Tweet
Originally posted by Oerdin
View Post
-
I thought the Cretaceous Period had a relatively stable global average temperature, but it appears that is now in question. -
Oh yes, and it was only 80 million years long. My bad.Comment
-
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven WeinbergComment
-
You are kidding right? He starts out with a totally crackpot theory, that the ice at various depths has residual temperature from the temperature of the earth when it was laid down, graphs it up, then the narrator says a whole lot of true stuff, so you (if you're simple-minded) go "Wow, this all seems right", then he overlays his balmy assumption on modern science.
Tell me you posted this as a joke. Please.Comment
-
No joke - it's science - hard core science. The same method has been used in mines etc.
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven WeinbergComment
-
-
"The ice has not forgotten how cold or warm it was at the time the snow fell", leaving a residual temperature difference. 120,000 years later.
Riiiight. I'll just going to make a phone call BlackCat, you just wait right there and keep enjoying your cup of tea.Comment
-
Well, just make that phone call, but don't be surprised when they pick you up.
Where do you think that they found those old time temps and how ?
Edit: I actually prefer coffe
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven WeinbergComment
-
Isotope variations in ice cores. Not by measuring their current temperature.Originally posted by BlackCat View PostComment
-
.With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven WeinbergComment
-
Nope, I had doubts and did the best - unfortunatedly, you had read it.
No matter what, the method has been used both on ice cores and solid ground and is accepted as a sound method.
Edit: I have tried to find the solid ground papers, but it's a couple of years ago I last saw them, so it's a bit difficult to find them
.
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven WeinbergComment
-
Your belief in this concept betrays a profound lack of understanding of thermodynamics.Originally posted by BlackCat View PostNope, I had doubts and did the best - unfortunatedly, you had read it.
No matter what, the method has been used both on ice cores and solid ground and is accepted as a sound method.
Edit: I have tried to find the solid ground papers, but it's a couple of years ago I last saw them, so it's a bit difficult to find them.Comment
-
Found it, it was Huang, not Hue
Happy reading
PS There actually a fourth, but I can't find it anymore. It's typically referenced to as HPS97.With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven WeinbergComment
-
OK, I've read the first one and one and a few important extracts are:
To that I will add that it totally ignores fluctations in the heat coming up from the mantle, which are totally unknown in the past and therefore unable to be accounted for. The theory also ignores the fact that the direction of subsurface heat travel (deeper than a few feet) is outward from the centre of the earth, not inward.Most reconstruction techniques involve the process of inversion and therefore must contend with incomplete (finite) and noisy data that make it increasingly difficult to resolve climatic excursions in the more remote past. Noise in the system is principally of two types: (i) errors in the measurement of temperatures, depths, and thermophysical properties and (ii) errors that arise from departures of the mathematical representation of the system from conditions existing in the real world. Most analyses of borehole climatic perturbations assume that heat is transferred solely through one-dimensional heat conduction. Deviations from this idealization (for example, moving fluids with an associated advective component of heat transfer, lateral heterogeneity in thermal conductivity, and topography and nonuniform vegetation along the surface) are manifest as noise in the analysis.
But ignoring that, let's look at some of the rest...
What they're saying is that due to noise over time, 500 years is about as far back as they can go. Not 120,000 years as per the ice core nutcase.The combination of the predominant depth range of observations and the characteristic magnitude of noise has led us to choose five centuries as the practical interval over which to develop climate reconstructions.
As an aside, they have made the following observation:
I may get around to having a look at the others, but given the inherent flaws in this one my enthusiasm is not high.The geothermal reconstruction and all multiproxy reconstructions show that the 20th century is the warmest recent century and that the mean rate of temperature increase in the 20th century is well in excess of temperature trends of earlier centuries. Thus, the geothermal analysis, which is based on direct temperature data and a methodology that is totally different from the multiproxy investigations, provides an independent confirmation of the unusual character of 20th-century climate.Comment
Comment