PDA

View Full Version : Global Warming: Dire Prediction for the Year 3000



Gingersnap
01-14-2011, 01:03 PM
Global Warming: Dire Prediction for the Year 3000

LiveScience.com Wynne Parry

livescience.com – Thu Jan 13, 9:00 am ET

Even if humans stop producing excess carbon dioxide in 2100, the lingering effects of global warming could span the next millennia. The results? By the year 3000, global warming would be more than a hot topic - the West Antarctic ice sheet could collapse, and global sea levels would rise by about 13 feet (4 meters), according to a new study.

Using a computer model, researchers looked at two scenarios - an end to humans' industrial carbon dioxide emissions by 2010 and by 2100 - stretched out to the year 3000.

Even if humans were to stop emitting excess carbon dioxide - or if they figured out a way to completely capture it - the effects of global warming would continue to accumulate. That's because previously emitted carbon dioxide lingers in the atmosphere and the oceans, unlike land, warm only gradually, according to one of the study researchers, Shawn Marshall, an associate professor of geography at the University of Calgary.

The carbon dioxide legacy

A number of gases contribute to global warming, among them carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide. The study focused on carbon dioxide, because it is the principal greenhouse gas, and it can linger in the atmosphere for centuries, according to Marshall.

"Some of the carbon dioxide going into the atmosphere this century will be there still 1,000 years from now," he said.

Marshall, lead researcher Nathan Gillett of the government agency Environment Canada, and their colleagues found that, by the year 3000, the brunt of the changes occurred in Southern Hemisphere. Not surprisingly, the 2100 scenario yielded more extreme results. In particular, the model predicted that southern oceans - the combined South Pacific, Atlantic and Indian Oceans, where the Antarctic Circumpolar Current resides - would warm considerably, with some far-reaching results.

North vs. south

The 2100 scenario highlights stark differences between the Northern and Southern hemispheres, according to Gillett.

In the north, "the changes, which will occur up to 2100, some of those will reverse partially, it will cool a little bit after 2100, the rainfall in high latitudes will tend to decrease," he said. "The biggest ongoing change is in the Southern Hemisphere."

This is because the Northern Hemisphere is covered primarily by land, which warms and cools more quickly than water. After emissions drop off, warming over land is expected to decline fairly quickly, Marshall said. Not so with water, which dominates the Southern Hemisphere.

The long-term warming seen there occurs because this century's elevated temperatures would continue to propagate into the oceans for many centuries, even after warming at the surface has eased, according to Marshall.

The researchers found that warming would be concentrated most the further from the equator (at higher latitudes) at ocean depths between 0.3 and 0.9 miles (0.5 and 1.5 kilometers). The model showed these waters would warm very little by 2100 - but by 3000 they'd likely increase by 5.4 degrees Fahrenheit (3 degrees Celsius) in parts.

Yahoo (http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20110113/sc_livescience/globalwarmingdirepredictionfortheyear3000)

Odysseus
01-14-2011, 02:39 PM
Yahoo (http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20110113/sc_livescience/globalwarmingdirepredictionfortheyear3000)

The worst prediction about Global Warming for 3000 is that Al Gore will still be talking.

Rockntractor
01-14-2011, 02:45 PM
http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv230/upyourstruly/McCarthy_ComplexShit.jpg

The Night Owl
01-14-2011, 03:11 PM
Impossible. We can pump an endless supply of CO2 into the atmosphere with no consequence because... well... Jesus controls the fate of the planet. Everyone knows that.

:rolleyes:

Odysseus
01-14-2011, 03:16 PM
Impossible. We can pump an endless supply of CO2 into the atmosphere with no consequence because... well... Jesus controls the fate of the planet. Everyone knows that.

:rolleyes:

So, when Mars, Venus and Saturn showed the same range of warming and cooling as the Earth did over the last decade, was that because their SUVs were also pumping out CO2? :rolleyes:

Wei Wu Wei
01-14-2011, 03:55 PM
same range? these are different planets with radically different climates (or lack thereof), do you just clump everything into "getting hotter" vs "getting colder"? my god

wilbur
01-14-2011, 03:58 PM
So, when Mars, Venus and Saturn showed the same range of warming and cooling as the Earth did over the last decade, was that because their SUVs were also pumping out CO2? :rolleyes:

How on earth do you guys trust our temperature readings of mars and venus when you don't even trust Nasa, et al to accurately measure our own?

In any case, when it comes to Mars, the warming isnt established to be a trend... and at this point, is mostly considered occur because of changes in the color of its landscape... lighter reflects heat, darker absorbs it.

