MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus on Twitter · Facebook · Flickr · Newsletters · Instagram 
Tuesday, September 2, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 66.0° F  Fair
Collapse Photo Bar

Antarctic ice loss greater than any time in last 1,000 years

Races for the Senate, U.S. House, etc. and other issues of national importance.

Re: Antarctic ice loss greater than any time in last 1,000 y

Postby rabble » Sun Jun 16, 2013 4:07 pm

I think Sandi just wants to stay away from the "if you're in a hole you should stop digging" analogy.

If humans are causing the warming "trend" or whatever the hell it is, then even if there's no way to stop it, it implies two things: it's going to KEEP getting hotter because we're still doing it, and we could slow the rise by altering our behavior on a global scale.

ie we're in a hole but if we stop digging so fast it will be inconvenient and therefore we must dig as we have always dug.
rabble
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6122
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: Antarctic ice loss greater than any time in last 1,000 y

Postby Sandi » Sun Jun 16, 2013 5:08 pm

Galoot wrote:That seems incredibly odd considering that humans put out about 200x more CO2 each year than all the world's volcanoes do.


I agree with the CO2 output, but I believe it is the ash and other particulate matter from volcanoes that change climate initially by blocking sunlight for weeks and months depending on the volcano.
Sandi
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1536
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 11:31 pm

Re: Antarctic ice loss greater than any time in last 1,000 y

Postby Sandi » Sun Jun 16, 2013 5:11 pm

rabble wrote:I think Sandi just wants to stay away from the "if you're in a hole you should stop digging" analogy.

If humans are causing the warming "trend" or whatever the hell it is, then even if there's no way to stop it, it implies two things: it's going to KEEP getting hotter because we're still doing it, and we could slow the rise by altering our behavior on a global scale.

ie we're in a hole but if we stop digging so fast it will be inconvenient and therefore we must dig as we have always dug.


Your premise is wrong, I didn't say, and highly doubt that humans are the cause.
Sandi
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1536
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 11:31 pm

Re: Antarctic ice loss greater than any time in last 1,000 y

Postby rabble » Sun Jun 16, 2013 5:17 pm

Sandi wrote:
rabble wrote:I think Sandi just wants to stay away from the "if you're in a hole you should stop digging" analogy.

If humans are causing the warming "trend" or whatever the hell it is, then even if there's no way to stop it, it implies two things: it's going to KEEP getting hotter because we're still doing it, and we could slow the rise by altering our behavior on a global scale.

ie we're in a hole but if we stop digging so fast it will be inconvenient and therefore we must dig as we have always dug.


Your premise is wrong, I didn't say, and highly doubt that humans are the cause.

No, my premise is correct.

You will never say humans are the cause because that would imply that humans might have some control but if we exerted control globally, it would inconvenience you.

Therefore no matter the evidence, you CAN'T admit it's happening. You must stay in denial.

That's my premise.
rabble
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6122
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: Antarctic ice loss greater than any time in last 1,000 y

Postby Sandi » Sun Jun 16, 2013 5:54 pm

No, my premise is correct.

You will never say humans are the cause because that would imply that humans might have some control but if we exerted control globally, it would inconvenience you.

Therefore no matter the evidence, you CAN'T admit it's happening. You must stay in denial.

That's my premise.


You cannot read my mind. Why oh why do you troll your own thread. You add nothing but spite to the discussion.

Guess I may as well put you back on blocked.
Sandi
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1536
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 11:31 pm

Re: Antarctic ice loss greater than any time in last 1,000 y

Postby rabble » Sun Jun 16, 2013 6:17 pm

Sandi wrote:You cannot read my mind.


I can sure as hell read your actions. :-)
Sandi wrote:Why oh why do you troll your own thread. You add nothing but spite to the discussion. Guess I may as well put you back on blocked.

