Support NeoGAF

[jeff_rigby]

It's obvious you either did not read the material I linked you to or could not understand it. I sent you to the intermediate version, but there is a basic tab that dumbs it down if that is more your speed.

I dismissed the missing Heat is going into the ocean bit. Deep water ocean currents are a result of salinity differences at the equator and polar regions. The cycle for water to move from pole to equator and back to have an impact and absorb more than steady state is: 1000 years. In geological terms, for the Ocean suddenly absorbing more from one year to the next or in a period of 5, 10 or 20 years would require light speed acceleration of the current, remember water is not compressible and has an immense inertia.

If they are talking local and surface heating of water, I would think that either it's also steady state or would change with new or accelerating currents slowly over a period of 10's of years not immediately as seen after 2000. Same for warmer water at the same speed in the surface portion of the deep ocean conveyer. It should dampen...affect the slope of Global temperature change and would be directly related to temp increases. It should have shown up delayed by several years and could in no way suddenly show up in 2000 40 years later.

El Niño has a regional impact not global and could explain the colder weather in the US but it's about surface weather and surface water currents created by pressure differences between hot and cold atmospheric temps over the Pacific. El Nino creates on-shore wind currents and higher seas along the cost of California that reduce the cold water upwelling.

During El Niño events, increased precipitation is expected in California due to a more southerly, zonal, storm track.[4] During La Niña, increased precipitation is diverted into the Pacific Northwest due to a more northerly storm track.[5]

This October it's supposed to be warmer (El Niño) impacting weather in the North to central US and more rain in Caliornia. Remember Global warming is causing drought in California according to Democrats so this must be wrong. <sigh>

 

[Yagharek]

There's a difference between el nino and climate change Jeff.

You're making the same logical fail as representatives taking snowballs into the house.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

a mod should have closed this thread two pages ago.

Nothing but junk science being thrown around by Jeff and the subject at hand has been derailed.

 

[jeff_rigby]

There's a difference between el nino and climate change Jeff.

You're making the same logical fail as representatives taking snowballs into the house.

I was replying to the points made in the cited article. The point I was making is exactly that, El Nino is regional and would not impact global warming which I take is your reference to taking snowballs into a home or leaving a refrigerator door open to cool a room. Short term it does but long term it's a closed loop and actually heats the room due to inefficiency.

 

[KHarvey16]

I dismissed the missing Heat is going into the ocean bit. Deep water ocean currents are a result of salinity differences at the equator and polar regions. The cycle for water to move from pole to equator and back to have an impact and absorb more than steady state is: 1000 years. In geological terms, for the Ocean suddenly absorbing more from one year to the next or in a period of 5, 10 or 20 years would require light speed acceleration of the current, remember water is not compressible and has an immense inertia.

If they are talking local and surface heating of water, I would think that either it's also steady state or would change with new or accelerating currents slowly over a period of 10's of years not immediately as seen after 2000. Same for warmer water at the same speed in the surface portion of the deep ocean conveyer. It should dampen...affect the slope of Global temperature change and would be directly related to temp increases. It should have shown up delayed by several years and could in no way suddenly show up in 2000 40 years later.

What? This is just nonsense. We can measure where the heat is going. We know it's heating up the ocean. You claim it isn't because why, exactly? Some nonsense about currents you pulled out of your ass?

El Niño has a regional impact not global and could explain the colder weather in the US but it's about surface weather and surface water currents created by pressure differences between hot and cold atmospheric temps over the Pacific. El Nino creates on-shore wind currents and higher seas along the cost of California that reduce the cold water upwelling.

This October it's supposed to be warmer (El Niño) impacting weather in the North to central US and more rain in Caliornia. Remember Global warming is causing drought in California according to Democrats so this must be wrong. <sigh>

You have no idea what el nino or el nina even mean.

It's becoming increasingly obvious you aren't playing with a full deck here.

 

[Yagharek]

I was replying to the points made in the cited article. The point I was making is exactly that, El Nino is regional and would not impact global warming which I take is your reference to taking snowballs into a home or leaving a refrigerator door open to cool a room. Short term it does but long term it's a closed loop and actually heats the room due to inefficiency.

Ive taken thermodynamics classes too. The snowball was a remark where some republican took a snowball in to the house or senate as "proof" against climate change. Its like people saying its global cooling when a cold front comes through.

Your argument that we can't take californian drought as an example of climate change is specious at best, though, since it is extreme and prolonged and matches well with forecasts of changes in circulation, such as the average position of the sub tropical ridges which influence places at the same latitude as california.

 

[Stinkles]

Poor guy.

 

[BlastProcessing]

Nah, some Sony employees tired of the corporate secrecy contact me from time to time to leak info. I go through the trouble to cite and cite to keep Sony corporate from knowing I am getting inside information.

My stock portfolio is heavily Sony and I do research on their plans. If you read the whitepapers, CE industry news and FCC plans, Sony was a bargain in 2011 with the greatest turnaround chance. Whats coming has been delayed by both Tivo suits to the FCC and the end of Moore's law. In 2010 everything was on track for Microsoft's Yukon and the PS4 using 3D memory. By late 2011 it became clear to industry insiders that 3D memory and interposers weren't going to happen. Yukon became Durango and Sony has to use GDDR5 so they moved the ARM block out of the APU to Southbridge with it's own DDR3 memory. This is still part speculation based on Industry papers that did a turnaround on Amkor 3D assembly plans from early to late Oct 2011 ....

You didn't reply to it, but you do know that insider trading is very illegal right? And if you were getting private information about Sony while investing in it , it is a violation of federal law?

They sent Martha Stewart away for that yo.

 

[ibyea]

I dismissed the missing Heat is going into the ocean bit. Deep water ocean currents are a result of salinity differences at the equator and polar regions. The cycle for water to move from pole to equator and back to have an impact and absorb more than steady state is: 1000 years. In geological terms, for the Ocean suddenly absorbing more from one year to the next or in a period of 5, 10 or 20 years would require light speed acceleration of the current, remember water is not compressible and has an immense inertia.

If they are talking local and surface heating of water, I would think that either it's also steady state or would change with new or accelerating currents slowly over a period of 10's of years not immediately as seen after 2000. Same for warmer water at the same speed in the surface portion of the deep ocean conveyer. It should dampen...affect the slope of Global temperature change and would be directly related to temp increases. It should have shown up delayed by several years and could in no way suddenly show up in 2000 40 years later.

El Niño has a regional impact not global and could explain the colder weather in the US but it's about surface weather and surface water currents created by pressure differences between hot and cold atmospheric temps over the Pacific. El Nino creates on-shore wind currents and higher seas along the cost of California that reduce the cold water upwelling.

This October it's supposed to be warmer (El Niño) impacting weather in the North to central US and more rain in Caliornia. Remember Global warming is causing drought in California according to Democrats so this must be wrong. <sigh>

What? Why would you need speeding up of the current to absorb heat? It just happens because of thermodynamics and objects want to reach thermodynamic equilibrium.

You got El nino all wrong. First of all, it does have a global impact. Second of all, el nino is warm water moved from western to eastern pacific due to weakening or changing of the wind direction, and that draws accumulated heat out of the pacific ocean in the process. And what about a temporary el nino induced rain causes global warming to be wrong?

 

[Indicate]

On El Nino:

A key feature of ocean-atmosphere interactions in the tropical Pacific is the positive feedback between trade wind intensity and zonal sea surface temperature (SST) contrasts referred to as the Bjerknes feedback (9). The trade winds normally pile up warm surface water in the western Pacific while upwelling colder water in the east from below the surface along the equator and off the west coast of South America. The resulting east-west surface temperature contrast reinforces an eastwest air pressure difference across the basin that in turn drives the trades.

During El Niño, the trade winds weaken along the equator as atmospheric pressure rises in the western Pacific and falls in the eastern Pacific. Anomalous warming in the central and eastern Pacific ensues as warm water in the western Pacific migrates eastward and upwelling is reduced (Fig. 1). The Bjerknes feedback now runs in reverse, with weakened trade winds and SST warming tendencies along the equator reinforcing one another as El Niño develops. Weakened trade winds at the onset of El Niño generate basin-scale waves in sea level, upper ocean currents, and temperatures that rapidly propagate eastward and westward along the equator. These waves initially support the growth of anomalously warm SSTs. However, after transiting the basin and reflecting off the eastern and western boundaries, they act in concert with upwelling favorable waves generated by wind forcing at the height of El Niño to eventually shut off the warming (2). Equatorial wave-induced cooling thus represents a delayed negative feedback that brings about the demise of El Niño...

On it's global impacts:

The remote effects of ENSO are felt in the North and South Pacific (Fig. 1), in all other ocean basins, on all seven continents (3, 18, 19), and in the stratosphere (20). Strong events like those in 1982&#8211;1983 and 1997&#8211;1998 have dramatic worldwide consequences, whereas weak events like the one in 2004&#8211;2005 (Fig. 2) may have impacts that are muted or even undetectable above the background weather noise of the atmosphere (21)

Year-to-year variability in global atmospheric carbon concentrations is dominated by the ENSO cycle (37). The equatorial Pacific is the largest natural oceanic source of carbon to the atmosphere, outgassing about 1 billion metric tons of carbon in the form of CO2 per year. The source of this carbon is equatorial upwelling, which brings water rich in inorganic carbon from the interior ocean to the surface. During El Niño, equatorial upwelling is suppressed in the eastern and central Pacific, significantly reducing the supply of CO2 to the surface (38). As a result, the global increase in atmospheric CO2, which is primarily driven by anthropogenic sources, noticeably slows down during the early stages of an El Niño. However, during the later stages of an El Niño, global CO2 concentrations rise sharply, reflecting the delayed response of the terrestrial biosphere to El Niño&#8211;induced changes in weather patterns. Widespread droughts and elevated temperatures in the tropics contribute to an increase in the number and extent of forest fires and to modification of the balance between respiration and photosynthetic uptake of CO2 in land plants. These processes, which were particularly pronounced during the severe 1982&#8211;1983 and 1997&#8211;1998 El Niños (39), result in an anomalous increase in the supply of CO2 to the atmosphere sufficient to override the reduction in CO2 from decreased equatorial upwelling. Forest fires in Indonesia during the 1997&#8211;1998 El Niño, because of their scale and duration, released unprecedented amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere, producing the largest annual increase in concentrations since recordkeeping began in 1957 (40).

Michael J. McPhaden, et al. 2006. ENSO as an Integrating Concept in Earth Science. Science 314, 1740.

I may go back for the rest and the other posts, but I have a lot of work to do.

 

[Stereogatari]

If we had that money, we'd avoid Climate Change as well.

 

[Hey Im Patrick]

.. :|

Well even if they did do something about it by that time, it will probably not make any difference. Today, even if there are more people know about global warming stuff, they don't give shit about it. People just care about other stuff, like getting likes and followers in social media.

 

[whitehawk]

If we had that money, we'd avoid Climate Change as well.

I'd like to think, no.

I'm just reading up on this again since it's a topic in a class of mine. It's crazy to think how much could have been done had they said something 35 years ago.

 

[blu]

I'd like to think, no.

I'm just reading up on this again since it's a topic in a class of mine. It's crazy to think how much could have been done had they said something 35 years ago.

Something was said plenty of years ago. Alas, corporate bottomlines, and sheer consumerism..