Climate Outcome NZ
  • Climate Outcome. Home page.
  • Latest posts & news
  • Temperature
  • Precipitation changes in a warming world.
  • Increased flood damage in a warming world.
  • Drought
  • Wind
  • El Nino Southern Ocilation. ENSO.
  • Sea Level
  • Polar melting
  • Arctic sea ice + weather.
  • West Antarctica
  • Ocean Acidity
  • Plant Die Back. Animal Migration.
  • Climate threats
  • Streams a vital resource.
  • Clean energy alternatives.
  • Climate Change in the Bay of Islands
  • The Author. Bob Bingham.
  • Satellite accuracy.
  • Reference sites

Bob Bingham Blog page.

A series of opinion pieces on, mostly climate change and related subjects to do with New Zealand.

Back to home page.

Recurring ice ages and warm periods explained

15/10/2014

9 Comments

 
Picture
To understand modern climate change a knowledge of the natural cycle of ice ages and warm periods is a great help. Once the simple mechanics of how the system works is appreciated it is easier to see where we are going wrong and the likely consequences of our actions.
A detailed explanation is available on this simple website or watch this 30 minute explanation on YouTube.


9 Comments
Bob Bristow
19/10/2014 12:01:19 pm

Interesting and clear video - Many thanks for blowing some cobwebs away.

I recently learnt that an international symposium of scientists figured that we had a 50% chance of keeping under +2°C (global average) at 450 ppm of atmospheric CO2 concentration.

Remembering my business experience (with computer capacity planning), I would draw a thick red line at around 425 ppm. As we are now at 400 and increasing around 2 ppm per year, we need to really move within the next 10 years, and also consider scrubbing the atmosphere for CO2 (overcoming Second Law of Thermodynamics), a lot to do and so little time. Now aged nearly 70 I expect to see a late summer ice free Arctic before I finally depart.

Reply
Bob Bingham
20/10/2014 10:52:25 am

When they talk about the forecast temperature from CO2 I am never sure if that is a simple calculation based on a certain level of CO2 say at 425 ppm or if it includes feedbacks from methane and dying trees and warmer seas. I suspect that it does not include feedbacks because it would be a very complicated calculation.

Reply
Bob Bristow
20/10/2014 04:44:08 pm

I suspect you can use Svante Arrhenius's 1896 formula

\Delta F = \alpha \ln(C/C_0)

With a bit of computer modelling/forecasting feedbacks and amplifiers. The result is approximate but not too inaccurate. The law of physics is known.


Mack
29/10/2014 03:02:14 pm

Bob Bristow......"we really need to move within the next 10yrs"
Hell Bob, we haven't moved for 40yrs,..what's the hurry? Add another 10yrs or so of inaction would give new meaning to the word "lethargy"
To both Bobs ....There's one thing you don't have to worry about any more and that's Man-made global warming. You might want to take a read of these comments I said to Dr. Roy Spencer last year beginning with something like this....
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2013/04/direct-evidence-of-earths-greenhouse-effect/#comment-75584
then this....
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2013/04/a-simple-model-of-global-average-surface-temperature/#comment-77341
Which then probably caused this.....
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2013/05/time-for-the-slayers-to-put-up-or-shut-up/#comment-78670
I wish you happy reading and good fortune for the remainder of your lives,
Mack

Reply
Bob Bingham
30/10/2014 04:51:21 am

Mack. As you can see I don't get many comments on my website so it was interesting to get a post from a denier. When looking at Roy Spencer you have to realise that he is a member of the Marshal Institute which is an extreme right wing organisation, funded in large part by the coal and oil companies and completely committed to misinformation concerning global warming.. He is one of a very, very few scientists who speak against the science of climate change. Most who do are either meteorologists, as Spencer is or physicists. .

