At the risk of having not followed this discussion thread too closely, this issue could bend to another perspective, that of specific effects of carbon build up and not the global and more vague nut that's so hard to pin down.
Chemical oceanographers Ken Caldeira and Long Cao presented a paper in the December 14 issue of Science. The work is based on computer simulations of ocean chemistry under levels of atmospheric CO2 ranging from 280 parts per million (pre-industrial levels) to 5000 ppm. Present levels are 380 ppm and rapidly rising due to accelerating emissions from human activities, primarily the burning of fossil fuels. By the time we reach 550 ppm all the coral reefs are dead. Likely other ocean species will bite the dust as well. The human side? Coral reefs and their species are a beautiful manifest expression of life (genetic diversity). Its a quick ending to hundreds of thousands of years of development. Kinda sad when it's possibly preventable. As an aside, here is a Chart of CO2 emisions (not atmospheric buildup) over the last century. From I think 600 million to 6000 million tons per year. A ten-fold increase over the time since the year 1900. http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file20356.pdf Brian Prothro -----Original Message----- From: Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 7:06 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Sunspotless Jones Beene on 2 Sep 2008 wrote: ``One interesting point which I am surprised is not often mentioned in this polarized debate: Blow up the third chart on Michael's cited reference, and contemplate the full implication of the "Maunder Minimum" and the so-called "little ice age" ... ... and the likelihood that we could be on the brink of a repeat of this in 2008... If it turns out that what humans are doing to the environment is in fact - on the bottom line, and after all is said and done - NOT harmful in itself due to these unusual circumstance - and that wanton CO2 release is simply forestalling another "little ice age" then - YES - that can seen by most of us non-specialists as a *good thing*, at least in the short term. However, it does not follow that what Algore is promoting is itself unscientific. Quite the contrary. Like it or not, he IS the spokesperson for the majority of specialists in the field - although admittedly there exists a strong and vocal minority of specialists who do not go along with most of it and especially the way it has been politicized. The bigger question for the rest of us - what is the true situation? -- and the true unpoliticized risk of this situation? -- i.e. IF both Algore AND also his critics are partly correct in that yes, humans are rapidly changing the normal course of environmental change in a way which could have been harmful, BUT that change, as it turns out is not harmful at all, and in fact the short-term benefit is poised to have the (unforeseen by the polluters) effect of forestalling another "little ice age" .... Interesting moral dilemma, if nothing else ... wrong for the right reason, or right for the wrong reason? Jones Michael Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Could a significant global cooling effect be taking place.? I notice there is a deafening silence from Pope Algore and his Church of Global Warming on this subject. It would be very inconvenient for the selling of carbon indulgences, oops... that's offsets. Nothing is made of the fact that 2007 saw the largest one year drop in average global temperature in recorded history. Didn't hear about that did you? Almost everyone who lives on the real earth, rather that the computer climate model earth, has noticed that it's been a lot cooler lately. Where I live in southern California, winter before last winter was the coldest since 1948, but of course nothing was made of that in the news. I lost 500 feet of ficus hedge because it froze to death. There was a massive die-out of native plant species in the canyons near my home as well, all frozen. The fast dancing and circumlocutory nonsense spewing forth from the Global Warming Priesthood grasping for some explanation are becoming both shrill and comical. The real reason for climate changes, solar activity, is showing us something quite the opposite of Algore's dreamworld. You know, that's the one where all of us ride bicycles and starve to death, while Algore flies about in his Gulfstream and has a special lane on the road for his fleet of SUVs while he grows ever fatter. Anyone else notice he's begun to resemble a fat Bela Lugosi? There has been a total lack of sunspots for a month. This is not good