myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Global cooling
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 552, 553, 554 ... 566, 567, 568  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 8394
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2018 9:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

right wing costs us a 200 billion dollar contract. and 100,000 jobs because they hate renewables....

SA will be completely on solar in todays demand with this project.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-29/batteries-included-even-the-huge-saudi-solar-farm-will-use-them?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=bd&utm_campaign=headline&cmpId=yhoo.headline&yptr=yahoo

The World’s Biggest Solar Project Comes With a ‘Batteries Included’ Sticker

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MalibuGuru



Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 7488

PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 12:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hundreds of scientists involved in 40 recent scientific papers say the scare about global warming is based on hysteria and false science.

Over 40 scientific papers on the global warming hoax have been published in just the first three months of 2018. What their charts show is that “nothing climatically unusual is happening.“

In the chart below from a study by Polovodova et al, we see that 20th century warming is perfectly normal in a long-term historical context. It was no warmer – indeed, is slightly cooler – than either the Roman Warm Period or the Medieval Warming Period.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 10671
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 12:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Laughing Malibu's source is political vel craft--something he doesn't have the honesty to cite. Here's how credible they are:

Quote:
Political Vel Craft is a website hosting the paranoid ravings of a Minnesota-based Teabagger lunatic in the form of green ink articles and a blog. The proprietor's favorite conspiracies seem to be ones of the Obamunist, birther, Illuminati, New World Order, Federal Reserve, chemtrail, and international Jewish varieties. The site is also ragingly racist and promotes bigotry of all kinds, including homophobia, Islamophobia and anti-Semitism


What a surprise. Cue "I scare myself."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wsurfer



Joined: 17 Aug 2000
Posts: 687

PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 11:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MalibuGuru wrote:
Hundreds of scientists involved in 40 recent scientific papers say the scare about global warming is based on hysteria and false science.

Over 40 scientific papers on the global warming hoax have been published in just the first three months of 2018. What their charts show is that “nothing climatically unusual is happening.“

In the chart below from a study by Polovodova et al, we see that 20th century warming is perfectly normal in a long-term historical context. It was no warmer – indeed, is slightly cooler – than either the Roman Warm Period or the Medieval Warming Period.


Dude, stop smoking NOW!!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 10671
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 3:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A bit of reality for those in the bubble to ignore. Yes Dorothy, there still is science, despite the efforts of the GOP and talk radio to discredit it.


Quote:
By SETH BORENSTEIN
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) — Global warming is likely slowing the main Atlantic Ocean circulation, which has plunged to its weakest level on record, according to a new study.

The slowdown in the circulation — a crucial part of Earth’s climate — had been predicted by computer models, but researchers said they can now observe it. It could make for more extreme weather across the Northern Hemisphere, especially Europe, and could increase sea level rise along the U.S. East Coast, they said.


The slowdown also raises the prospect of a complete circulation shutdown, which would be a dangerous “tipping point,” according to a study in Wednesday’s journal Nature .

Such a shutdown was the premise of the scientifically inaccurate 2004 disaster movie “The Day After Tomorrow.” Study authors said a collapse is at least decades away but would be a catastrophe.


“We know somewhere out there is a tipping point where this current system is likely to break down,” said study co-author Stefan Rahmstorf, a climate scientist at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany. “We still don’t know how far away or close to this tipping point we might be. … This is uncharted territory.”

Some other scientists are skeptical, citing a scarcity of data.

The Atlantic meridional overturning circulation, called AMOC, is a key conveyor belt for ocean water and air, creating weather. Warm salty water moves north from the tropics along the Gulf Stream off the U.S. East Coast to the North Atlantic, where it cools, sinks and heads south. The faster it moves, the more water is turned over from warm surface to cool depths.

“This overturning circulation redistributes heat on our planet,” said study lead author Levke Caesar, a physicist at the Potsdam Institute. “It brings heat from the tropics to the high latitudes.”

The Caesar study and another one published in the same issue of Nature by a different team indicate that the Atlantic’s circulation is the weakest it’s been in about 1,500 years. And the slowdown is intensifying.

