Climate Science

Total layman question here.... I understand that the effects are and will be different in N VS S but of course I don't fully understand. I see migration predictions indicting moving north as a hedge but i don't see any that mention moving south. In the simplest terms, if moving to Canada / Alaska might be a hedge then why wouldn't moving to Buenos Aires / Patagonia be the same / similar hedge

Questions Regarding Expanding Oxygen Minimum Zones: A review of the "Scripps O2 Program" website it was noted that a slight reduction in atmospheric concentrations of 02 is occurring - worldwide. This caused me to wonder how this might affect the ocean solute. Is it "probable" O2 was "stored" as ocean solute when atmospheric O2 concentrations were somewhat higher than in this emerging Anthropocene; and that in order for atmospheric O2 concentrations to sample at lower concentration, O2 stored in the oceans would first have to come out of solution? Would this have a tendency to mask atmospheric de-oxygenation? In my review of this subject I noted that …

His prediction is dire. We have already destroyed ourselves, but are ignorant of the fact.

I'm wondering if I could get some info here on a few issues that a friend of mine has put forth which, some of which seem ridiculous to me, but I don't have the expertise to refute (I'd be interested in anyone pointing me to any websites and/or scientific papers that might help). First off, he claimed that the thousands of peer reviewed papers regarding climate change were "pop science", amounting to a conspiracy of like-minded, politically influenced dittoheads out to fool us. He also called the 97% "mob science". He further claimed "whatever the majority agrees on must be the truth and whoever disagrees should be shunned and told to stop burying their heads in the san…

How would climate on Earth look like if the axial tilt was higher, say 45 degrees and not current 23.45 degrees? Likewise, what if it was lower - 10 degrees for example?

I never bought into the claim that there has been a Pause or Hiatus in global warming - it looked obvious to me that global warming overlays a lot of variability and that variability in surface temperatures is more than capable of ups and downs lasting as long or longer than a period as short as from 1998 to 2014. I think Ocean heat content shows the change in global heat balance more directly and clearly than surface temperatures and shows much less year to year, decade to decade variability. It never showed any warming Hiatus - When known causes of temperature variability were taken into account - most of all ENSO, which was dominated during the 'hiatus' period…

Ophiolite and I had an exchange in the "Who here is a global warming skeptic?" thread. I did want to continue but the thread was locked (for being overlong) before I could do so. Hope I'm not stepping on toes by starting this thread. Ophiolite asked for responses to this - My own reply was that it is not an appropriate default position to take because most people do not have the ability to evaluate complex science and accepting what the overwhelming majority of experts in a field tell us is not just appropriate, for those who hold positions of trust and responsibility it could be considered negligence for them to fail to do so. Ophiolite replied that many parti…

Would altering the albedo of deserts by (for example) planting trees or building a large number of solar panels cause them to cool down and have more rain?

I am! Anybody else? It's still considered plausible to have doubts about it, right?

If it were the goal to regulate the temperature of a planetary surface, would screwing around with atmospheric composition be the best way to go about it? I think not, and to my way of reasoning consider shading the planet(metaphorical "smoke") or the judicious application of mirrors to augment solar radiation directly to be more direct and efficacious. Obviously this has implications for terraforming new planets and since we are unlikely to find worlds suitable for habitation "off the rack", we had better get used to tailoring, if you will pardon another metaphor.

I just got this. Is this accurate? How should we check this information? [Original journal ref. at bottom of article.] 2015-11-12 Massive northeast Greenland glacier is rapidly meltinghttp://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/11/151112150438.htm No hard timescale in this article, but it appears that one massive glacier has broken off already, and its melt will raise oceans by 18". Clearly, such a melt will be in the open Atlantic Ocean, and so in the next decade or so. IPCC's worst projection is 3 metres by 2100, & at best 1 metre. IPCC's Global Mean Sea Level Rise https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/unfccc/cop19/3_gregory13sbsta.pdf Original glacier article…

An interesting article from David Roberts. You might remember this quote form David Roberts. http://www.vox.com/2015/10/23/9604120/climate-models-uncertainty Here is my favorite parts . So why are we spending tax money on climate change or climate change mitigation?

NOAA's September data just came in, still showing an unusual cold patch of water south of Iceland, which has now been there for about a year. Interesting discussion about the issue here: http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/is-the-gulf-stream-slowing-down-d11-e725.php

Just wondering what more informed minds than mine think about this theory that humans aren't changing the planet. Thanks!

Just ran a cross this. Interesting Climate change skeptics may be about to lose one of their favorite arguments The other thing to remember is that salt water freezes at a lower temperature than fresh water, so the ocean can be at some temperature <0º so frozen fresh(er) water can be warmer than liquid salt water. The amount of ice increasing is still consistent with the temperature rising.

Hey everyone, I found this image off of Facebook, and it seemed too insane to be true, so I wanted to find out just how legitimate it is... hence my being on here - the first result that came up when I typed "science forum" into Google - in an attempt to get the answer from the horse's mouth. Is it true - is the amount of energy that hits the Earth in an hour enough to meet the world's energy demands for a whole year? Is it maybe a half-truth, one that's been oversimplified, or is it just plain wrong? Would really appreciate an answer, thanks.

Hi all I was watching a post which based most of the effects of global sea change on melting ice caps or ice melting in general. My objection might be correct , or I may get educated. I thought water expanded according to increased temperature , therefore a change in global temperature would increase the volume of the oceans as a whole long before the icecaps really came into play. I haven't really heard or read much about the water which is already contained in the oceans having an impact on rising sea levels ,So this is the reason for my comment. Cheers Iseason

This is a graph generated from ice core samples from Lake Vostok, Antarctica. They were able to determine temperature data based on the way the ice crystallized, extrapolate CO2 and Methane concentrations of the time when the ice formed and dust concentrations. This data goes back 400,000 years (actually I think they have up to 800,000 years now). It tells a simple story. Ice ages happen approximately every 90,000 years. After the ice age, there is a subtle global warming which takes about 90,000 years, until it becomes a more aggressive global warming, which somehow results in an ice age. Why do we care about all the other stuff? Who cares about some cities showi…

I was wondering if any of you could tell me some o your ideas about climate change related with clean energy and waste manegement, and also a way in what you think, this problems could be solve in differents levels (community, country, world)

Do solid particles of pollutants actually act as nuclei for the formation of clouds ? Is this a caveat of pollution being detrimental to humans ? Please advise.

This TED talk (remixed) says that if we get to 4 or 5 degrees, natural feedbacks (like the 'methane bomb') could take us to 12. At that point, this popular Grist writer summarises climate science as predicting half the planet would be uninhabitable. Is this really what climate science is saying? Could the methane feedbacks take us from 4 or 5 degrees to 12 and then dump our great grandchildren with half the planet being uninhabitable? www.youtube.com/watch?v=pznsPkJy2x8 Read more: http://bravenewclimate.proboards.com/thread/499/talk-says-degrees-planet-evacuated#ixzz3GYu0JMIb

A major part of the AGW doctrine is that the influence of rising CO2 levels will bring about increasing incidence and severity of extreme weather events, most recently loudly trumpeted regarding Hurricane Sandy. So what does the historical record tell us? A completely different story, that's what. Instead of rains of blood and frogs, plagues of locusts and acne, we find relatively docile storm seasons around the globe as CO2 levels relentlessly creep upward. Don't take my word for it look for yourselves. If CO2 levels are the DOMINANT factor in climate why not give credit where credit is due? Because only nasty weather has anything to do with global warming accord…

Recent events in South Asia have been the cause of much hand wringing among the Faithful. Evidently the lofty glaciers of the Himalayas are dwindling to the point that the future of hydroelectric power on the subcontinent is imperiled. Fortunately that ancient land is endowed with abundant reserves of thorium and is already a leader in thorium reactor research, and happily for all concerned such a power source generates no additional CO2. Of course, dire warnings of a similar nature have been made before and without benefit of peer review, leading to some rancor between the IPCC and Indian officials.

Are earthquakes the result of impulse forces acting at a point ? And do they obey the inverse square law ? Please advise.

Below is a link to a video, in the video Professor Bob Carter lectures on climate-change. Would his views hold with the Experts here on Science Forums? https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DRCISn1KfKQ