Earth is Warming from Inside out NOT Outside in and that is Causing our Climate Change!

[Philip James]

A 10% increase seems like a significant amount, and the trend line is upward.

Be careful how you use percentages..

(Numbers from your chart)

70's levels 280 dobson units..

Fell to 140 DU
(50%)

Rose to 154 ( your 10% increase)

Current levels 154/280

Is 55% of 70's levels...

Now the levels we are taking about in increased solar radiation are tenths of a watt/m2 over 40-50 years.

How long and how deep can you warm the ocean by adding this amount of energy?

The increase from the bottom of energy input up to 5% is now talking of 100ths of w/m2 .

How long would it take to show that amongst normal occillations? Certainly more than a couple years..

Its ok, Yehren, I understand where you are coming from...
Remain skeptical of what I'm saying,
But start looking at the data rather than their interpretation of it.
And consider, that heat can only flow naturally from a warmer object to a colder object.
(If we could ever find the reverse, free energy for everyone!)

Peace!

 

[Yehren]

Fell to 140 DU
(50%)

Rose to 154 ( your 10% increase)

Is 55% of 70's levels...

Which, if your idea is right, means that there should have been significant cooling after that 10% increase. But instead, things warmed up.

How long would it take to show that amongst normal occillations? Certainly more than a couple years..

Less than that of carbon dioxide levels showed up within a year.

 

[Yehren]

Thanks Yeheren....I can do this all day but I won't. The FACT is the earth has been VERY warm and VERY cold.

But the recent rapid warming fits nicely with the increase in carbon dioxide. And this rise was predicted first in the 1800s, long before it actually happened. We know why it happens. Carbon dioxide absorbs IR radiation at wavelenghts not absorbed by other greenhouse gases.

Life has continued thru both with MOST people dying during the COLD periods.

Even if it was true, it would have no relevance to what is happening.

Right now we are probably going thru a warming period

Which was predicted about 30 years ago, by a model using only carbon dioxide concentration and one major volcanic eruption. And it's remarkably accurate.

In the 1970s, the most comprehensive study on climate change (and the closest thing to a scientific consensus at the time) was the 1975 US National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council Report.

No, that's a myth. People have actually gone back, read all the climate papers, and counted all the ones that predicted cooling and ones that predicted warming. Even then, the vast majority predicted warming.

 

[Marymog]

Well, someone actually went back and read all the climatology papers and tested that belief. Here's the results:

As you see, the great majority of climatologists, even in 1975, were predicting warming, not cooling.

The FACT is there is NO consensus amongst "scientist" and their "science based predictions" are ALWAYS wrong. https://www.dennisprager.com/2004-prediction-2020-we-will-all-be-drowning/

The FACT is global cooling kills more people.

The FACT is "scientist" are looking at a small time frame of earths million year climate and blaming man for our current "high" temperature even though it has been MUCH warmer BEFORE industrialization.

Follow the money Yehern.....It's all about money $$$


Study: Models Overestimate Global Warming

 

[Yehren]

Well, someone actually went back and read all the climatology papers and tested that belief. Here's the results:

As you see, the great majority of climatologists, even in 1975, were predicting warming, not cooling.

The FACT is there is NO consensus amongst "scientist" and their "science based predictions" are ALWAYS wrong.

See above. The paper documents that the consensus was for more warming, and as you know, their predictions were correct.

The FACT is global cooling kills more people.

Not much yet. Global warming right now, does it by generating more powerful hurricanes that kill more people. That happens because the oceans are warming up. The crop failures and reduction in nutritional value of crops will become more important as time goes on. And there will be some winners; northern Africa will be greener as warming disrupts the dry winds coming down out of Asia. Already the Sahel is greening and becoming wetter.

Western U.S. is going to get drier and less livable.

Follow the money Yehern.....

Yes. Oil companies, even as their own research led them to make changes to deal with global warming, spent hundreds of millions for propaganda denying warming. The offered lots of money to any scientist who would write papers denying warming. Would you like to see that? "Follow the money", you bet.

It's all about the money.

 

[Marymog]

Well, someone actually went back and read all the climatology papers and tested that belief. Here's the results:

As you see, the great majority of climatologists, even in 1975, were predicting warming, not cooling.

Dear sir,

Read what I wrote. I am agreeing with you!! The majority of climatologists, even in 1975, were predicting warming, not cooling. The same thing is happening TODAY!!

What you are denying is that the FACT is there is NO consensus amongst "scientist" and their "science based predictions" are ALWAYS wrong. EVEN TODAY....40+ years later.

Mary

 

[Marymog]

Not much yet. Global warming right now, does it by generating more powerful hurricanes that kill more people. That happens because the oceans are warming up. The crop failures and reduction in nutritional value of crops will become more important as time goes on. And there will be some winners; northern Africa will be greener as warming disrupts the dry winds coming down out of Asia. Already the Sahel is greening and becoming wetter.

Oh goodness....Crop Failures???? There are MORE crops with MORE food in the last 20 years to feed the earth than anytime in HISTORY. That is a FACT.

