Merged Global Warming Discussion II: Heated Conversation

Status
Not open for further replies.
amazing how quickly deniers will accept new unorthodox views in science when they fit into their bias. even thou the evidence is yet very week and missions to gather evidence still underway. but hey, if it fits their agenda, they don't need the evidence nor any details of classification of that variablility.
 
DC said:
yeah this is indeed a new view that gets more and more accepted, amazing, you got something right.

yet compared to other stars, its not very variable.
and considering the maximum variability we know of , the impact compared to for example the CO2 forcing, is very small.
Click to expand...


From the same site where j-r found his quote ...

Solar Variability and Terrestrial Climate

Jan. 8, 2013: In the galactic scheme of things, the Sun is a remarkably constant star. While some stars exhibit dramatic pulsations, wildly yo-yoing in size and brightness, and sometimes even exploding, the luminosity of our own sun varies a measly 0.1% over the course of the 11-year solar cycle.

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2013/08jan_sunclimate/
Click to expand...
 
YOu notice r-j that it's in quotes.

Let's look at this...

"Understanding solar variability is crucial," says space scientist Judith Lean of the Naval Research Lab in Washington DC. "Our modern way of life depends upon it."
Click to expand...

What do you think that means????

That the output is "variable".....

Or that the CMEs and solar storms are unpredictable??

There is a specific definition of a variable star.

variable star - definition of variable star by the Free Online Dictionary ...
www.thefreedictionary.com/variable+star‎
A star whose brightness varies because of internal changes or periodic eclipsing of mutually revolving stars. variable star.
Click to expand...

Ours is not classed as a variable star.

Variations in output are small over the 11 year period and a magnitude below the AGW signal.

RIght now the sun is in a unusually quiet period yet we've had 10 of the 12 hottest years.

So it's affect on climate is small.

It's affect as a threat via CME and other magnetic phenomena is very real and could be crippling and is unpredictable.

If this hits today we'd have an enormous bill, in the trillions...

From August 28, 1859, until September 2, numerous sunspots were observed on the Sun. Just before noon on September 1, the English amateur astronomers Richard Carrington and Richard Hodgson independently made the first observations of a solar flare.[3] It caused a major coronal mass ejection (CME) to travel directly toward Earth, taking 17.6 hours. Such a journey normally takes three to four days. This second CME moved so quickly because the first one had cleared the way of the ambient solar wind plasma.[3]
Because of a simultaneous "crochet" observed in the Kew Observatory magnetometer record by Scottish physicist Balfour Stewart and a geomagnetic storm observed the following day, Carrington suspected a solar-terrestrial connection. Worldwide reports on the effects of the geomagnetic storm of 1859 were compiled and published by Elias Loomis which support the observations of Carrington and Stewart.
On August 29, 1859, aurorae were observed as far north as Queensland.[4]
On September 1–2, 1859, the largest recorded geomagnetic storm occurred. Aurorae were seen around the world, even as far south as the Caribbean; those over the Rocky Mountains were so bright that their glow awoke gold miners, who began preparing breakfast because they thought it was morning.[3] People who happened to be awake in the northeastern US could read a newspaper by the aurora's light.[5] The aurora was visible as far from the poles as Cuba and Hawaii.[6]
Telegraph systems all over Europe and North America failed, in some cases giving telegraph operators electric shocks.[7] Telegraph pylons threw sparks.[8] Some telegraph systems continued to send and receive messages despite having been disconnected from their power supplies.[9]
On Saturday, September 3, 1859, the Baltimore American and Commercial Advertiser reported, "Those who happened to be out late on Thursday night had an opportunity of witnessing another magnificent display of the auroral lights. The phenomenon was very similar to the display on Sunday night, though at times the light was, if possible, more brilliant, and the prismatic hues more varied and gorgeous. The light appeared to cover the whole firmament, apparently like a luminous cloud, through which the stars of the larger magnitude indistinctly shone. The light was greater than that of the moon at its full, but had an indescribable softness and delicacy that seemed to envelop everything upon which it rested. Between 12 and 1 o'clock, when the display was at its full brilliancy, the quiet streets of the city resting under this strange light, presented a beautiful as well as singular appearance."[10]
In June 2013, a joint venture from researchers at Lloyd's of London and Atmospheric and Environmental Research (AER) in the United States used data from the Carrington Event to estimate the current cost of a similar event to the world economy at $2.6 trillion (£1.67tr).[11]
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_storm_of_1859

If you want to start a thread on geomagnetic risk be my guest....it's a real risk....but it has only faintly to do with climate science.
 
aleCcowaN said:
In the last five years there is a lot of [ocean] data but I fail to see much people using it. I managed to make some measurements about what I told by departing from the Marine Atlas application using periodically updated ARGO information. By informal means (deriving information from renders), I could follow some heat flows but I realized that the error margins of departing from visual information made the work unusable but as a "there is something here worth analysing in a proper way" (I posted in this forum some of the first groups of images about three years ago). That for the "hobbyist" part of it. For the institutional, I'll better keep quiet to avoid falling in what I often criticize.
Click to expand...
As I say, a late start, but we are now getting systematic data collection. Most ocean research in the past has been little more than exploration.
 
macdoc said:
That is the ONLY smidgeon of evidence I could find that Haig might mistakenly think the V stands for variable since he continues to claim it's a variable star and frankly it took some search time to pin down the V was for 5.

Hey I'm trying to at least save him a bit of face ;)
Click to expand...

He could've mistaken the Sun for Mira.

