The Most Extra New Super Global Warming Thread

[Switch]

Here's a direct link, the Huffington post article is only an intermediary.
http://gristmill.grist.org/skeptics

[LordKelvin]

You know, everyone throws statistics at each other like stones, thinking that they will make an impact.

How about we look at CO2, just by itself. The amount of this gas in the atmosphere is one of the more concrete measurements we can make. Ok, so, since measurements started being made in the late 1800's, the amount of CO2 recorded or estimated then was less than 0.01 percent of the atmosphere. Fast forward 200 years. The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is still EXACTLY the same. Why? Two reasons. One: The ratio of trees to factories is about 1000000 to 1. Each tree is a CO2 eating machine. Unless you were to cover the entire face of the earth with 24 hour factories, we aren't going to make the slightest change to the makeup of the atmosphere. Secondly, the Earth is constantly losing high-energy molecules to space. Since CO2 naturally absorbs energy from sunlight better than other air molecules, it is more likely to be energized enough to leave the atmosphere.

So don't presume to tell me that greenhouse gases, especially CO2, are culprits in a trend of global warming. We're just coming out of an Ice Age in cosmic terms, people. You know... maybe the SUN has something to do with it. But no, that flaming ball that is 400 million degrees Celsius and 500 million times more massive than our planet couldn't possibly have an effect on our climate, especially when other planets with similar observed temperature increases DON'T have human industry on them.

[bkelly]

Originally Posted by LordKelvin

Fast forward 200 years. The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is still EXACTLY the same.

LordKelvin, would you consider anthropogenic global warming as being possible if CO2 levels were not the same?

bkelly

[LordKelvin]

Possibly, but I would still cite the Sun as the likelier source of global warming.

[bkelly]

Originally Posted by LordKelvin

Possibly, but I would still cite the Sun as the likelier source of global warming.

And what if I could show you that the sun is putting out no more energy than it has in years past?

bkelly

[LordKelvin]

I wasn't suggesting it was. Variations in Earth's orbit, bringing it closer to the Sun, can have a profound effect on temperatures on the surface. So can axis tilt. If the poles get more sunlight, of course they will melt. And geologically, we are in a period that it makes sense for the Earth to warm up. As I said before, we just left an Ice Age. So what comes after Ice Age? You guessed it, global warming.

[bkelly]

Originally Posted by LordKelvin

I wasn't suggesting it was. Variations in Earth's orbit, bringing it closer to the Sun, can have a profound effect on temperatures on the surface. So can axis tilt. If the poles get more sunlight, of course they will melt. And geologically, we are in a period that it makes sense for the Earth to warm up. As I said before, we just left an Ice Age. So what comes after Ice Age? You guessed it, global warming.

Makes sense. All right, what if I showed that the energy the Earth has received from the sun in the past thirty-five years has not changed significantly?

bkelly

[LordKelvin]

Energy, perhaps not, but distribution of said energy is relevant. If the Earth tilts slightly more towards the Sun at the North Pole, say, more of that equal amount of energy is soaked up there, causing more ice to melt, and hence, warming.

[bkelly]

Originally Posted by LordKelvin

Energy, perhaps not, but distribution of said energy is relevant. If the Earth tilts slightly more towards the Sun at the North Pole, say, more of that equal amount of energy is soaked up there, causing more ice to melt, and hence, warming.

Okay, what if I showed that that the Earth is currently losing tilt in relation to the sun?

bkelly

[Switchcraft]

bkelly, if you show that we're getting less heat from the sun overall, I think you'll be lending credence to the idea that global warming is protecting us from another ice age.

[bkelly]

Originally Posted by Switchcraft

bkelly, if you show that we're getting less heat from the sun overall, I think you'll be lending credence to the idea that global warming is protecting us from another ice age.

I believe I am offering to show that the heat we've been getting from the sun is relatively unchanged.

bkelly

[Switchcraft]

Originally Posted by bkelly

I believe I am offering to show that the heat we've been getting from the sun is relatively unchanged.

bkelly

You said you could prove outpout hadn't changed and that we're tilting away from the sun, right?

[LordKelvin]

If we "tilt away from the sun" that exposes the other pole. The spin of the Earth causes axis wobble, so the Earth never 'loses' angle to the sun, and the axis of rotation never changes far enough to prevent a pole from being lit up.

Not to mention, you've been offering all these hypothetical arguments, but haven't actually shown me that the scenarios you are using as counterpoints are actually the case.

[bkelly]

Originally Posted by Switchcraft

You said you could prove outpout hadn't changed and that we're tilting away from the sun, right?

Well, tilting "toward the sun" or "away from the sun" is a bit confusing when we circle it every year. I did offer to show that the Earth's axis is currently becoming more perpendicular to the ecliptic.

But the tilt has almost no effect on how much total solar energy gets to the Earth. I believe LordKelvin's argument was that if more solar energy is hitting the poles, it could be the cause of the ice caps melting. I was offering to show that, if anything, the poles are getting less direct solar energy.

bkelly

[LordKelvin]

Ok, lets assume the poles are getting less sunlight. That would mean the equatorial regions receive more, right? The ocean and wind currents that blow upwards along the Eastern Asia Coast and Western Atlantic Coast carry this very warm, sometimes hot air and water all the way to the poles, even in the deepest of winters. Even if it only changes the average temperature a degree, thats enough energy, in terms of that great mass of water, to melt a substantial amount of ice.

With more ice melting, that means more liquid water, which holds heat, at least on a scale that massive, for a very long time. This could also effectively explain a global trend of melting ice and rising temperatures.