Posted on 12/17/2007 11:43:27 AM PST by dangus
In 2000, when scientists declared that the Earth's temperature was rising, much anxiety ensued, even though the increase was only half of a degree over sixty years. In just the past year, however, the Earth's temperature has reversed, yielding back one-half of that increase.
The past month's (November's) global oceanic data from the National Climatic Data Center has now been released, and the Earth's oceans surface is .2548 degrees warmer than the 1880-2007 average. That's down from .5250 last year and .5597 roughly a decade ago.
There have been drops of roughly a couple tenths of a degree previously, in spite of the general warming trend. But such drops, blamed on "La Ninas," have occured immediately following temperature spikes. What makes this current La Nina unusual is that the current temperature drop follows an imperceptibly small temperature spike.
As a result, the cold snap is pulling down even the six-year running average of temperatures.
This does not mean that the warming trend has necessarily reversed itself; there have, indeed been declines in running averages even longer than that during this decline. In fact, a cooling trend lasted from the 1940s through the 1970s.
However, unable to justify drastic temperatures with fears of the temperature rising a single degree or less next century, the global-warming doomsday-preachers have been asserting that the surge in global warming in the late 1990s indicated an acceleration of global warming.
The notion of such an acceleration seems difficult to reconcile with the new data: The world's oceans were warmer during warm spells of the 1940s.
Yes. I'm fascinated by mid-ocean ridge geothermal systems.
It's not enough heat to affect the temperature of the oceans, though.
Citations?
I was involved in quite a bit of FR discussion on this. Operative word in the second paper is “most”.
How does 1,200 pounds (a little over half a ton) of jet fuel combust with ambient oxygen to generate 40 TONS of carbon dioxide?
http://oceans.pmel.noaa.gov/Pdf/heat_2006.pdf
The scale of the cooling in the author’s earlier paper had been found to be exaggerated by inadequate sampling, so this article takes the form of a correction, but the authors still find a downward trend.
(Gee, wouldn’t it be nice if the Global Warming crowd would correct themselves, when various assertions like sea-level rise, the “hockey-stick theory”, and US warming all prove to be 100% bunk?)
>> One thing is known, and that is the percent of the atmosphere that CO2 comprises has been rising steadily for decades. How would you explain that? I’m still undecided about man made causes of global warming. <<
There’s nothing to explain. No-one questions whether humans are releasing CO2. But sharp reversals of temperature trend have been shown to precede sharp reversals of CO2 trend, meaning CO2 is not a cause of historical temperature shifts, and, in fact, seem impotent in preventing them. The sharp reversals belie any notion that CO2 is even a significant source of feedback of temperature changes from other sources.
>> If the Gulf Stream is slowed or stopped all together, expect a mini Ice Age in Europe. <<
Why? Researchers suggest that an increase of global temperatures of about 5 degrees Celsius would stop the gulf stream from warming of Europe. So what? The Pacific coast doesn’t have a warm current. The result of losing the warm current is that instead of having temperatures similar to Seattle, England would have temperatures similar to Anchorage. Except, of course, five degrees warmer. Which would make Anchorage like Seattle. So there’s no net effect.
To put 40 tonnes into perspective:
5.57 tones of CO2 per year is the emissions of the average car..
Ask Al Gore.
Cheers!
One thing you've forgotten is the heat capacity of the ice, in order to raise it to the melting point.
Without good data on the average temp of the ice sheet, guesstimates are all we have on that.
Cheers!
You are assuming complete combustion to CO2, no CO, and no multiple-carbon products.
Cheers!
Maybe we need a Manhattan Project to stop this radical cooling of the Earth due to the influence of humans on the environment. Or maybe Carbon Credits should be issued to those how are putting a maximum amount of Carbon Dioxide into the atmosphere to help reverse this freezing trend.
Where is Al Gore when we really need him?
It seems a bit high at first blush...
Cheers!
Cheers!
Strictly speaking, you're right, of course. I believe that I used the term "rough calculation" in my original post.
For estimating the difference between the claimed 40 tons and the (roughly) calculated 2.2 tons, though, I really don't think those assumptions are especially harmful to the accuracy.
The image has changed since I commented on it.
That's one of the problems with the internet, things can change when you aren't looking and it is hard to prove what used to be there.
And 800 lbs is too low. A little more than three times the weight of fuel will be released as carbon dioxide. For 2400 lbs of fuel I figure 7460 lbs of carbon dioxide if you are burning it completely.
When you see something that seems stupid, make a print screen and paste it into word or something then you can use it later if necessary.
~~Anthropogenic Global Warming ™ ping~~
Good. Maybe we'll all die soon so I don't have to hear any more of this global warming B.S.
To: dangus
if you can find an update which includes December 2007, please post.
Thanks,
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.