ocean conditions are changing due to Rapid Global Climate Shift

Discussion in 'All Things Boats & Boating' started by Boston, Jan 10, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    actually its solid science. There is even a new buoy system specifically designed to track this phenomenon.

    Not sure how a buoy has a political agenda

    and yes it is still flowing ( I edited my initial post )

    I will grant you any day that the issue is not settled ( the current loss question, not the theory of Rapid Global Climate Shift which is very well established ) and there is ongoing work to clarify what's up with the large amount of variability seen concerning ocean currents in the last few decades

    for instance this article ( from a reputable outfit ) would concur with your assessment that its just as likely some form of variability

    http://www.nopp.org/2010/gulf-stream-is-not-slowing-down/

    with some viable researchers reporting significant slow downs in the gulf stream and others suggesting that the same data could represent variability based on the NAO. I think its an interesting question. One that could effect the oceans conditions and as such how we interact within those conditions.
     
  2. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    Here's another one that supports Gonzo's view ( or at least part of it )

    http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2010/2010GL042372.shtml

    the buoy system showed no specific pattern of change, instead it shows large irregular variability

    IE
    they still don't know whats going on and the NAO would look like the more likely culprit for the recent cool weather in some areas

    does not negate however the 1° rise in ocean temps overall or the pattern of increased wave heights, the large and more numerous anoxic zones and the greater intensity of storms to name a few

    it does mean that we are going to be discussing very new data here on this thread, which means lots of possible interpretations and lots of uncertainty, hell, its posible even a muppet can provide valuable input

    [​IMG]
     
  3. wardd
    Joined: Apr 2009
    Posts: 897
    Likes: 37, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 442
    Location: usa

    wardd Senior Member

    if your conclusion doesn't fit the facts, change the facts
     
  4. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    not sure what direction that was going but if in was aimed my way I think I covered my *** pretty well with my first post.

    I thought I handed one to our fuzzy friend rather gracefully eh Wat
     
  5. gonzo
    Joined: Aug 2002
    Posts: 14,499
    Likes: 659, Points: 123, Legacy Rep: 2031
    Location: Milwaukee, WI

    gonzo Senior Member

    I think that there are too many unknowns to have any certainty. For example, higher levels of CO2 where supposed to rise the acidity of oceans and damage shellfish and corals. However, zooplancton increased and used a lot of it to form calcium carbonate. It would be naive to say that politics can be kept out of science, but we can be aware of it. I am simply not convinced that many conclusions are correct.
     
  6. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    Some areas of climate science they know well enough to have made predictions 50+ years ago, which can be shown accurate today. For instance that the arctic would warm at roughly 4X the global mean, which it has almost exactly. Or that a rise of x % of CO2 would result in X % of increase in temp, which it also has. Then there are other areas that are a bit more ambiguous like certain aspects of the sun cycle and this issue we just touched on about ocean current strength.

    The higher levels of CO2 "have" had an impact on ocean acidity levels and it is having adverse effects in mollusks just as predicted. For instance oysters in some areas have stopped reproducing over the last few years and ocean plankton is down as well as its average size. So some of the predictions are found to be true and others are awaiting confirmation in other areas predictions cant be accurately made yet.

    It is however expected that a number of things will happen that haven't yet and since we're shooting craps with the only planet we have to play with, its a bit hard to run any double blind studies or control groups. Some projections will just have to wait for confirmation but

    that said there has been a lot of really good predictions over the last 50 years or so and they are ample evidence that the basics of the theory are sound

    for instance
    that global cooling bet made a few years ago
    http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/05/global-cooling-wanna-bet/
    and
    http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/05/the-global-cooling-bet-part-2/
    some fool said it would cool off several years ago and sure enough its been a couple years and guess what
    here's the latest
    http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2010/11/so-how-did-that-global-cooling-bet-work-out/

    saving the readers a lot of reading here's the graph showing the cooling predictions by the deniers in lime green and the instrument data in red and blue

    [​IMG]

    kinda looks like the deniers lost that bet eh kids

    so the theory continues to provide adequate information to predict accurately within certain boundaries

    I will however grant you Gonzo that your take on some of the data being incomplete or inconclusive is also easily shown, for instance the current strength data I started this thread with. After looking into it even for just a few hours its pretty ambiguous and the only fair thing to say about it is exactly what you suggested in the first place.