Articulate_Ape
01-14-2011, 06:54 PM
How on earth do you guys trust our temperature readings of mars and venus when you don't even trust Nasa, et al to accurately measure our own?

In any case, when it comes to Mars, the warming isnt established to be a trend... and at this point, is mostly considered occur because of changes in the color of its landscape... lighter reflects heat, darker absorbs it.

Then all that white stuff on the ground right now, white stuff that wasn't supposed to be there according to your god, should do a nice job of reflecting the heat back out into space. No worries, right? You dolt.

Rockntractor
01-14-2011, 07:05 PM
Impossible. We can pump an endless supply of CO2 into the atmosphere with no consequence because... well... Jesus controls the fate of the planet. Everyone knows that.

:rolleyes:

This is where you are wrong, CO2 is relatively scarce. there is no way we could pump it endlessly because there is no an endless supply. Less than 1% of the atmosphere is CO2, It's a shame we can't find more, it would be a lush garden here, plants use every bit they can get.

Rockntractor
01-14-2011, 07:07 PM
How on earth do you guys trust our temperature readings of mars and venus when you don't even trust Nasa, et al to accurately measure our own?

In any case, when it comes to Mars, the warming isnt established to be a trend... and at this point, is mostly considered occur because of changes in the color of its landscape... lighter reflects heat, darker absorbs it.

There are no politicians on mars so they can't lie about it there. We need to send them ours and you while we are at it.

wilbur
01-15-2011, 04:22 PM
Then all that white stuff on the ground right now, white stuff that wasn't supposed to be there according to your god, should do a nice job of reflecting the heat back out into space. No worries, right? You dolt.

Seriously man?

Snow does reflect light back to space... but snowcover returns and recedes seasonally on earth, due to changes in the tilt of the earth's axis.

The geological changes that occur on Mars that affect its reflectivity arent like that (to the best of our knowledge) and more long term, not seasonal.

In any case, we don't have nearly enough information about the climates on other planets to make any serious predictions or claims about climate trends on them.

Lager
01-15-2011, 04:47 PM
Wasn't there someone in the Obama admin that stated we could solve the climate crisis if we only painted every roof white?

The Night Owl
01-15-2011, 05:52 PM
Wasn't there someone in the Obama admin that stated we could solve the climate crisis if we only painted every roof white?

No.

Articulate_Ape
01-15-2011, 05:58 PM
Seriously man?

Snow does reflect light back to space... but snowcover returns and recedes seasonally on earth, due to changes in the tilt of the earth's axis.

The geological changes that occur on Mars that affect its reflectivity arent like that (to the best of our knowledge) and more long term, not seasonal.

In any case, we don't have nearly enough information about the climates on other planets to make any serious predictions or claims about climate trends on them.

So, when the average global temp drops by .5C/year for the next ten years, what will you say then? Surely y'all are working that into your plans at this point, no? I mean, you really don't want to get caught with your pants down again now, do you? Have you considered "Cold Heating"? That kind of has a ring to it.

Rockntractor
01-15-2011, 05:59 PM
No.
You are wrong feather face!:rolleyes:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/5389278/Obamas-green-guru-calls-for-white-roofs.html

Obama's green guru calls for white roofs
President Obama's energy adviser has suggested all the world's roofs should be painted white as part of efforts to slow global warming.
U.S. energy secretary, Steven Chu Photo: BLOOMBERG
By Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent 1:32AM BST 27 May 2009

490 Comments

Professor Steven Chu, the US Energy Secretary, said the unusual proposal would mean homes in hot countries would save energy and money on air conditioning by deflecting the sun's rays.

More pale surfaces could also slow global warming by reflecting heat into space rather than allowing it to be absorbed by dark surfaces where it is trapped by greenhouse gases and increases temperatures.

In a wide-ranging discussion at the three-day Nobel laureate Symposium in London, the Professor described climate change as a "crisis situation", and called for a whole host of measures to be introduced, from promoting energy efficiency to renewable energy such as wind, wave and solar.

The Nobel Prize-winning physicist said the US was not considering any large scale "geo-engineering" projects where science is used to reverse global warming, but was in favour of "white roofs everywhere".

He said lightening roofs and roads in urban environments would offset the global warming effects of all the cars in the world for 11 years.

wilbur
01-15-2011, 06:19 PM
So, when the average global temp drops by .5C/year for the next ten years, what will you say then?

