










Comments     Threshold


RE: The World is Too Big
By JediJeb on 1/13/2010 5:36:45 PM , Rating: 2
I think you and I disagree and I think both of our minds are pretty well made up. However I also think both of us are open to the idea that we may be wrong. As long as science continues to be open to the idea that it could be wrong then science will be alive and healthy.

I didn't get in on the begining of the discussion, but I will agree this one has been rather civil and productive for the reason you stated. I think the problem we not experts have with the current pro AGW scientists is that most seem to not follow the above statement on being able to admit they could be wrong. That is what is ruining the whole study of the change in climate and possibly driving us into some very bad political areas with the false belief that government can control the climate.

Someone mentioned using their knowledge of math in examining the problem, I use my knowledge of chemistry. The one thing about many of the theories that troubles me the standard line on temperature versus CO2 concentration in the oceans. The AGW group says that CO2 concentration rises in the atmosphere, causing temperatures to rise, causing the ocean to absorb more CO2 and become more acidic. The problem with that from a chemists view is that as temperatures rise the ocean will desorb CO2 which should make it become less acidic. It would seem that CO2 rise in the atmosphere should follow behind temperature rise not cause it. Their theory from a chemistry standpoint would suggest that climate over-rides the laws of chemistry and physics which should not be able to happen. I may be wrong and not be seeing something that is taking place there, but none of the AGW theories have yet to explain the discrepancy.

RE: The World is Too Big
By Smilin on 1/13/2010 5:50:33 PM , Rating: 2

I thought the AGW consensus was the opposite of that. Warming should cause the oceans to emit CO2 rather than absorb it.

RE: The World is Too Big
By TheEinstein on 1/13/2010 9:03:29 PM , Rating: 2
There are so many 'ocean this and ocean that' theories as to make me cry for sanity. All the ones who include the ocean have so many variances in what is supposed to happen, it almost feels like they are trying hard to account for anything so they can say 'eureka' when their model follows the oceans a bit.

Recently however Al Gores primary scientist backtracked when he said the Oceans were not heating as much as his models had indicated they should, showing a greater ability to diffuse heat somehow.

The real scientists of the oceans however have said... oh crap I forget the word... Submarines move between the layers in the ocean commonly... dangit I hate forgetting a word!!! Anyways these thermal barriers keep divergent tempatured waters away from each other, and each section can grow, or shrink, with local temperature conditions.

The layers therefore can be huge for a warm spot, when weather above increases, compacting the lower, more cooler, levels down, or it can be visa versa. The current situations also help dictate changes in how these thermal levels work, since the areas with a permanent current get cycled from warm to cold, or visa-versa.

But your chemical study could be a great avenue to go down. The scientists I follow have said a lot that carbon dioxide in the past increased as a result of heating, and not the other way around.

RE: The World is Too Big
By JediJeb on 1/14/2010 2:00:50 PM , Rating: 2
Is the word " thermocline "?

