|
|
JerseyBluEyz
Joined: 09 Jul 2003
Posts: 1257
Location: Northeast |
Ice Age Cycle & Global Warming
 Sat Mar 20, 2004 7:32 am
|
 |
|
I'm not so sure I'll get an answer to my question below. So I was hoping if I posted it here, someone might help me with an answer.
Here is an update I received today that I thought was worth posting. I’m not sure exactly what the expected end result is behind the Global Warming theory, and I’d really appreciate it if someone would point it out to me!!! But I believe we are headed into a solar affected ice age cycle. I DO think that deforestation and the coal burning has had adverse affects on this planet as well, but even if we DID stop all those negatives, I’m not so sure that the cycle which is upon us could be diverted.
Environmental Activist Show Their Colors; Human (bad) Grant Money (good)...03/18/04
by Mitch Battros (ECTV) http://www.earthchangestv.com/
The latest article circulating the internet is put out by a group of environmental extremist. It is exactly as I predicted in my article posted on February 25th outlining what we would see beginning in March. Below is the latest article coming out of the UK Independent.
'Sixth Mass Extinction Is Unfolding': http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/environment/story.jsp?story=502762
And guess who is responsible? That's right, you sick pathetic humans. Here are two excerpts "Scientists have accumulated the most detailed data to date indicating that human activity is systematically stripping the planet of its rich biodiversity." And yet more twisted environmental propaganda fighting for the almighty research dollar. "This represents the sixth great wave of extinction, fully compatible with the big five mass extinctions of the geological past, but different in that it results from the activities of a single other species [humans] rather than from external environmental changes."
The following is from my Feb. 25th article attacking the other propaganda story suggesting the Pentagon supports theories of global warming caused by humans. http://www.earthchangestv.com/mitch/26mitch.php
"I will go on record as saying “we will see none of these things”. What we will see is a barrage of PSA’s telling us 1) how to recycle, 2) not to cut trees, 3) not to drive big cars, 4) restrict, and heavily fine polluters….and this list goes on even further than the above.
Now please read carefully. I am not opposed to messages coming out for humans to practice responsibility and remain aware of our environment. This is our home, and we should treat it as such. Believe me, I do my part. However, this is not what the article is telling us, now is it? No. What we have are the same lies, deception, and manipulation put upon us, which is really no different than what the bubba bush regime has being doing to US citizens ever since he took office. How pathetic for those to use the same ‘bait and switch’ techniques which I would assume, the environmental activists themselves would despise most fervently.
So let’s see what the future will bring. I have publicly made my statement and prediction. Watch for PSA’s (public service announcements) beginning the first week of March. I expect organizations such as ‘GreenPeace’ to rev up their engines. It wouldn’t surprise me to see Ralph Nader jump into the picture about the same time. Again, I’m not against being environmentally responsible, but being manipulated puts a bad taste in my mouth.
I have been on record since 1997 stating my research, and that of many others far beyond my credentials, suggest the trend we are in today and trends for the near and far future, have been tracked, recorded, monitored, and predicted through current instruments, and through ancient text, artifacts and documents. What the sum of all gathered material suggest, is what we see today is nothing more than a very natural cycle the Earth has seen many times before. Yes, this is to say 'global warming' was here before one single human on Earth. Then again when there were 1000 humans on Earth, and when there were 1 million humans on Earth, and even now when thereare billions of humans on Earth. Empirical data suggest we would be experiencing so-called 'global warming' if there were no humans alive today. The same applies to the opposite, or more accurately put co-existing 'ice age'.
On at least 50 "live" television shows, and hundreds of articles authored by me, I have said over and over again, "yes it is true, we would experience climate shifts if no one was here to see it". I also make clear, keeping in mind many environmentalist who follow the show, that current empirical evidence also suggest, that yes, fossil fuel and other human pollutants do contribute to our climate and weather today. Most research material suggests perhaps as much as 15% to 18%.
This flies in the face of staunch environmentalists who proclaim "we are the cause of the Earth dying", stating humans are 100% responsible for the cause of today’s extreme weather shifts. This simply is not true. But having said this, I have on numerous occasions as mentioned above, stated clearly and with self-conviction, that 15% to 18% is a significant number. Something we do have control over, and can by self discipline have a marginal effect strictly related to "cleaner air". However, nothing suggests it would have any effect on climate change. Yes, I do recycle. Yes, I do drive effectively. And yes, I even ride my bike during summer months. Probably more because I simply love to ride, but as a consequence, it does help the environment. Finally, my message is this. It is important to be responsible. This is our home, and it is getting smaller everyday.
For those of you who commented on my "playing into George Bush's hands". Do I really need to comment on how I feel about bubba bush? I think even the most recent members to ECTV know my stance on this dim wit!
I wish to assert my stance, belief, conviction, "my truth" regarding the scientific community, metaphysical practitioners, channelors, visionaries, and people in general. No one, and I mean no one, has "the truth". Those that come off professing to have some secret inside knowledge, or some special knowingness that no one else has, is a "fraud". There is nothing, and I mean nothing, that is so omnipotent to proclaim "the truth". In fact on many occasions, I have warned that during this time of fast paced earth and political change, we were guaranteed to witness many coming forward yelling "follow me....follow me" as if they have some specialness of insight no one else can posses. My suggestion to you, is the minute you tune into this form of "postulation", immediately ask yourself "on whose authority"? |
| |
|
|
Boomer Chick
Joined: 01 Sep 2003
Posts: 407
Location: Colorado |
|
Tue Mar 30, 2004 6:52 pm
|
|
|
quote:
Here is an update I received today that I thought was worth posting. I’m not sure exactly what the expected end result is behind the Global Warming theory, and I’d really appreciate it if someone would point it out to me!!! But I believe we are headed into a solar affected ice age cycle. I DO think that deforestation and the coal burning has had adverse affects on this planet as well, but even if we DID stop all those negatives, I’m not so sure that the cycle which is upon us could be diverted.
I agree with you on the solar theory!
The following is a sign post and observation only. It may only indicate the climactic changes occuring which affect wildlife, as the decline in wildlife numbers is an indication of changes.
Study supports new mass extinction theory
WASHINGTON (AP) -- A detailed survey of birds and butterflies in Britain shows a population decline of 54 percent to 71 percent, a finding that suggests the world may be undergoing another major extinction.
Researchers said the study helps support the theory that the sixth big extinction in Earth's history is under way, and this one is caused by humans.
In a series of population surveys that combed virtually every square yard of England, Scotland and Wales over 40 years, more than 20,000 volunteers counted each bird, butterfly and native plant they could find. An analysis of the findings appears this week in the journal Science.
The results showed that populations of the surveyed species are in sharp decline throughout England, Wales and Scotland, with some species gone altogether.
A survey of 58 butterfly species found that some species had experienced a 71 percent population swoon since similar surveys were taken in 1970 through 1982. Some 201 bird species were tracked between 1968 and 1971, and then again from 1988 to 1991. An analysis showed that that avian population had declined by about 54 percent.
Two surveys of 1,254 native plant species showed a decrease of about 28 percent over the past 40 years.
"Population extinctions were recorded in all the main ecosystems of Britain," the authors report in Science. They suggested that the finding strengthens the hypothesis shared by many scientists that "the biological world is approaching the sixth major extinction event in its history."
Scott Miller, a biologist with the Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History, said the British study was impressive and powerful because it was so thorough.
"The United Kingdom has a monitoring system [for birds, plants and wildlife] that is unmatched," Miller said. "They may not be representative of the world as a whole, but they have the best data."
He said the data supports the idea that the rise of humans over the tens of thousands of years along with climate changes are bringing on an extinction of many species and reshaping the natural world in ways that aren't thoroughly understood.
Scientists have identified five extinction events in Earth's history, with some so severe that more than 90 percent of all life forms were killed off. The last and most famous extinction was the Cretaceous-Tertiary event some 63 million years ago that killed off the dinosaurs and allowed the rise of mammals. It is thought to have been caused by an asteroid hitting Earth.
The causes of the other extinctions are not well understood. The largest ended the Permian Period some 250 million years ago. All but about 4 percent of all species disappeared then. There were three other lesser-known events in the Ordovician (435 million years ago), the Devonian (357 million years ago) and the Triassic (198 million years ago) periods.
"We are in the middle of a sixth extinction event that began about 50,000 years ago" with the expanding role in the world of human beings, said Paul S. Martin, a zoologist and geochemist at the University of Arizona in Tucson. "It's happening, but it's slower and it is not clear it will be as severe as some of the others."
Stuart Pimm, an ecologist at Duke University, said in Science that the British study results "show that we have likely underestimated the magnitude of the pending extinctions."
Miller and Martin both point to the hundreds of species, mostly large animals and birds, that already are gone, some wiped out directly through human action.
Martin said the fossil records show that the disappearance of many animals in Australia, Madagascar and North America started about the time that humans arrived at those sites. Gone from the natural North American environment, for instance, are mammoths, camels, giant sloths and saber-toothed tigers.
"For tens of millions of years there were much larger animals on this continent," said Martin. "We have to settle now for deer, antelope and bison. But there was much more" before humans came.
Miller said the most significant thing about the British study is that it makes a detailed survey of insects, specifically the butterfly, and finds that they are in decline.
"They have good evidence of an insect population decline that is at a much higher rate than assumed in the literature," said Miller. "The butterfly may be a good indicator for what is happening to the other insects. We don't even know which factors in our changing environment is affecting the insects more."
The study, conducted by a group of British scientists led by J.A. Thomas of the Natural Environment Research Council, analyzed data collected by an army of volunteers whom Pimm described in Science as "amateurs of a very high level of competence."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright 2004 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
------------------------
This next article contains a political spin and relevance, but the Gulf Stream information is critical. Now whether the polar ice caps are melting due to CO2 or the sun's behvior could be debated. I'm on the solar side!
Climate Change Alert
Patrick Doherty spent a decade in the field of international conflict resolution, working in the Middle East, Africa, Southeastern Europe and the Caucasus.
First Paul O’Neill, now Andrew Marshall. Marshall has just blown the lid off another Bush administration can of worms—namely, its unwillingness to acknowledge and address the massive threat posed by global climate change.
Marshall is the founding director of the Pentagon’s Office of Net Assessment, a quiet but powerful think tank within the Pentagon. In 2001, Marshall was tapped by George W. Bush to lead the Pentagon’s military review that largely defined the scope of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s “transformation” agenda. Marshall, whose ONA has served every president since Nixon, introduced the term "revolution in military affairs."
In an article published Jan. 26 in Fortune magazine, Marshall released the findings of an unclassified report—written by Peter Schwartz and Doug Randall of the Global Business Network—entitled "An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Security."
Global Warming Happens
Until now, the debate over climate change in the United States has focused on whether global warming exists and if so, whether it can be attributed to human activity. In their report, Schwartz and Randall close that debate and raise the stakes. They write that "the IPCC [International Panel on Climate Change] documents the threat of gradual climate change," deftly allowing Marshall to implicitly acknowledge that the IPCC findings have sufficiently established what the report calls "the scientifically proven link between CO2 and climate change" as well as the international consensus around climate change itself. But, while fully recognizing the reality of global warming, the report argues that the gradualist view "may be a dangerous act of self-deception." The real threat to national security is from global warming triggering an "abrupt climate change event."
Abrupt climate change is an increasingly probable and, the authors show, a historically precedented event in which global atmospheric warming triggers a rapid modification in global oceanic patterns. The report focuses on the threat receiving the most concern from researchers, which occurs when atmospheric warming releases enough fresh water into the North Atlantic to shut down the "thermohaline conveyor"—currents including the Gulf Stream—that move warm water north from the tropics. That, in turn would send much of the Northern Hemisphere into a deep freeze, disrupting energy, agriculture and fresh water supplies around the world.
This is no abstract hypothetical scenario. The Fortune article cites a presentation made by Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute director Robert Gagosian who, at last year's World Economic Forum at Davos, "urged policymakers to consider the implications of possible abrupt climate change within two decades."
Thankfully, Marshall did just that. The ONA-commissioned report, using the well-established scenario-planning techniques developed at Shell's planning unit, generated a plausible future scenario in which the thermohaline conveyor collapses in 2010. What follows that oceanic shut-down sounds apocalyptic and yet the authors contend, is quite plausible.
By 2020, average rainfall in Europe drops 30 percent; "megadroughts" affect Southern China and Northern Europe; massive boatlifts of people from the Caribbean attempt to enter the United States and Mexico; China is unable to feed its population due to the combination of droughts and violent monsoons and flooding; Eastern European countries invade a weakened Russia to seek minerals and energy; nuclear India, Pakistan, and China go to war over water, land, and refugees. In all 400 million people could be forced to migrate from uninhabitable regions. In the United States, the East Coast population areas experience severe shortages of freshwater; flooding creates an inland sea in California's Central Valley and disrupts freshwater supplies for Southern California; and energy disruptions are commonplace due to storms, ice and conflict. The authors make the point clear: this is not a prediction, this is a plausible scenario given what we know now.
Overcoming Resistance
While the content of this release raises the alarm, Marshall is sending multiple messages. The timing of the Fortune article, for instance. For a man of Marshall's long legacy of discretion to directly challenge the current administration's line on global warming at the beginning of a presidential election year speaks volumes. That he chose to do so by releasing a report by respected business consultants in Fortune magazine seems to say he wants the business world, Bush's most important constituency, to understand clearly that the status quo is untenable.
This extraordinary act by a senior Defense Department official implies high-level recognition that the Bush administration's resistance to the near global consensus on climate change—a consensus that includes the vast majority of the scientific community, many corporations including General Motors, Alcoa, IBM, DuPont, Johnson & Johnson, and all the remaining governments of the OECD—is a threat to national security itself. Indeed, last month in the journal Science, the United Kingdom's Chief Scientific Advisor declared that "climate change is the most severe problem that we are facing today—more serious even than the threat of terrorism." Perhaps inoculating itself from future criticism the report states, "Many scientists would regard this scenario as extreme. . . But history tells us that sometimes the extreme cases do occur, there is evidence that it might be [occurring] and it is DOD's job to consider such scenarios."
And that resistance has been staunch. In the battle over climate change, according to a report from the group Environment2004, the Bush administration has both misrepresented the science and misled the public. According to The New York Times, the Bush administration acted to distort and omit EPA findings on global warming. The group notes that the administration has dismissed the findings of the International Panel on Climate Change set up by the first President Bush and the findings of a panel of the National Academy of Sciences that Bush himself requested. They document how administration has tried to mislead the public by substituting the absolute indicator of total emissions with emissions per unit of GDP, which can go down while total U.S. emissions continue to rise—and then asking emitters (unsuccessfully) to voluntarily commit to reducing emission intensity. And they highlight how the administration has stalled the debate by calling for a research agenda which The New York Times described as a "redundant examination of issues that had largely been settled, bereft of vision, executable goals and timetables—in short, little more than a cover-up for inaction."
It's The Emissions, Stupid
Ultimately, "Abrupt Climate Change" is a report for the Department of Defense. But not entirely. While DoD is primarily concerned with predicting the arrival of and managing the security nightmare caused by abrupt climate change, the report also calls for prevention measures which can only happen through a transformation of the U.S. economy.
"It's important to understand human impacts on the environment—both what's done to accelerate and decelerate (or perhaps even reverse) the tendency toward climate change. Alternative fuels, greenhouse gas emission controls and conservation efforts are worthwhile endeavors."
Only a month ago, Democrats' best chances in the 2004 general elections relied heavily on the undesirable combination of continued failure in Iraq and sustained economic underperformance. That began to change two weeks ago, when the Institute for America's Future brought together coalition of labor and environmental groups called the Apollo Alliance and issued a report describing the core of a new economic engine based on shifting America from suburban sprawl and fossil fuels towards smart growth and renewable energy. (See Democrats' Moon Shot )
Democrats now have a powerful opportunity to reframe the 2004 elections and focus their agenda around an integrated agenda of triage and transformation. Terrorism is still a real threat and Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel/Palestine and HIV/AIDS must be stabilized and resolved. The larger threat of abrupt climate change, however, means we must comprehensively transform our emissions-ridden economy. Apollo is a good start, but now Marshall's warnings make it clear that America has no time to waste on low emissions reduction targets and wasteful subsidies, much less Bush's stalling and deception. Global emissions markets are the best answer. Research has shown that emissions trading is the leading pathway to eliminating emissions, energy independence and reducing agricultural subsidies that impoverish the developing world-all of which will reduce conditions that fuel terrorism and the medium-term threat of abrupt climate change while building a booming new economic engine for America and the world.
Marshall's sense of patriotic responsibility may just save the lives of hundreds of millions of people around the world and usher in a new era of prosperity, sustainability and peace—but only if Democrats reframe the 2004 elections starting now.
Published: Feb 02 2004
Related links:
International Panel on Climate Change Summary for Policy Makers
Fortune.com "Climate Collapse: the Pentagon’s Weather Nightmare”
Environment 2004: Bush’s Record on Global Warming
http://www.envirolink.org/external.html?www=http%3A//www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/9882&itemid=200402030956100.391926
----------------------
Great link from Woods Hole Oceanographic answering questions on climate change:
http://www.whoi.edu/institutes/occi/currenttopics/abruptclimate_15misconceptions.html
Pic of Gulf Stream and other ocean cycles:
http://www.whoi.edu/home/index_research.html
______________________
As far as why the poles are melting? I'll try to find more on that subject! I suspect it's a natural cycle connected to the sun's cycles. CO2 may contribute, but the sun may certainly override the CO2 influence, but I'm no scientist, so I don't truly know!
bc
|
| |
|
|
Boomer Chick
Joined: 01 Sep 2003
Posts: 407
Location: Colorado |
|
Thu Apr 01, 2004 10:03 pm
|
|
|
After reading a few of edufer's posts over on CT Science, I found this article and scientist supportive of the solar cycle theory influencing the ice caps melting and the changing of the CO2 levels to a far greater degree than the human CO2 contributary pollution factor.
This article is written by a German scientist. And I agree with edufer's conclusion about scientists. They DON'T all agree.
Variations in CO2 Growth Rate
Associated with Solar Activity
Dr Theodor Landscheidt
Schroeter Institute for Research in Cycles of Solar Activity
Klammerfelsweg 5, 93449 Waldmuenchen, Germany
th.landscheidt@t-online.de
1. Introduction
CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere have increased from about 280 ppmv in pre-industrial times to 372.9 ppmv in 2002. This rise runs approximately parallel with the increase in CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion. The 10-year mean of CO2 concentrations increased steadily during the last century. Since 1990 there have been some indications that the increment is levelling off. The average annual increment over the last 10 years was 1.66 ppmv/yr. The curve of the global average CO2 concentrations shows only small deviations from the trend line. The annual growth rates, however, vary significantly. In some cases they go beyond 3 ppmv/yr.
According to the World Data Centre for Greenhouse Gases (2003) "The high growth rates in 1983, 1987/88, 1994/1995, and 1997/1998 are associated with warm events of El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO). The anomalously strong El Niño event in 1997/1998 brought about worldwide high increases in 1998. The exceptionally low growth rates in 1992, including negative values for northern high and mid-latitudes, were caused by low global temperatures following the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo in 1991." As this connection could be of great import (Kuo et al., 1990; Metzner, 1996), it is subjected to a detailed analysis.
2. Connection between extrema in CO2 growth rates
and crucial phases in the Sun’s torque cycle
I have shown that ENSO events are closely connected with eruptive phases of the 11-year sunspot cycle. This relationship was corroborated by correct long-range forecasts of the last three El Niños and the course of the last La Niña. In addition, I have provided evidence that negative and positive extrema in global temperature anomalies like those in 1992 and 1998 show such a close relationship with solar motion cycles and solar activity that they can be predicted years before the respective event (Landscheidt, 1983-2003). In view of the synchronism described by the World Data Centre for Greenhouse Gases it seems justified to investigate whether there is, too, a link between variations in CO2 growth rates and the solar cycles used in the forecast of global temperature.
http://www.john-daly.com/theodor/co2new.htm
Fig. 1 shows the result.(go to link above to see the graph) The blue curve displays the yearly growth rate of atmospheric CO2 concentrations (ppmv) derived from in situ air samples collected at Mauna Loa Observatory (Keeling and Whorf, 2003). The data were subjected to 2-year smoothing based on locally weighted least squares (Lowess). The red triangles in the plot indicate zero phases in the absolute rate of change |dL/dt| (torque) in the Sun’s orbital angular momentum related to its irregular oscillation about the centre of mass of the solar system (CM). The mean interval between these zero phases in a torque cycle (ZPTC), emerging in the |dL/dt| time series, is 8 years, but there is considerable variation.
The Sun’s orbital motion is governed by difference forces in the same way as the planets’ course around the Sun. Gravitation and centrifugal force are balanced overall, but in single phases of the orbit one of the two forces may prevail. In Figure 1 the filled red triangles mark zero phases ZPTCg that initiate a period of prevailing gravitation and an orbital motion towards the CM, whereas zero phases ZPTCc, indicated by open red triangles, mark the start of dominating centrifugal force and a motion away from the CM. These changes in the physical quality of the solar motion have a strong effect on the distribution of solar eruptions in different regions of the Sun (Landscheidt, 1986 a).
The parameter P = 0.618 between consecutive ZPTCs, marked by green triangles, is a regulator of stability in dynamical systems. As to details I refer to Chapter 3 of my on-line paper "Long-Range Forecast of U.S. Drought Based on Solar Activity" (Landscheidt, 2003 a). The arrow at the upper left of Figure 1 indicates a phase reversal in the connection between growth rate extrema and zero phases as well as the parameters 0.618 in the torque cycle. In nearly all of my papers I could show that such phase reversals are a regular feature in climate time series related to solar motion cycles. This is not an ad hoc invention, but a computable phase of instability which occurs when the zero phase of a longer solar motion cycle coincides with a zero phase of a shorter solar motion cycle (Landscheidt, 1983-2003).
After the phase reversal in 1968, the zero phases ZPTC (red triangles) and the parameters P at 0.618 of the distance between consecutive zero phases (green triangles) consistently coincide with maxima in the CO2 growth rate. Obviously zero phases ZPTCc (open red triangles) have a considerably weaker effect than zero phases ZPTCg and phases 0.618. In the case of an especially long torque cycle, the parameter 0.382, formed by the symmetry operation 1- 0.618, had a similar effect. This case is marked by an open green triangle. Around the phase of instability in 1968 a reversal in the relationship was in progress.
3. Principal component analysis of solar activity and CO2 growth rates
As the intervals between consecutive zero phases show strong variations between 3 and 8 years replicated by the intervals between consecutive growth rate extrema, the good fit cannot easily be dismissed as fortuitous. Monte Carlo experiments show that we are dealing with a rare species. The probability P of a false rejection of the sceptic null hypothesis is much smaller than 0.001. It is not easy to determine what this result means. It could be that ENSO events (El Niño and La Niña) and extrema in global temperature anomalies that have been shown to be predictable because of their connection with solar activity have a secondary effect on CO2 growth rates.
It cannot be excluded, though, that there is also a direct effect of solar activity. So the relationship between CO2 growth rates and solar activity has been subjected to a Principal Component Analysis (PCA) that leads to a significant reduction of the amount of data while retaining most of the variance. It has the advantage of identifying smaller subspaces that contain most of the dynamics of the observed system or relationship (von Storch and Zwiers, 1999; Venables and Ripley, 2002). It is then easier to judge the impact of the involved variables on the investigated relationship.
The phases ZPTC (red triangles) and P of the torque cycle indicate that extrema of global temperature anomalies go along with enhanced eruptional activity on the Sun. These eruptions and their effect on Earth is best represented by Mayaud’s geomagnetic aa index (Mayaud, 1973). This is the first variable subjected to PCA. The second variable is the international smoothed yearly sunspot number R, as special phases of the 11-year sunspot cycle are linked to ENSO events. The third variable of interest is the yearly CO2 growth rate. As the principal components depend on the scaling of the original variables and aa, R, and CO2 are on very different scales, the variables were normalized to unit.
According to the PCA analysis, the first component explains 49 percent of the total variance, the second component 33 percent, and the third component 18 percent. The loadings in the first component as well as in the third component are exclusively ascribed to aa and R, whereas CO2 growth rates solely get loadings in the second component. Overall, the loadings of variables representing solar activity outweigh the CO2 growth rates by far. This is a first indication that in addition to an indirect solar effect via temperature there is a direct solar effect related to solar eruptions accumulating around crucial phases of the torque cycle in the Sun’s irregular orbital motion and in special phases of the 11-year sunspot cycle.
Naturally, this first result does not yet provide striking evidence, but it opens new perspectives that should be explored by further investigations that yield more details. Hopefully, such additional results will make it less difficult to find a physical explanation of the potential relationship. As to models that generally explain the Sun’s impact on climate change in different fields there is progress. I refer to the AGU Monograph "Solar Variability and its Effects on the Earth’s Atmosphere and Climate System," edited by J. Pap et al., which is about to appear, and especially the chapter "Atmospheric Ionization and Clouds as Links Between Solar Activity and Climate" by Brian A. Tinsley and Fangqun Yu.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acknowledgements: I thank Peter Dietze who suggested in November 1997 that there could be a link between variations in CO2 growth rates and the solar torque cycle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
References:
Keeling, C. D., Whorf, T. P., and the Carbon Dioxide Research Group (2003): Atmospheric CO2 concentrations (ppmv) derived from in situ air samples collected at Mauna Loa, Hawaii.
< http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/ftp/ndp001/maunaloa.CO2 >
Kuo, C., Lindberg, C., and Thompson, D. J. (1990): Coherence established between atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperature. Nature 343, 709.
Landscheidt, T. (1983): Solar oscillations, sunspot cycles, and climatic change. In: McCormac, B. M., ed.: Weather and climate responses to solar variations. Boulder, Associated University Press, 293-308.
Landscheidt, T. (1984): Cycles of solar flares and weather. In: Moerner, N.A. und Karlén, W., eds..: Climatic changes on a yearly to millennial basis. Dordrecht, D. Reidel, 475, 476.
Landscheidt, T. (1986): Long-range forecast of energetic x-ray bursts based on cycles of flares. In: Simon, P. A., Heckman, G., and Shea, M. A., eds.: Solar-terrestrial predictions. Proceedings of a workshop at Meudon, 18.-22. Juni 1984. Boulder, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 81-89.
Landscheidt, T. (1987): Long-range forecasts of solar cycles and climate change. In: Rampino, M. R., Sanders, J. E., Newman, W. S. and Königsson, L. K., eds.: Climate. History, Periodicity, and predictability. New York, van Nostrand Reinhold, 421-445.
Landscheidt, T. (1988): Solar rotation, impulses of the torque in the Sun’s motion, and climatic variation. Clim. Change 12, 265-295.
Landscheidt, T.(1990): Relationship between rainfall in the northern hemisphere and impulses of the torque in the Sun’s motion. In: K. H. Schatten and A. Arking, eds.: Climate impact of solar variability. Greenbelt, NASA, 259-266.