Well, we come back to that darn term 'significant' again... if those temperatures are shown to be a trend, not mere coincidence - in other words, statistically significant - and outside the predicted temperature range modeled according to the theory of AGW, then we can say AGW is falsified...

... but so far, this has never happened.

Lager
01-15-2011, 06:34 PM
Wasn't there someone in the Obama admin that stated we could solve the climate crisis if we only painted every roof white?


No.

You sure you don't want to check that out before quickly replying?

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/obamas-climate-guru-paint-your-roof-white-1691209.html

http://climateprogress.org/2009/05/27/energy-steven-chu-white-roofs-geo-engineering-adaptation-mitigation/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/26/paint-it-white-chu-calls_n_207935.html

Steven Chu, the US Secretary of Energy and a Nobel prize-winning scientist, said yesterday that making roofs and pavements white or light-coloured would help to reduce global warming by both conserving energy and reflecting sunlight back into space. It would, he said, be the equivalent of taking all the cars in the world off the road for 11 years.

The Night Owl
01-15-2011, 06:38 PM
You are wrong feather face!:rolleyes:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/5389278/Obamas-green-guru-calls-for-white-roofs.html

Lager claimed that painting roofs white was proposed as a solution to global warming. The article you posted clearly indicates that painting roofs white was proposed as a way to slow global warming, not end it.

Articulate_Ape
01-15-2011, 06:42 PM
Well, we come back to that darn term 'significant' again... if those temperatures are shown to be a trend, not mere coincidence - in other words, statistically significant - and outside the predicted temperature range modeled according to the theory of AGW, then we can say AGW is falsified...

... but so far, this has never happened.


Stay tuned. And get a story ready. 2010 was no warmer than 1998 and 2011 is off to one chilly start. Like all Ponzi schemes, this one will collapse too. You are gonna have to lie like hell to distance yourself from it so your grandkids don't throw you out into the cold.

Rockntractor
01-15-2011, 06:42 PM
Lager claimed that painting roofs white was proposed as a solution to global warming. The article you posted clearly indicates that painting roofs white was proposed as a way to slow global warming, not end it.

In his mind it was a part of a solution. You could paint the top of your head white too!

The Night Owl
01-15-2011, 06:42 PM
You sure you don't want to check that out before quickly replying?

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/obamas-climate-guru-paint-your-roof-white-1691209.html

http://climateprogress.org/2009/05/27/energy-steven-chu-white-roofs-geo-engineering-adaptation-mitigation/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/26/paint-it-white-chu-calls_n_207935.html

Steven Chu, the US Secretary of Energy and a Nobel prize-winning scientist, said yesterday that making roofs and pavements white or light-coloured would help to reduce global warming by both conserving energy and reflecting sunlight back into space. It would, he said, be the equivalent of taking all the cars in the world off the road for 11 years.

You claimed that someone proposed a measure which would solve the climate crisis. In reality, someone proposed a measure which would reduce global warming. That person never claimed the measure would solve the climate crisis. You exaggerated and I called your bluff.

Articulate_Ape
01-15-2011, 06:44 PM
You claimed that someone proposed a measure which would solve the climate crisis. In reality, someone proposed a measure which would reduce global warming. That person never claimed the measure would solve the climate crisis. You exaggerated and I called your bluff.

So now Global Warming and Climate Change are two different things? Wow, you guys are GOOD!

Rockntractor
01-15-2011, 06:45 PM
You claimed that someone proposed a measure which would solve the climate crisis. In reality, someone proposed a measure which would reduce global warming. That person never claimed the measure would solve the climate crisis. You exaggerated and I called your bluff.

Lying sack of feathers!:rolleyes:

Lager
01-15-2011, 06:45 PM
That's a pretty lame defense of an incorrect answer. If the problem is that the earth is going to warm to a degree that causes massive disruption to human life and society, then anything that slows or lessens the temperature increase would be deemed a solution.

obx
01-15-2011, 06:47 PM
I'm about to freeze. Isn't there anything we can do to speed it up?

Articulate_Ape
01-15-2011, 06:48 PM
I'm about to freeze. Isn't there anything we can do to speed it up?

You're not cold, you're hot. Get with the program, geez! :rolleyes:

The Night Owl
01-15-2011, 06:55 PM
That's a pretty lame defense of an incorrect answer. If the problem is that the earth is going to warm to a degree that causes massive disruption to human life and society, then anything that slows or lessens the temperature increase would be deemed a solution.