There is NO evidence that we have "more powerful hurricanes". We have more technology in the last 20 years to determine hurricane strength. AND there are more people living near the coast that are susceptible to death from hurricanes but BOTH of your statements are completely and utterly not true.

I thank you for your time......

 

[Yehren]

Oh goodness....Crop Failures????

Yep. Surprisingly , it's already underway:
To analyze these questions, a team of researchers led by the University of Minnesota’s Institute on the Environment spent four years collecting information on crop productivity from around the world. We focused on the top 10 global crops that provide the bulk of consumable food calories: Maize (corn), rice, wheat, soybeans, oil palm, sugarcane, barley, rapeseed (canola), cassava and sorghum. Roughly 83 percent of consumable food calories come from just these 10 sources. Other than cassava and oil palm, all are important U.S. crops.

We found that climate change has affected yields in many places. Not all of the changes are negative: Some crop yields have increased in some locations. Overall, however, climate change is reducing global production of staples such as rice and wheat. And when we translated crop yields into consumable calories – the actual food on people’s plates – we found that climate change is already shrinking food supplies, particularly in food-insecure developing countries.
...
Our analysis showed that climate change has already affected crop yields around the world. There were variations between locations and among crops, but when all of these different results were totaled, we found yields of some important global staples were already declining. For example, we estimated that climate change was reducing global rice yields by 0.3% and wheat yields by 0.9% on average each year.

In contrast, some more drought-tolerant crops have benefited from climate change. Yields of sorghum, which many people in the developing world use as a food grain, have increased by 0.7% in sub-Saharan Africa and 0.9% yearly in western, southern and southeastern Asia due to climate shifts since the 1970s.

In the United States corn and soybeans are important cash crops, with a combined value of more than US$90 billion in 2017. We found that climate change is causing a small net increase in yields of these crops – on average, about 0.1% and 3.7% respectively each year.

But these numbers reflect both gains and losses. In some Corn Belt states, such as Indiana and Illinois, climate change is shaving up to 8% off of annual corn yields. At the same time, it has boosted annual yields in Iowa and Minnesota by approximately 2.8%. All four of these states now have slightly warmer and wetter corn growing seasons, but Indiana and Illinois have seen larger increases in warming and smaller increases in moisture compared to Iowa and Minnesota.

Our maps track these changes down to the county level. In eastern Iowa, Illinois and Indiana, climate change has been reducing corn yields even as it boosts them to the northwest in Minnesota and North Dakota. We see similar patterns for soybean farming: Reductions are moving up from the south and east parts of the country, where slightly more warming has occurred than in states farther north. Climate change is also reducing overall yields of other important crops, such as wheat and barley.

What’s more, we found that decreases in consumable food calories are already occurring in roughly half of the world’s food insecure countries, which have high rates of undernourishment, child stunting and wasting, and mortality among children under age 5 due to lack of sufficient food. For example, in India annual food calories have declined by 0.8% annually and in Nepal they have fallen by 2.2% annually.

Reductions are also occurring in southern African countries, including Malawi, Mozambique and Zimbabwe. We even found losses in some rich industrialized nations, such as Australia, France and Germany.

Rich countries can work their way out of food calorie shortages by importing food. But poorer countries may need help. Short-term strategies could include using our findings to breed or increase cultivation of crops that are resilient to or even benefit from climate change. Farming techniques and agriculture policies can also help small-scale farmers increase crop yields.

The fact that world hunger has started to rise after a decade-long decline is alarming. In the long run, wealthy and developing countries alike will have to find ways to produce food in a changing climate. I hope this will lead to a rethinking of the entire food system, from diets to food waste, and to more sustainable techniques for feeding the world.
Climate change is affecting crop yields and reducing global food supplies

There are MORE crops with MORE food in the last 20 years to feed the earth than anytime in HISTORY.

See above. You've been badly misled about that.

 

[Yehren]

Dear sir,

Read what I wrote. I am agreeing with you!! The majority of climatologists, even in 1975, were predicting warming, not cooling. The same thing is happening TODAY!!

And they were right. Global warming is proceeding as they predicted.

What you are denying is that the FACT is there is NO consensus amongst "scientist" and their "science based predictions" are ALWAYS wrong.

The data show that even in the 1970s, the consensus was that warming would take place, as it has. And as you just learned, Hansen's model accurately predicted today's warming almost thirty years in advance. No point in denying the fact.

 

[Timtofly]

And a little over 1000 years from now it will totally be consumed in fire as predicted.

 

[Yehren]

"No more water, the fire next time?"

 

[Yehren]

That's wrong. Oceans actually have a lower albedo than the average for land, which means the oceans cause more heating, not less. The albedo of oceans is about 0.06, while land goes from about 0.1 to 0.7 (the higher one is for ice-covered areas.)

Edit: This is why melting of Arctic sea ice is such a concern. It won't raise ocean levels, for reasons that are obvious, but it will effectively lower the average albedo of the Earth, and result in more warming.

Water is effective at transferring thermal energy from one place to another, because it has an extremely high specific heat. But it doesn't magically make the thermal energy go away; it just moves it somewhere else.

Water cools the surface primarily by evaporation.

And it heats it mostly by absorbtion on radiant energy. It's darker than most land surface, and so absorbs more energy.