The Climate Change Thread
- Thread starter Scotty
- Start date
- Status
S
spooony
Guest
Cut and paste where? Where did they have to evolve? Proof please. Shark species can only breed amongst themselves and they share distinctive characteristics that separate them from other species in and outside of their genus. That is the first time they have interbred are with those two named up there. And again my point is warmer waters destroy the coral as it bleach it and it can take decades to heal.
I also read the article wrong the first time as I thought they were trying to force them or try it genetically self to breed them but that is still claims and no one has yet provided facts or proof that it has actually happened.
That is the point not the sharks
Karl
Bill McLean (32)
1. I could tell just by reading the post it came from a number of sources, but your challenge made me go and prove it. - For the bit "No matter where they live, sharks play a crucial role in their ecosystems. Sharks keep ecosystem populations in check by hunting and killing other animals, particularly those that are weak or diseased." - here for starters - http://www.angelfire.com/extreme/TBsDolphinLake/Dolphin4.html Here too - http://www.angelfire.com/anime5/cyber26/longpage.html . On another of your cut and pasted pastiche peices - Here - http://www.ukm.my/ahmadukm/images/stories/data/kuliah/manusia/artikel/evolution.htm Actually the word string "Fossils, furthermore, provide evidence of how species change over time. The study of comparative anatomy has highlighted physical similarities in the features of widely different species—proof of common ancestry." pops up in a lot of places. Look, I have no drama with it, just don't lie and deny it.
2. So sharks just popped into our oceans fully formed in their present state? And the current species of sharks are the same as the ones 300 million years ago? Proof - start here, then google your head off - http://fossil.wikia.com/wiki/Shark_evolution
3. Wrong. Different, closely related species can interbreed. The article is all about that. Happens in other species too - the offspring is usually sterile though. It's all in my post. Maybe you read it wrong again.
4. It's the first time they caught a hybrid. Who knows how many times it's happened before given that they can't breed and would just die in the normal course and the differences need anatomical dissection and genetic testing to establish.
5. Whether coral bleaching is due to AGW or just local conditions or an extreme el nino is debateable. eg -
6. You didn't just read the article wrong if you took that away from it, you barely read it at all.
Bruwheresmycar
Nicholas Shehadie (39)
I was just about to ask why Spoony's posts are hard to understand one minute, and lecturing us in biology the next.
If you are using other sources Spoony, in this thread it's useful if you quote and source every one properly. Or else the conversation gets confusing.
If you are using other sources Spoony, in this thread it's useful if you quote and source every one properly. Or else the conversation gets confusing.
Schadenfreude
John Solomon (38)
Orca.
S
spooony
Guest
S
Anyone who knows the slightest thing about DNA would know that would not be possible without help from a geneticist. I know there is something called inter-species cloning now.
From the article
Nothing in that press release about a climate change effecting or forcing the sharks to interbreed
SST for Australia:
Water is warmer not cooler ---> So scratch that theory of the cooler water
Last 30 years of temperature for that area
Australia Sea temperature went up by 0.45 degrees centigrade over the last 30 years.
Sharks survived for over 400 million years in the roughest of temps without bonking like hillbillies
The sharks lifespan is 12 yrs for female and 8 yrs for male
Davenport, S.; Stevens, J.D. (1988). Age and growth of two commercially imported sharks (Carcharhinus tilstoni and C. sorrah) from Northern Australia
That makes the Hybrid being about 10 years old or its "Species"
Carcharhinus tilstoni is not defined to the tropics
http://www.publish.csiro.au/paper/MF9880417
One of the most difficult species of sharks to ID is the ‘blacktip sharks’
Theres a map
Get it? Got it? Are we finished with the sharks? Can we move on?
Oh and the sharks fossils of 400 million years ago. Here is some teeth samples
This is a great white teeth of today
Although not the same species or they can't say from which species the teeth is still almost the same. Over 400 million years thats your difference
Sources let me explain to you what is wrong with that article.
Anyone who knows the slightest thing about DNA would know that would not be possible without help from a geneticist. I know there is something called inter-species cloning now.
From the article
Nothing in that press release about a climate change effecting or forcing the sharks to interbreed
SST for Australia:
Water is warmer not cooler ---> So scratch that theory of the cooler water
Last 30 years of temperature for that area
Australia Sea temperature went up by 0.45 degrees centigrade over the last 30 years.
