A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

contrails



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #261  
Old January 24th 10, 01:25 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Fred the Red Shirt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 180
Default Global Warming/Climate Change (was contrails)


Being a bit touchy aren't we Tom? If you want to present AGW/Climate
Change as a religion (which it seems to have become), then I am
neither a believer or a disbeliever (denialist), but an agnostic. The
latest data on World temperatures, which show a slight cooling, do not
correlate with the theory, so that is why.


Not according to people who actually track that sort of thing:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/?report=global#gtemp

Possibly you were thinking of data sets that begin with the El Nino
event of 1998-99?

If you use that as your starting point then it biases the result to
show
fairly flat temperatures from 1998 - 2008, just like you could use it
to exaggerate increasing temperatures from 1989 1999.

I think some people call that 'cherry picking' the data.

For myself, I don't put much stock in the currently available database
of direct temperature measurements, and less stock in proxies. In
both cases the sampling problem looms large.

I do trust the measurements of atmospheric gases from Mauna Loa
and the measurements of solar activity. Those are much easier to
sample.

If one does accept direct temperature measurement and pre-Mauna
Loa atmospheric gas measurements and proxies like these:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:In...ure_Record.png

What we see is a temperature rise of ~ 0.7 degrees Celsius during the
20th century.

One can explain that as follows:

Temperatures rose quickly at the end of the 19th century due
to methane released by oil exploitation (early on there was no
market for natural gas so gas wells were typically left uncapped).
As methane has a fairly low half life in the atmosphere (12 years)
temperatures dropped quickly until 1910 or so at which point
carbon emissions from industrial growth caused a continuous
rise through WWII.

Then very rapid industrial growth and coal burning in particular,
especially to power the world's electrical grids loaded the
atmosphere with aerosols that offset the increased greenhouse
effect of the concurrently released carbon dioxide until pollution
abatement came into vogue in the 1970s. This pollution abatement
concentrated on particulates and sulfur compounds, but ignored
carbon dioxide.

As particulates continued to drop out of the atmosphere and
carbon-dioxide rose so did temperatures from then until now,
with a noted acceleration after German reunification produced
a cleanup of East German Industry.

Other explanations are possible.

--

FF
  #262  
Old January 26th 10, 03:32 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
delboy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 56
Default Global Warming/Climate Change (was contrails)

On 24 Jan, 00:25, Fred the Red Shirt wrote:
Being a bit touchy aren't we Tom? If you want to present AGW/Climate
Change as a religion (which it seems to have become), then I am
neither a believer or a disbeliever (denialist), but an agnostic. The
latest data on World temperatures, which show a slight cooling, do not
correlate with the theory, so that is why.


Not according to people who actually track that sort of thing:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/?report=global#gtemp

Possibly you were thinking of data sets that begin with the El Nino
event of 1998-99?

If you use that as your starting point then it biases the result to
show
fairly flat temperatures from 1998 - 2008, just like you could use it
to exaggerate increasing temperatures from 1989 1999.

I think some people call that 'cherry picking' the data.

For myself, I don't put much stock in the currently available database
of direct temperature measurements, and less stock in proxies. *In
both cases the sampling problem looms large.

I do trust the measurements of atmospheric gases from Mauna Loa
and the measurements of solar activity. *Those are much easier to
sample.

If one does accept direct temperature measurement and pre-Mauna
Loa atmospheric gas measurements and proxies like these:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:In...ure_Record.png

What we see is a temperature rise of ~ 0.7 degrees Celsius during the
20th century.

One can explain that as follows:

Temperatures rose quickly at the end of the 19th century due
to methane released by oil exploitation (early on there was no
market for natural gas so gas wells were typically left uncapped).
As methane has a fairly low half life in the atmosphere (12 years)
temperatures *dropped quickly until 1910 or so at which point
carbon emissions from industrial growth caused a continuous
rise through WWII.

Then very rapid industrial growth and coal burning in particular,
especially to power the world's electrical grids loaded the
atmosphere with aerosols that offset the increased greenhouse
effect of the concurrently released carbon dioxide until pollution
abatement came into vogue in the 1970s. This pollution abatement
concentrated on particulates and sulfur compounds, but ignored
carbon dioxide.

As particulates continued to drop out of the atmosphere and
carbon-dioxide rose so did temperatures from then until now,
with a noted acceleration after German reunification produced
a cleanup of East German Industry.

Other explanations are possible.

--

Climate change has always happened through perfectly natural events.
Such as:

1) Changes in the Earth's orbit.
2) Changes in the Sun's activity levels.
3) Volcanic eruptions.
4) Large meteorite strikes.

Should we get the East Germans to start producing smoky two-stroke
Trabant cars in factories powered by smoky coal fired power stations
again, to reverse global warming? That seems to be one of your
arguments. Remember also that there was a large meteorite strike in
Siberia in 1908, which might have caused a cooling event, followed by
a slow rise in temperatures again. Also the Mount St Helens volcanic
eruption in 1980 put loads of particulates into the atmosphere. I
remember that we had a pretty awful cold wet summer after that.

Derek Copeland
  #263  
Old February 12th 10, 02:23 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Brian Whatcott
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 915
Default contrails

Tom Gardner wrote:
....
On the micro-climate scale, people round here are glad of a
winter cold spell - to extinguish the noxious pests, if only temporarily.
Brian W-...


I was looking forward some nice Mediterranean type weather for the UK
by now, due to global warming. In practice it seems to be colder
wetter and snowier. What went wrong?
Derek Copeland

....
I was shocked when somebody showed me that the UK is approximately on
Siberian latitudes, so that there is supposed to be some warm flow that
keeps it bearable

....
That would be the Gulf Stream.
rj

....
I don't argue with the naming of the warm Northward current, I argue
with the idea that the climate is bearable! :-)

Brian W


ObJoke: we don't have climate, we have weather!