Maybe he's mixing up the concept of "variable star" with the output variations of our Sun, about 0.15% in the whole spectrum, with peaks of 7% in the shortest-wave end of its spectrum. In that sense any star is a variable star, but that says nothing. We know pretty well that the sun varies, and I tried to explain to Haig its implications about global warming with this denialist-level doodles to explain how the "pauses" work, if for the Sun's variations:







But you know, he is in awe with all that crap of the Electrical Universe and also the Astrometria Project.

By the way, while looking for those images in my albums, I came across two figures I posted with more than 3 years between them. In 2010:

picture.php


and this year:



Compare predictions and facts, and then compare Haig's quotation "has the Sun fallen silent? In 2013, the Sun began the peak phase of its 11-year sun spot cycle ... However, the lack of sun spot activity has left solar physicists startled." Too much for "silent" and "lack of sun spot activity".
 
DC said:
amazing how quickly deniers will accept new unorthodox views in science when they fit into their bias. even thou the evidence is yet very week and missions to gather evidence still underway. but hey, if it fits their agenda, they don't need the evidence nor any details of classification of that variablility.
Click to expand...

In short: epistemological hedonism.
 
macdoc said:
Except no one but you and perhaps a few English majors knows what you mean ;)
But keep peddling that meme....might go viral. :D
Click to expand...

It'd would be a pitty everywhere, and a shame if it happens in JREF :mad:

I think that the problem is many going to wiki and finding there a different thing, more related to Epicureanism, and Hedonism as a school of thought, with an epistemology. And another problem is a very lame value among the English speakers that tells you that a word with five or more syllables is unnecessary complicated and pretentious. That's why I think English speakers has degraded desiderative thinking to a much common -and limited- wishful thinking, which matches the limited number of syllables people expect for a now equally limited concept.
 
aleCcowaN said:
It'd would be a pitty everywhere, and a shame if it happens in JREF :mad:

I think that the problem is many going to wiki and finding there a different thing, more related to Epicureanism, and Hedonism as a school of thought, with an epistemology. And another problem is a very lame value among the English speakers that tells you that a word with five or more syllables is unnecessary complicated and pretentious. That's why I think English speakers has degraded desiderative thinking to a much common -and limited- wishful thinking, which matches the limited number of syllables people expect for a now equally limited concept.
Click to expand...
Indubitably.
 
aleCcowaN said:
It'd would be a pitty everywhere, and a shame if it happens in JREF :mad:

I think that the problem is many going to wiki and finding there a different thing, more related to Epicureanism, and Hedonism as a school of thought, with an epistemology. And another problem is a very lame value among the English speakers that tells you that a word with five or more syllables is unnecessary complicated and pretentious. That's why I think English speakers has degraded desiderative thinking to a much common -and limited- wishful thinking, which matches the limited number of syllables people expect for a now equally limited concept.
Click to expand...

I think syllabic efficiency is elegant and effective. I agree that when the precision afforded by a complex word or phrase is necessary, it should be used- no doubt. But not when a simple word or phrase provides comparable accuracy. Putting aside, of course, multi-syllabic words as an occasional seasoning to add flavor and flexibility to prose.

You're right about a disturbing trend to reflexively dismiss all complex words and phrases as being artificial and self serving. But the Ward Churchill's of the world are much, much worse.
 
Simple logic dictates that our sun is a very stable star. If it varied a lot, the climate of the planet would change. Since climate stays the same, the sun can't be variable.
 
I wonder if someone is saying that a planet orbiting a variable star, a Cepheid for instance, has necessarily a variable climate. It would be like saying that the Earth has a variable climate just for the fact there are Winter, Spring, and Summer. And that just in some places. Ooh! So variable!

I reckon that when global warming denialism resorts to Sun-related escapism, the crap acquires cosmic dimensions.
 
Originally Posted by r-j View Post
Simple logic dictates that our sun is a very stable star. If it varied a lot, the climate of the planet would change. Since climate stays the same, the sun can't be variable.
Click to expand...

r-j - logic does does not dictate reality. Logic is a closed system.

Earths climate has varied widely over it's billions of years but except very early on perhaps ( under review ) not due to variations of Sol but to changes in the atmospheric composition and the biome.

Here you go Atmosphere History 101 or less
http://teachertech.rice.edu/Participants/louviere/history.html

and there is more discovered all the time.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130926102630.htm

The continents greatly affected the climate
http://know.climateofconcern.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=article&id=84

If you are going to participate please know a bit more about your only planet. :rolleyes:

The Holocene has been reasonably stable and allowed humans to become the wide ranging pests we are and now we have cope and try and mitigate. Oh joy.
 
Of course I am talking about the recent past, which mankind used to become a vast civilization (questionable), in which the climate has not changed much. If the sun varied it's output, we would see global changes from this. In some sort of cycle, matching the sun.

We have not, so logic says the sun is not variable. it's logic.
 
r-j said:
Simple logic dictates that our sun is a very stable star.
Click to expand...
Logic doesn't dictate anything.

If it varied a lot, the climate of the planet would change.
Click to expand...
That's your premise.

Since climate stays the same, the sun can't be variable.
Click to expand...
If your premise is correct, which you don't even attempt to demonstrate.

Climate does change due to Milankovich cycles, as can be seen in the evidence.
Milankovitch forcing is very small.
Therefore small changes in forcing cause climate change.

Moving on from there :
Solar variation creates climate forcings.
No climate change can be found in the evidence to correspond with such forcings.
Therefore such variation must create very small changes in forcing.

You can't do anything without evidence to work with. Evidence which, for instance, shows that current global warming is nothing to do with the Sun (and almost everything to do with the enhanced greenhouse effect).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom