getting warmer? Global Warming leads to extinction?
- Thread starter welsh
- Start date
Paladin Solo said:
It's not. Scientists know (or at least think they know, but if you want to argue about whether scientists know anything, then go to the "Dark Matter thread") the signs of a pole shift, and it's not happening right now.
EDIT: Although I think a pole shift is due to happen relatively soon, in geological time
EDIT #2: Sorry - didn't know I wasn't supposed to double post. I thought since I was saying two completely separate things, I should separate them.
Yeah, you're right. Scientist make up everything! 
NASA Confirms North Pole Ozone Hole Trigger
Greenbelt - Sept. 17, 2001
NASA researchers using 22 years of satellite-derived data have confirmed a theory that the strength of "long waves," bands of atmospheric energy that circle the earth, regulate the temperatures in the upper atmosphere of the Arctic, and play a role in controlling ozone losses in the stratosphere. These findings will also help scientists predict stratospheric ozone loss in the future.
These long waves affect the atmospheric circulation in the Arctic by strengthening it and warming temperatures, or weakening it and cooling temperatures. Colder temperatures cause polar clouds to form, which lead to chemical reactions that affect the chemical form of chlorine in the stratosphere.
In certain chemical forms, chlorine can deplete the ozone layer. One theory is that greenhouse gases may be responsible for decreasing the number of long waves that enter the stratosphere, which then thins the ozone layer.
Just as the weather at the Earth's surface varies a lot from one year to the next, so can the weather in the stratosphere. For instance, there were some years like 1984, in which it didn't get cold enough in the Arctic stratosphere for significant ozone loss to occur.
"During that year, we saw stronger and more frequent waves around the world, that acted as the fuel to a heat engine in the Arctic, and kept the polar stratosphere from becoming cold enough for great ozone losses," said Paul Newman, lead author of the study and an atmospheric scientist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, in Greenbelt, Md.
"Other years, like 1997, weaker, and less frequent waves reduced the effectiveness of the Arctic heat engine and cooled the stratosphere, making conditions just right for ozone destruction," Newman said. The paper appears in the September 16 issue of Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres.
The temperature of the lower level of the stratosphere over the poles is also controlled by the change in seasons from winter to spring, and by gases such as ozone, water vapor and carbon dioxide.
A long wave or planetary wave is like a band of energy, thousands of miles in length that flows eastward in the middle latitudes of the upper atmosphere, and circles the world. It resembles a series of ocean waves with ridges (the high points) and troughs (the low points). Typically, at any given time, there are between one and three of these waves looping around the Earth.
These long waves move up from the lower atmosphere (troposphere) into the stratosphere, where they dissipate. When these waves break up in the upper atmosphere they produce a warming of the polar region. So, when more waves are present to break apart, the stratosphere becomes warmer. When fewer waves rise up and dissipate, the stratosphere cools, and the more ozone loss occurs.
Weaker "long waves" over the course of the Northern Hemisphere's winter generate colder Arctic upper air temperatures during spring. By knowing the cause of colder temperatures, scientists can better predict what will happen to the ozone layer.
The temperature of the polar lower stratosphere during March is the key in understanding polar ozone losses - and the temperature at that time is usually driven by the strength and duration of "planetary waves" spreading into the stratosphere.
This discovery provides a key test of climate models that are used to predict polar ozone levels. "This then lends itself to adjusting climate models, and increasing their accuracy, which means scientists will have a better way to predict climate change in the future," Newman said.
The stratosphere is an atmospheric layer about 6 to 30 miles above the Earth's surface where the ozone layer is found. The ozone layer prevents the sun's harmful ultra-violet radiation from reaching the Earth's surface. Ultra-violet radiation is a primary cause of skin cancer. Without upper-level ozone, life on Earth would be non-existent.
The research used temperature measurements of the stratosphere from the Upper Atmospheric Research Satellite (UARS).
NASA Confirms North Pole Ozone Hole Trigger
Greenbelt - Sept. 17, 2001
NASA researchers using 22 years of satellite-derived data have confirmed a theory that the strength of "long waves," bands of atmospheric energy that circle the earth, regulate the temperatures in the upper atmosphere of the Arctic, and play a role in controlling ozone losses in the stratosphere. These findings will also help scientists predict stratospheric ozone loss in the future.
These long waves affect the atmospheric circulation in the Arctic by strengthening it and warming temperatures, or weakening it and cooling temperatures. Colder temperatures cause polar clouds to form, which lead to chemical reactions that affect the chemical form of chlorine in the stratosphere.
In certain chemical forms, chlorine can deplete the ozone layer. One theory is that greenhouse gases may be responsible for decreasing the number of long waves that enter the stratosphere, which then thins the ozone layer.
Just as the weather at the Earth's surface varies a lot from one year to the next, so can the weather in the stratosphere. For instance, there were some years like 1984, in which it didn't get cold enough in the Arctic stratosphere for significant ozone loss to occur.