Remember to tell everyone not to quote me.
rabble
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6122
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: Antarctic ice loss greater than any time in last 1,000 y

Postby DCB » Sun Jun 16, 2013 7:46 pm

Bludgeon wrote:Anyway, yeah where are the charts from the 12th century seismologists who were out there by Mt. Etna with the Seismograph, providing us with the accurate and scientifically useful data we need today to determine the meaning of what we perceive as climate change?
.

Believe it or not, there are people who much more clever than you. And instead of sitting on their ass speculating, they do real research. They gather information on isotope levels, ice cores, tree rings and kinds of interesting things. That's how they determine historical climate records.
DCB
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2622
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:08 pm

Re: Antarctic ice loss greater than any time in last 1,000 y

Postby snoqueen » Sun Jun 16, 2013 8:01 pm

I believe it is the ash and other particulate matter from volcanoes that change climate initially by blocking sunlight for weeks and months depending on the volcano.


This is so. The volcano Krakatoa (Krakatau) in 1883 is a well-known example: it affected the weather for months and caused unusually red sunsets due to particulate matter in the atmosphere. Cooling also followed the eruption of Pinatubo in 1991.

Volcanoes can exert ozone, haze, and greenhouse effects on climate. Here's a very readable page with more about the whole matter from San Diego State University, hardly a politically questionable source:

http://www.geology.sdsu.edu/how_volcano ... fects.html

Volcanic eruptions can enhance global warming by adding CO2 to the atmosphere. However, a far greater amount of CO2 is contributed to the atmosphere by human activities each year than by volcanic eruptions. T.M.Gerlach (1991, American Geophysical Union) notes that human-made CO2 exceeds the estimated global release of CO2 from volcanoes by at least 150 times. The small amount of global warming caused by eruption-generated greenhouse gases is offset by the far greater amount of global cooling caused by eruption-generated particles in the stratosphere (the haze effect). Greenhouse warming of the earth has been particularly evident since 1980. Without the cooling influence of such eruptions as El Chichon (1982) and Mt. Pinatubo (1991), described below, greenhouse warming would have been more pronounced.


There's a lot more at the link if you care to study it.

The point is you're not exactly wrong, you're just misunderstanding the magnitude of various volcano effects versus the magnitude of the human-caused effects.

It's important to note volcanoes do not erupt without our noticing them, so in order for a volcano to be influencing the weather at any given time you are expected to show which volcano you're talking about.
snoqueen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 11437
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 11:42 pm

Re: Antarctic ice loss greater than any time in last 1,000 y

Postby rabble » Sun Jun 16, 2013 8:11 pm

Pardon me, but I'm a little confused by this thread direction.

Is the premise that climate change is not happening because volcanoes, or that we don't need to do anything because volcanoes could have done this?

Or is it that climate change is not man made because volcanoes would have caused this current warming trend if they had wanted to but didn't feel like it?

Are the volcanoes doing something right now?
rabble
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6122
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: Antarctic ice loss greater than any time in last 1,000 y

Postby Bludgeon » Sun Jun 16, 2013 8:21 pm

DCB wrote:
Bludgeon wrote:Anyway, yeah where are the charts from the 12th century seismologists who were out there by Mt. Etna with the Seismograph, providing us with the accurate and scientifically useful data we need today to determine the meaning of what we perceive as climate change?
.

Believe it or not, there are people who much more clever than you.

Oh, I do believe it.
DCB wrote:...they do real research. They gather information on isotope levels, ice cores, tree rings and kinds of interesting things.

But this is where you lost me ^ . I could hold my nose and follow the argument down into the ice and mud and mood rings, I just don't find these to be credible barometers. Yknow, throw in grain patterns too, its all too esoteric to spend much time seriously questioning what they dig up.

Whole thing seems like a futile effort to me, other than the beginning of a climatological record that will be useful many, many decades from now.