According to the article Rockntractor posted, Steven Chu has called for "a whole host of measures to be introduced" to combat global warming. If the scheme to paint roofs white were intended as the solution to the climate crisis then why is Chu calling for other measures? Just for fun?

Articulate_Ape
01-15-2011, 07:05 PM
According to the article Rockntractor posted, Steven Chu has called for "a whole host of measures to be introduced" to combat global warming. If the scheme to paint roofs white were intended as the solution to the climate crisis then why is Chu calling for other measures? Just for fun?

Because he, like everyone else involved in this scam, has boat payments due. Bernie Madoff has to be wondering why he didn't think this one up.

The Night Owl
01-15-2011, 07:22 PM
So now Global Warming and Climate Change are two different things? Wow, you guys are GOOD!

The terms are related but not the same. Global warming pertains to global temperature. Climate change pertains to global temperature and other aspects of climate.

Rockntractor
01-15-2011, 07:24 PM
The terms are related but not the same. Global warming pertains to global temperature. Climate change pertains to global temperature and other aspects of climate.

Oh yeah, and bullshit pertains to both!:rolleyes:

Articulate_Ape
01-15-2011, 07:37 PM
The terms are related but not the same. Global warming pertains to global temperature. Climate change pertains to global temperature and other aspects of climate.

Please. Try harder. You are never going to become a bishop that way.

AmPat
01-15-2011, 07:39 PM
You are wrong feather face!:rolleyes:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/5389278/Obamas-green-guru-calls-for-white-roofs.html

:mad:Beat me to it.:mad:

Rockntractor
01-15-2011, 07:44 PM
Please. Try harder. You are never going to become a bishop that way.

His is a d-CON® like most owls.

wilbur
01-15-2011, 08:21 PM
On the relatively new popularity of the term "climate change" - see the wikipedia article on Frank Luntz:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Luntz



Although Luntz later tried to distance himself from the Bush administration policy, it was his idea that administration communications reframe "global warming" as "climate change" since "climate change" was thought to sound less severe. Luntz has since said that he is not responsible for what the Bush administration did after that time. Though he now believes humans have contributed to global warming, he maintains that the science was in fact incomplete, and his recommendation sound, at the time he made it.[8]


Climate change became the defacto term for global warming due to the global warming skeptic republicans.... it worked so well, you morons actually think was it was devised by AGW proponents in the midst of damage control.. how 'bout them apples?

Rockntractor
01-15-2011, 08:25 PM
On the new popularity of the term "climate change" - see the wikipedia article on Frank Luntz:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Luntz



Climate change became the defacto term for global warming due to the global warming skeptic republicans.... it worked so well, you morons actually think was it was devised by AGW proponents in the midst of damage control.. how 'bout them apples?

The name climate change is Bushes fault, of course it is Wilbur, everything is Bushes fault!

wilbur
01-15-2011, 08:28 PM
The name climate change is Bushes fault, of course it is Wilbur, everything is Bushes fault!

No, not everything is Bush's fault... but 'climate change' was republican strategy... and one of the most successful and subversive manipulations of public opinion that I have ever seen...

Seriously, it worked so damn well every single one of you is convinced that the term came from the other side... I am in awe of its brilliance, to be honest... but it leaves me simultaneously depressed about how stupid, incurious and naive most people are.

BadCat
01-15-2011, 08:32 PM
"Climate change"....it's called "weather".

Rockntractor
01-15-2011, 08:41 PM
No, not everything is Bush's fault... but 'climate change' was republican strategy... and one of the most successful and subversive manipulations of public opinion that I have ever seen...

Seriously, it worked so damn well every single one of you is convinced that the term came from the other side... I am in awe of its brilliance, to be honest... but it leaves me simultaneously depressed about how stupid, incurious and naive most people are.

You do more for the conservative cause than you can possibly imagine, thank you Wilbur!:)

wilbur
01-15-2011, 10:21 PM
You do more for the conservative cause than you can possibly imagine, thank you Wilbur!:)

Well, hey.... That's good right? You certainly don't do it any favors,

obx
01-15-2011, 10:25 PM
The climate changes four times a year.

Rockntractor
01-15-2011, 10:28 PM
The climate changes four times a year.

It's worse than we thought!:eek:

Sonnabend
01-15-2011, 11:10 PM
but it leaves me simultaneously depressed about how stupid, incurious and naive most people are.

Looking at you, yes.

I am still waiting for you to meet my small challenge.

Take any event from the last forty years, any event, and prove conclusively that it is the result of global warming and nothing else.

Cant be that hard now, can it?