Sharks survived for over 400 million years in the roughest of temps without bonking like hillbillies
The sharks lifespan is 12 yrs for female and 8 yrs for male
Davenport, S.; Stevens, J.D. (1988). Age and growth of two commercially imported sharks (Carcharhinus tilstoni and C. sorrah) from Northern Australia
That makes the Hybrid being about 10 years old or its "Species"
Bullshit
Carcharhinus tilstoni is not defined to the tropics
http://www.publish.csiro.au/paper/MF9880417
One of the most difficult species of sharks to ID is the ‘blacktip sharks’
http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/research/areas/systems-research/wild-fisheries/outputs/2010/1778
Theres a map
Get it? Got it? Are we finished with the sharks? Can we move on?
Oh and the sharks fossils of 400 million years ago. Here is some teeth samples
This is a great white teeth of today
Although not the same species or they can't say from which species the teeth is still almost the same. Over 400 million years thats your difference
Karl
Bill McLean (32)
OMG. And you guys used to say I was hard to follow. 
So, Spoony - can we have some acknowledgement that you liberally borrowed other material, passed it off as your own and then denied doing it, only to be caught red-handed and lieing through your highly evolved back teeth?
This is utter rubbish, and you clearly know nothing about genetics or DNA other than what you randomly read and copy from the web. The hybridisation of these two species of Black Tip shark happened in the wild wihout some random geneticist swimming around the place with a turkey baster molesting unsuspecting female sharks. How you arrive at some other conclusion is beyond me, but you have admitted you don't always read things very well.
The rest of this post is so disjointed and randomly thrown together that I can't be bothered with it. You seem to think you've made some point though, so at least you'll be at peace. So yes. Lets move along. Enough about sharks.
So, Spoony - can we have some acknowledgement that you liberally borrowed other material, passed it off as your own and then denied doing it, only to be caught red-handed and lieing through your highly evolved back teeth?
This is utter rubbish, and you clearly know nothing about genetics or DNA other than what you randomly read and copy from the web. The hybridisation of these two species of Black Tip shark happened in the wild wihout some random geneticist swimming around the place with a turkey baster molesting unsuspecting female sharks. How you arrive at some other conclusion is beyond me, but you have admitted you don't always read things very well.
The rest of this post is so disjointed and randomly thrown together that I can't be bothered with it. You seem to think you've made some point though, so at least you'll be at peace. So yes. Lets move along. Enough about sharks.
L
luikang
Guest
That stuff is nowhere near of what I have written.OMG. And you guys used to say I was hard to follow.
So, Spoony - can we have some acknowledgement that you liberally borrowed other material, passed it off as your own and then denied doing it, only to be caught red-handed and lieing through your highly evolved back teeth?
This is utter rubbish, and you clearly know nothing about genetics or DNA other than what you randomly read and copy from the web. The hybridisation of these two species of Black Tip shark happened in the wild wihout some random geneticist swimming around the place with a turkey baster molesting unsuspecting female sharks. How you arrive at some other conclusion is beyond me, but you have admitted you don't always read things very well.
The rest of this post is so disjointed and randomly thrown together that I can't be bothered with it. You seem to think you've made some point though, so at least you'll be at peace. So yes. Lets move along. Enough about sharks.
That stuff is nowhere near of what I have written.
Then read this
http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/research/areas/systems-research/wild-fisheries/outputs/2010/1778
Let me quote it again. Its from your own scientist
Why were they watching the Blacktip shark specifically? Did they catch them by accident and did some DNA testing and said wow hybrids?
I have backed up all those statements with proof of your own scientist in Australia. I don't think you read one of those papers. I can see it by your replies.
Due to Global warming? No. That hybrids ain't even 10 years old and the water temps did not even raise by 1 degree in the last 30 years.
Go read that papers and stop reading childrens book at Angelfire
Karl
Bill McLean (32)
The quotes from my posts were not in response to anything you wrote luikang. I have no idea why you're going to such lengths to point out that they are "nowhere near of what I have written". The were in response to Spoony and the links to material on Angelfire were where I located information Spoony was using and putting forward as his own thoughts and then denying he had cut and pasted it from the web. Nothing to do with you.
I have no idea what point you're trying to make and it doesn't matter. We're done talking about sharks now anyway.
Karl
Bill McLean (32)
So, Spoony - can we have some acknowledgement that you liberally borrowed other material, passed it off as your own and then denied doing it, only to be caught red-handed and lieing through your highly evolved back teeth?
Karl
Bill McLean (32)
Good news
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...iers-mountains
The Himalayas and nearby peaks have lost no ice in past 10 years, study shows
Meltwater from Asia's peaks is much less then previously estimated, but lead scientist says the loss of ice caps and glaciers around the world remains a serious concern
• In pictures: the best images of the earth from space
Hopar glacier in Pakistan. Melting ice outside the two largest caps - Greenland and Antarctica - is much less then previously estimated, the study has found. Photograph: Paula Bronstein/Getty Images
The world's greatest snow-capped peaks, which run in a chain from the Himalayas to Tian Shan on the border of China and Kyrgyzstan, have lost no ice over the last decade, new research shows.
