The debate is over: The oceans are in hot, hot water

Page 5 of 7 [ 97 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

30 Jan 2019, 8:52 pm

cberg wrote:
EzraS wrote:
cberg wrote:
https://sos.noaa.gov/datasets/water-vapor-real-time/

https://sos.noaa.gov/datasets/carbon-flux/

There, I had time to find you these without actually having any spare time. There are probably thousands, it's a major computing project that's in no way hard to find or access.


So you're saying that it's all very simplistic.


It is to look at.


I think as is common with some aspies, you're expecting someone to already have your level of familiarity.



QuantumChemist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Oct 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,058
Location: Midwest

30 Jan 2019, 9:40 pm

While I am not a climate scientist, I am a physical scientist who reguarly reads the literature on the subject. Based upon the data that I have saw published in peer-reviewed journals, it is highly likely that the planet is undergoing a major climate change process. Parts of it are natural and parts of it has been caused by humans over the past century. In a way, the topic relates to an event that greatly affected my father when he was growing up: The dust bowl.

That event was caused by both man and nature. Man overplowed the prairie grasses and planted crops that did not hold the soil well. Then came a period of no rain for years. The area is well known as a grassland desert for a reason. Prairie grasses that were native do not need much rain to live. The crops that farmers planted were constantly thirsty and needed moisture to survive. Without the rain, the crops withered and died in the fields. Without living plants to hold the topsoil in, windstorms started blowing it away, leaving only hard subsoil.

The dust storms were so bad that people died from dust pneumonia when caught out in the storms too long, if they did not just suffocate first. It lasted the better part of a decade before a major dust storm made its way to the east coast. That got the attention of the government to step in and do something about the mess.

Farmers are much more aware of what they do can cause damage to their environment now. They leave parts of the land alone (paid for by the government) to keep this from happening again. The prairie is making a come back but is no where as strong as it was. That area is only a few missteps away from going back to the dusty days. Man partially fixed what they helped messed up.

Why am I going on about past history? We are at a tipping point in time that could potentially prevent a global climate disaster. Some parts will go up in temperature, while others might cool down. This causes some strange effects, not all of them are bad. Last year had a new record of fewest tornados since recording began, yet there were a larger than usual hurricane season. Your perspective on what is good or bad in this case depends on where you live.

The differences between the two extremes will likely get larger if nothing is done. If the polar ice caps melt (it is happening based upon many reported studies), costal areas where a majority of the population lives become closer to being flooded. Where will they go if that happens? The answer will eventually affect you one way or the other. Man may not have caused the entire change, but we do have the chance to prevent it from getting worse if we choose to do so.



EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

30 Jan 2019, 9:46 pm

QuantumChemist wrote:
While I am not a climate scientist, I am a physical scientist who reguarly reads the literature on the subject. Based upon the data that I have saw published in peer-reviewed journals, it is highly likely that the planet is undergoing a major climate change process. Parts of it are natural and parts of it has been caused by humans over the past century. In a way, the topic relates to an event that greatly affected my father when he was growing up: The dust bowl.

That event was caused by both man and nature. Man overplowed the prairie grasses and planted crops that did not hold the soil well. Then came a period of no rain for years. The area is well known as a grassland desert for a reason. Prairie grasses that were native do not need much rain to live. The crops that farmers planted were constantly thirsty and needed moisture to survive. Without the rain, the crops withered and died in the fields. Without living plants to hold the topsoil in, windstorms started blowing it away, leaving only hard subsoil.

The dust storms were so bad that people died from dust pneumonia when caught out in the storms too long, if they did not just suffocate first. It lasted the better part of a decade before a major dust storm made its way to the east coast. That got the attention of the government to step in and do something about the mess.

Farmers are much more aware of what they do can cause damage to their environment now. They leave parts of the land alone (paid for by the government) to keep this from happening again. The prairie is making a come back but is no where as strong as it was. That area is only a few missteps away from going back to the dusty days. Man partially fixed what they helped messed up.

Why am I going on about past history? We are at a tipping point in time that could potentially prevent a global climate disaster. Some parts will go up in temperature, while others might cool down. This causes some strange effects, not all of them are bad. Last year had a new record of fewest tornados since recording began, yet there were a larger than usual hurricane season. Your perspective on what is good or bad in this case depends on where you live.