"During that year, we saw stronger and more frequent waves around the world, that acted as the fuel to a heat engine in the Arctic, and kept the polar stratosphere from becoming cold enough for great ozone losses," said Paul Newman, lead author of the study and an atmospheric scientist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, in Greenbelt, Md.
"Other years, like 1997, weaker, and less frequent waves reduced the effectiveness of the Arctic heat engine and cooled the stratosphere, making conditions just right for ozone destruction," Newman said. The paper appears in the September 16 issue of Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres.
The temperature of the lower level of the stratosphere over the poles is also controlled by the change in seasons from winter to spring, and by gases such as ozone, water vapor and carbon dioxide.
A long wave or planetary wave is like a band of energy, thousands of miles in length that flows eastward in the middle latitudes of the upper atmosphere, and circles the world. It resembles a series of ocean waves with ridges (the high points) and troughs (the low points). Typically, at any given time, there are between one and three of these waves looping around the Earth.
These long waves move up from the lower atmosphere (troposphere) into the stratosphere, where they dissipate. When these waves break up in the upper atmosphere they produce a warming of the polar region. So, when more waves are present to break apart, the stratosphere becomes warmer. When fewer waves rise up and dissipate, the stratosphere cools, and the more ozone loss occurs.
Weaker "long waves" over the course of the Northern Hemisphere's winter generate colder Arctic upper air temperatures during spring. By knowing the cause of colder temperatures, scientists can better predict what will happen to the ozone layer.
The temperature of the polar lower stratosphere during March is the key in understanding polar ozone losses - and the temperature at that time is usually driven by the strength and duration of "planetary waves" spreading into the stratosphere.
This discovery provides a key test of climate models that are used to predict polar ozone levels. "This then lends itself to adjusting climate models, and increasing their accuracy, which means scientists will have a better way to predict climate change in the future," Newman said.
The stratosphere is an atmospheric layer about 6 to 30 miles above the Earth's surface where the ozone layer is found. The ozone layer prevents the sun's harmful ultra-violet radiation from reaching the Earth's surface. Ultra-violet radiation is a primary cause of skin cancer. Without upper-level ozone, life on Earth would be non-existent.
The research used temperature measurements of the stratosphere from the Upper Atmospheric Research Satellite (UARS).
Paladin Solo said:
Also, scientists can track ozone holes.
(look at this nifty site) http://jwocky.gsfc.nasa.gov/ozone/today.html
They have been measuring temperatures, it's definitely global warming
welsh
Junkmaster
More news on the weather-
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2004/05mar_arctic.htm
March 5, 2004: Global warming could plunge North America and Western Europe into a deep freeze, possibly within only a few decades.
That's the paradoxical scenario gaining credibility among many climate scientists. The thawing of sea ice covering the Arctic could disturb or even halt large currents in the Atlantic Ocean. Without the vast heat that these ocean currents deliver--comparable to the power generation of a million nuclear power plants--Europe's average temperature would likely drop 5 to 10°C (9 to 18°F), and parts of eastern North America would be chilled somewhat less. Such a dip in temperature would be similar to global average temperatures toward the end of the last ice age roughly 20,000 years ago.
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2004/05mar_arctic.htm
March 5, 2004: Global warming could plunge North America and Western Europe into a deep freeze, possibly within only a few decades.
That's the paradoxical scenario gaining credibility among many climate scientists. The thawing of sea ice covering the Arctic could disturb or even halt large currents in the Atlantic Ocean. Without the vast heat that these ocean currents deliver--comparable to the power generation of a million nuclear power plants--Europe's average temperature would likely drop 5 to 10°C (9 to 18°F), and parts of eastern North America would be chilled somewhat less. Such a dip in temperature would be similar to global average temperatures toward the end of the last ice age roughly 20,000 years ago.
welsh
Junkmaster
Yes, it was I. Saw some news and felt like posting it.
Hm... I agree with Toresica: the last few years lots of records have been broken. I think the hottest summer Belgium ever had was in 1976 (the year in which this guy was born), but last year that record almost got broken. It got broken in India if I remember correctly and in some other countries as wel. And think about France last year and all the elderly people who died because of the extreme heat (and bad medical care). And think about rain: these last five years more and more cities get flooded. I know there are other reasons for these tragedies as well (people building houses near rivers and stuff), but climatic changes aren't total bullshit, imo. Summers are getting hotter and winters are getting harder, that's what I conclude after spending 28 years on this sad planet.
Another thing: the amazone forests aren't the lungs of the world. That's just Greenpeace trying to formulate good reasons why we should save those forests. A better reason to save them would be this: these forests contain species we haven't discovered and named yet and plants that could one day give us useful drugs.
The real lungs of this planet are the seas and oceans and the algae in them. They take care of like 70% of CO and CO2.
Another thing: the amazone forests aren't the lungs of the world. That's just Greenpeace trying to formulate good reasons why we should save those forests. A better reason to save them would be this: these forests contain species we haven't discovered and named yet and plants that could one day give us useful drugs.
The real lungs of this planet are the seas and oceans and the algae in them. They take care of like 70% of CO and CO2.