The discovery has stunned scientists, who had believed that around 50bn tonnes of meltwater were being shed each year and not being replaced by new snowfall.
The study is the first to survey all the world's icecaps and glaciers and was made possible by the use of satellite data. Overall, the contribution of melting ice outside the two largest caps – Greenland and Antarctica – is much less then previously estimated, with the lack of ice loss in the Himalayas and the other high peaks of Asia responsible for most of the discrepancy.
Bristol University glaciologist Prof Jonathan Bamber, who was not part of the research team, said: "The very unexpected result was the negligible mass loss from high mountain Asia, which is not significantly different from zero."
The melting of Himalayan glaciers caused controversy in 2009 when a report from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change mistakenly stated that they would disappear by 2035, instead of 2350. However, the scientist who led the new work is clear that while greater uncertainty has been discovered in Asia's highest mountains, the melting of ice caps and glaciers around the world remains a serious concern.
"Our results and those of everyone else show we are losing a huge amount of water into the oceans every year," said Prof John Wahr of the University of Colorado. "People should be just as worried about the melting of the world's ice as they were before."
His team's study, published in the journal Nature, concludes that between 443-629bn tonnes of meltwater overall are added to the world's oceans each year. This is raising sea level by about 1.5mm a year, the team reports, in addition to the 2mm a year caused by expansion of the warming ocean.
The scientists are careful to point out that lower-altitude glaciers in the Asian mountain ranges – sometimes dubbed the "third pole" – are definitely melting. Satellite images and reports confirm this. But over the study period from 2003-10 enough ice was added to the peaks to compensate.
The impact on predictions for future sea level rise is yet to be fully studied but Bamber said: "The projections for sea level rise by 2100 will not change by much, say 5cm or so, so we are talking about a very small modification." Existing estimates range from 30cm to 1m.
Wahr warned that while crucial to a better understanding of ice melting, the eight years of data is a relatively short time period and that variable monsoons mean year-to-year changes in ice mass of hundreds of billions of tonnes. "It is awfully dangerous to take an eight-year record and predict even the next eight years, let alone the next century," he said.
The reason for the radical reappraisal of ice melting in Asia is the different ways in which the current and previous studies were conducted. Until now, estimates of meltwater loss for all the world's 200,000 glaciers were based on extrapolations of data from a few hundred monitored on the ground. Those glaciers at lower altitudes are much easier for scientists to get to and so were more frequently included, but they were also more prone to melting.
The bias was particularly strong in Asia, said Wahr: "There extrapolation is really tough as only a handful of lower-altitude glaciers are monitored and there are thousands there very high up."
The new study used a pair of satellites, called Grace, which measure tiny changes in the Earth's gravitational pull. When ice is lost, the gravitational pull weakens and is detected by the orbiting spacecraft. "They fly at 500km, so they see everything," said Wahr, including the hard-to-reach, high-altitude glaciers.
"I believe this data is the most reliable estimate of global glacier mass balance that has been produced to date," said Bamber. He noted that 1.4 billion people depend on the rivers that flow from the Himalayas and Tibetan plateau: "That is a compelling reason to try to understand what is happening there better."
He added: "The new data does not mean that concerns about climate change are overblown in any way. It means there is a much larger uncertainty in high mountain Asia than we thought. Taken globally all the observations of the Earth's ice – permafrost, Arctic sea ice, snow cover and glaciers – are going in the same direction."
Grace launched in 2002 and continues to monitor the planet, but it has passed its expected mission span and its batteries are beginning to weaken. A replacement mission has been approved by the US and German space agencies and could launch in 2016.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...iers-mountains
The Himalayas and nearby peaks have lost no ice in past 10 years, study shows
Meltwater from Asia's peaks is much less then previously estimated, but lead scientist says the loss of ice caps and glaciers around the world remains a serious concern
• In pictures: the best images of the earth from space
- <LI class=share-links sizset="58" sizcache="0">
- Damian Carrington
- guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 8 February 2012 18.10 GMT
- Article history
The world's greatest snow-capped peaks, which run in a chain from the Himalayas to Tian Shan on the border of China and Kyrgyzstan, have lost no ice over the last decade, new research shows.
The discovery has stunned scientists, who had believed that around 50bn tonnes of meltwater were being shed each year and not being replaced by new snowfall.
The study is the first to survey all the world's icecaps and glaciers and was made possible by the use of satellite data. Overall, the contribution of melting ice outside the two largest caps – Greenland and Antarctica – is much less then previously estimated, with the lack of ice loss in the Himalayas and the other high peaks of Asia responsible for most of the discrepancy.
Bristol University glaciologist Prof Jonathan Bamber, who was not part of the research team, said: "The very unexpected result was the negligible mass loss from high mountain Asia, which is not significantly different from zero."
The melting of Himalayan glaciers caused controversy in 2009 when a report from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change mistakenly stated that they would disappear by 2035, instead of 2350. However, the scientist who led the new work is clear that while greater uncertainty has been discovered in Asia's highest mountains, the melting of ice caps and glaciers around the world remains a serious concern.
"Our results and those of everyone else show we are losing a huge amount of water into the oceans every year," said Prof John Wahr of the University of Colorado. "People should be just as worried about the melting of the world's ice as they were before."
His team's study, published in the journal Nature, concludes that between 443-629bn tonnes of meltwater overall are added to the world's oceans each year. This is raising sea level by about 1.5mm a year, the team reports, in addition to the 2mm a year caused by expansion of the warming ocean.
The scientists are careful to point out that lower-altitude glaciers in the Asian mountain ranges – sometimes dubbed the "third pole" – are definitely melting. Satellite images and reports confirm this. But over the study period from 2003-10 enough ice was added to the peaks to compensate.
The impact on predictions for future sea level rise is yet to be fully studied but Bamber said: "The projections for sea level rise by 2100 will not change by much, say 5cm or so, so we are talking about a very small modification." Existing estimates range from 30cm to 1m.
Wahr warned that while crucial to a better understanding of ice melting, the eight years of data is a relatively short time period and that variable monsoons mean year-to-year changes in ice mass of hundreds of billions of tonnes. "It is awfully dangerous to take an eight-year record and predict even the next eight years, let alone the next century," he said.
The reason for the radical reappraisal of ice melting in Asia is the different ways in which the current and previous studies were conducted. Until now, estimates of meltwater loss for all the world's 200,000 glaciers were based on extrapolations of data from a few hundred monitored on the ground. Those glaciers at lower altitudes are much easier for scientists to get to and so were more frequently included, but they were also more prone to melting.
The bias was particularly strong in Asia, said Wahr: "There extrapolation is really tough as only a handful of lower-altitude glaciers are monitored and there are thousands there very high up."
The new study used a pair of satellites, called Grace, which measure tiny changes in the Earth's gravitational pull. When ice is lost, the gravitational pull weakens and is detected by the orbiting spacecraft. "They fly at 500km, so they see everything," said Wahr, including the hard-to-reach, high-altitude glaciers.
"I believe this data is the most reliable estimate of global glacier mass balance that has been produced to date," said Bamber. He noted that 1.4 billion people depend on the rivers that flow from the Himalayas and Tibetan plateau: "That is a compelling reason to try to understand what is happening there better."
He added: "The new data does not mean that concerns about climate change are overblown in any way. It means there is a much larger uncertainty in high mountain Asia than we thought. Taken globally all the observations of the Earth's ice – permafrost, Arctic sea ice, snow cover and glaciers – are going in the same direction."
Grace launched in 2002 and continues to monitor the planet, but it has passed its expected mission span and its batteries are beginning to weaken. A replacement mission has been approved by the US and German space agencies and could launch in 2016.
Cutter
Nicholas Shehadie (39)
My skim read identified that the high peaks didn't melt as much as expected in an 8 year period but that period is acknowledged as too small a sample from which to draw any real conclusions. The lower peaks were melting in accordance with expectations. The net change is that instead of 30cm to 100cm sea rises by 2100, we're looking at 25cm to 95cm.
That doesn't sound particularly good to me.
Karl
Bill McLean (32)
Time for a refresher
March 20 2000
Quote:
Britain's winter ends tomorrow with further indications of a striking environmental change: snow is starting to disappear from our lives.
Sledges, snowmen, snowballs and the excitement of waking to find that the stuff has settled outside are all a rapidly diminishing part of Britain's culture, as warmer winters - which scientists are attributing to global climate change - produce not only fewer white Christmases, but fewer white Januaries and Februaries.
The first two months of 2000 were virtually free of significant snowfall in much of lowland Britain, and December brought only moderate snowfall in the South-east. It is the continuation of a trend that has been increasingly visible in the past 15 years: in the south of England, for instance, from 1970 to 1995 snow and sleet fell for an average of 3.7 days, while from 1988 to 1995 the average was 0.7 days. London's last substantial snowfall was in February 1991.
Global warming, the heating of the atmosphere by increased amounts of industrial gases, is now accepted as a reality by the international community. Average temperatures in Britain were nearly 0.6°C higher in the Nineties than in 1960-90, and it is estimated that they will increase by 0.2C every decade over the coming century. Eight of the 10 hottest years on record occurred in the Nineties.