news, either for real people or Algore. This normally indicates a significant colder period on the earth, or even an ice age. We need to get really serious about energy supplies, both conventional and new, especially the new ones. We also need to quit whining about genetically modified crops. If there is a long term colder climate, agricultural output will plummet. More energy and higher crop yields in a shorter growing season will be essential to prevent the starvation of millions or even billions. Here is a link to the observations about the lack of sunspots:'' http://www.dailytech.com/Sun+Makes+History+First+Spotless+Month+in+a+Century /article12823.htm ------------- Hi All, Enclosed below are some interesting posts from the Cycles Group. Jack Smith PS: I am strongly in favor of energy alternatives to rock oil regardless of the causes of global warming. This is the most pressing national security problem that we face. We should not be trapped into sending young Americans to die for oil in the Kazakh War of 2020. ----------------- ``Source: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [cyclesi] Digest Number 2556 Date: Thu Jul 3, 2008 4:13 pm ((PDT)) 53.5 and 210 year Solar Cycles Peaked in 1990s Posted by: "Ray Tomes" [EMAIL PROTECTED] rjtomes Date: Thu Jul 3, 2008 4:13 pm ((PDT)) I just noticed that the 53.5 year cycle is modulated also, being stronger when the 210 year cycle is high and weaker when itis low. Such a modulation results when there are beats between a 53.5 year cycle and a cycle of about 71 years. All these components are in Dewey's table of common cycles ... 53.25, 71, 213 years. Some articles relating to this longer cycle in climate and the Sun: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/centralamericaandthecaribbean/mexi co/1330762/Sun%27s-200-year-cycle-may-have-doomed-Mayans.html#article ---------------- ARTICLE from The London Telegraph, 5-18-01 By David Derbyshire, Science Correspondent Sun's 200-year cycle may have doomed Mayans ... [Solar] output had a direct effect on the climate of the Yucatan causing the recurrence of drought, which influenced the Maya evolution. He has previously argued that the collapse of the Mayan civilisation was influenced by a severe drought that lasted more than 150 years. The new findings come from a study of cores removed from the bottom of Lake Chichancanab in central America. The team found distinct layers of gypsum in the cores, formed when the lakes dried out during droughts. The layers appeared every 208 years.The cycle is almost identical to a 206-year natural cycle in solar intensity, said Dr Hodell. His team found that the droughts took place during the most intense part of the cycle. The driest years also occurred at times when the Mayan culture was going through downturns, abandoning cities or slowing down the amount of building and carving. He said: "It is ironic that a culture so obsessed with keeping track of celestial movements may have met their demise because of a 206-year cycle." ... ------------ 53.5 and 210 year Solar Cycles Peaked in 1990s Posted by: "g_etzkorn" [EMAIL PROTECTED] g_etzkorn Date: Thu Jul 3, 2008 5:08 pm ((PDT)) Blog: Science Australian Researchers Warn of Global Cooling Michael Asher (Blog) - July 1, 2008 11:09 AM A 2005 prediction of solar activity. The sunspot number should now stand close to 100, instead it is zero."Spin-orbit coupling" to blame; effects could last decades. A new paper published by the Astronomical Society of Australia is warning of upcoming global cooling due to lessened solar activity. The study, written by three Australian researchers, has identified what is known as a "spin-orbit coupling" affecting the rotation rate of the sun. That rotation, in turn, is linked to the intensity of the solar cycle and climate changes here on Earth. The study's lead author, Ian Wilson, explains further, "[The paper] supports the contention that the level of activity on the Sun will significantly diminish sometime in the next decade and remain low for about 20 - 30 years." According to Wilson, the result is a strong, rapid pulse of global cooling, "On each occasion that the Sun has done this in the past the World's mean temperature has dropped by ~ 1 - 2 C." A 2 C drop would be twice as large as all the warming the earth has experienced since the start of the industrial era, and would be significant enough to impact global agriculture output. Earlier this year, astronomers from around the world noted solar activity was suspiciously low; some began predicting global cooling at that time. Since then, activity has remained far below average, with it now being over two months since a single sunspot has appeared on the surface of the sun. ------------ 2r. Re: Global Temperature Cycles Posted by: "Ray Tomes" [EMAIL PROTECTED] rjtomes Date: Fri Jul 4, 2008 12:31 am ((PDT)) ... The cyclical forecast indicates that global temperatures are headed back to the level of the 1950s and 1960s within 7 years (that is by 2015) and to remain in that vicinity for a further 23 years. The assumptions used may not be totally valid. However even if there are human components to global temperatures, the cyclical components, which we know are mostly solar driven, are indicating the 1990s as anomolously high. ------------ 2s. Re: Searching for Global Temperature data from Satellites Posted by: "Ray Tomes" [EMAIL PROTECTED] rjtomes Date: Fri Jul 4, 2008 3:41 am ((PDT)) I don't think there is any doubt now about correlations between sunspots and weather. The periods 11 years, 54 years and 210 years are found in both. I think that the synodic periods also relate to solar activity, but perhaps not as clearly to weather. With longer series these things can be tested far more accurately. ------------ 1a. Re: Global Temperature Cycles Posted by: "Ray Tomes" [EMAIL PROTECTED] rjtomes Date: Fri Jul 4, 2008 8:16 pm ((PDT)) ... The prediction is that over the next 30 years, the temperature might fall back to about the level of the ~1940 high. Of course if the process were continued further in to the future, the human part would eventually send us skyward when some of the longer cycles turn upwards again. Therefore such an approach does not lead to complacency. Rather, it warns that even if nearly all the experts are wrong, and temperatures come down over the next few decades, the danger is still there waiting to leap forth with renewed vigour ... -------------- http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=633&st=30&start=30 http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20...ayadrought.html The Castillo pyramid, built by the Maya possibly as early as A.D. 618, has four stairways totaling 365 steps, which may represent the days in a year. Photograph by Otis Imboden, copyright National Geographic Society Climate Change Killed Off Mayan Civilization; Study says With their awe-inspiring architecture and sophisticated concepts of astronomy and mathematics, the Maya were undoubtedly among the great ancient civilizations of Mesoamerica. At the peak of their glory, around 800 A.D., the Maya ranged from Mexico's Yucatán peninsula to Honduras. Then, almost in an instant, a society of some 15 million people imploded, leaving deserted cities, trade routes, and immense pyramids in ruins. The sudden demise is one of the greatest archeological mysteries of our time. What caused the collapse of the great Maya civilization? The answer, say researchers, is climate change. According to a new study published in the current issue of Science, a long period of dry climate, punctuated by three intense droughts, led to the end of the Maya society. "Climate change is to blame for one of the most catastrophic collapses in human history," said Gerald Haug, a professor of geology at the University of Potsdam, Germany, and one of the study's authors. Identifying the Culprit The drought hypothesis is not new. Sediments taken by scientists in 2001 from a lake on the Yucatan peninsula showed that a series of extended droughts coincided with major cultural upheavals among the Maya people. But the study of that lake also found man-made effects, such as deforestation and soil erosion, and therefore didn't reflect a "pure climate signal," according to Haug. For the new study, the scientists instead analyzed sediment core from the Cariaco Basin off northern Venezuela, where the record is cleaner. Identifying annual titanium levels, which reflect the amount of rainfall each year, the Swiss and U.S. researchers found that the pristine sediment layers in the basin formed distinct bands that correspond to dry and wet seasons. According to the scientists, there were three large droughts occurring between 810 and 910 A.D., each lasting less than a decade. The timing of the droughts matched periodic downturns in the Maya culture, as demonstrated by abandonment of cities or diminished stone carving and building activity. Experts say the Maya were particularly susceptible to long droughts because about 95 percent of their population centers depended solely on lakes, ponds, and rivers containing on average an 18-month supply of water for drinking and agriculture. Reading the Sun The Maya were skilled astronomers who constantly followed the movements of the sun and the