Since the middle of the 20th century, the speed at which the ocean moves water in the AMOC has dropped 15 percent, the study found, using cold subpolar water temperatures as an indirect measurement. And it has plummeted in recent years, the study concluded.
The Gulf Stream, the warm water current where hurricanes can power up, historically veers away from the United States around the Carolinas or Virginia. The Gulf Stream now hugs closer to coast around New York, and there’s a significantly warmer bulge around Maine related to the circulation slowdown, Rahmstorf and Caesar said. The northern U.S. Atlantic coastal waters have warmed faster than most parts of the ocean in recent decades, researchers said.

Scientists blame global warming in a couple of ways.

Warmer water lessens the amount of cooling and makes it harder for the water to sink and turn over. Ice sheets and glaciers in Greenland are melting and the fresh water is pouring into the area where the water turns over, making it less salty, less dense and therefore less likely to sink. There’s also more rain and snow in northern areas and more evaporation in southern areas, altering the flow, Rahmstorf said.

“It’s a slow change at the moment, but we’re changing it,” Caesar said. “One danger is in the unknown of what will happen. We should expect changes.”

Rahmstorf and Caesar looked at an established cold patch — about 2 million square miles (5.2 million square kilometers), or the size of India and Mexico combined — as the indirect measurements for the speed of the AMOC, calling it a fingerprint of the ocean circulation.

It’s clear that the circulation is weakening, said Colorado State hurricane expert Phil Klotzbach, who wasn’t part of the studies. Decades ago, that would have meant weaker Atlantic hurricane activity, but that hasn’t been happening and it could mean there is a difference in weakening in winter and summer, he said.


Andreas Schmittner at Oregon State University, who also wasn’t part of the studies, said the Potsdam group’s analysis makes sense, adding that as the world emits more greenhouse gases from the burning of fossil fuels, we can expect it to slow further.

But MIT’s Carl Wunsch said that the paper’s “assertions of weakening are conceivable, but unsupported by any data.”

And Kevin Trenberth of the National Center for Atmospheric Research said his recent work faults regular cycles in the atmosphere more than the ocean. He said the Potsdam study doesn’t explain year to year variability, while atmospheric cycles do.

Rahmstorf said his study averages data over a decade at a time to render year-to-year changes less meaningful. The work shows that it is ocean circulation that drives the changes in atmosphere, not the other way around, he said.


I'm sure that some of you whack jobs think climate change, and Trump, are part of Jesus' plan. After all, he's already done Noah and the ark.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 4854
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 6:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You think it's so simple mac, science is not that simple, and it never stops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
New source of global nitrogen discovered
Rocks could hold key to carbon storage and improved global climate projections

Date:
April 5, 2018
Source:
University of California - Davis
Summary:
Not all of the nitrogen on the planet comes from the atmosphere, according to a new study. Up to a quarter comes from Earth's bedrock. The discovery could greatly improve climate change projections.


For centuries, the prevailing science has indicated that all of the nitrogen on Earth available to plants comes from the atmosphere. But a study from the University of California, Davis, indicates that more than a quarter comes from Earth's bedrock.
The study, to be published April 6 in the journal Science, found that up to 26 percent of the nitrogen in natural ecosystems is sourced from rocks, with the remaining fraction from the atmosphere.
Before this study, the input of this nitrogen to the global land system was unknown. The discovery could greatly improve climate change projections, which rely on understanding the carbon cycle. This newly identified source of nitrogen could also feed the carbon cycle on land, allowing ecosystems to pull more emissions out of the atmosphere, the authors said.
"Our study shows that nitrogen weathering is a globally significant source of nutrition to soils and ecosystems worldwide," said co-lead author Ben Houlton, a professor in the UC Davis Department of Land, Air and Water Resources and director of the UC Davis Muir Institute. "This runs counter the centuries-long paradigm that has laid the foundation for the environmental sciences. We think that this nitrogen may allow forests and grasslands to sequester more fossil fuel CO2 emissions than previously thought."

Weathering Is Key
Ecosystems need nitrogen and other nutrients to absorb carbon dioxide pollution, and there is a limited amount of it available from plants and soils. If a large amount of nitrogen comes from rocks, it helps explain how natural ecosystems like boreal forests are capable of taking up high levels of carbon dioxide.
But not just any rock can leach nitrogen. Rock nitrogen availability is determined by weathering, which can be physical, such as through tectonic movement, or chemical, such as when minerals react with rainwater.
That's primarily why rock nitrogen weathering varies across regions and landscapes. The study said that large areas of Africa are devoid of nitrogen-rich bedrock while northern latitudes have some of the highest levels of rock nitrogen weathering. Mountainous regions like the Himalayas and Andes are estimated to be significant sources of rock nitrogen weathering, similar to those regions' importance to global weathering rates and climate. Grasslands, tundra, deserts and woodlands also experience sizable rates of rock nitrogen weathering.