The differences between the two extremes will likely get larger if nothing is done. If the polar ice caps melt (it is happening based upon many reported studies), costal areas where a majority of the population lives become closer to being flooded. Where will they go if that happens? The answer will eventually affect you one way or the other. Man may not have caused the entire change, but we do have the chance to prevent it from getting worse if we choose to do so.


Do you think as we move into the 21st century that 20th century mechanics that produce C02 are going to end up being replaced anyways? One example being electric automobiles.



karathraceandherspecialdestiny
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Jan 2017
Age: 45
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,857

30 Jan 2019, 9:54 pm

QuantumChemist wrote:
While I am not a climate scientist, I am a physical scientist who reguarly reads the literature on the subject. Based upon the data that I have saw published in peer-reviewed journals, it is highly likely that the planet is undergoing a major climate change process. Parts of it are natural and parts of it has been caused by humans over the past century. In a way, the topic relates to an event that greatly affected my father when he was growing up: The dust bowl.

That event was caused by both man and nature. Man overplowed the prairie grasses and planted crops that did not hold the soil well. Then came a period of no rain for years. The area is well known as a grassland desert for a reason. Prairie grasses that were native do not need much rain to live. The crops that farmers planted were constantly thirsty and needed moisture to survive. Without the rain, the crops withered and died in the fields. Without living plants to hold the topsoil in, windstorms started blowing it away, leaving only hard subsoil.

The dust storms were so bad that people died from dust pneumonia when caught out in the storms too long, if they did not just suffocate first. It lasted the better part of a decade before a major dust storm made its way to the east coast. That got the attention of the government to step in and do something about the mess.

Farmers are much more aware of what they do can cause damage to their environment now. They leave parts of the land alone (paid for by the government) to keep this from happening again. The prairie is making a come back but is no where as strong as it was. That area is only a few missteps away from going back to the dusty days. Man partially fixed what they helped messed up.

Why am I going on about past history? We are at a tipping point in time that could potentially prevent a global climate disaster. Some parts will go up in temperature, while others might cool down. This causes some strange effects, not all of them are bad. Last year had a new record of fewest tornados since recording began, yet there were a larger than usual hurricane season. Your perspective on what is good or bad in this case depends on where you live.

The differences between the two extremes will likely get larger if nothing is done. If the polar ice caps melt (it is happening based upon many reported studies), costal areas where a majority of the population lives become closer to being flooded. Where will they go if that happens? The answer will eventually affect you one way or the other. Man may not have caused the entire change, but we do have the chance to prevent it from getting worse if we choose to do so.


And this jives very much with what I've read and heard on the subject. I don't know who the hysterical prognosticators are but I wonder if you have to specifically go looking for them to hear that because it's not what I've learned when looking into the subject, and there wasn't the hysterical tone to what I learned in college either. I was always given the impression that we're having an impact but it's an impact that we have control over and we can makes changes to--and we have already made changes that have had a positive impact, like banning chemical propellants that were contributing to the hole in the ozone layer, and the subsequent recovery of the ozone layer.



EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

30 Jan 2019, 10:05 pm

The alarmists exist within social media, blogs and websites.



QuantumChemist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Oct 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,058
Location: Midwest

30 Jan 2019, 10:06 pm

EzraS wrote:
QuantumChemist wrote:
While I am not a climate scientist, I am a physical scientist who reguarly reads the literature on the subject. Based upon the data that I have saw published in peer-reviewed journals, it is highly likely that the planet is undergoing a major climate change process. Parts of it are natural and parts of it has been caused by humans over the past century. In a way, the topic relates to an event that greatly affected my father when he was growing up: The dust bowl.

That event was caused by both man and nature. Man overplowed the prairie grasses and planted crops that did not hold the soil well. Then came a period of no rain for years. The area is well known as a grassland desert for a reason. Prairie grasses that were native do not need much rain to live. The crops that farmers planted were constantly thirsty and needed moisture to survive. Without the rain, the crops withered and died in the fields. Without living plants to hold the topsoil in, windstorms started blowing it away, leaving only hard subsoil.