However, the warming is so far manifesting itself more in winters which are less cold than in much hotter summers. According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become "a very rare and exciting event".
"Children just aren't going to know what snow is," he said.
The effects of snow-free winter in Britain are already becoming apparent. This year, for the first time ever, Hamleys, Britain's biggest toyshop, had no sledges on display in its Regent Street store. "It was a bit of a first," a spokesperson said.
Fen skating, once a popular sport on the fields of East Anglia, now takes place on indoor artificial rinks. Malcolm Robinson, of the Fenland Indoor Speed Skating Club in Peterborough, says they have not skated outside since 1997. "As a boy, I can remember being on ice most winters. Now it's few and far between," he said.
Michael Jeacock, a Cambridgeshire local historian, added that a generation was growing up "without experiencing one of the greatest joys and privileges of living in this part of the world - open-air skating".
Warmer winters have significant environmental and economic implications, and a wide range of research indicates that pests and plant diseases, usually killed back by sharp frosts, are likely to flourish. But very little research has been done on the cultural implications of climate change - into the possibility, for example, that our notion of Christmas might have to shift.
Professor Jarich Oosten, an anthropologist at the University of Leiden in the Netherlands, says that even if we no longer see snow, it will remain culturally important.
"We don't really have wolves in Europe any more, but they are still an important part of our culture and everyone knows what they look like," he said.
David Parker, at the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research in Berkshire, says ultimately, British children could have only virtual experience of snow. Via the internet, they might wonder at polar scenes - or eventually "feel" virtual cold.
Heavy snow will return occasionally, says Dr Viner, but when it does we will be unprepared. "We're really going to get caught out. Snow will probably cause chaos in 20 years time," he said.
The chances are certainly now stacked against the sortof heavy snowfall in cities that inspired Impressionist painters, such as Sisley, and the 19th century poet laureate Robert Bridges, who wrote in "London Snow" of it, "stealthily and perpetually settling and loosely lying".
Not any more, it seems.
http://www.independent.co.uk/environ...st-724017.html
March 20 2000
Quote:
Britain's winter ends tomorrow with further indications of a striking environmental change: snow is starting to disappear from our lives.
Sledges, snowmen, snowballs and the excitement of waking to find that the stuff has settled outside are all a rapidly diminishing part of Britain's culture, as warmer winters - which scientists are attributing to global climate change - produce not only fewer white Christmases, but fewer white Januaries and Februaries.
The first two months of 2000 were virtually free of significant snowfall in much of lowland Britain, and December brought only moderate snowfall in the South-east. It is the continuation of a trend that has been increasingly visible in the past 15 years: in the south of England, for instance, from 1970 to 1995 snow and sleet fell for an average of 3.7 days, while from 1988 to 1995 the average was 0.7 days. London's last substantial snowfall was in February 1991.
Global warming, the heating of the atmosphere by increased amounts of industrial gases, is now accepted as a reality by the international community. Average temperatures in Britain were nearly 0.6°C higher in the Nineties than in 1960-90, and it is estimated that they will increase by 0.2C every decade over the coming century. Eight of the 10 hottest years on record occurred in the Nineties.
However, the warming is so far manifesting itself more in winters which are less cold than in much hotter summers. According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become "a very rare and exciting event".
"Children just aren't going to know what snow is," he said.
The effects of snow-free winter in Britain are already becoming apparent. This year, for the first time ever, Hamleys, Britain's biggest toyshop, had no sledges on display in its Regent Street store. "It was a bit of a first," a spokesperson said.
Fen skating, once a popular sport on the fields of East Anglia, now takes place on indoor artificial rinks. Malcolm Robinson, of the Fenland Indoor Speed Skating Club in Peterborough, says they have not skated outside since 1997. "As a boy, I can remember being on ice most winters. Now it's few and far between," he said.
Michael Jeacock, a Cambridgeshire local historian, added that a generation was growing up "without experiencing one of the greatest joys and privileges of living in this part of the world - open-air skating".
Warmer winters have significant environmental and economic implications, and a wide range of research indicates that pests and plant diseases, usually killed back by sharp frosts, are likely to flourish. But very little research has been done on the cultural implications of climate change - into the possibility, for example, that our notion of Christmas might have to shift.
Professor Jarich Oosten, an anthropologist at the University of Leiden in the Netherlands, says that even if we no longer see snow, it will remain culturally important.
"We don't really have wolves in Europe any more, but they are still an important part of our culture and everyone knows what they look like," he said.
David Parker, at the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research in Berkshire, says ultimately, British children could have only virtual experience of snow. Via the internet, they might wonder at polar scenes - or eventually "feel" virtual cold.
Heavy snow will return occasionally, says Dr Viner, but when it does we will be unprepared. "We're really going to get caught out. Snow will probably cause chaos in 20 years time," he said.
The chances are certainly now stacked against the sortof heavy snowfall in cities that inspired Impressionist painters, such as Sisley, and the 19th century poet laureate Robert Bridges, who wrote in "London Snow" of it, "stealthily and perpetually settling and loosely lying".
Not any more, it seems.
http://www.independent.co.uk/environ...st-724017.html
Bruwheresmycar
Nicholas Shehadie (39)
Doesn't it make people raise an eyebrow when none of the sentences quoted are complete? The journalist is just taking parts of an answer to an (unstated) question that suits his article conclusion.
The best climate "skeptics" can do is attack half of a statement made by a scientist that has been included in a sensational news peice.
Not much of a "refresher", unless you are reminding us of bad journalism. This isn't a scientific prediction of any sort so don't pass it off as one. That wouldn't be very skeptical.
The best climate "skeptics" can do is attack half of a statement made by a scientist that has been included in a sensational news peice.
Not much of a "refresher", unless you are reminding us of bad journalism. This isn't a scientific prediction of any sort so don't pass it off as one. That wouldn't be very skeptical.
Karl
Bill McLean (32)
Solar System Influence
Nicola Scafetta has identified the change in the location of the center of mass of the solar system (CMSS) as a possible mechanism driving the 60-year cycle. (Scafetta, N., “Empirical evidence for a celestial origin of the climate oscillations and its implications”, Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics (2010), doi:10.1016/j.jastp.2010.04.015 [http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1005/1005.4639v1.pdf])
Scafetta shows the following figures described as: “[A- (left)] Rescaled SCMSS 60 year cycle (black curve) against the global surface temperature record (grey) detrended of its quadratic fit; [B- (right)] Eight year moving average of the global temperature detrended of its quadratic fit and plotted against itself shifted by 61.5 years. Note the perfect correspondence between the 1880-1940 and 1940-2000 periods. Also a smaller cycle, whose peaks are indicated by the letter “Y”, is clearly visible in the two records. This smaller cycle is mostly related to the 30-year modulation of the temperature. These results reveal the natural origin of a large 60-year modulation in the temperature records.” (SCMSS – Speed of the CMSS)
(Note: The term “barycenter” refers to the center of gravity of a system, which would be the same as the center of mass in a uniform gravitational field, and thus the two terms are often interchanged.)
As the planets orbit around the sun, the sun’s position also changes as the whole solar system orbits around the CMSS, whose position changes as the relative positions of the planets change. The planets / sun influence this based on their relative mass. The following figure (left) show a gravity simulation of the solar system barycenter position. The center figure shows the hypothetical barycenter movement with Jupiter removed from the system showing that Jupiter causes most of the wobble. The right-hand figure then removes Saturn. Once Neptune is removed the effect of the remaining planets is barely noticeable (not shown below). [http://www.orbitsimulator.com/gravity/articles/ssbarycenter.html]
Jupiter has the largest mass of any planet and thus is the most influential. The Wolf cycle (solar sunspot cycle) has a period that fluctuates but averages 11.2 years. Jupiter’s solar orbital cycle is 11.9 Earth years. Saturn, the second-largest planet, has a solar orbital cycle of 29.4 Earth years. This leads to Jupiter-Saturn conjunction every 19.9 years (J/S Synodic Cycle). (As a coincidence, in the Maya calendar 1 Katun = 19.7 years.) A full cycle of Jupiter / Saturn around the sun (J/S Tri-Synodic Cycle) is 59.6 years – in other words it takes 60 (59.6) years for the Earth / Jupiter / Saturn reach the same relative alignment around the sun.
The following figure shows the speed of the Sun relative to the CMSS showing “20 and 60 year oscillations”. (From the Scafetta paper referenced above.) It shows a 60-year cycle with peaks similar to the global average temperatures shown at the start of this document – around 1880, 1940 and 2000.
