toldailytopic: Are the fires and unusual heat in Colorado some kind of judgement, a p
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
Reminds me of millennial movements. Or, we're always the wicked generation. But if God didn't turn his face from us when we were buying and selling and raping and mutilating other human beings for our pleasure and profit I doubt He's going to. Or, to put another shoe on it: TURNED?
The faithful exist in many nations, but show me a nation that ever was faithful since the fall of Israel, except by proclamation.
The faithful exist in many nations, but show me a nation that ever was faithful since the fall of Israel, except by proclamation.
You are thinking about a made for tv miniseries called the stand by stephen king...
One season is not evidence for anything. Even one year isn't necessarily evidence for climate change. But one decade after another, does give you enough data.
It's going to be more interesting weather in many parts of the world for a while.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts.txt
It's going to be more interesting weather in many parts of the world for a while.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts.txt
If the weather has a cycle of any kind how could we know how long those cycles are? Maybe the cycles overreach the stats we have on record. :idunno:
Isn't it possible we could have short cycles as well as long cycles?
Barbarian observes:
One season is not evidence for anything. Even one year isn't necessarily evidence for climate change. But one decade after another, does give you enough data.
It's going to be more interesting weather in many parts of the world for a while.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/ta..._v3/GLB.Ts.txt
Checking evidence. We know, for example, that sunspot minimums run roughly in a cycle, and that these correspond to a decrease in global temperature.
That's the problem. We just got through a sunspot minimum. Should have been colder than normal. Instead, it was a lot hotter than normal.
And there are scores of events like that. Cycles this profound aren't as sudden as the sudden increase in warming. And the correlation with CO2 is far better than any other data.
You could pray for another major volcanic eruption, which in the short term would be enough to account for the extra output of CO2 from the developing world. (maybe as much as a year or two).
But it won't last.
We do. But the CO2 loading is swamping those cycles.
One season is not evidence for anything. Even one year isn't necessarily evidence for climate change. But one decade after another, does give you enough data.
It's going to be more interesting weather in many parts of the world for a while.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/ta..._v3/GLB.Ts.txt
Checking evidence. We know, for example, that sunspot minimums run roughly in a cycle, and that these correspond to a decrease in global temperature.
That's the problem. We just got through a sunspot minimum. Should have been colder than normal. Instead, it was a lot hotter than normal.
And there are scores of events like that. Cycles this profound aren't as sudden as the sudden increase in warming. And the correlation with CO2 is far better than any other data.
You could pray for another major volcanic eruption, which in the short term would be enough to account for the extra output of CO2 from the developing world. (maybe as much as a year or two).
But it won't last.
We do. But the CO2 loading is swamping those cycles.
Alate_One
Well-known member
Of course there are many cycles. One cycle we've just started anew is the sunspot cycle which has been quiet for a very long period of time and is just picking up again.
Historic temperature trends look like this:
In other words, global warming was partially abated by the sunspot minimum. Now we're heading in the other direction. Pray for a big volcano.
Alate_One
Well-known member
The the Younger Dryas is actually the coldest part of the holocene (that's the dip way on the left). It's been relatively warm since. The little dip closest to the present is the little ice age.
The Younger Dryas stadial, also referred to as the Big Freeze,[1] was a geologically brief (1,300 ± 70 years) period of cold climatic conditions and drought which occurred between approximately 12,800 and 11,500 years BP (before present).--wikipedia
The Holocene is a geological epoch which began at the end of the Pleistocene[1] (around 12,000 14C years ago) and continues to the present---wikipedia
My point still stands.
The Holocene is a geological epoch which began at the end of the Pleistocene[1] (around 12,000 14C years ago) and continues to the present---wikipedia
My point still stands.
If you define an ice age as a period of time where the earth spends 80 to 90 percent of geological time covered in ice sheets from the polar latitudes down to temperate zones, wouldn't you agree that we are still in the midst of an ice age when you consider the temperature record for the last 5 million years? An ice age includes interglacial times like the one we are currently in. The holocene is just another interglacial period of the last major ice age.
What, are we Westeros now?
Locally, it was.
The terms "Little Ice Age" and "Medieval Warm Period" have been used to describe two past climate epochs in Europe and neighbouring regions during roughly the 17th to 19th and 11th to 14th centuries, respectively. The timing, however, of these cold and warm periods has recently been demonstrated to vary geographically over the globe in a considerable way (Bradley and Jones, 1993; Hughes and Diaz, 1994; Crowley and Lowery, 2000). Evidence from mountain glaciers does suggest increased glaciation in a number of widely spread regions outside Europe prior to the 20th century, including Alaska, New Zealand and Patagonia (Grove and Switsur, 1994). However, the timing of maximum glacial advances in these regions differs considerably, suggesting that they may represent largely independent regional climate changes, not a globally-synchronous increased glaciation (see Bradley, 1999). Thus current evidence does not support globally synchronous periods of anomalous cold or warmth over this timeframe, and the conventional terms of "Little Ice Age" and "Medieval Warm Period" appear to have limited utility in describing trends in hemispheric or global mean temperature changes in past centuries.
