Wanna See Antartica? Coming to a Coast Near You!

[Kyreth]

More bull shit*

This winter has been the coldest and most snowy/rainy/sleety in about 5 years.

You're an idiot, though I suppose it's not your fault. Global warming is a misnomer but it's really easy to trumpet whether it's the media or an idiot activist.

Our climate conditions are going to oscillate between extremes more than it has the past 30 years as a direct result of our influence on the environment. It's not just an overall warming pattern but a movement away from the relatively stable T we had been blessed with.

Just wait till the summer though. It's going to challenge for one of the hottest ever recorded, if not break all records out right.

What's interesting is that a system going out of balance very often experiences more and more extreme "corrections" before crashing into a new and relatively "stable" pattern.

We keep getting more radical and violent weather/climate changes like this and it's a good sign (well, a bad one actually) that the global climate is retaining more and more energy as we go along. That is, "global warming". Yeah, it may be snowy/sleety as hell where you are- but that doesn't mean "normal" patterns are happening elsewhere. Quite the opposite, you want to see weather patterns NOT be so strongly off-kilter as they've been and continue to be nation and world-wide.

[Kaylia]

From seeing positive energy output via Fusion, probably a while, but there are locations capable of producing controlled Fusion on Earth.

Just costs more to run em than you get out still.

You say why worry about the sun, since you can't do anything about it, yet you're worrying about climate change like you can do something about it?

I've had a grand epic discussion a year or so ago on another board about the suns effect on climate, and I'm going to trim it down as such: Findings suggest that the major driving force behind Ice Ages is a long term Solar Cycle coinciding with the wobble in the Earths Axis, when it hits during one period of the wobble, you get increased global temperatures.

When it hits during another period, you get increased glaciation and ice ages.

There are too many factors influencing the Earths temperature to pin it down to our actions being a major one.

Cosmic Radiation has been suggested to have ties to Cloud Formation, Solar Wind variations affect the amount of Cosmic Rays reaching Earth, Intra-Galactic Magnetic Fields and Interstellar Gas seem to have a greater effect on the Heliosphere than was previously thought.

Solar Burps, Algae Blooms, Magnetic Pole fluctuations, Cloud Composition, Ozone Depletion, Ozone Replenishing, interplanetary dust, space trash, entropy.

There are too many things affecting the condition of our planet, on top of the Atmosphere and it's contents, to say "We're killing the Environment."

As funny as it sounds, we don't exist in a vacuum, but the sky probably isn't falling chicken little.


Though, if you ask me, I'll happily shout METEOR'S DID IT!

That'll be $20 dollars.

Like you said, we can make controlled fusion on Earth, but there is still a huge technology gap that prevent us of doing anything efficient with it. We still cant tell for sure if it will ever be worthwhile to do on Earth.Fission is relatively clean compared to most method, and Fast neutron reactor are promising tho.

I'm not sure why you say we cant do anything about climate change, because we can. We can affect our environment more than any other organism with our technology. Give us a few year to wipe all forest, toss hundred of tons of toxic waste in the ocean, drop a few bombs here and there, and you will get a pretty waste land.

[Keno]

Also, I believe I read somewhere that we are due for another ice age, and that glaciers in the northern hemisphere are actually increasing in size?

Welcome to the 1970s.

I'll say the same thing to you about global warming in 40 years :D

Also, /clap Max

[Tristam]

Also, I believe I read somewhere that we are due for another ice age, and that glaciers in the northern hemisphere are actually increasing in size?

Welcome to the 1970s.

I'll say the same thing to you about global warming in 40 years :D

Also, /clap Max

Not quite, there was a cooling period between the 40s and 70s, but scientists were pointing out as early as 76' that extrapolation of that cooling (done in the popular media, not the scientific media) was done erroneously.

"In a bit more detail, people were aware of various forcing mechanisms - the ice age cycle; CO2 warming; aerosol cooling - but didn't know which would be dominant in the near future. By the end of the 1970's, though, it had become clear that CO2 warming would probably be dominant; that conclusion has subsequently strengthened."

from
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=94

Also, max makes the common mistake of confusing the greenhouse effect with global warming. Yes, H2O is responsible for a majority of the greenhouse effect that keeps this planet quite a bit warmer than would be otherwise. The reason scientists don't really care about H2O is for a number of reasons, one of which is that the absorption spectra of different gases are not the same, so 1+1 does not necessarily = 2 in the atmosphere. The warming effects of an atmosphere 50% CO2 and 50% H2O would not be the same as one 25% CO2 75% H2O if total volume is the same. Furthermore, CO2 has a much longer residence time in the atmosphere than H2O, water drops as rain/snow after evaporation in about five days, while CO2 spends muuuuuuuuch longer up there. Lastly, the global H2O atmospheric content has not changed due to human activity, we know this, but CO2 has changed.