The dust storms were so bad that people died from dust pneumonia when caught out in the storms too long, if they did not just suffocate first. It lasted the better part of a decade before a major dust storm made its way to the east coast. That got the attention of the government to step in and do something about the mess.

Farmers are much more aware of what they do can cause damage to their environment now. They leave parts of the land alone (paid for by the government) to keep this from happening again. The prairie is making a come back but is no where as strong as it was. That area is only a few missteps away from going back to the dusty days. Man partially fixed what they helped messed up.

Why am I going on about past history? We are at a tipping point in time that could potentially prevent a global climate disaster. Some parts will go up in temperature, while others might cool down. This causes some strange effects, not all of them are bad. Last year had a new record of fewest tornados since recording began, yet there were a larger than usual hurricane season. Your perspective on what is good or bad in this case depends on where you live.

The differences between the two extremes will likely get larger if nothing is done. If the polar ice caps melt (it is happening based upon many reported studies), costal areas where a majority of the population lives become closer to being flooded. Where will they go if that happens? The answer will eventually affect you one way or the other. Man may not have caused the entire change, but we do have the chance to prevent it from getting worse if we choose to do so.


Do you think as we move into the 21st century that 20th century mechanics that produce C02 are going to end up being replaced anyways? One example being electric automobiles.


Yes and no is the answer. Yes because we will not be using petroleum fuels that way, but also no because we will likely be still burning coal to produce the electrical energy for those cars, which gives off CO2. The net to the answer above is basically a stalemate at best in CO2 production. If you really want to get a better answer, then we will have to drastically change how we produce electrical energy. However, that physically costs more to do. People invested in petroleum will fight that tooth to nail to protect their investment, at the cost of our future in the process.



QuantumChemist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Oct 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,058
Location: Midwest

30 Jan 2019, 10:13 pm

EzraS wrote:
The alarmists exist within social media, blogs and websites.


That is why I always check the data to see if it jives with what was written there. The sources they site are what I look for. I sometimes wish more people would learn to read the peer-reviewed scientific literature for certain subjects, rather than just believing because it was on a social media site. Even then, there are times when the science data was reported wrong or interprited incorrectly. However it usually gets corrected or pulled as those issues are found.



EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

30 Jan 2019, 10:14 pm

QuantumChemist wrote:
EzraS wrote:
QuantumChemist wrote:
While I am not a climate scientist, I am a physical scientist who reguarly reads the literature on the subject. Based upon the data that I have saw published in peer-reviewed journals, it is highly likely that the planet is undergoing a major climate change process. Parts of it are natural and parts of it has been caused by humans over the past century. In a way, the topic relates to an event that greatly affected my father when he was growing up: The dust bowl.

That event was caused by both man and nature. Man overplowed the prairie grasses and planted crops that did not hold the soil well. Then came a period of no rain for years. The area is well known as a grassland desert for a reason. Prairie grasses that were native do not need much rain to live. The crops that farmers planted were constantly thirsty and needed moisture to survive. Without the rain, the crops withered and died in the fields. Without living plants to hold the topsoil in, windstorms started blowing it away, leaving only hard subsoil.

The dust storms were so bad that people died from dust pneumonia when caught out in the storms too long, if they did not just suffocate first. It lasted the better part of a decade before a major dust storm made its way to the east coast. That got the attention of the government to step in and do something about the mess.

Farmers are much more aware of what they do can cause damage to their environment now. They leave parts of the land alone (paid for by the government) to keep this from happening again. The prairie is making a come back but is no where as strong as it was. That area is only a few missteps away from going back to the dusty days. Man partially fixed what they helped messed up.

Why am I going on about past history? We are at a tipping point in time that could potentially prevent a global climate disaster. Some parts will go up in temperature, while others might cool down. This causes some strange effects, not all of them are bad. Last year had a new record of fewest tornados since recording began, yet there were a larger than usual hurricane season. Your perspective on what is good or bad in this case depends on where you live.

The differences between the two extremes will likely get larger if nothing is done. If the polar ice caps melt (it is happening based upon many reported studies), costal areas where a majority of the population lives become closer to being flooded. Where will they go if that happens? The answer will eventually affect you one way or the other. Man may not have caused the entire change, but we do have the chance to prevent it from getting worse if we choose to do so.


Do you think as we move into the 21st century that 20th century mechanics that produce C02 are going to end up being replaced anyways? One example being electric automobiles.