Image

^ Chicken Little; sky is falling; end of the world; panic ^

Just... not productive, to put it politely.
Bludgeon
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1291
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 2:27 am

Re: Antarctic ice loss greater than any time in last 1,000 y

Postby DCB » Sun Jun 16, 2013 8:29 pm

I think the Denier crowd is saying: volcanoes influence the climate, therefore burning fossil fuels doesn't. Which means you accept the science that confirms the former, but reject the latter. Because.

Also scientists have conclusively proved that surface temperatures were warmer in the past, therefore we shouldn't believe those same scientists when they say it will get even warmer in the future.

I'm particularly enchanted by armchair philosophers like Bludgie who just dismiss it all out of hand because "its too esoteric".
DCB
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2622
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:08 pm

Re: Antarctic ice loss greater than any time in last 1,000 y

Postby rabble » Sun Jun 16, 2013 8:54 pm

DCB wrote:I'm particularly enchanted by armchair philosophers like Bludgie who just dismiss it all out of hand because "its too esoteric".

Yes but he almost always throws in some insulting graphics to prove he's done his research. That's gotta count for somethin.
rabble
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6122
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: Antarctic ice loss greater than any time in last 1,000 y

Postby snoqueen » Mon Jun 17, 2013 1:29 am

Bludgeon wrote:
DCB wrote:...they do real research. They gather information on isotope levels, ice cores, tree rings and kinds of interesting things.

But this is where you lost me ^ . I could hold my nose and follow the argument down into the ice and mud and mood rings, I just don't find these to be credible barometers. Yknow, throw in grain patterns too, its all too esoteric to spend much time seriously questioning what they dig up.


Bludgeon, you can do better than this.

Isotope levels are measured in various layers of ice sheets in the arctic. Each volcanic eruption produces its own unique isotope signature: some have more of one isotope (variation of an element) and some have more of another. Thin layers of dust unique to a particular volcano are laid down following an eruption. By studying these layers, scientists can tell when the ice alongside the layers was formed, because they know when the volcano erupted. When thicker layers of ice formed, the years were colder. The patterns of coldness, combined with the dates of the layers as determined by the isotope patterns, show us patterns of ancient climate change going back many centuries.

Ice cores are the way the scientists collect material from the ice sheets to study these layers. The layers toward the top are the recent ones, with more ancient layers being further and further down.

Tree rings show climate patterns because a tree will grow more (forming a larger ring) in warm or moist years and less in cold or dry ones. In addition ancient wood (like parts of a Viking ship) can be dated using carbon isotopes. I'm sure you've read about carbon dating of organic material. If scientists can date particular wood to a certain period, they can see how far apart the rings are. Then they can determine whether that wood grew faster or slower than the same kind of wood grows today, or compare it with wood from a different time. This is another way of determining the climate in distant eras.

When the data matches up well on a timeline -- say ice data and wood data -- then you've got pretty good evidence of climate patterns.

If you want to pretend this is pseudoscience similar to mood rings and crop circles (grain rings?), go ahead but it sure doesn't make you look like a bright person.

You know, many reasonable people find science interesting. Little kids find science interesting. If you'd look into it, you might find it interesting too.
snoqueen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 11437
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 11:42 pm

Re: Antarctic ice loss greater than any time in last 1,000 y

Postby Sandi » Mon Jun 17, 2013 11:52 am

snoqueen wrote:Tree rings show climate patterns because a tree will grow more (forming a larger ring) in warm or moist years and less in cold or dry ones.


Using tree rings (dendrochronology) is quite good at determining age, but not very good at determining past climate. It is not very accurate, because the growth of the ring depends on both temperature and moisture.

If there are no records for moisture, temp or both one can only guess or assume an average.
Sandi
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1536
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 11:31 pm

Re: Antarctic ice loss greater than any time in last 1,000 y

Postby fennel » Mon Jun 17, 2013 1:00 pm

Sandi, go look up sophistry. It's not an honorable pursuit.
fennel
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3156
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 4:24 pm
Location: Inside the Green Zone, Madison

PreviousNext

Return to National Politics & Government

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


commentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar