Friday, November 1, 2013

Brrrrrrr!

Global Warming: The end of a beautiful relationship


        I’m not a scientist. But when I see a curious correlation, I can't help but to hypothesize. I had written this article back in 2009 (which even I was skeptical about). But since becoming aware of the news on polar climate (see links below), I believe my idea has credibility.

        Ice core samples have shown that Co2 goes up a few hundred years after temperature goes up. Why? Know one knows. However, if they are related, then current day Co2 could be high not necessarily because of anything man has done, but because of the medieval warm period that ended around 1600AD. Additionally, since the medieval ice age followed after the medieval warm period, we may also see a corresponding drop in Co2 and temperature in the future.

        Should we care about Co2? Is what we breathe out really horrible? Besides, plants love it. More plants mean more oxygen for us and more food on our tables. But let’s set aside Co2 and address global warming.

        The world news has not been diligent about reporting the fact that in the last decade, there has been more cooling going on*, and coincidentally with virtually no sunspots. What do sunspots have to do with it?

        Sunspot activity means more solar wind pushes out and around the Earth to force away the cosmic rays that bombard the earth. These same cosmic rays stimulate cloud activity. When there are more sunspots, low cloud condensation nuclei formation decreases, more clear sky increases the incoming radiation to, paradoxically, elevate gaseous water, the most important part of the greenhouse effect. Thus, more heat.  When there are more sunspots, the earth warms, and ultimately the oceans will warm up and create more Co2. Sounds like global warming, eh? Well, hold on a minute.

        When the oceans warm, they stimulate what is known as the ocean conveyor system called the thermohaline circulation. This ocean conveyor is a process where warm salt water moves heat from the equatorial zones and up to the north where it cools. The cool salt water then sinks down and flows back to the equator. Fresh water is provided by northern ice melts, and mixes with the salt water. When the mix is heavy with fresh water, the water sinks less and slows the ocean conveyor process down.

        When the fresh water ice melts too much, the ocean conveyor will slow down and restrict the warm southern waters from circulating to the northern regions of the earth. In the near future there will be a tipping point in the ocean conveyor system where it will shut down and start to reverse, allowing the north to cool again.

        Remember I said that there could be a correlation between the Co2 drop and the medieval ice age. We are near that event. My hypothesis is that when the ocean conveyor slows and Co2 starts to decrease, look out…This could be the beginning of a new ice age.


        During 1645-1715, few if any sunspots were seen, and Western Europe entered what is known as the Little Ice Age. So if the sunspots activity increases, it may contribute to a warm decade; but in the long run it will assist in the acceleration of the ocean conveyor process to what I believe is the tipping to cooling. With this in mind, I believe we’re due for a cold century.

 

Gary Riedl 12/1/09 rev3

 

The Arctic: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2415191/And-global-COOLING-Return-Arctic-ice-cap-grows-29-year.html 

Antarctica: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2012/09/19/antarctic-sea-ice-sets-another-record/

       

*Over the last six years, global temperatures from satellite and land-temperature gauges have cooled (-0.14 F and -0.22 F, respectively). Ocean buoys have echoed that slight cooling since the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration deployed them in 2003.

 

 

Not CO2, but water vapor is the most important greenhouse gas," asserted climatologist Luc Debontridder of Belgium's Royal Meteorological Institute. "It is responsible for at least 75 percent of the greenhouse effect. 

 

 

 

 


 

4 comments:

  1. I didn't read anything yet... I just went straight to your chdo. Where did you get it? Because thermometers weren't invented until the mid-18th century. How do we know it is valid?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I try to use sources from NASA or other reputable sources. But you may be correct on this chart. It should not have shown detail temperatures. My intention was to show only general temperature variations.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Here is a link that explains two sources of temperature accuracy (tree rings and ice core). http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/taking-the-earths-temperature
    Nevertheless, we should assume that accuracy diminishes the further we go back in time.

    ReplyDelete