... the variability of which makes us acutely sensitive
to changes. ... and is the reason why "the weather" is a standard
conversation topic amongst the British


Ha! You said it.

B
  #264  
Old February 12th 10, 12:19 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
delboy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 56
Default AGW/Climate Change (was contrails)

On 12 Feb, 01:23, brian whatcott wrote:
Tom Gardner wrote:
On the micro-climate scale, people round here are glad of a
winter cold spell - to extinguish the noxious pests, if only temporarily.
Brian W-...
I was looking forward some nice Mediterranean type weather for the UK
by now, due to global warming. In practice it seems to be colder
wetter and snowier. What went wrong?
Derek Copeland

...
I was shocked when somebody showed me that the UK is approximately on
Siberian latitudes, so that there is supposed to be some warm flow that
keeps it bearable

...
That would be the Gulf Stream.
rj

...
I don't argue with the naming of the warm Northward current, I argue
with the idea that the climate is bearable! *:-)


Brian W


ObJoke: we don't have climate, we have weather!


... the variability of which makes us acutely sensitive
to changes. ... and is the reason why "the weather" is a standard
conversation topic amongst the British


Ha! You said it.

B

On another group an AGW/Climate Change believer claimed that the
recently observed slight global cooling was a blip caused by an
absence of sun spots and reduced solar output. In that case can we say
for sure that the Sun wasn't just unusually active during the 20th
century?

Derek Copeland

P.S. No sign of Mediterannean weather for the UK yet. We have had one
of the coldest winters for many years!

  #265  
Old February 12th 10, 04:31 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Frank Whiteley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,099
Default AGW/Climate Change (was contrails)

On Feb 12, 4:19*am, delboy wrote:
On 12 Feb, 01:23, brian whatcott wrote:

Tom Gardner wrote:
On the micro-climate scale, people round here are glad of a
winter cold spell - to extinguish the noxious pests, if only temporarily.
Brian W-...
I was looking forward some nice Mediterranean type weather for the UK
by now, due to global warming. In practice it seems to be colder
wetter and snowier. What went wrong?
Derek Copeland

...
I was shocked when somebody showed me that the UK is approximately on
Siberian latitudes, so that there is supposed to be some warm flow that
keeps it bearable

...
That would be the Gulf Stream.
rj

...
I don't argue with the naming of the warm Northward current, I argue
with the idea that the climate is bearable! *:-)


Brian W


ObJoke: we don't have climate, we have weather!


... the variability of which makes us acutely sensitive
to changes. ... and is the reason why "the weather" is a standard
conversation topic amongst the British


Ha! You said it.


B


On another group an AGW/Climate Change believer claimed that the
recently observed slight global cooling was a blip caused by an
absence of sun spots and reduced solar output. In that case can we say
for sure that the Sun wasn't just unusually active during the 20th
century?

Derek Copeland

P.S. No sign of Mediterannean weather for the UK yet. We have had one
of the coldest winters for many years!


There's some indication the extended solar minimum ended about
December 12th.
  #266  
Old February 12th 10, 07:08 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Mark Jardini
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 48
Default AGW/Climate Change (was contrails)

How much would the weather patterns change if the average earth temp
went up 2 degF? how many storms and droughts? how much alteration in
ocean current? How many failed crops for dryland farmers? How much of
this can we tolerate?

The earth is perched in pretty fine ballance supporting 6+ billion H
sapiens, and more all the time. How much room is left for the other
forms of life on this planet? How hard would we have to hit the last
undeveloped landmasses if there were widespread crop failures? How
many starvations in the undeveloped world? How many would die of
thrist on a planet where fresh water is already a thin commodity? How
many extinctions of unique and wonderful species, let alone the
possible commercial values of said species?

How many dislocations and migrations of populations can we handle?
(witness the slow remedy in Haiti for a relatively mild disaster on a
world scale.)

Are you so sure global warming is hoax? Are you willing to risk all of
this on a stubborn point? If you are not concerned, you are not
thinking.

Mark Jardini MD, Capt, USAF (ret)
  #267  
Old February 13th 10, 12:23 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
AK
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 95
Default AGW/Climate Change (was contrails)

On Feb 12, 1:08*pm, Mark Jardini wrote:
How much would the weather patterns change if the average earth temp
went up 2 degF? how many storms and droughts? how much alteration in
ocean current? How many failed crops for dryland farmers? How much of
this can we tolerate?

The earth is perched in pretty fine ballance supporting 6+ billion H
sapiens, and more all the time. How much room is left for the other
forms of life on this planet? How hard would we have to hit the last
undeveloped landmasses if there were widespread crop failures? How
many starvations in the undeveloped world? How many would die of
thrist on a planet where fresh water is already a thin commodity? How
many extinctions of unique and wonderful species, let alone the
possible commercial values of said species?

How many dislocations and migrations of populations can we handle?
(witness the slow remedy in Haiti for a relatively mild disaster on a
world scale.)

Are you so sure global warming is hoax? Are you willing to risk all of
this on a stubborn point? If you are not concerned, you are not
thinking.

Mark Jardini MD, Capt, USAF (ret)


Enough of this global warming discussion on RAS. If you guys have so
much time, go and join another group. This is about flying please be
respectful. Do we really want to discuss politics here? I hope not.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
contrails No Name Aviation Photos 3 June 22nd 07 01:47 PM
Contrails Darkwing Piloting 21 March 23rd 07 06:58 PM
Contrails Kevin Dunlevy Piloting 4 December 13th 06 09:31 PM
Contrails Steven P. McNicoll Piloting 17 December 10th 03 11:23 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.