You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: These glass beads explain climate change.
The original information that I had pointed toward the 12068 cycle using an interpretation of the formation of those beads found on the moon (ie. periodically they are ejected from the sun). I was thinking that there was some process found in the larger universe which would account for this (cosmic waves). Today I found this video -
which still points at the sun but has the fluctuations due to the spin and swoop of the sun.
That's a very long video. Could you please compress its content?
A snapshot is that most climate models tend to fail on prediction. The model developed by Zharkova et al gives a close prediction to actual sunspot activity:
This model allowed them to create a formula which could be used to predict what the sunspot activity would have been in the past (eg. the little ice age) as well into the future:
Depending upon the veracity of this model, instead of global warming, we are actually heading toward a short period of cooling ... similar to that found during the Maunder Minimum.
I would say we are heading towards a warmer period, as the number of sunspots will decrease.
Sunspots are actually cooler than the rest of the sun. Therefor less sunspot would mean the overall temperature would rise, right?
Also I would say that the effect of the number of sunspots on earth isn't measurable. Although at this one point 400 years ago the little ice age fits into this model, there are no other big temperature drops every 400 years.
You could argue that there is a small bump every 400 years or so, but those bumps could be within the measuring error(shown in light blue) and are also negligible compared to the rise of temperature within the last century.
Fortunately we have only a couple of years to wait to see the accuracy of this model. I "believe" the sun is analogous to a pot of boiling water. When it is at its hottest if bubbles away. If you don't see bubbles it isn't as hot. I also "don't believe" that there is enough information to establish a causal relationship. Did the decrease in sunspots causing the Maunder Minimum precipitate the Mini Ice Age or is it possible the decrease in sunspots signal some other action which is also associated with temperature change. For instance one hypothesis is that the tidal forces of the inner planets affect the sun. If that is true the roughly 400 year variation of the earth's temperature is caused by the its action on the sun. Another consideration is the Earth's precession which has been attributed to the greening and desertifying the Sahara.
While I concede that the pollution that China is creating is disrupting the jet stream and causing really nasty weather in the US, I feel that there is other phenomena not explained by carbon emissions:
Source
The magnetic pole started moving 100 years ago in a trajectory toward Siberia.
Source: Cavit, via Wikimedia Commons
As can be seen by this illustration, the magnetic field strength has been waning for 3 hundred years.
Magnetic pole reversal will pose a big risk for humanity when it happens, that's for certain.
I think we don't have enough data to decide if the sunspots are a sign of an overall hot sun or if they are leading to an overall cooler sun.
I would argue that Jupiter and Saturn also have a similar effect on the sun due to their high mass.
That sounds rather like people who don't want to take responsibility towards our planet. Precession is just the effect that is holding earth's axis steady, leading to seasons.
Desertification is most likely created because of extensive agriculture which removes local plants, that keep desertification from happening, and replaces them by a monoculture of some profitable plant.
Evidence for this can be seen in the type of remains found in the deserts of Northern Africa
Source
I don't think that it is that people don't want to take responsibility but that it is a multivariate problem not just something that is one source. By focussing on one aspect (man made CO2) which should lead to global warming, it neglects that a number of events are happening at the same time. For instance in this video
you can see the expansion of rifts in Africa. In no way can CO2 be held responsible for this type of event. I think we have a situation of a sinking ship that catches fire. Focussing on one crisis while denying the other exists might lead to unfortunate consequences.
But how would precession lead to the desertification of the sahara?
Of course not, but the number of geological catastrophes is not rising. Only the number of reported ones is.
Even if the ship is actually sinking, we should not set it consciously on fire.
I agree that CO₂ is not our only problem, but most of the other problems I see are like CO₂ mostly made by ourself (except from a few earth-quakes here and there), and not by some widely unknown and badly documented astrophyical phenomenon.
Precession has affected weather a couple of ways. The first effect of the wobble is that about 8000 years ago the northern hemisphere received more sunlight. This in turn shifted the amount of rainfall which occurred in Africa. The second aspect is that during that time Earth was closest to the sun in the winter. Now it is closest during the summer. This article describes how a change in the "Hadley circulation" shifted with the end result of the Sahara turning to desert.
This phenomenon is actually known by scientists in the field. One problem with these other factors which are affecting climate is that they are a single news cycle event. Imagine if only precession was the cause (all the other factors were irrelevant). News broadcasters come on an say "Climate change is because of the wobble". There is no follow up to that item. People cannot change the wobble. You cannot raise money to fight the wobble etc.
Carbon caused climate change is something that can be spun out time and time again. I am perhaps being a little cynical but it is like investing in the stock market. When the bellboy has a hot tip ... its time to get out.
Earth's magnetic field
Earth's magnetic field, also known as the geomagnetic field, is the magnetic field that extends from the Earth's interior out into space, where it interacts with the solar wind, a stream of charged particles emanating from the Sun. The magnetic field is generated by electric currents due to the motion of convection currents of molten iron in the Earth's outer core: these convection currents are caused by heat escaping from the core, a natural process called a geodynamo. The magnitude of the Earth's magnetic field at its surface ranges from 25 to 65 microteslas (0.25 to 0.65 gauss). As an approximation, it is represented by a field of a magnetic dipole currently tilted at an angle of about 11 degrees with respect to Earth's rotational axis, as if there were a bar magnet placed at that angle at the center of the Earth.