http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipcc_tar/?src=/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/070.htm
Little Ice Age cold interval in West Antarctica: Evidence from borehole temperature at the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) Divide
"The largest climate anomaly of the last 1000 years in the Northern Hemisphere was the Little Ice Age (LIA) from 1400–1850 C.E., but little is known about the signature of this event in the Southern Hemisphere, especially in Antarctica. We present temperature data from a 300 m borehole at the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) Divide. Results show that WAIS Divide was colder than the last 1000-year average from 1300 to 1800 C.E. The temperature in the time period 1400–1800 C.E. was on average 0.52 ± 0.28°C colder than the last 100-year average. This amplitude is about half of that seen at Greenland Summit (GRIP). This result is consistent with the idea that the LIA was a global event, probably caused by a change in solar and volcanic forcing, and was not simply a seesaw-type redistribution of heat between the hemispheres as would be predicted by some ocean-circulation hypotheses. The difference in the magnitude of the LIA between Greenland and West Antarctica suggests that the feedbacks amplifying the radiative forcing may not operate in the same way in both regions. "
GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL. 39, L09710, 7 PP., 2012
doi:10.1029/2012GL051260
The Little Ice Age as Recorded in the Stratigraphy of the Tropical Quelccaya Ice Cap
"The analyses of two ice cores from a southern tropical ice cap provide a record of climatic conditions over 1000 years for a region where other proxy records are nearly absent. Annual variations in visible dust layers, oxygen isotopes, microparticle concentrations, conductivity, and identification of the historical (A.D. 1600) Huaynaputina ash permit accurate dating and time-scale verification. The fact that the Little Ice Age (about A.D. 1500 to 1900) stands out as a significant climatic event in the oxygen isotope and electrical conductivity records confirms the worldwide character of this event. "
L. G. Thompson, E. Mosley-Thompson, W. Dansgaard and P. M. Grootes
Science
New Series, Vol. 234, No. 4774 (Oct. 17, 1986), pp. 361-364
(article consists of 4 pages)
Gulf Stream weakened in little Ice Age: Published online 29 November 2006 | Nature | doi:10.1038/news061127-8
I acknowledge that the LIA was not as severe in its impact in the southern hemisphere as it was in the northern hemisphere, but that does not stop the phenomena known as the LIA from being a period of time globally that was colder than any other time in the holocene since the younger dryas which began the period. The coldest periods may have been staggered over slightly different times and over different locations but taken as an average, there is no other period in the holocene that can compare to it. It has only been roughly 300 years since the LIA and it is insignificant that there should be a warming period since then. If the 10,000 years prior to the LIA were warmer on average than the twentieth century, why is the warming of the twentieth century anything to be alarmed about? Do we know the causes of the interglacial periods? What caused the increase in temperature from the coldest of the younger dryas period to the peak in temperature at the holocene optimum? Can we predict what the rate of temperature increase would be for the last 300 years based on those ancient causes, assuming preindustrial carbon dioxide levels? If not, on what basis can we claim to know what percentage of the temperature increase of the last 300 years was due to increased carbon dioxide levels?
In fact, the weakening of the Gulf stream was no doubt responsible for the colder climate in Europe.
Variations must take place in the ocean circulation when the general wind circulation varies. There are hints even within recent years that the variations in the ocean between Iceland and Scotland and Norway can be big: The area has been regarded as the main path of the warm, saline North Atlantic Drift water heading towards the Arctic; but, when the polar water occasionally intrudes from the north, sea-surface temperature is liable to fall by 3 to 5°C and presumably by more than this when, as in 1888, the ice advanced to near the Faeroe Islands. The long series of sea-surface temperature observations at that point, starting in 1867, and earlier observations covering the area in 1789, are studied. Various kinds of proxy data—notably the CLIMAP Atlantic ocean-bed core analysis results for the last IceAge climax and cod fishery and sea-ice reports from the LittleIceAge in the 17th century ad—are then used to indicate the variability in this part of the ocean on longer time scales. The reconstruction of the situation between ad 1675 and 1705 resulting from this study suggests a probable mean departure of the sea surface temperature from modern values between the Faeroes and southeast Iceland amounting to about −5°C; and at the climax in 1695 the polar water seems to have spread all around Iceland, across the entire surface of the Norwegian Sea to Norway, and south to near Shetland. Support for this diagnosis is found in a considerable variety of reports of environmental conditions existing at the time in Scotland, south Norway and elsewhere. The enhanced thermal gradient between approximately latitudes 55 and 65°N during the LittleIceAge, which this result indicates, offers an explanation for the occurrence in that period of a number of windstorms which changed the coasts in various places and seem to have surpassed in intensity the worst experienced in the region in more recent times.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/003358947990067X
No magic "cycles"; just a local event, which explains why it wasn't much outside of Europe.
Variations must take place in the ocean circulation when the general wind circulation varies. There are hints even within recent years that the variations in the ocean between Iceland and Scotland and Norway can be big: The area has been regarded as the main path of the warm, saline North Atlantic Drift water heading towards the Arctic; but, when the polar water occasionally intrudes from the north, sea-surface temperature is liable to fall by 3 to 5°C and presumably by more than this when, as in 1888, the ice advanced to near the Faeroe Islands. The long series of sea-surface temperature observations at that point, starting in 1867, and earlier observations covering the area in 1789, are studied. Various kinds of proxy data—notably the CLIMAP Atlantic ocean-bed core analysis results for the last IceAge climax and cod fishery and sea-ice reports from the LittleIceAge in the 17th century ad—are then used to indicate the variability in this part of the ocean on longer time scales. The reconstruction of the situation between ad 1675 and 1705 resulting from this study suggests a probable mean departure of the sea surface temperature from modern values between the Faeroes and southeast Iceland amounting to about −5°C; and at the climax in 1695 the polar water seems to have spread all around Iceland, across the entire surface of the Norwegian Sea to Norway, and south to near Shetland. Support for this diagnosis is found in a considerable variety of reports of environmental conditions existing at the time in Scotland, south Norway and elsewhere. The enhanced thermal gradient between approximately latitudes 55 and 65°N during the LittleIceAge, which this result indicates, offers an explanation for the occurrence in that period of a number of windstorms which changed the coasts in various places and seem to have surpassed in intensity the worst experienced in the region in more recent times.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/003358947990067X
No magic "cycles"; just a local event, which explains why it wasn't much outside of Europe.
Son of Jack
New member
Yup...