Landscheidt, T. (1995b): Die kosmische Funktion des Goldenen Schnitts. In: Richter, P. H., ed.: Sterne, Mond und Kometen. Bremen, Hauschild, 240-276.
Landscheidt, T. (1998 a): Forecast of global temperature, El Niño, and cloud coverage by astronomical means. In: Bate, R., ed.: Global Warming. The continuing debate. Cambridge, The European Science and Environment Forum (ESEF), 172-183.
Landscheidt, T. (1998 b): Solar activity - A dominant factor in climate dynamics.
< http://www.john-daly.com/solar/solar.htm >
Landscheidt, T. (2000 a): Solar forcing of El Niño and La Niña. In: Vázquez , M. and Schmieder, B, ed.: The solar cycle and terrestrial climate. European Space Agency, Special Publication 463, 135-140.
Landscheidt, T. (2000 b): Solar wind near Earth: Indicator of variations in global temperature. In: Vázquez, M. and Schmieder, B, ed.: The solar cycle and terrestrial climate. European Space Agency, Special Publication 463, 497-500.
Landscheidt, T. (2000 c): River Po discharges and cycles of solar activity. Hydrol. Sci. J. 45, 491-493.
Landscheidt, T. (2000 e): New confirmation of strong solar forcing of climate.
< http://www.john-daly.com/po.htm >
Landscheidt, T. (2001 a): Solar eruptions linked to North Atlantic Oscillation.
< http://www.john-daly.com/theodor/solarnao.htm >
Landscheidt, T. (2001 b): Trends in Pacific Decadal Oscillation subjected to solar forcing.
< http://www.john-daly.com/theodor/pdotrend.htm >
Landscheidt, T. (2002): El Niño forecast revisited. < http://www.john-daly.com/sun-enso/revisited.htm >
Landscheidt,T. (2003 a): Long-range forecast of U.S. drought based on solar activity.
< http://www.john-daly.com/solar/US-drought.htm >
Landscheidt, T. (2003 b): New Little Ice Age instead of global warming. Energy and Environment
14, 4. 327-350.
Mayaud, P. N. (1973): A hundred year series of geomagnetic data. IUGG Publication Office, Paris.
Metzner, H. (1996): Gibt es einen CO2 – induzierten Treibhauseffekt? In: Metzner, H., ed.: Treibhauskontroverse und Ozonproblem. Europäische Akademie für Umweltfragen, Leipzig.
|
| |
|
|
Boomer Chick
Joined: 01 Sep 2003
Posts: 407
Location: Colorado |
|
Fri Apr 02, 2004 4:51 am
|
|
|
Pointing to possible solar and extra solar global climate-changing factors -- is this interesting article posted by KNOW THIS!
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/ubb/Forum22/HTML/000161.html
Jupiter has gained a new blue ring, suddenly, and this astronomer (?) claims that other solar system planets are going through sudden changes, too! Hmmmmm! |
| |
|
|
Boomer Chick
Joined: 01 Sep 2003
Posts: 407
Location: Colorado |
|
Wed Apr 07, 2004 11:33 pm
|
|
|
Are we on the brink of a mini ice age?
http://www.whoi.edu/institutes/occi/currenttopics/abruptclimate_joyce_keigwin.html
Great article with pics!
excerpt:
Abrupt Climate Change
Are We on the Brink of a New Little Ice Age?
By Terrence Joyce, Senior Scientist, Physical Oceanography and
Lloyd Keigwin, Senior Scientist, Geology & Geophysics
When most of us think about Ice Ages, we imagine a slow transition into a colder climate on long time scales. Indeed, studies of the past million years indicate a repeatable cycle of Earth’s climate going from warm periods (“interglacial”, as we are experiencing now) to glacial conditions.
The period of these shifts are related to changes in the tilt of Earth’s rotational axis (41,000 years), changes in the orientation of Earth’s elliptical orbit around the sun, called the “precession of the equinoxes” (23,000 years), and to changes in the shape (more round or less round) of the elliptical orbit (100,000 years). The theory that orbital shifts caused the waxing and waning of ice ages was first pointed out by James Croll in the 19th Century and developed more fully by Milutin Milankovitch in 1938.
Ice age conditions generally occur when all of the above conspire to create a minimum of summer sunlight on the arctic regions of the earth, although the Ice Age cycle is global in nature and occurs in phase in both hemispheres. It profoundly affects distribution of ice over lands and ocean, atmospheric temperatures and circulation, and ocean temperatures and circulation at the surface and at great depth.
Since the end of the present interglacial and the slow march to the next Ice Age may be several millennia away, why should we care? In fact, won’t the build-up of carbon dioxide (CO²) and other greenhouse gasses possibly ameliorate future changes?
Indeed, some groups advocate the benefits of global warming, including the Greening Earth Society and the Subtropical Russia Movement. Some in the latter group even advocate active intervention to accelerate the process, seeing this as an opportunity to turn much of cold, austere northern Russia into a subtropical paradise.
Evidence has mounted that global warming began in the last century and that humans may be in part responsible. Both the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the US National Academy of Sciences concur. Computer models are being used to predict climate change under different scenarios of greenhouse forcing and the Kyoto Protocol advocates active measures to reduce CO² emissions which contribute to warming.
Thinking is centered around slow changes to our climate and how they will affect humans and the habitability of our planet. Yet this thinking is flawed: It ignores the well-established fact that Earth’s climate has changed rapidly in the past and could change rapidly in the future. The issue centers around the paradox that global warming could instigate a new Little Ice Age in the northern hemisphere.
Evidence for abrupt climate change is readily apparent in ice cores taken from Greenland and Antarctica. One sees clear indications of long-term changes discussed above, with CO² and proxy temperature changes associated with the last ice age and its transition into our present interglacial period of warmth. But, in addition, there is a strong chaotic variation of properties with a quasi-period of around 1500 years. We say chaotic because these millennial shifts look like anything but regular oscillations. Rather, they look like rapid, decade-long transitions between cold and warm climates followed by long interludes in one of the two states.
The best known example of these events is the Younger Dryas cooling of about 12,000 years ago, named for arctic wildflower remains identified in northern European sediments. This event began and ended within a decade and for its 1000 year duration the North Atlantic region was about 5°C colder.
The lack of periodicity and the present failure to isolate a stable forcing mechanism à la Milankovitch, has prompted much scientific debate about the cause of the Younger Dryas and other millennial scale events. Indeed, the Younger Dryas occurred at a time when orbital forcing should have continued to drive climate to the present warm state.
A whole volume that reviews the evidence for abrupt climate change and speculates on its mechanisms was published recently by an expert group commissioned by the National Academy of Sciences in the US. This very readable compilation contains a breadth and depth of discussion that we cannot hope to match here. [ “Abrupt Climage Change,” National Academy Press, 2002].(link given at site)
Presently, there is only one viable mechanism identified in the report that may play a major role in determining the stable states of our climate and what causes transitions between them: It involves ocean dynamics.
(please continue reading at link!)
|
| |
|
|
Boomer Chick
Joined: 01 Sep 2003
Posts: 407
Location: Colorado |
|
Wed Apr 07, 2004 11:36 pm
|
|
|
Notice the date on this one!
Climate: A warming-induced Ice Age?
By Dan Whipple
United Press International
Published 12/15/2003 10:25 AM
View printer-friendly version
A weekly series by UPI examining the possible human impact on global climate change.
--
BOULDER, Colo., Dec. 15 (UPI) -- Of all the warnings made about the ramifications of climate change, the most counterintuitive is that the global warming phenomenon could lead to a new Ice Age.
The culprit in this curious conclusion is the predicted impacts of atmospheric carbon dioxide and warming on what is called the thermohaline circulation of the world's oceans.
The process, also known as THC, often is compared to a huge conveyor belt of waters in the world's oceans, driven by an engine that resides in the North Atlantic. The word thermohaline describes the interaction of temperature -- thermo -- and salt concentrations -- haline -- of ocean water.
To oversimplify, the conveyor belt carries an enormous amount of warm, shallow water up the coast of Africa to the vicinity of Iceland, where winter cooling increases the density of the salty water, allowing it to sink to the bottom. The deep, cold water flows back to the south, past South America and along about the 40th degree southern parallel past Australia, then up the Pacific to near Alaska, where it warms, rises to the surface, and returns eventually as warm shallow water to Iceland via the Indian Ocean.
The dynamics are more complex, of course, but this appears to be the general pattern. There is a huge volume of water involved -- equivalent to 100 Amazon rivers -- and the journey is slow, taking perhaps 1,000 years for a complete circuit.
Thomas Stocker, professor of climate and environmental physics at the University of Bern, Switzerland, and colleagues wrote a 2001 paper on the issue for the American Geophysical Union.
"The thermohaline circulation strongly influences the climate on regional-to-hemispheric scales," they said. "Changes in both the ocean THC and the atmospheric storm tracks would seriously affect the climate in northwestern Europe."
The dynamics of this circulation is one of the main reasons Europe's climate is moderate and agriculturally productive, despite being 10 degrees to 15 degrees farther north than the most populous areas of North America and Asia.
If the temperature warms and additional fresh water enters the North Atlantic from Greenland and the Arctic, these factors could alter the buoyancy relationships, preventing the warm surface water from sinking, possibly slowing or shutting down the system.
"A modeled increase to 750 parts per million by volume C02 (carbon dioxide) with 100 years (corresponding approximately to a continuation of today's growth rate) leads to a permanent shutdown of the thermohaline circulation," the researchers concluded.
The rate of increase is important, however. If the C02 accumulates more slowly, the circulation slows, but does not stop altogether.
Wallace Broecker, a geologist with Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, N.Y., thinks THC changes have led to rather abrupt changes in Earth's climate in the past -- changes that occurred within decades, rather than centuries or millennia.
A weakening of THC, he said, "might led to a jump to one of the Earth's climate system-alternate modes. Because these jumps were heralded by a several-decades-long series of flickers, such an event would perhaps stress our ability to feed the 9 billion or so people likely to be present on the planet a century from now."
One possible result, among many, from the breakdown of the warm water circulation is a renewed Ice Age in the northern hemisphere.
The fresh water needed to trigger these events could come from a melting of Greenland glaciers and Arctic ice.
Peter Gent, head of the National Center for Atmospheric Research's oceanography group in Boulder, said there are two primary things that could trigger a thermohaline response.
"One is the influx of fresh water to the surface, and the other is that the surface warms up some," he told United Press International. "Both of those tend to make the surface water less dense ... If the surface water is less dense, the depth of deep convection is reduced, which leads to a weakening of thermohaline circulation."
The first of these conditions seems well under way. "The trends in the sea ice are well documented," Gent said. "The sea ice in the Arctic is shrinking in area and reducing in thickness."
Despite this evidence however, Gent said he does not see a thermohaline catastrophe on the horizon.
"There have been ice ages in the past, but I'm not sure why they happen," he explained. "We have absolutely no evidence that we could go into a cold patch at any time in the near future. We have quite a lot of evidence for the opposite."
Gent added he thinks there will likely be a gradual response by THC, perhaps resulting in some moderation of the warming expected in Europe.
"In my view," he said, "the most likely thing is that Europe would not warm quite as quickly as otherwise."
One problem with the predictions is THC cannot be observed directly. It only can be inferred from theory and models.
"From the models we run, there are varying strengths of responses," Gent noted. "The honest answer is that we expect a slowing down, but exactly the magnitude or the rate we are uncertain of at the moment."
--
Dan Whipple covers the environment for UPI Science News. E-mail sciencemail@upi.com
Copyright © 2001-2004 United Press International
http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20031212-042255-6744r
|
| |
|
|
Boomer Chick
Joined: 01 Sep 2003
Posts: 407
Location: Colorado |
|
Wed Apr 07, 2004 11:40 pm
|
|
|
Could it be the moon, Alice?
It's high tide for ice age climate change.(Brief Article)
Science News, April 15, 2000, by T. Hesman
Earth's climate veers between warm and cool roughly every 1,500 years. Many scientists have thought that sunspots choreograph these fluctuations, but new research puts the spotlight on the moon.
A few years ago geochemist Charles D. Keeling and geophysicist Timothy P. Whorf, both of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla, Calif., suggested that Earth's climate doesn't swing with sunspot rhythms but instead syncopates to the beat of the tides.
When tides are higher than usual, the scientists say, they bring colder water to the surface from deep in the ocean and lead to an overall Earth cooling. In a report in the April 11 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, the researchers propose that the tides may sometimes be strong enough to tug Earth into an ice age.
Tidal cycles have been known for centuries, says Keeling, but most scientists assumed that such transient events couldn't influence climate. Scientists did not consider whether strong tides could cause the deep cooling that grips the North Atlantic about every 1,500 years. After all, says Keeling, a cycle of that period "can't depend on something that only happens for a few hours."
However, Keeling and Whorf say that clusters of tides can make a big difference in Earth's warming and cooling pattern.
Tides are unusually high every 411 days, when the moon comes closest to Earth. An eclipse also makes for strong tides, as the sun, moon, and Earth come into alignment, says Keeling. Tides swell as Earth moves closest to the sun, too, he adds.
When those three events take place at the same time--something that happens once every approximately 1,800 years--powerful tides could churn enough cold seawater to plunge the world into an ice age, the researchers say.
The scientists correlated the pattern of tides with seafloor sediments that record major climate changes. They found that many cooling events, including the Little Ice Age of about 500 years ago, happened near the peak of the tidal cycle.
The correlation isn't perfect, acknowledges Keeling. He points out that the sun, moon, and Earth change their alignments slightly from cycle to cycle. In d tail, there's nothing ever quite the same from one cycle to the next," he says. Other climate-changing conditions could also override the tides, he says.
The researchers had to discard four "exceptional events" in the sediment record to see the correlation with the tidal cycle. Their hypothesis "is really going to fly or fall on whether you can really throw those out," say Gerard Bond, a paleoclimatologist at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, N.Y. Discarding some of the data may be valid because those records may come from climate-shifting events other than tides, Bond says.
"I think it's a very interesting idea," says climatologist Randall S. Cerveny of Arizona State University in Tempe, but it's a notion "that's going to bear some further analysis."
COPYRIGHT 2000 Science Service, Inc. in association with The Gale Group and LookSmart.
COPYRIGHT 2000 Gale Group
http://www.findarticles.com/m1200/16_157/62195124/p1/article.jhtml
 |
| |
|
|
Boomer Chick
Joined: 01 Sep 2003
Posts: 407
Location: Colorado |
|
Wed Apr 07, 2004 11:50 pm
|
|
|
This study was on ice core samples was done in 2000! Very informational!
Climate Change: New Antarctic Ice Core Data
The information in this web page was researched on Earth Day, 2000.
This page was last updated on May 30, 2000.
In June of 1999 the latest ice core data from the Vostok site in Antarctica were published by Petit et al in the British journal Nature. These new data extended the historical record of temperature variations and atmospheric concentrations of CO2, methane and other greenhouse trace gases (GTG) back to 420,000 years before present (BP). The ice cores were drilled to over 3,600 meters. This is just over 2.2 miles deep. These new data double the length of the historical record.
The main significance of the new data lies in the high correlation between GTG concentrations and temperature variations over 420,000 years and through four glacial cycles. However, because of the difficulty in precisely dating the air and water (ice) samples, it is still unknown whether GTG concentration increases precede and cause temperature increases, or vice versa--or whether they increase synchronously. It's also unknown how much of the historical temperature changes have been due to GTGs, and how much has been due to orbital forcing, ie, increases in solar radiation, or perhaps long-term shifts in ocean circulation.
Whether the ultimate cause of temperature increase is excess CO2, or a different orbit, or some other factor probably doesn't matter much. It could have been one or the other, or different combinations of factors at different times in the past. The effect is still the same. Nevertheless, the scientific consensus is that GTGs account for at least half of temperature increases, and that they strongly amplify the effects of small increases in solar radiation due to orbital forcing.
The graph below includes data from the Nature paper, plus data from other studies referenced below. Notice how CO2 concentration rises vertically at the end of the time series. The increase appears vertical because of the large time scale, but it actually occurs over the past 150 years, which corresponds to the age of fossil fuels (the modern industrial age). Notice too that there hasn't been a corresponding increase in temperature during this time period. This is probably due to the ability of the oceans to function as a heat sink, and thereby delay the increase in atmospheric temperatures. However, there are recent indications that the oceans are now warming, which will reduce their ability to act as a heat sink.
Note on graph presentation: The heavier temperature lines 160,000 BP to present reflect more data points for this time period, not necessarily greater temperature variability.
Other interesting patterns in the data include the extreme increases and decreases in temperature preceding and following the interglacial phases (the five high temperature phases in the graph). Some possible reasons for this pattern are explained in the research papers referenced below. In particular, positive feedback mechanisms are instrumental in rapid temperature increases. In any case, the current interglacial period is the longest on record. The current interglacial is also unique in that maximum temperatures have not increased above +2C relative to the mid-20th century benchmark (0C) for very long. It would appear that the +2C threshhold must be exceeded for some period of time to initiate a new glacial phase. Or perhaps the threshold is +1C, but for a longer period of time. The present mean temperature is about +.8C. Recent peak temperatures have been in the +1.4C to +1.6C range. See the Data 4 graph on the next page.
Paleoclimatologists theorize that interglacial periods come to an end when polar ice caps melt rapidly (due to high atmospheric temperatures) and increase the amount of fresh water in the sub-polar oceans, thereby altering the thermohaline circulation patterns which govern global climate. The thermohaline "conveyor belts" essentially shut down and stop moving warm water and air away from the equator toward the poles. The net result is colder water and air temperatures. These colder temperatures deepen and continue despite high GTG concentrations left over from the previous interglacial phases.
Given all the new ice core data, what changes can we anticipate for our climate? If CO2 has increased over the past 150 years as much as it normally increases over thousands of years leading up to an interglacial phase (about 80 ppmv), then we could expect as much as a corresponding 10-12C increase in temperature. But if half the historical temperature increases have been due to orbital forcing and other factors, then we should expect an increase of "only" about 5-6C, or 9-11F.
Most computer models don't predict either of these magnitudes of temperature change for the new century. They typically cite evidence indicating that overall global temperatures have not changed as much as polar temperatures, where the ice cores were taken, and that increases of only 2-3C should be anticipated. Unfortunately, new evidence from high-elevation tropical ice cores indicates that this is not really the case. The latest data show that the amplitude of sub-polar temperature changes has been in the range of 8-12C, which is not all that different from the 10-12C found at the poles.
Thus we seem to be headed for some very large climate changes. Temperatures could increase rapidly, and then decrease just as rapidly--as they have repeatedly over the past 420,000 years. Another possibility is that there will be so much GTGs in the atmosphere that they will actually override historical patterns of thermohaline circulation and climate change. It's noteworthy in this context that the current atmospheric methane level is about 230% of its pre-industrial maximum (contrasted with CO2 being about 130% of its pre-industrial maximum). For closer looks at the ice core data for the 18,000 year, 200 year, and 50 year time frames, go to the next page.
REFEERENCES
Graph Data
1) Historical carbon dioxide record from the Vostok ice core: Graphics & Digital Data
Period of Record: 414,085-2,342 years BP
J.M. Barnola, D. Raynaud, C. Lorius, Laboratoire de Glaciologie et de Géophysique de l'Environnement, CNRS, BP96, 38402 Saint Martin d'Heres Cedex, France
N.I. Barkov, Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute, Beringa Street 38, 199397, St. Petersburg, Russia http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/trends/co2/vostok.htm
2) Historical Isotopic Temperature Record from the Vostok Ice Core: Graphics & Digital Data
Period of Record: 420,000 years BP-present
J.R. Petit, D. Raynaud, and C. Lorius: Laboratoire de Glaciogie et Géophysique de l'Environnement, CNRS, Saint Martin d'Hères Cedex, France
J. Jouzel and G. Delaygue: Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l'Environnement (LSCE), CEA/CNRS, L'Orme des Merisiers, CEA Saclay, 91191, Gif-sur-Yvette Cedex, France
N.I. Barkov: Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute, Beringa Street 38, 199397 St. Petersburg, Russia
V.M. Kotlyakov: Institute of Geography, Staromonetny, per 29, Moscow 109017, Russia http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/trends/temp/vostok/jouz_tem.htm
3) Holocene Carbon-cycle Dynamics Based on CO2 Trapped in Ice at Taylor Dome, Antarctica. 1999. A. Indermühle, T. F. Stocker, F. Joos, H. Fischer, H. J. Smith, M. Wahlen, B. Deck, D. Mastroianni, J. Tschumi, T. Blunier, R. Meyer & B. Stauffer. Nature 398: 121-125. http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/taylor/indermuehle99nat.pdf
4) Historical CO2 records from the Law Dome DE08, DE08-2, and DSS ice cores. 1998. Etheridge DM, Steele LP, Langenfelds RL, Francey RJ, Barnola JM and Morgan VI. In Trends, "A compendium of data on global change," Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN. http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/trends/co2/lawdome.html
5) Monte Carlo inverse modelling of the Law Dome (Antarctica) temperature profile. 1999. D Dahl-Jensen, VI Morgan, A Elcheikh. Annals of Glaciology 29:145-150. [Data interpolated from graph in Figure 4b]
6) Atmospheric CO2 concentrations (ppmv) derived in situ air samples collected at Mauna Loa Observatory, Hawaii. 1999. Keeling CD, Whorf TP. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center. http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/ftp/ndp001/maunaloa.co2.
