The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Cosmic cycles, not carbon dioxide, control climate > Comments

Cosmic cycles, not carbon dioxide, control climate : Comments

By Viv Forbes, published 20/1/2016

The warm days, seasons, years and epochs have never been a deadly threat to life on Earth. Frost, snow, hail and ice are the killers.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. All
Another straw in the bucket of denialism. Why not see the situation as it is instead of getting the latest conspiracy to help deny your future. Twenty two years and progress is just starting to happen.
The Sun-Climate Connection
The rate at which energy from the sun reaches the top of Earth’s atmosphere is denoted by the term “total solar irradiance” (or TSI). TSI fluctuates slightly from day to day and week to week. Superimposed on these rapid short-term fluctuations is a cycle related to sunspots in the outer layers of the Sun that lasts approximately every 11 years.
The current TSI varies with season, time of day, and latitude. Yet it is thought that small changes in this relatively small amount of absorbed solar energy can make a difference to our climate. Might changes in the rate of solar absorption, called radiative forcing (RF), be influencing our climate today?

(1) Direct changes in climate due to solar output
The average increase in solar radiative forcing since 1750 is much smaller (~ 0.12 W m-2) than the increase in RF due to heat-trapping gases (~2.6 W m-2) over that same time period. [3]The slight increase in solar absorption is, moreover, more than offset by natural cooling. The twentieth century witnessed the eruption of major volcanoes— the most recent, Pinatubo, in 1991—that spewed tiny reflective particles into the atmosphere. Incoming energy from the sun that encountered these particles was reflected back into space. In other words, natural processes alone would have brought about slight late twentieth century cooling—not the warming we have experienced.
Posted by 579, Thursday, 21 January 2016 8:38:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Curmugeon, suggest you go to California and take a bo peep at the latest actual Solar thermal plant. One built by private enterprise in the desert, which by the way, does everything I've claimed!

Or are you so obtuse as to believe Rich industrialists are going to risk their own capital on a pipe dream?

Suggest all you other anti renewables go take a look see. Moreover, not everything I've suggested is a renewable.

With cheaper than coal thorium being mainstream energy production and simply abandoned in the fifties due to a lack of weapons spin off.

Incidently, thorium reaction uses up nearly all its fuel in almost complete inverse proportion to oxide reactors. With the waste product of thorium reaction being far less toxic and eminently suitable for long life space batteries.

Suggest you engage brain next time before putting your mouth into gear, or just opening your mouth to change socks!
Rhrosty
Posted by Rhrosty, Thursday, 21 January 2016 4:29:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ho Humm !
Posted by Bazz, Monday, 25 January 2016 7:42:39 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The first impressions of the Paris deliberations provided some promise; perhaps generated by the self congratulatory slaps on the back that politicians gave themselves. The seriousness discussed by scientists has not been replicated by political decision making since. Pushing for the Adami Mine is mutually exclusive to mitigating climate change; other governments are pushing similar projects though not on such a scale.

Over the last years the US has been hit by one major extreme weather event after another. Some of those extreme events being completely out of season.
The “blob” which was noticed off the West Coast of the US in 2013 has warmed waters extending from Mexico through to Alaska. The current debate is about whether the El Nino will dissipate those warm waters created by the "blob".

Lake Poopo in Bolivia (area of 3,191 km2) has just dried through the break down of glaciers, mining and climate change.
Last year the Atacama Desert in Chile was flooded, causing death and loss of infrastructure in a mining town.
The Amazon Basin has been impacted by set fires, wildfires and drought. Access to reticulated water has been an issue in some areas of Brazil, Mexico and Caribbean countries.

Around Christmas time areas within the Arctic Circle were experiencing above freezing temperatures when they should have been well into minus temperatures.
A current forecast suggests that the Arctic Circle is about to be hit by another warm spell.

The examples provided have been noted on the basis of being extraordinary; one or two of those examples might be accepted as being natural variation in climate; but, they are just some examples, there are many more.

Some here do not believe in anthropogenic climate change; what do they propose to do about the view that climate is changing naturally? Low lying areas subject to storm surge and sea rise, areas subject to extreme rainfall events, or bushfires will cause major problems regardless of being natural or man made.
Posted by ant, Monday, 25 January 2016 1:36:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy