What Do We Think About Climate Change

In 1724 Gabriel Fahrenheit invented the first mercury thermometer.
Not even 300 years ago. I want to know how we are getting tempretures from a thousand years ago. How do we know that it is accurate?

The answer is that we don't know. No one knows because we were not there, and we have no records.

 

CO2 is under the same laws and regulations as Natural Gas since CO2 considered a natural gas (as far as oil production is concerned).

There are more laws and regulations than you can shake a stick at. All can be found in API, OSHA, ASTM, CFR, among others.

To show it to you could take hours of my time. Basicly, "flares have to burn" is the regulation as stipulated by the US government. Since we flare CO2, then CO2 has to burn.

 

:?:

 

And who says it is because of MAN MADE climate change?
The ocean is not rising overall, it has points that go up and points that go down. Islands and some coastal areas on the other side are going down and some going up. If the island is going down, there are two alternatives. Build in a different spot that is higher or leave the island.
"The World" is not a social security sponge to be milked when things go wrong.
Adapt is the challenge not play victim and hope for donations.

 

Are you really interested in learning, or is this just a rhetorical question?

OK, let's assume you really want to know. There are a number of methods that are used to reconstruct the ancient temperature record. I am not going to discuss all methods, or even give a full explanation of any particular methods, but I will just briefly comment on three methods.

One is to use the width of tree rings. By correlating the width of tree rings of various ages they can count the years back and date the tree rings. Then, using the more or less known relationship between width of tree rings and weather conditions (a relationship that can be inferred from actual historical data) they can obtain an estimate of the temperature of a given tree ring, and by using the date of the tree ring (from the tree ring dating scheme touched upon above) they can reconstruct the local temperature the year during which the tree ring was laid down. To get global temperature estimates one must do this scheme many times over many trees and over many geographical areas and then do an averaging of the data. As with any measurement, there are confounding factors that can arise.

Another dating method is to look at the species distributions of fossils, such as foraminifera fossils. Each species of foraminifera has a preferred temperature range for living and reproducing, so by looking at what kind of foraminifera shells are in a marine deposit it is possible to estimate the water temperature that prevailed while the foraminfera were alive.

A third method of dating is to measure the ratio of oxygen isotopes in a sediment or rock sample. The ratio of O-18 to O-16 can be related to the temperature that prevailed at the time the deposit was laid down.

Correction: in the two preceding paragraphs I should have said "temperature measurement method" rather than "dating method".

 

We could make up a graph from 2007 onwards and demonstrate without a shadow of a doubt that we are facing "rapid cooling" and that in 10 years we will be in an ice age. We could blame the labour and democrat administrations since they started around that time. Name could be "Populogenic catastrophic cooling". Clearly then it is logic to believe that voters can just vote this catastrophe out. VOte conservative and the cooling will stop.

Makes as much sense as stopping CO2 and hope the islands will stop sinking, old people will have a third dentition and the salt water crocodile will turn vegetarian.

 

I love that. I learn a lot, thanks. I had no idea how they were doing that.
I read with great pleasure you very informative post. I can't say I understand all of them, some terms escape me, and I am not a scientist, but when I understand, it is realy interresting to learn from you.
Daniel

 

I agree Hoyt, there is no end to the BS
Blaming global warming for the sinking of that particular island is complete and utter nonsense. If that island is being flooded by rising sea, then why aren't all our Torres strait island sinking?
The ******** that is going on in Papua New Guinea and the way their corrupt government sponges us and the rest of the world for aid that goes directly in the coffers of the most corrupt government ever on this planet, is well know to Australians.

Malaria? Blame the greens for getting DDT banned.

 

I'm sorry, but you have not supplied an actual reference to the law, just an alphabet soup of the names of governmental and other agencies. you don't need to find all the laws that require the burning of CO2. Just show us one actual example.

 

It was my pleasure.

 

During Noah's time the trees had no rings and the skies held no rainbows before the flood.

 

In another thread, you said you worked in the oil fields long enough to go from worm hand to driller. If that's true, you should know better than to say such things. What comes out of wells along with the oil is natural gas, not CO2. Natural gas is mostly methane, although it does contain a small dab of CO2 along with other assorted gases. It's dissolved in the oil, and effervesces out of it because of the reduction in pressure as the oil is brought to the surface. Natural gas is what causes blowouts, and it's what caused the explosion on the rig in the Gulf.

They used to burn off the gas in the old days, and they still do if there isn't enough of it to justify building a pipeline and collecting it. In some oil fields they inject it back into the ground through wellheads, to keep the pressure up and allow them to collect more oil.

Here in California, my company owns old oil fields, and we basically use them as giant underground storage tanks. We buy natural gas when prices are down and inject it into the storage fields, and recover it as we need it.

We do collect a little bit of oil as a byproduct of that process, even though the storage fields are mostly depleted; we separate it from the gas, collect it and sell it.

If you managed to become a driller without learning the difference between CO2 and natural gas, I doubt you have enough knowledge to make an intelligent decision about global warming.

 

When that may be so from the desk of a burocrate, "burning" what has already saturation of O2 is not possible. If releasing CO2 as the byproduct of fuel combustion is illegal, then so is the use of CO2 extinguishers, opening a beer or coke can, and having green plants. All of the above release CO2.

However, if you are interested in the topic, I would keep an eye out for artificial photosynthesis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_photosynthesis
Wiki is a good place to start.
And by the way.... don't take alan's outburst too seriously. Lately he has been having a bad time controlling his temper.
Who knows, may be Daniel can bring him down from his white marble tower. He was not always like that.

 

Marco1, as you well know, the argument for global warming is not as simple as drawing lines on a time series graph and extrapolating into the future, and there are no serious climatologists who would attempt to predict the future on the basis of time series data alone. Rather than just time series graphs, there are many threads of evidence, most of which are pointing toward the same conclusion (the earth is warming), and a fewer number that seem to point to a different conclusion.

Furthermore, your statement that the time series data since 2007 "demonstrates without a shadow of a doubt that we are facing rapid cooling" is specious. Making any extrapolation of future temperatures based on time series data alone, and particularly on just three years of time series data, is completely unjustified.

This is not to say that time series data is not useful. It is extremely useful for looking backward at historical trends, and it may be useful as part of a predictive scheme, provided the theory and other measurements used for the prediction are reasonable and preferably tested on retrospective data.

 

I remember about the rainbow since it did not rain before the flood..well before the rain that caused the flood. But no rings?