Global Warming/Climate Change/Global Weirding?

[nathanm]

I'm sure I've said this before, but we have built our society around the weather patterns dominant in the 20th Century. I don't really care whether we're causing the change or not, I would just like to not starve to death because the rain quits falling on our agriculturally productive areas. Thus, I think it behooves us to counteract the changes regardless of the cause. We have the capability, but lack the will.

[Red Arrow]

Thus, I think it behooves us to counteract the changes regardless of the cause. We have the capability, but lack the will.

That's where we disagree.  I don't believe we have the capability.

That doesn't mean I want to go back to 10 mpg cars and making styrofoam with CFCs.  Nor do I want to go back to living in caves.  Finding the line which is economically feasible (at whatever time you look at) and gets the best bang for the $ will always be a point of contention.  Going past the point of diminishing returns is a waste of money that could be used to develop something else less polluting.

[nathanm]

I've only read the first few pages (I should be working instead of reading), but this paper, released yesterday, attempts to apply statistics to global warming: http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2011/20111110_NewClimateDice.pdf

Not too sure what to make of it yet, but it seems to make an argument that you can in fact relate some extreme weather events as to the overall warming trend, based on their relation to the 1951-1980 baseline. I don't know why the author chose those years.

It may or may not be bunk, but it definitely provides some food for thought.

[heironymouspasparagus]

I've only read the first few pages (I should be working instead of reading), but this paper, released yesterday, attempts to apply statistics to global warming: http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2011/20111110_NewClimateDice.pdf

Not too sure what to make of it yet, but it seems to make an argument that you can in fact relate some extreme weather events as to the overall warming trend, based on their relation to the 1951-1980 baseline. I don't know why the author chose those years.

It may or may not be bunk, but it definitely provides some food for thought.

The problem is that 60 years is way too short a sample time.  It just doesn't provide enough information to make any kind of valid prediction.

Look at that chart I posted on page 8.  For the last 10,000 years, we have moved continuously from +/- 2 deg C from the nominal zero point.  And that has been one of the most stable times in the last half million years.  We definitely have evolved our society in this quiet time.  What happens if the temp goes up to +4?  Well, it is likely then to head to -8 or -10.  Quickly.

We live in an aberrant time.  We may be reverting back to the more normal cycle.  Or we may be adding to the problem in a huge way (very likely) that will cause the changes even faster.  But the cycle is gonna happen no matter what.

[Conan71]

The problem is that 60 years is way too short a sample time.  It just doesn't provide enough information to make any kind of valid prediction.

Look at that chart I posted on page 8.  For the last 10,000 years, we have moved continuously from +/- 2 deg C from the nominal zero point.  And that has been one of the most stable times in the last half million years.  We definitely have evolved our society in this quiet time.  What happens if the temp goes up to +4?  Well, it is likely then to head to -8 or -10.  Quickly.

We live in an aberrant time.  We may be reverting back to the more normal cycle.  Or we may be adding to the problem in a huge way (very likely) that will cause the changes even faster.  But the cycle is gonna happen no matter what.

That sound you hear?  That's me applauding.

[heironymouspasparagus]

That sound you hear?  That's me applauding.

Applauding the end of civilization as we know and have developed it? 

Hate to be a broken record - well, maybe I don't really - the movie mentioned earlier is not entertainment.  It is a prescient documentary.
There will be incredibly huge adjustments.

[Conan71]

Applauding the end of civilization as we know and have developed it? 

Hate to be a broken record - well, maybe I don't really - the movie mentioned earlier is not entertainment.  It is a prescient documentary.
There will be incredibly huge adjustments.

No, your shared common sense approach to climatological cycles on this crazy planet.

[dbacks fan]

'The Day After Tomorrow' a documentary?

[heironymouspasparagus]

'The Day After Tomorrow' a documentary?

Yes!  Absolutely!

When you look at the number (several) of large herbivores in the form of mammoths who have been entrained in ice packs it is obvious that something very radical must be happening very quickly.  In this case, extreme cold beyond any of our experience happening in the course of minutes to possibly tens of minutes (less than an hour).

Where is the evidence?  Well, look at the conditions in which the animal was found - still standing, with a stomach full of partially and undigested fresh food, and with a mouth full of food that it had been chewing on.  How long does it take a mammoth to chew a mouthful and swallow?  Unknown, but a reasonable guess would be on a par with an elephant.  Minutes at the outside - I watch the animal shows like everyone else where the elephant grabs a mouthful, chews it up, then 30 seconds later is going for another bite.

What happened is that a very large mammal, with about a two foot layer of fat for living in extreme winter conditions, was wallking along eating a plant that was growing (that means above 32 degrees F), and in mid-chew, became incapable of finishing that bite, locked in place, surrounded by enough snow/ice so that it and the food was perfectly preserved for thousands of years.  That is 'quick-freezing' that our food industry would pay huge sums of money to know how to do.

And that whole sequence took many minutes to play out in the movie, so it was shown in 'slow motion' compared to the reality.

Documentary.

[nathanm]

What happened is that a very large mammal, with about a two foot layer of fat for living in extreme winter conditions, was wallking along eating a plant that was growing (that means above 32 degrees F), and in mid-chew, became incapable of finishing that bite, locked in place, surrounded by enough snow/ice so that it and the food was perfectly preserved for thousands of years.  That is 'quick-freezing' that our food industry would pay huge sums of money to know how to do.

I suspect it's called an avalanche.

[heironymouspasparagus]

I suspect it's called an avalanche.

I've thought about that...avalanche puts a small cocoon around the victim, which may suffocate, but decay would start before even an instantly dead mammoth would be frozen solid.  This happened fast, and may have been accompanied by snow, but not an avalanche.

[Red Arrow]

I suspect it's called an avalanche.

I think Space Aliens did it. 

[Townsend]

I think Space Aliens did it. 

Finally someone with reason.

[dbacks fan]

I think Space Aliens did it. 

I though it was because it started raining liquid nitrogen and it flash froze everything.

[heironymouspasparagus]

I though it was because it started raining liquid nitrogen and it flash froze everything.

That would probably take a very large tank of liquid nitrogen.  And there were more than one that have been found over the years.

Actually, I lean toward the Space Aliens more than any other explanation, most of the time.  They have the technology!