    But its important to remember that there is a working theory and although incomplete it is making accurate predictions within its limitations

    its also important to realize there is no competing theory let alone a competing hypothesis and nowhere is there anyone making accurate predictions based on contrarian models

    so the science is in fact very sound with more coming in all the time

    cheers
     
  7. gonzo
    Joined: Aug 2002
    Posts: 14,499
    Likes: 659, Points: 123, Legacy Rep: 2031
    Location: Milwaukee, WI

    gonzo Senior Member

    I was not aware of anyone predicting global warming 50 years ago. Do you know who it was? When I was in highschool, 40 years ago, we were scared with global cooling and an ice age coming.
     
  8. ancient kayaker
    Joined: Aug 2006
    Posts: 3,497
    Likes: 146, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 2291
    Location: Alliston, Ontario, Canada

    ancient kayaker aka Terry Haines

    When I was in high scool 62 years ago we were scared of the Russians ...
     
  9. Landlubber
    Joined: Jun 2007
    Posts: 2,640
    Likes: 124, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 1802
    Location: Brisbane

    Landlubber Senior Member

    ...oh, com'n Boston, just because the climate change thread has been shut down, we do not need another few thousand comments on weather, you can tell whether by looking into her eyes......no need to ask.
     
  10. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    Gonzo
    will do give me a minute to sift through my notes
    Lubber
    Climate is changing and it will effect our survivability, both at sea and on land. Given that I am hoping to retire back to the water soon enough it seem reasonable to keep a running dialog concerning climate change going in order to keep as up to date as possible. Altering long term trends are something we should all be concerned about.

    cheers
    B

    ok the information you asked for is in this lecture by Naomi Oreske's
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2T4UF_Rmlio
    I'm going to turn it on and listen in while I do some other stuff so when I catch it I'll post it but I'd recommend this lecture to everyone

    ok she begins going over the predictions at about 5:45 into the flick
    its a lot to right down so I'll just encourage you to go check it out for yourself
    initial work on CO2 greenhouse effect was done back in the 1800's
    if you watch you'll see that about 8~9 minutes in a physicist named Calender back in the 30's found instrument data in direct support of the theory and just previous to that in the flick is another scientist who predicts the rate of temp increase for a given increase in CO2

    predictions in the 30's link CO2 and temp
    note a rising trend in CO2 and expect a corresponding rise in temp
    proved accurate

    Revelle and Keeling
    1965
    predict the % rise of CO2 by the year 2000 of about 25% +
    proved accurate

    1979
    prediction of polar amplification
    21 minutes into the flick
    proved accurate

    just a few pieces from the flick but the gist is that throughout the 20th century warming was expected and by 1979 the theory was generally accepted within the scientific community but accurate predictions were being made back in the 30's and precise predictions were being made in the 60 with very specific predictions being make as early as 1979.
     
  11. Submarine Tom

    Submarine Tom Previous Member

    "The ocean conditions are changing."

    Always has, always will.

    -Tom
     
  12. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,654
    Likes: 274, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: North of Cuba

    hoytedow Bananas

    There is no Rapid Global Climate Shift and it certainly isn't anthropogenic even if there were. It is a tool of those who don't want us powering our boats with coal.
     
  13. CatBuilder

    CatBuilder Previous Member

    Coal is yesterday's fuel. I'm using a new carbon neutral fuel called BioPower(tm) to run my new catamaran. It's made up mostly of a slurry of kittens and puppies with a hint of whale oil to improve flow characteristics. :D
     
  14. Billy_Ingram
    Joined: Jan 2011
    Posts: 2
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Alabama

    Billy_Ingram New Member

    the earth regenerates itself every 10,000 yrs. or so,and we are past due.
     

  15. ancient kayaker
    Joined: Aug 2006
    Posts: 3,497
    Likes: 146, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 2291
    Location: Alliston, Ontario, Canada

    ancient kayaker aka Terry Haines

    Climate opinions have become a belief system, and like any other religion nobody is interested in facts and other peoples' opinions are just there to be disgreed with. If we are destroying the planet we will do it anyway, it is probably too late to stop or too eary to start or something like that.

    If the scientists actually know what is happening, someone - pr0bably a politician - is doing a masterly job of confusing the issue so the rest of us poor slobs never find out. Wait for a few years and you will know.
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.