Geology and Carbon Sequestration
Mapping nutrient profiles in rocks to their potential for carbon uptake could help drive conservation considerations. Areas with higher levels of rock nitrogen weathering may be able to sequester more carbon.
"Geology might have a huge control over which systems can take up carbon dioxide and which ones don't," Houlton said. "When thinking about carbon sequestration, the geology of the planet can help guide our decisions about what we're conserving."

Mysterious Gap
The work also elucidates the "case of the missing nitrogen." For decades, scientists have recognized that more nitrogen accumulates in soils and plants than can be explained by the atmosphere alone, but they could not pinpoint what was missing.
"We show that the paradox of nitrogen is written in stone," said co-leading author Scott Morford, a UC Davis graduate student at the time of the study. "There's enough nitrogen in the rocks, and it breaks down fast enough to explain the cases where there has been this mysterious gap."
In previous work, the research team analyzed samples of ancient rock collected from the Klamath Mountains of Northern California to find that the rocks and surrounding trees there held large amounts of nitrogen. With the current study, the authors built on that work, analyzing the planet's nitrogen balance, geochemical proxies and building a spatial nitrogen weathering model to assess rock nitrogen availability on a global scale.
The researchers say the work does not hold immediate implications for farmers and gardeners, who greatly rely on nitrogen in natural and synthetic forms to grow food. Past work has indicated that some background nitrate in groundwater can be traced back to rock sources, but further research is needed to better understand how much.

Rewriting Textbooks
"These results are going to require rewriting the textbooks," said Kendra McLauchlan, program director in the National Science Foundation's Division of Environmental Biology, which co-funded the research. "While there were hints that plants could use rock-derived nitrogen, this discovery shatters the paradigm that the ultimate source of available nitrogen is the atmosphere. Nitrogen is both the most important limiting nutrient on Earth and a dangerous pollutant, so it is important to understand the natural controls on its supply and demand. Humanity currently depends on atmospheric nitrogen to produce enough fertilizer to maintain world food supply. A discovery of this magnitude will open up a new era of research on this essential nutrient."
UC Davis Professor Randy Dahlgren in the Department of Land, Air and Water Resources co-authored the study.

The study was funded by the National Science Foundation's Division of Earth Sciences and its Division of Environmental Biology, as well as the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/04/180405140946.htm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm sure you won't like this, because all you warmers don't seem to appreciate good news, if it's good, it's really bad.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wsurfer



Joined: 17 Aug 2000
Posts: 687

PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 6:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

nw30 wrote:
You think it's so simple mac, science is not that simple, and it never stops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
New source of global nitrogen discovered
Rocks could hold key to carbon storage and improved global climate projections

Date:
April 5, 2018
Source:
University of California - Davis
Summary:
Not all of the nitrogen on the planet comes from the atmosphere, according to a new study. Up to a quarter comes from Earth's bedrock. The discovery could greatly improve climate change projections.


For centuries, the prevailing science has indicated that all of the nitrogen on Earth available to plants comes from the atmosphere. But a study from the University of California, Davis, indicates that more than a quarter comes from Earth's bedrock.
The study, to be published April 6 in the journal Science, found that up to 26 percent of the nitrogen in natural ecosystems is sourced from rocks, with the remaining fraction from the atmosphere.
Before this study, the input of this nitrogen to the global land system was unknown. The discovery could greatly improve climate change projections, which rely on understanding the carbon cycle. This newly identified source of nitrogen could also feed the carbon cycle on land, allowing ecosystems to pull more emissions out of the atmosphere, the authors said.
"Our study shows that nitrogen weathering is a globally significant source of nutrition to soils and ecosystems worldwide," said co-lead author Ben Houlton, a professor in the UC Davis Department of Land, Air and Water Resources and director of the UC Davis Muir Institute. "This runs counter the centuries-long paradigm that has laid the foundation for the environmental sciences. We think that this nitrogen may allow forests and grasslands to sequester more fossil fuel CO2 emissions than previously thought."

Weathering Is Key
Ecosystems need nitrogen and other nutrients to absorb carbon dioxide pollution, and there is a limited amount of it available from plants and soils. If a large amount of nitrogen comes from rocks, it helps explain how natural ecosystems like boreal forests are capable of taking up high levels of carbon dioxide.
But not just any rock can leach nitrogen. Rock nitrogen availability is determined by weathering, which can be physical, such as through tectonic movement, or chemical, such as when minerals react with rainwater.
That's primarily why rock nitrogen weathering varies across regions and landscapes. The study said that large areas of Africa are devoid of nitrogen-rich bedrock while northern latitudes have some of the highest levels of rock nitrogen weathering. Mountainous regions like the Himalayas and Andes are estimated to be significant sources of rock nitrogen weathering, similar to those regions' importance to global weathering rates and climate. Grasslands, tundra, deserts and woodlands also experience sizable rates of rock nitrogen weathering.

Geology and Carbon Sequestration
Mapping nutrient profiles in rocks to their potential for carbon uptake could help drive conservation considerations. Areas with higher levels of rock nitrogen weathering may be able to sequester more carbon.
"Geology might have a huge control over which systems can take up carbon dioxide and which ones don't," Houlton said. "When thinking about carbon sequestration, the geology of the planet can help guide our decisions about what we're conserving."

Mysterious Gap
The work also elucidates the "case of the missing nitrogen." For decades, scientists have recognized that more nitrogen accumulates in soils and plants than can be explained by the atmosphere alone, but they could not pinpoint what was missing.
"We show that the paradox of nitrogen is written in stone," said co-leading author Scott Morford, a UC Davis graduate student at the time of the study. "There's enough nitrogen in the rocks, and it breaks down fast enough to explain the cases where there has been this mysterious gap."
In previous work, the research team analyzed samples of ancient rock collected from the Klamath Mountains of Northern California to find that the rocks and surrounding trees there held large amounts of nitrogen. With the current study, the authors built on that work, analyzing the planet's nitrogen balance, geochemical proxies and building a spatial nitrogen weathering model to assess rock nitrogen availability on a global scale.
The researchers say the work does not hold immediate implications for farmers and gardeners, who greatly rely on nitrogen in natural and synthetic forms to grow food. Past work has indicated that some background nitrate in groundwater can be traced back to rock sources, but further research is needed to better understand how much.

Rewriting Textbooks
"These results are going to require rewriting the textbooks," said Kendra McLauchlan, program director in the National Science Foundation's Division of Environmental Biology, which co-funded the research. "While there were hints that plants could use rock-derived nitrogen, this discovery shatters the paradigm that the ultimate source of available nitrogen is the atmosphere. Nitrogen is both the most important limiting nutrient on Earth and a dangerous pollutant, so it is important to understand the natural controls on its supply and demand. Humanity currently depends on atmospheric nitrogen to produce enough fertilizer to maintain world food supply. A discovery of this magnitude will open up a new era of research on this essential nutrient."
UC Davis Professor Randy Dahlgren in the Department of Land, Air and Water Resources co-authored the study.

The study was funded by the National Science Foundation's Division of Earth Sciences and its Division of Environmental Biology, as well as the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/04/180405140946.htm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm sure you won't like this, because all you warmers don't seem to appreciate good news, if it's good, it's really bad.


Additional nitrogen may well feed the cycle. I will believe you if you show me the real data related to rocks vs. the burning of fossill fuels.
I'll wait patiently. Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 10671
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 7:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NW—you are finally correct on one thing—science is not simple. But lest you be thought of as simple—what do you think your source means in terms of global warming? Why did you post it in response to evidence about changes in ocean circulation—it seems to have nothing to do with it all. And finally, what right wing troll sent it to you?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 4854
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 8:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LOL, I knew you'd be offended. Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 10671
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 8:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You are too clueless to know how I feel. You posted a non sequitur—it had nothing to do with what I posted. It was interesting, and probably true—but so what? I didn’t really expect you to answer the questions—or even know how to. It appears that you were just trolling—thinking seems to be a bridge too far. SAD.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 552, 553, 554 ... 566, 567, 568  Next
Page 553 of 568

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group