7) Annual and Seasonal Temperature Deviations in the Troposphere and Low Stratosphere, as derived from radiosonde records, 1958-1998. Temperature deviations (in relation to a 1958-1977 average) expressed in degrees Celsius for Win (December-February), Spr (March-May), Sum (June-August), and Fall (September-November). South Polar (60 degrees S - 90 degrees S)August 1999. Source: J. K. Angell. Air Resources Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/ftp/trends/temp/angell/spolar.dat
Reference Papers
Climate and atmospheric history of the past 420,000 years from the Vostok ice core, Antarctica. 1999. Petit J.R., Jouzel J., Raynaud D., Barkov N.I., Barnola J.M., Basile I., Bender M., Chappellaz J., Davis J. Delaygue G., Delmotte M. Kotlyakov V.M., Legrand M., Lipenkov V.M., Lorius C., Pépin L., Ritz C., Saltzman E., Stievenard M. Nature 399: 429-436. http://www.cnrs.fr/cw/en/pres/compress/mist030699.html
The ice record of greenhouse gases : a view in the context of future changes. 2000. Raynaud, D., J. M. Barnola, J. Chappellaz, T. Blunier, A. Indermuhle and B. Stauffer. Quaternary Science Reviews 19: 9-17. http://www.elsevier.nl/cas/tree/store/jqsr/sub/2000/19/1-5/99000827.pdf
Ice core evidence for climate change in the Tropics: implications for our future. 2000. Lonnie G. Thompson. Quaternary Science Reviews 19: 19-35. http://www.elsevier.nl/cas/tree/store/jqsr/sub/2000/19/1-5/99000529.pdf
Background Information
Ice Core Dating
By Matt Brinkman http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/icecores.html
Sudden climate transitions during the Quaternary
By Jonathan Adams, Mark Maslin & Ellen Thomas http://www.esd.ornl.gov/projects/qen/transit.html
Deciphering Mysteries of Past Climate from Antarctic Ice Cores
American Geophysical Union. http://www.agu.org/sci_soc/vostok.html
Remembrance of Things Past: Greenhouse Lessons from the Geologic Record
By Thomas J. Crowley http://www.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/winter96/geoclimate.html
Learning from Polar Ice Core Research
American Chemical Society http://pubs.acs.org/hotartcl/est/99/apr/learn.html
EDF Global Warming Projections for the New Millennium http://www.edf.org/programs/GRAP/y3k/
The Vostok ice core data
By Hugh http://www.daflight.demon.co.uk/science/
Ice core records of atmospheric CO2 around the last three glacial terminations. 1999. Fischer, H., Wahlen, M., Smith, J., Mastroianni, D. and Deck B. Science 283: 1712-1714. http://www.co2science.org/journal/1999/v2n8c3.htm
The NOAA Paleoclimatology Program has dedicated this section to studies and data, as well as science research articles that focus on issues important to climate and paleoclimatology. http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/whatsnew.html
NOAA Paleoclimatology Program, International Ice Core Data Cooperative.
Vostok Ice Core Data http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/icecore/antarctica/vostok/vostok.html
World Data Center Data Access & Data Submission
New Ice Core data include CO2 from Vostok , and Taylor Dome CO2 for 11-0 KYrBP, 27-11 KYrBP and 60-20 KYrBP , plus GRIP N2O. WDC Paleo Data is also mirrored at several sites around the world. http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/data.html
website: http://www.daviesand.com/Choices/Precautionary_Planning/New_Data/
----------------------
|
| |
|
|
JerseyBluEyz
Joined: 09 Jul 2003
Posts: 1257
Location: Northeast |
|
Thu Apr 08, 2004 4:37 am
|
|
|
I'm sorry I've been slack on this thread! I probably won't get to read here or comment until next week. In the meantime, I wanted to add something for your eyes! I posted this info in CT Science but I’m not sure if you saw it or not. But I’d like this info posted here anyway. Here are two REAL QUICK but thought provoking articles that eventually led me to read Jaworowski and Felix:
http://www.hevanet.com/kort/DIGRES35.HTM
http://www.hevanet.com/kort/ICE1.HTM
I started reading (and STILL didn’t finish a whole month later!) a captivating article written by Zbigniew Jaworowski, M.D., Ph.D., D.Sc. He believes that solar cycles and not CO2 has a direct effect on our climate. I find his work to be thought provoking and quite fascinating. You know I believe global deforestation and the burning of coal IS having adverse effects on our planet’s climate, but I’m still not convinced to what extent. I believe solar cycles plays the BIGGEST part in our approaching climatic change and that the every day solar flares (CMEs) has a direct effect on our current weather and storm patterns. Tell me what you think of this Jaworowski article – it was featured in 21st Century Science & Technology magazine: http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Articles%202004/Winter2003-4/global_warming.pdf
Another ice cycle theorist, Robert Felix - author of Not by Fire but by Ice was on Coast to Coast on (3/5/04). I wanted to listen in but couldn’t since I’m not a subscriber! Since you are, can you check out the archives if you get a chance and report back. I’d love to hear your analysis of his interview! BTW, here is Felix’s site: http://www.iceagenow.com/
Speaking of CMEs, look at this image. Ouch!
Remember in October 2003 when we had all those solar flares, I did a bit of research at that time and came across this information.
“There appears to be a correlation between the rise and fall of civilizations with the rise and fall of radiation from the sun. The graph shows a long-term envelope of sunspot activity derived from the center graph of Carbon 14. More carbon 14 is absorbed in the growth rings of tress udring the sunspot minima. Sunspot minima also correlcate with mini-ice ages and a winter severity index based on a mean for Paris and London - for the period shown. The Maya disappeared during a sunspot minimum.”
Sunspots and the Rise and Fall of Civilizations
[Edited 5 times, lastly by JerseyBluEyz on 04-07-2004] |
| |
|
|
 
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is Sat May 26, 2012 1:41 pm
|
|
|
|
|
Login
