Originally posted by Catholicity
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Natural Science 301 Guidelines
This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.
As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Robot Sub Finds Surprisingly Thick Antarctic Sea Ice
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by Catholicity View PostCFC's were taken out in the 80's for fear of Global cooling,the now rebuilt hole in the ozone then in the late 90's early 2000's it was global warming now its climate change......"Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostActually the coming 'Ice Age' is likely inevitable, but were talking maybe ~20,000 to 40.000 or more in the future.Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?
Comment
-
Originally posted by TheLurch View PostAlso, please see the graph i posted on the previous page.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Jedidiah View PostKeep in mind that the sun is actually increasing it's energy output. 20 to 40 k years may be enough to offset this inevitable ice age. Not a claim just a question.The greater number of laws . . . , the more thieves . . . there will be. ---- Lao-Tzu
[T]he truth I’m after and the truth never harmed anyone. What harms us is to persist in self-deceit and ignorance -— Marcus Aurelius, Meditations
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostActually the coming 'Ice Age' is likely inevitable, but were talking maybe ~20,000 to 40.000 or more in the future.
The human impact is a spanner in the works; the long range impact of an enhanced greenhouse effect is very likely to have prevented the next ice age from occurring at all, even if we manage to put strong limits on future emissions and limit the consequent extent of warming over the next century. If we overheat the planet in a big way by continuing to burn as much fossil carbon as we can, then the whole ice age cycle thing is likely to stop for quite a long time; maybe several hundred thousand years.
In brief: long range estimation of a perturbed climate indicate that the usual triggers for the next ice age won't be enough; we've ALREADY prevented the next ice age. This long range isn't a long range climate projection as such; it's a long range CO2 projection (which is on much more solid quantified grounds.) Since raised CO2 levels persist for a long time, they become a factor to compare with the orbital forcings thought to precipitate ice ages. If CO2 levels are significant raised, a glacial epoch can't get started.
Typically, discussions of global warming and human driven climate change focus on the next 100 years. The impact of a changed atmosphere lasts much much longer than this.
A good book on this is Deep Future, by Curt Stager (2011). Subtitled: "The next 100,000 years of life on Earth". Online resources include This review at Science magazine, and Stager, C. (2012) What Happens AFTER Global Warming? in Nature Education Knowledge 3(10):7
Originally posted by Jedidiah View PostKeep in mind that the sun is actually increasing it's energy output. 20 to 40 k years may be enough to offset this inevitable ice age. Not a claim just a question.
However, as noted, the "something drastic" has already happened, and glacial cycles have most likely had a hiccup for the next hundred thousand years, at least.
You do touch on a very interesting point, however!
Solar changes have their impact on a scale of more like 100 million years; and it has been a mystery as to why Earth's climate has been so comparatively stable on such scales with the Sun getting brighter all the time. This is called the "faint young sun paradox". Google it; it's a well known puzzle in science.
The answer turns out to be carbon dioxide again; carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere have fallen as the Sun has got brighter, and so the two factors (roughly) cancel out. There's a fairly well supported hypothesis about this phenomenon. Specifically, that this is no accident, but is rather the consequence of a very long range "slow" negative feedback. Hotter temperatures tend to result in increased weathering, and a draw down of carbon from the atmosphere to carbonates into geological reserves. The specifics mean that there is a characteristic temperature at which the draw down matches the comparatively steady output of carbon dioxide again from geological carbonate reserves through volcanic activity; and the feedback tends to drive temperature towards that sweet point, for a whole range of very different solar inputs. The effect is really really slow however. It's enough to keep up with the slow rate of increased solar output, but not enough to be a big factor driving swings in climate as occur from time to time for many reasons.
Cheers -- sylas
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by eider, 04-14-2024, 03:22 AM
|
20 responses
71 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by eider
Today, 01:18 AM
|
||
Started by Ronson, 04-08-2024, 09:05 PM
|
41 responses
163 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Ronson
04-12-2024, 09:08 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-18-2024, 12:15 PM
|
48 responses
140 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Sparko
03-20-2024, 09:13 AM
|
Comment