See also: http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1005/1005.5303.pdf
A shared frequency set between the historical mid-latitude aurora records and the global surface temperature Nicola Scafetta, October 2011 [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364682611002872]
“Herein we show that the historical records of mid-latitude auroras from 1700 to 1966 present oscillations with periods of about 9, 10–11, 20–21, 30 and 60 years. The same frequencies are found in proxy and instrumental global surface temperature records since 1650 and 1850, respectively, and in several planetary and solar records. We argue that the aurora records reveal a physical link between climate change and astronomical oscillations. Likely in addition to a Soli-Lunar tidal effect, there exists a planetary modulation of the heliosphere, of the cosmic ray flux reaching the Earth and/or of the electric properties of the ionosphere. The latter, in turn, has the potentiality of modulating the global cloud cover that ultimately drives the climate oscillations through albedo oscillations. In particular, a quasi-60-year large cycle is quite evident since 1650 in all climate and astronomical records herein studied, which also include a historical record of meteorite fall in China from 619 to 1943. These findings support the thesis that climate oscillations have an astronomical origin. We show that a harmonic constituent model based on the major astronomical frequencies revealed in the aurora records and deduced from the natural gravitational oscillations of the solar system is able to forecast with a reasonable accuracy the decadal and multidecadal temperature oscillations from 1950 to 2010 using the temperature data before 1950, and vice versa. The existence of a natural 60-year cyclical modulation of the global surface temperature induced by astronomical mechanisms, by alone, would imply that at least 60–70% of the warming observed since 1970 has been naturally induced. Moreover, the climate may stay approximately stable during the next decades because the 60-year cycle has entered in its cooling phase.”
January 2012: Nicola Scafetta published “Testing an astronomically based decadal-scale empirical harmonic climate model versus the IPCC (2007) general circulation climate models” [http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/reprint/astronomical_harmonics.pdf]
“The most prominent cycles that can be detected in the global surface temperature records have periods of about 9.1 year, 10-11 years, about 20 year and about 60 years. The 9.1 year cycle appears to be linked to a Soli/Lunar tidal cycles, as I also show in the paper, while the other three cycles appear to be solar/planetary cycles ultimately related to the orbits of Jupiter and Saturn.” The following figure from that paper show the prominence of the 60 year cycle.
Source - http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/SixtyYearCycle.htm
Nicola Scafetta has identified the change in the location of the center of mass of the solar system (CMSS) as a possible mechanism driving the 60-year cycle. (Scafetta, N., “Empirical evidence for a celestial origin of the climate oscillations and its implications”, Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics (2010), doi:10.1016/j.jastp.2010.04.015 [http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1005/1005.4639v1.pdf])
Scafetta shows the following figures described as: “[A- (left)] Rescaled SCMSS 60 year cycle (black curve) against the global surface temperature record (grey) detrended of its quadratic fit; [B- (right)] Eight year moving average of the global temperature detrended of its quadratic fit and plotted against itself shifted by 61.5 years. Note the perfect correspondence between the 1880-1940 and 1940-2000 periods. Also a smaller cycle, whose peaks are indicated by the letter “Y”, is clearly visible in the two records. This smaller cycle is mostly related to the 30-year modulation of the temperature. These results reveal the natural origin of a large 60-year modulation in the temperature records.” (SCMSS – Speed of the CMSS)
(Note: The term “barycenter” refers to the center of gravity of a system, which would be the same as the center of mass in a uniform gravitational field, and thus the two terms are often interchanged.)
As the planets orbit around the sun, the sun’s position also changes as the whole solar system orbits around the CMSS, whose position changes as the relative positions of the planets change. The planets / sun influence this based on their relative mass. The following figure (left) show a gravity simulation of the solar system barycenter position. The center figure shows the hypothetical barycenter movement with Jupiter removed from the system showing that Jupiter causes most of the wobble. The right-hand figure then removes Saturn. Once Neptune is removed the effect of the remaining planets is barely noticeable (not shown below). [http://www.orbitsimulator.com/gravity/articles/ssbarycenter.html]
Jupiter has the largest mass of any planet and thus is the most influential. The Wolf cycle (solar sunspot cycle) has a period that fluctuates but averages 11.2 years. Jupiter’s solar orbital cycle is 11.9 Earth years. Saturn, the second-largest planet, has a solar orbital cycle of 29.4 Earth years. This leads to Jupiter-Saturn conjunction every 19.9 years (J/S Synodic Cycle). (As a coincidence, in the Maya calendar 1 Katun = 19.7 years.) A full cycle of Jupiter / Saturn around the sun (J/S Tri-Synodic Cycle) is 59.6 years – in other words it takes 60 (59.6) years for the Earth / Jupiter / Saturn reach the same relative alignment around the sun.
The following figure shows the speed of the Sun relative to the CMSS showing “20 and 60 year oscillations”. (From the Scafetta paper referenced above.) It shows a 60-year cycle with peaks similar to the global average temperatures shown at the start of this document – around 1880, 1940 and 2000.