Also remember, just because you don't understand how all this climate stuff happens, dosen't mean other people, especially those that have been studying this their entire lives, don't. Solar cycles are very well characterized and total irradiance has been accurately measured by satellite over the past 30 years, and is actually just past an 11 year minimum on that cycle. NASA reports that solar activity, which may have been increasing overall over the past 100 years, has had little effect on climate variation. If the sun continues increasing in irradiance over the next few centuries, then we can worry about that compounding what we're already doing. The only thing worth worrying about the sun right now is if some sort of megaflare happens that overwhelms the magnetosphere and fries everything that dosen't happen to be miles underground at the time.

http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Pu ... ut2004.pdf

[Max™]

Actually, I deliberately brought up Greenhouse effects, as they are often cited in terms of runaway situations leading to drastic Global Warming (See: Venus, which I like the theory that a previous visiting race to the Solar System broke) but not as the only cause.

Then I specifically mentioned that Greenhouse gases are but one part of Climate Change as a whole.

Then I pointed out that for all that we CAN do to affect the Climate, there are so many factors which are completely out of our control.

I don't think it's a bad thing to stop polluting like we do, I can SMELL the air in big cities.

I just think this think green trend is a little half assed because the technology hasn't caught up yet.

My mom made a really funny point though, to reduce global temperatures, one could simply increase the albedo of the Earth. Painting your roof white or with a mirrored silver paint could help achieve this, and probably much more directly than any single consumer could hope to achieve otherwise.

Most of our Co2 production is upstream from the end consumer, Cars make a good amount, Coal Plants, Gas Refineries, they make a lot more.


I still say this is all just part of a periodic fluctuation, which will sooner or later reverse and dip back into another Ice Age.

So remember kids, give a hoot! Pollute! Cause only YOU can prevent Glaciation!

[Kaylia]

Actually, I deliberately brought up Greenhouse effects, as they are often cited in terms of runaway situations leading to drastic Global Warming (See: Venus, which I like the theory that a previous visiting race to the Solar System broke) but not as the only cause.

Our of curiosity, what sciences class did you had at school?



And while we are taking about extraterrestial life form, here is an interesting articles. We found almost every ingredients needed for life on saturn's moon (organic matter similar to the one on comet, heat and h20). Liquid water is the last one we need, but it's very likely there is some.
http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/news/press-r ... newsID=827

[Melchiah]

entropy

This is the single most intelligent statement in this thread.

[Max™]

I've been studying the sciences since I was 4 or 5 years old, when I asked my mom a little kid question like "why is the sky blue?" she gave me a set of encyclopedia's, and I just kind of took off from there.

22 Years of studying and thinking produces some weird results, and even weirder views.

Which moon btw, they found organic molecules on Enceladus, signs of a possible water mantle on Titan, and good old Europa of course.

[Blarg]

Findings suggest that the major driving force behind Ice Ages is a long term Solar Cycle coinciding with the wobble in the Earths Axis, when it hits during one period of the wobble, you get increased global temperatures.

Those Milankovitch cycles only worked/coincided for 1 ice age and were wrong about other ones. Also, the 2 major cycles that should effect the temp the most are currently on the cooling side.

[Melchiah]

Organic molecules like... acetic acid or alcohols? Sorry, I haven't taken Orgo, and my BME major doesn't require them.

[evilbau]

Which moon btw, they found organic molecules on Enceladus, signs of a possible water mantle on Titan, and good old Europa of course.

Related: couple TED talks about those subjects I saw a while ago which maybe others would enjoy. Interesting what our solar system consists of.

Carolyn Porco: Fly me to the moons of Saturn
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/178

Bill Stone: Journey to the center of the Earth ... and beyond!
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/141

[Kaylia]

I've been studying the sciences since I was 4 or 5 years old, when I asked my mom a little kid question like "why is the sky blue?" she gave me a set of encyclopedia's, and I just kind of took off from there.

22 Years of studying and thinking produces some weird results, and even weirder views.

Which moon btw, they found organic molecules on Enceladus, signs of a possible water mantle on Titan, and good old Europa of course.

I'm talking about solving physics problems using calculus and the like. Reading a vulgarized articles isn't a bad thing, but it usually make the imagination works more than logics. Most people I met who mentions "aliens" are people who like reading about sciences, but never did any after high school.

The reason why Venus is the way it is can be explained with our current model. Sun's proximity and the lack of carbon cycle are the principal factors to explain the differences between both planet.

The moon I was talking about Enceladus, everything was in the article. Organic matter can be found everywhere, but it's the only place in the solar system where all 3 conditions are found (I guess we could count mars too). Finding life is very important to determine the likeliness of finding life around other star. There is a huge difference between 1/1 and 2/2

Organic molecules like... acetic acid or alcohols? Sorry, I haven't taken Orgo, and my BME major doesn't require them.

Organic molecules like the one you find everywhere in space. So yes, any "C-H-N" molecules. Dosnt mean much by itself, but knowing it has the other element to make life, it will be interesting to see if anything came out of it.

[Max™]

Actually the thing about Venus came from a really depressing book by Stephen Baxter, Manifold: Time.

Basically postulated that the reason Venution days are so long relative to the year, and the current state of the atmosphere, is from interstellar colonist/exploiters coming in, laying down superconducting cables on Venus, and sapping the energy of the planets rotation, while triggering the run away greenhouse to make mining the Carbon easier.

Is it likely? Who can say, is it interesting as hell? Yes, it is a fascinating thought experiment to consider that we may not have been the first intelligences to inhabit this planetary system.

I'm dysnomic, math and my eyes don't get along well unless I convert the numbers into objects, I got through school math by turning problems into visual puzzles, and fitting them together.

This tends to lean me towards the theoretical, philosophical, side of things. As I call it, Quantum Philosophy. I see, therefore you are.

[Tajin]

I'm dysnomic, math and my brain don't get along well unless I convert the numbers into objects, I got through school math by turning problems into visual puzzles, and fitting them together.

O.o there is a word for that, heh good to know because I'm the same. Though I fixed the quote a little.

[Kaylia]

Actually the thing about Venus came from a really depressing book by Stephen Baxter, Manifold: Time.

Tide effect simply amplified the situation, but it's generally considered a consequence more than a cause. Same effect can be found on Earth as well, that's why the Moon is showing the same face, and why Earth will stop spinning in 1 billion (?) year (day get half a second longer every 100 years). Either way, it doesn' really change a thing, greenhouse effect is needed to keep a planet warm and stable. There was a carbon atmosphere on both Venus and Earth originally, but we lost our to carbon's cycle early, saving us from a fate similar to Venus

Stephen Baxter is a science fiction author. His book are novel, not science.. They will look believable to someone with no or little science background because the guys know his physics well, but they don't have any weight in a science argument. Understanding a phenomenon doesn't mean you can control it, not even close, and that's usually where the "fiction" come in. Tossing idea like "aliens tried to teraform venus" is ridiculous when we have a relatively accurate planet model. It's not something you could ever deny completly, but it's so unlikely it's not even an option that should be considered. Of course, there is nothing wrong with that in a novel, that's an interesting plot twist, but it's not a theory.

Call it Quantum philosophy if you want, I will call it day dreaming. Nothing wrong with that, we all do it, but it's not science.

[Khamsin]

Tide effect simply amplified the situation, but it's generally considered a consequence more than a cause. Same effect can be found on Earth as well, that's why the Moon is showing the same face, and why Earth will stop spinning in 1 billion (?) year (day get half a second longer every 100 years).

That soon? Wow... with 4.5 billion years behind us, and only 1 billion left to go, we're almost at the end of life as we know it in the universe unless we can find evidence of it elsewhere before we all die off.

Emphasis: as we know it.

[Max™]

I didn't call the books fact, I called it an interesting thought experiment.

Call it daydreaming if you wish, without the daydreamers we wouldn't be where we are now scientifically.

Someone has to sit around and ponder things in different ways til their brain goes "oh, THAT'S what it is". The difference is, they had brains that converted the problems into math simply, I don't. I convert physical concepts into the same thing I convert math into, images, visual puzzles.

I couldn't give you a tensor equation showing the rate at which spacetime is distorted around a massive spinning body.

I could explain it to you in such a way that you could SEE it happening in your mind though, it's just how the stuff has always occured to me.

As I said, didn't say I was a scientist, just that I've been studying the sciences for decades now, and prefer the term quantum philosopher, thinker, or hell, daydreamer.

[Kaylia]

Tide effect simply amplified the situation, but it's generally considered a consequence more than a cause. Same effect can be found on Earth as well, that's why the Moon is showing the same face, and why Earth will stop spinning in 1 billion (?) year (day get half a second longer every 100 years).

That soon? Wow... with 4.5 billion years behind us, and only 1 billion left to go, we're almost at the end of life as we know it in the universe unless we can find evidence of it elsewhere before we all die off.

Emphasis: as we know it.

Technically. it just mean we will have 6 months days and 6 months night. Can probably stay here for the next 5 billions years, unless magnetic field dying with earth rotation kill us

[Tristam]

Tide effect simply amplified the situation, but it's generally considered a consequence more than a cause. Same effect can be found on Earth as well, that's why the Moon is showing the same face, and why Earth will stop spinning in 1 billion (?) year (day get half a second longer every 100 years).

That soon? Wow... with 4.5 billion years behind us, and only 1 billion left to go, we're almost at the end of life as we know it in the universe unless we can find evidence of it elsewhere before we all die off.

Emphasis: as we know it.

Technically. it just mean we will have 6 months days and 6 months night. Can probably stay here for the next 5 billions years, unless magnetic field dying with earth rotation kill us

The earth would become tidally locked relative to the moon at a point where we'd have 40days of light and 40days of night, not sure where I read that but it's all moot cuz' it probably won't get that far before something else happens, like the sun becoming a red giant. technically, if it did get that far, the earth and moon would still be "spinning" but they'd be spinning as one system about the same point. We would still have some tides from the sun tho.

[Kaylia]

The earth would become tidally locked relative to the moon at a point where we'd have 40days of light and 40days of night, technically, the earth and moon would still be "spinning" but they'd be spinning as one system about the same point. We would still have some tides from the sun tho.

either way, by the time the earth's rotation is calculated to slow to that degree, the sun will have become a red giant and we'll all be very very dead.

Wouldnt locking on the sun make it a 360 days cycle? Or 80 days is the estimated balance we would reach including Earth, Sun and Moon? I don't understand where that 80 is comming from.

I didn't call the books fact, I called it an interesting thought experiment.

Call it daydreaming if you wish, without the daydreamers we wouldn't be where we are now scientifically.

Someone has to sit around and ponder things in different ways til their brain goes "oh, THAT'S what it is". The difference is, they had brains that converted the problems into math simply, I don't. I convert physical concepts into the same thing I convert math into, images, visual puzzles.

It's not an interesting thought experiment, it's a fantasy. I could think about pokemon parallel universe, or a dwarven city near the core of the Earth, the results would be the same. That's what I'm saying. The only thing you get is pretty picture your head.

You say that someone has to sit around and ponder things in a differents way, but you got that idea from a novelist, who was probably inspired by someone else . Where is the thinking? There is a reason why aliens (intelligent species flying around colonizing planet) topics arent discussed often in scientific community, and it's not because they "cant think outside the box". It's because there is no evidence of their existance, and there is no need to use them to explain anything.

That's always how science worked. #1 Find an event that cant be explained. #2 Make a theory. #3 test it. #4 Look for another mystery. Rarely did it skip a step. Einstein didn't simply sit down thinking "what if light is constant", he was trying to find a possible solution to something newton's physics couldnt explain.

I could explain it to you in such a way that you could SEE it happening in your mind though, it's just how the stuff has always occured to me. As I said, didn't say I was a scientist, just that I've been studying the sciences for decades now, and prefer the term quantum philosopher, thinker, or hell, daydreamer.

It's easy to say this, and it's usually the impression you get in physics; but when you are actually working on a problem, you realize more often then not how wrong your initial conceptions were. Allow me to express my doubt when you say you can see it happen in your mind, when I spend 40 hours a week doing playing with those equations and barely understand it. Actually, the more I study, the more insecure I become in my understanding. Your total knowledge increase, but you become scared of generalization


Explaining physics with analogies, examples and comparisons is a good place to start (actually, it's the best way start imo), but you miss all the subtlety of science. What you take for granted usually involve many other branchings and conditions that make the problem much more complex than it seem to be. It also allow you to see the limit of an equation, something that is often ignored in vulgarized science.