Yes and no is the answer. Yes because we will not be using petroleum fuels that way, but also no because we will likely be still burning coal to produce the electrical energy for those cars, which gives off CO2. The net to the answer above is basically a stalemate at best in CO2 production. If you really want to get a better answer, then we will have to drastically change how we produce electrical energy. However, that physically costs more to do. People invested in petroleum will fight that tooth to nail to protect their investment, at the cost of our future in the process.


My thinking is along with electric car, primitive coal burning to produce energy would also become replaced by a more sophisticated process. I agree that moving away from petroleum isn't going to be easy for those reasons. Unless maybe a dirty cash cow can be replaced with a clean one.



mjb4321
Hummingbird
Hummingbird

User avatar

Joined: 30 Sep 2018
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 21

30 Jan 2019, 10:30 pm

Stan Meyers had a hydrogen on the fly converter that powered cars. All you needed was a computer controlled engine for the burning of the hydrogen and splitter to split water into oxygen and hydrogen to be burned. Turns back into water.



AspE
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,114

30 Jan 2019, 11:01 pm

mjb4321 wrote:
Stan Meyers had a hydrogen on the fly converter that powered cars. All you needed was a computer controlled engine for the burning of the hydrogen and splitter to split water into oxygen and hydrogen to be burned. Turns back into water.

Where do you get the energy to split water?



QuantumChemist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Oct 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,058
Location: Midwest

31 Jan 2019, 9:56 am

AspE wrote:
mjb4321 wrote:
Stan Meyers had a hydrogen on the fly converter that powered cars. All you needed was a computer controlled engine for the burning of the hydrogen and splitter to split water into oxygen and hydrogen to be burned. Turns back into water.

Where do you get the energy to split water?


There are similar devices for semis here in the US. It uses electrical energy produced by a petroleum based engine to split the water using a special catalyst. The hydrogen and oxygen gets transferred back into the intake. Unfortunately, there are no free lunches when it comes to thermodynamics. The energy gained by this process is offset by the amount of energy to split the water. However, some still swear that they see an improvement in mpg.

There are also an added problem as the burning of the additional hydrogen and oxygen can increase combustion pressure within the combustion chamber, causing stress over time that can reduce the working lifetime of the engine. If you do not care about needing to rebuild the engine more often, this process might be what you are looking for.

The other catch is in the cost of the system. Most of them use precious metals in the catalyst, so the system is expensive. These metals go up in cost if more demand is placed upon them in industry. If you could find a way to do it with a much cheaper method, that could reduce the cost. If one could use solar to split the water using catalysts, some of the problems from the above could be solved. To do so would likely be cost prohibitive to do.



cberg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Dec 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,183
Location: A swiftly tilting planet

31 Jan 2019, 2:59 pm

EzraS wrote:
cberg wrote:
EzraS wrote:
cberg wrote:
https://sos.noaa.gov/datasets/water-vapor-real-time/

https://sos.noaa.gov/datasets/carbon-flux/

There, I had time to find you these without actually having any spare time. There are probably thousands, it's a major computing project that's in no way hard to find or access.


So you're saying that it's all very simplistic.


It is to look at.


I think as is common with some aspies, you're expecting someone to already have your level of familiarity.


I'm expecting some people to have fun getting there. Supercomputing is everywhere these days, it's not my fault gimmicky apps & clickbait are so distracting.


_________________
"Standing on a well-chilled cinder, we see the fading of the suns, and try to recall the vanished brilliance of the origin of the worlds."
-Georges Lemaitre
"I fly through hyperspace, in my green computer interface"
-Gem Tos :mrgreen:


goldfish21
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

01 Feb 2019, 12:23 am

Image


_________________
No :heart: for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,036

04 Feb 2019, 2:48 am

goldfish21 wrote:
Image


ROFL :lol:



goldfish21
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

09 Feb 2019, 2:22 pm

I'm not actually a fish, buuuut:

Image


_________________
No :heart: for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,036

09 Feb 2019, 4:47 pm

When all the trees have been cut down,
when all the animals have been hunted,
when all the waters are polluted,
when all the air is unsafe to breathe,
only then will you discover you cannot eat money.

—Cree Prophecy