Rapid Global Climate Shift and its socio-economic effects

Its more likely that although we've changed the atmospheric chemistry at some phenomenal rate its not going to revert any faster than it has before when it went out of whack. Partly because this times its far more significant a change in the chemistry that we've elicited and partly because its just going to be a huge reaction.

Whats more likely is that the system do what its done before. Hickup in such a huge way that it either freezes everything for some millions of years or ends up like Venus. Either way we're screwed. Thing is if we change the atmospheric chemistry to much no one really knows just how extreme the systems reaction might be, one things for sure tho, there will definitely be a reaction and its definitely already begun.

 

Nature just doesn't seem to care if you use a plastic bag or a recyclable one.

 

"Until a few decades ago it was generally thought that all large-scale global and regional climate changes occurred gradually over a timescale of many centuries or millennia, scarcely perceptible during a human lifetime. The tendency of climate to change relatively suddenly has been one of the most suprising outcomes of the study of earth history, specifically the last 150,000 years (e.g., Taylor et al., 1993). Some and possibly most large climate changes (involving, for example, a regional change in mean annual temperature of several degrees celsius) occurred at most on a timescale of a few centuries, sometimes decades, and perhaps even just a few years."

http://www.esd.ornl.gov/projects/qen/transit.html


Have you read this yet Boston?
Interesting stuff..

To note- all of this research is dealing with glacial/interglacial variability. It does not address the longer term, greater amplitude shifts.

 

well the dog started making chewing motions in his sleep, even threw in a few burps so I'm in the midst of making him some dinner. I'll check it out soon as I get some food in us both over here.

the climate is a very dynamic system, local events can be very extreme.

 

A "local event" in these cases can be all of Europe for instance.

 

exactly. its not global unless its, well global ;-)

 

That is a pretty crazed paper, I'm still working on it but it definitely has my interest, thanks

 

Go to Alaska tonight. Solar flare activity is expected to increase enhancing Aurora Borealis and mess with gps and phones. Sun, not Man is the cause of this and Global Warming. It's going to be a cold winter.

http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/pmap/

 

there is absolutely no correlation between the warming seen over the last few decades and any increases in solar activity. Matter of fact we're just coming out of a solar minimum.

 

You can't just go around claiming that it will be cold in winter, you unscientific dolt.
Attach a graph next time!

 

Speaking of which Hoyt maybe we should look into tapping that power source as well. The effect is after all based on a charging of the upper atmosphere with massive amounts of ionized particles. Not quite what Tesla wanted to do but close enough. Its just a mater or reaching up high enough to collect it.

PS
Leo, you surprise me. Since when the change of heart?

 

It's going to be a cold winter.


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/65/DieselCycle_PV.svg

 

Boston- I am also noting recent thoughts on the 'real' short term risk as being one of precipitating the rapid phase. The extent of this may be postulated as raising temperatures to the normal epoch heights such as seen during the Eemian.

The key here is rapid as it is now demonstrated that these changes can occur over very short periods.

Causation is to my mind the area of interest as these changes have been seen during each prior epoch. Rate as I have pointed out has ample precedent in the record so may be taken as a non-starter for 'evidence'.

I also hold some interest in the question over whether the AGW effect is sufficient to draw temperatures outside of the range constrained by the glacial/interglacial.

I will re-toss the postulate that carboniferous rock structures bear the majority of CO2 which was present in the atmosphere during the Cambrian and similar 'hot house' periods.
As these sources cycle over millennial time frames, I would venture that the extent of AWG effect is potentially limited.

Edit- oops: no graph....

I take interest as Dorchester county in Maryland holds my interest:



The place is so low that the "low use" scenario for fossil fuels leaves 75% of the county under water by 2100:

http://www.mde.state.md.us/assets/document/Air/ClimateChange/Chapter5.pdf

 

Impressive! I didn't know you spoke latin.

 

didn't the term "dolt" come up in this conversation just a moment ago ?