See also: http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1005/1005.5303.pdf
A shared frequency set between the historical mid-latitude aurora records and the global surface temperature Nicola Scafetta, October 2011 [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364682611002872]
“Herein we show that the historical records of mid-latitude auroras from 1700 to 1966 present oscillations with periods of about 9, 10–11, 20–21, 30 and 60 years. The same frequencies are found in proxy and instrumental global surface temperature records since 1650 and 1850, respectively, and in several planetary and solar records. We argue that the aurora records reveal a physical link between climate change and astronomical oscillations. Likely in addition to a Soli-Lunar tidal effect, there exists a planetary modulation of the heliosphere, of the cosmic ray flux reaching the Earth and/or of the electric properties of the ionosphere. The latter, in turn, has the potentiality of modulating the global cloud cover that ultimately drives the climate oscillations through albedo oscillations. In particular, a quasi-60-year large cycle is quite evident since 1650 in all climate and astronomical records herein studied, which also include a historical record of meteorite fall in China from 619 to 1943. These findings support the thesis that climate oscillations have an astronomical origin. We show that a harmonic constituent model based on the major astronomical frequencies revealed in the aurora records and deduced from the natural gravitational oscillations of the solar system is able to forecast with a reasonable accuracy the decadal and multidecadal temperature oscillations from 1950 to 2010 using the temperature data before 1950, and vice versa. The existence of a natural 60-year cyclical modulation of the global surface temperature induced by astronomical mechanisms, by alone, would imply that at least 60–70% of the warming observed since 1970 has been naturally induced. Moreover, the climate may stay approximately stable during the next decades because the 60-year cycle has entered in its cooling phase.”
January 2012: Nicola Scafetta published “Testing an astronomically based decadal-scale empirical harmonic climate model versus the IPCC (2007) general circulation climate models” [http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/reprint/astronomical_harmonics.pdf]
“The most prominent cycles that can be detected in the global surface temperature records have periods of about 9.1 year, 10-11 years, about 20 year and about 60 years. The 9.1 year cycle appears to be linked to a Soli/Lunar tidal cycles, as I also show in the paper, while the other three cycles appear to be solar/planetary cycles ultimately related to the orbits of Jupiter and Saturn.” The following figure from that paper show the prominence of the 60 year cycle.
Source - http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/SixtyYearCycle.htm
Bruwheresmycar
Nicholas Shehadie (39)
Why can almost everything you post be traced back to Anthony Watts blog? I can't believe anyone takes him seriously, he gets the science wrong all the time and constantly endorses anti-science nutjobs like Lord Monckton. Why would anyone who respects science take Monckton seriously? It is beyond me.
His blog is full of conflicting messages, but I suppose his viewers are so simple minded they don't notice.
One minute the IPCC are corrupt liars who are tampering with data to fake a warming trend. The next minute he posts some shit about the sun accounting for global warming, or some movement in the Earth's orbit.
I suppose his readers just think "IPCC wrong, good" and "IPCC right, bad". So if they are constantly fed conflicitng messages they wont notice.
I'm ranting here but seriously, that place just amazes me to no end. I love how people who think scientists are politically motivated are getting their info from some ideologically driven conservative american weatherman.... (who proves himself time and time again to be an intellectually dishonest, unreliable source of information)
His blog is full of conflicting messages, but I suppose his viewers are so simple minded they don't notice.
One minute the IPCC are corrupt liars who are tampering with data to fake a warming trend. The next minute he posts some shit about the sun accounting for global warming, or some movement in the Earth's orbit.
I suppose his readers just think "IPCC wrong, good" and "IPCC right, bad". So if they are constantly fed conflicitng messages they wont notice.
I'm ranting here but seriously, that place just amazes me to no end. I love how people who think scientists are politically motivated are getting their info from some ideologically driven conservative american weatherman.... (who proves himself time and time again to be an intellectually dishonest, unreliable source of information)
Karl
Bill McLean (32)
The stuff I posted is from Alan Cheetham's web site actually.
http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/GW_About.htm
I don't think I have ever posted anything from Anthony Watt's blog. I don't think I have ever read it actually. I'll go over and have a look now. Thanks for the tip...
http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/GW_About.htm
I don't think I have ever posted anything from Anthony Watt's blog. I don't think I have ever read it actually. I'll go over and have a look now. Thanks for the tip...
Karl
Bill McLean (32)
I was kidding, but I did find a link through to this interesting article on Forbes.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/warrenmeyer/2012/02/09/understanding-the-global-warming-debate/
Actually, I really like the way this guy thinks and writes. Its about as close to someone else expressing what I think, but betterer, that I have found.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/warrenmeyer/2012/02/09/understanding-the-global-warming-debate/
Actually, I really like the way this guy thinks and writes. Its about as close to someone else expressing what I think, but betterer, that I have found.
- Status