moon. They predicted eclipses, explained the movements of planets, and devised a sophisticated calendar of the solar year. Scientists have found that the recurrence of the drought was remarkably cyclical, occurring every 208 years. That interval is almost identical to a known cycle in which the sun is at its most intense every 206 years. Nothing suggests the Maya knew anything about the sun's change in intensity. The drought theory is still controversial among some archeologists who believe a combination of overpopulation, an internecine struggle for control among the nobles, a weak economic base, and a political system that didn't foster power-sharing led to the Maya's collapse. One hypothesis suggests the Maya people themselves were responsible for their downfall as a result of environmental degradation, including deforestation. Defenders of the climate change theory, however, say the droughts sparked a chain of events that led to the demise of the Maya. "Sunny days, in and of themselves, don't kill people," said Richardson B. Gill, author of The Great Maya Droughts: Water, Life, and Death. "But when people run out of food and water, they die." Living on the Edge In their twilight days, the Maya were a society in deep trouble, according to the authors of the new study. Densely populated cities strained resources. Agricultural production became crucial in order to feed the people. "They were living on the absolute edge," said Hoag. While the Maya had learned to live with shorter droughts, the study indicates that a more subtle, long-term drying trend was ongoing during the collapse. The three specific droughts may have been what pushed the Mayan society over the edge. "Not only did the Maya have to face an intense climatic catastrophe, but the duration was something that they had never experienced before," said Hoag. "If they had stayed for another two years, they may have survived. But how could they know that the drought would end?" '' ----------------- The Central England Temperature series was originally constructed by the late Professor Gordon Manley, and is now routinely updated by the Hadley Centre. The monthly mean surface air temperatures, for a region representative of the English Midlands, are expressed in degrees Celsius for the period from 1659 to the present. The data are discussed in the following two papers: G. Manley, 'Central England Temperatures: monthly means 1659 to 1973', Quarterly Journal of the Royal ...'' ----------------- Jack Smith writes: I have the Hadley Center data if Vortex is interested. I'm enclosing below a post that came in today (9-2-08) from an enthusiastic member of Cycles. ----------------- 1.1. On The Special Theory Of Order: Sunspot, Weather and Planetary Synod Posted by: "Bill Arnold" [EMAIL PROTECTED] billarnoldfla Date: Mon Sep 1, 2008 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cyclesi/message/14931 Hi, Cycles Scientists, SHOCKER! GULP! EEK! GIVE US AN ACADEMY AWARD AND A NOBEL PRIZE FOR EVIDENCE OF CYCLIC EFFECTS and trash the global warming alarmist theory, forever: 2008 is now here, and we can report 2007 is behind us: Those cycle scientists who follow *CYCLES* of all kinds will take note that in AUGUST 08, there were EARTHSPOTS which formed in the TROPICS, causing massive thunderstorms systems including a damaging hurricane which went into New Orleans and another two off the east coast of Florida, and RAINY WEATHER continued with a vengeance and across America storms pushed into the Northeast. The RAINY WEATHER has returned, with a vengeance. The month OF AUGUST shows the drying out of the WORST floods along the Mississippi AND METEOROLOGISTS NOTE THE RETURN OF THE COLD LA NINA! Yikes! The poor wrong global warming alarmists will have to take shelter from the storms underground with the groundhog! All THREE FAY, Gustav and Hanna have SHOWN DIRECTIONLESS movement typical throughout Hurricane history of storms spawned during the SUNSPOT NODAL PERIOD. THINGS ARE DIFFERENT NOW: As the sun is NOW in its SUNSPOT NODAL CYCLE PHASE it means that the NUMBER of SUNSPOTS counted on the sun are at MINIMUM. During this time, the SUNSPOTS have basically disappeared from the surface of the sun IN/AND AT its EQUATOR. By the same token, INDUCTION in the EARTHSPOTS are equally LOW and EQUATORIAL. Let us also POINT out that INTENSITY factors are noted. When the sun begins to create NEW and REVERSED POLARITY SUNSPOTS in its next CYCLE, they will appear halfway toward EACH pole, and as noted, POLARITY will be REVERSED. The CAUSAL EFFECT on EARTHSPOTS has been pointed out in my *Cycles* papers decades ago: and REAFFIRMED.
