reported finding high iridium concentrations in terrestrial sediments dated during this time period, which led them to theorise that an impact event was instead the instigator of this climate shift.

A team led by FranÃ§ois Paquay, a Doctoral graduate student in the Department of Geology and Geophysics at the University of Hawaii at Manoa (UHM) decided to also investigate this theory, to add more evidence to what they considered a conceptually appealing theory.

However, not only were they unable to replicate the results found by the other researchers, but additional lines of evidence failed to support an impact theory for the onset of the Younger Dryas. Their results will be published in the December 7th early online edition of the prestigious journal the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The idea that an impact event may have been the instigator for this cooling period was appealing because of several alleged impact markers, especially the high iridium concentrations that the previous team reported. However, it is difficult for proponents of this theory to explain why no impact crater of this age is known.

"There is a black mat [CARBON] layer across North America which is correlated to the Younger Dryas climatic shift seen in Greenland ice cores dated at 13 thousand years ago by radio carbon," explains Paquay. "Initially I thought this type of layer could be associated with an impact event because concentration in the proxies of widespread wildfires are sky high. That plus very high levels of iridium (which is one indicator used to indicate extraterrestrial impact events).

So the theory was conceptually appealing, but because of the missing impact site, the idea of one or multiple airburst arose."

To corroborate the theory, Paquay and his colleagues decided to take a three-pronged approach. The first was to replicate the original researchers data, the second step was to look for other tracers, specifically osmium isotopes, of extraterrestrial matter in those rocks, and the third step was to look for these concentrations in other settings. "Because there are so many aspects to the impact theory, we decided to just focus on geochemical evidence that was associated with it, like the concentration of iridium and other platinum group elements, and the osmium isotopes," says Paquay. "We also decided to look in very high resolution sediment cores across North America, and yet we could find nothing in our data to support their theory."

The team includes American, Belgian and Canadian researchers. Analysis of the sediments was done both at UHM and in Belgium, using the same sediments from the same interval and indepedently did the analysis work and got similar results. Both the marine and terrestrial sediment records do not indicate that an impact event was the trigger for the transition into the Younger Dryas cold period. "The marine and terrestrial record both complement each other to support this finding," concludes Paquay. "That's what makes the beauty of this study." >>

Thanks you for the post.
Hi guys, Im a newbie. Nice to join this forum.

donnaj867 · **Joined:** Mon Jun 28, 2010 12:44 pm **Posts:** 1

Hello !
I am also a new member. Would a newcomer be warmly welcome here? Good day you guy !

__________________
Watch The Twilight Saga Eclipse Online Free

donnaj8887 · **Joined:** Wed Aug 18, 2010 6:45 pm **Posts:** 1

Hello !
I am also a new member. Would a newcomer be warmly welcome here? Good day you guy !

__________________
Watch The Switch Online Free

nicoledc109 · **Joined:** Thu Aug 19, 2010 12:53 pm **Posts:** 1

Lowrider wrote:

see http://www.physorg.com/news179159979.html

Quote:

While temperature readings in North America dropped back to about the level of 1996 last year,

it would have been even colder without the underlying effects of human-induced climate warming,

said co-author Martin Hoerling of the Earth System Research Laboratory of the government's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

and

http://www.livescience.com/environment/091202-fast-ice-age.html

Quote:

In the film, "The Day After Tomorrow," the world gets gripped in ice within the span of just a few weeks. Research now suggests an eerily similar event might indeed have occurred in the past.

Looking ahead to the future, there is no reason why such a freeze shouldn't happen again, and in ironic fashion it could be precipitated if ongoing changes in climate force the Greenland ice sheet to suddenly melt, scientists say. (North Atlantic "conveyer belt" shutdown)

Y'all soon might get pumping massive amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere.. LOL

the problem is...if the cause is not what established opinion/conjecture thinks it is

then the climate will not be remediated

and things could/will get far far more dire

Until the science model/understanding fits all data, all observations...... doing "something" can be fatal

Remember a slight drop in temperature of few degrees could send civilisation back to the dark ages... or even (if a snowball Earth results) bring on complete extinction of life on the planet

Playing know all..... rushing 'political' science.... eyeing the money.... misinterpreting the signs/data... grandstanding in Copenhagen..... hiding data by deceitful intent (BigOil)
is just keeping the eyes off the ball... self first, and y'all fall down

Science is collecting data... but it is also interpreting/formulating theories.... and opinions/theories can be multiple... but which one is correct ?

re Hanson on cap'n'trade
http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2009/12/07/2764523.htm

and http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/12/09/2765792.htm

Quote:

The Copenhagen climate talks have been rocked by the leak of a draft final agreement
The document abandons the Kyoto Protocol, sidelines the United Nations in future climate change negotiations, and hands most of the power to rich countries.
The leaked agreement not only brings the developing world into the frame, it allows rich countries to emit twice as much carbon as poor countries.

Quote:

Could increased CO2 levels be the result of global warming

AGW is a load, and what I have written below is what BigOil does not want you to know... BigOil has tried to blame everything/ or create confusion via sceptics, so all eyes are off the greasy oil ball

Processes elucidated via Physical Chemistry

CO2 lags warming... seas expel CO2 when the sea becomes heated... a well researched fact

The seas are warming, measured.

Normally in a climate cycle, the seas become heated because they become too salty..(too much ice on land) .... then the sea can't evaporate sea water to lose heat.... so skies clear, which heat the ice packs which then melt and release fresh water into the sea...diluting the sea so sea water evaporation starts/increases again to produce land ice packs again generated from massive cloud banks...

The Earth experiences cyclic ice ages with interglacial periods; these have been observed to occur over millions of years in geological time.

Enter man-made petroleum oil. This oil is covering the sea surface in a generally invisible membrane.. the oil layer has been measured, identified and is ubiquitous/found north and south..everywhere.

Marine micro-layer biologists documented this knowledge over eighty years ago. And yet Climate Scientists do not know this fact ?

What has happened is the petroleum oil that man has placed on the seas has lead to the equivalent of a too salty sea, in that it has caused the same/greater reduction in sea water evaporation ----> Ice Age trigger... started by ice melt

Normally the climate cycle is an equilibrium oscillation between sea salinity and fresh water land ice.

Man has forced the equilibrium too far towards the equivalent of extreme saltiness.

The tipping point for the new ice Age was past three+ years ago as heralded by the current proliferation of Ice Clouds.

Great post! It's very nice. Thank you so much for your post.

Zarkov · **Posted:** Thu Aug 19, 2010 8:54 pm

The information quoted above was background
Today the marine oil layer is reducing seawater evaporation and thus heating the oceans
which are melting the sea ice.. Arctic
which is releasing massive amounts of fresh water onto the sea surface..under the oil layer
The over-hot seas are causing this freshened water to evaporate (see last two Northern Hemisphere winters, snow)

Today this evaporation is leading to a "lumpy" Northern Hemisphere atmosphere:-

High altitude......Pakistan/Afghanistan/China etc flood... that rain water had to go up before it came down

and inland........clear sky Russia ----> drought and fire

The Northern Hemisphere will freeze this winter, like never before in living memory

The new Ice Age is upon this world IMO

Antigravics

Interactive Open Discussion

Who is online