Reply
Mack
30/10/2014 03:46:57 pm

......"to get a post from a denier" Please Bob, I'm a denialist,..it's more professional.
You misunderstand Roy Spencer's position Bob. Spencer is a "lukewarmer". He's listed as just that, in that right hand column on Anthony Watt's site, WUWT. If Watts were to classify himself on his own blog, he would be right there alongside Spencer...ie a "lukewarmer". Now whether or not Watts and Spencer have adopted this position to preserve the AGW arguement and hence their blogs, or they actually believe that Man is capable of altering the global temperature...is the moot point.
At this point in time, I would say Spencer is only throwing a bone to the true believers Bob. But unfortunately these 2 individuals have spent just about their whole lives researching, blogging, talking about "greenhouse" gases. They're not going to say..."Oh sorry, the slayers are right, There are no "greenhouse" gases...many apologies, let's all go home now and close all the blogs"
But the fact is , their position is untenable. They want their cake and eat it. "Can I have just a wee bit of AGW please....just some effect by Man, surely?" Sorry, they either have to adhere to the methodology and numbers of the IPCC or say ..no..the IPCC are wrong....the IPCC figures are wrong. They can't just sit in no-man's land between the denialists like myself and the IPCC, because they suddenly find themselves drifting about.... bereft of any numbers to support their stance. Nothing more than a thought experiment in the way science to support their "greenhouse" theory.
(Spencer really came out with his gloves on Jan 1st ! New Years day ! 2013 ...see his site Bob.)
Bob, what you really need to do is read the science presented by Nasif Nahle at Jennifer Marohasy's site to understand all this. It's a big read, put aside a couple of days, The facts are real, the characters are real and live, what better a read? I think you are looking at an historical document there...hence the attempts from your side to sabotage Jennifer's blog.
Here's another link to some of my comments
http://blog.hotwhopper.com/2014/08/sack-australias-biggest-laughing-stock.html?showComment=1408182051991#c8686407071562919858
to help you understand that we are looking at one of the biggest scientific mistakes/deceptions/hoaxs/scam in the history of modern times (spanning about 40yrs)
Some further clarification Bob, The incoming solar of 1360w/sq.m simply attenuates down to 340w/sq.m at the Earth's surface. The "missing" about 1020w/sq.m. (ie, the difference between) would be mainly attenuated in that place of physical paradox called the THERMOSPHERE. Climate scientists? who concocted the quack "greenhouse" theory. haven't thought much further than the clouds. In fact the theory artificially considers the atmosphere to the tropopause,about 20ks up , when in fact it goes out about 500ks to the exosphere
The newer outer satellites can actually see the glowing of nitric oxide and CO2 as they shed heat from incoming solar radiation. (Saber study) It gets to almost 2500degrees C out there Bob !
Space craft have to revolve otherwise they'd be red hot on one side and freeze on the other. Notice that all the astronauts say this is a piece of crap science.
Yes Bob, it's an old, outdated, unreal, crackpot "greenhouse" theory.
Divest yourself of it.
Regards,
Mack. (Chief Sky Dragon Slayer)

Reply
Bob Bingham
31/10/2014 05:25:34 am

As soon as you mentioned wattsouwith that I knew is was fossil fuel funded rubbish.

Reply
Mack
31/10/2014 06:30:51 am

Yes sorry Bob, unfortunately there are some people like you who could be waterboarded in the fount of knowledge but they still wouldn't drink.
Adios Amigo
Mack.

Reply
Bob Bingham
31/10/2014 09:10:35 am

Get a reference from NASA or NOAA and I will have a look at it.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Bob Bingham 

    Occasional blog posts on topical news items concerning the climate.  Please click the RSS feed to receive updates.

    Picture

    Archives

    December 2024
    April 2024
    June 2023
    January 2023
    November 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    May 2021
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    September 2019
    December 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    September 2017
    June 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    September 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013

    RSS Feed

    Categories

    All
    Clean Water
    Climate Change.
    CO2 Levels
    El Nino
    Floods
    Methane
    Ocean Acidity
    Pine Island Galacier
    Sea Level Rise
    Soil Loss
    Storms

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly