Jump to content

Global Warming Politicized?


Brasidas
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 5.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

"Geoff Sherrington says:

July 28, 2010 at 3:08 am

 

........

 

Settled science: Can everyplace really be warming much faster than everyplace else?"

 

That reminds me of a comment made in a creation/evolution debate I once attended.

 

The point under discussion was the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which states that unless acted upon by an outside force, entropy (randomness) will increase. IOW, eventually, everything eventually wears out. To explain the decline of entropy that life obviously entails, he explained that it was mathematically proven that somewhere in the universe, entropy was proceeding at a greater rate, to balance out the increasing order (reduced entropy) of evolution.

 

And yes, I AM a Biblical creationist (and a biology major).

 

Waiting for it..."For what I am about to receive, make me truly grateful."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Global what?

 

Has anybody seen much about climate change since Feb of 2010? Something tells me the issue died a messy death with all those unemployed former tax payers around the world.

 

The current heat wave may provide fresh fodder for the propaganda machine. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The current heat wave may provide fresh fodder for the propaganda machine. :rolleyes:

 

Heh... not just heat wave. Rains and floods will be further "proof" of AGW/CC, never mind incompetent flood management, or residential areas built on property that apparently is a natural catch basin of water and the developer (who knows of this fact) decided to cut costs and didn't build a proper sewage system....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heh... not just heat wave. Rains and floods will be further "proof" of AGW/CC, never mind incompetent flood management, or residential areas built on property that apparently is a natural catch basin of water and the developer (who knows of this fact) decided to cut costs and didn't build a proper sewage system....

 

Yep. Had New Orlean's maintenance people been competent and honest*, the dikes would have held and Katrina would have been "just another hurricane".

 

City and state officials were in a league of their own. :glare:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We made it through a third of the hurricane season. Four more months to go.

 

And so far, we've seen none of the above-average activity the country's top forecasters predicted in May. Many compared it with the record-breaking, chaotic season of 2005, which produced Katrina and 14 other hurricanes.

 

Come this week, however, those season outlooks may be toned down a bit. Top meteorologists at Colorado State University and the National Hurricane Center are expected to release their August forecasts on Wednesday and Thursday, respectively. Some weather analysts wonder if they'll back off the claim that this may be among the most active Atlantic storm seasons we've ever seen.

 

http://www.tampabay.com/news/weather/hurricanes/article1112505.ece

 

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_at4+shtml/203813.shtml?tswind120#contents

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uh what? And this is why I'm a firm believer that theologists should stick to theology and scientists should stick to science. There is absolutely no stipulation anywhere that the entropy of the universe must increase because it is unclear if it's even an isolated system in the first place. That the universe is isolated is merely an assumption. Clausius was emphatically NOT using the term universe in a cosmological sense!

 

Furthermore it is unclear if life (or systems of living creatures) are in any way reducing entropy on a large scale. In fact plenty of calculations exist which suggest that while there are local decreases of entropy as a whole system entropy increases. Remember too that there is a net influx of energy into all living systems coming from thermonuclear sources.

 

Please remember that entropy is a very specific thermodynamic quantity, not some philosophical interpretation of randomness, disorder or chaos. At a fundamental level it is a measure of the maximum possible ways a quantum system can arrange itself into a particular configuration.

 

I dunno.

 

I do agree about the "chaos" interpretation of entropy. It's a bad definition of chaos and isn't applicable to thermodynamics.

 

I do think the amount of energy in the universe is constant based on my schooling. Since energy can't be created or destroyed, it changes form. We disperse energy by digging it up, processing it, and changing it's form and making it disperse throughout the system quicker than it would otherwise (hence, causing entropy to increase to a small degree). Not that large a scale, but at the rate we are going, who knows where we will be in 10k years and what processes we'll be using?

 

The way I envisioned maximum entropy is when the total volume of space that exists has a homogeneous energy level throughout it's volume. With homogeneity, there exists no real differences in potential, and with no differences in potential what processes can occur? That is of course just a theoretical understanding based on my perception.

 

Now Clausius may not have attempted to apply his interpretation to a Universal scale, but that doesn't mean one cannot define the closed system under observation to be the universe. It certainly won't be proven to be a valid interpretation one way or the other in our lifetimes.

Edited by Brasidas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, overall you'd expect around half the globe warming up faster, and other half slower, than the global average. Such trends might be signifant in local context - I understand that in Spain, for example, desertification has been a major problem. Quick glancing of the articles behind the headlines (shocking idea, I know) did not seem to reveal anything else than regular localized studies. Though, I agree that often the news reports based on the studies tend to be blown out of proportion.

 

Have you guys established an actual physical church, yet? If so, what day of the week do you go? Do you tithe to Al Gore? Do you have worship music? ( I'd bet on Green Day as one Earthist hymn producer, but could be wrong.) Do you call yourselves Earthists, Gaiaists, or something more obscure?

 

No need to answer, of course. +1 on the post count. You like to make fun of my beliefs, so consider this a small return.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.tampabay.com/news/weather/hurricanes/article1112505.ece

 

We made it through a third of the hurricane season. Four more months to go.

 

And so far, we've seen none of the above-average activity the country's top forecasters predicted in May. Many compared it with the record-breaking, chaotic season of 2005, which produced Katrina and 14 other hurricanes.

 

Come this week, however, those season outlooks may be toned down a bit. Top meteorologists at Colorado State University and the National Hurricane Center are expected to release their August forecasts on Wednesday and Thursday, respectively. Some weather analysts wonder if they'll back off the claim that this may be among the most active Atlantic storm seasons we've ever seen.

 

It is way, way premature to declare this years hurricane season a bust. (Actually, two storms forming between May-July IS above average). 2005 had freakishly active July. But then there has been years like 2004, highly active and destructive hurricane season, when first storm didn't form until July 31. Without knowing what factors affect the forecasts, based on past seasons, 16-18 named storms seems still very much possible.

Edited by Yama
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest aevans
Please remember that entropy is a very specific thermodynamic quantity, not some philosophical interpretation of randomness, disorder or chaos. At a fundamental level it is a measure of the maximum possible ways a quantum system can arrange itself into a particular configuration.

 

The problem with entropy is that a lot of people think the Solar System is a large scale system. On the scale of the cosmos, it is the smallest, most insignificant of scales. When a cosmologist talks about "large scale structure", he's talking about distances of hundreds of millions of light years and masses of millions of galaxies. The apparent reversal of entropy embodied in a planetary ecosystem is the most infinitesimal fluctuation in relation to cosmological scales.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is way, way premature to declare this years hurricane season a bust. (Actually, two storms forming between May-July IS above average). 2005 had freakishly active July. But then there has been years like 2004, highly active and destructive hurricane season, when first storm didn't form until July 31. Without knowing what factors affect the forecasts, based on past seasons, 16-18 named storms seems still very much possible.

Anything to fit the narrative Yama? I would think that you would wait until the seasons over before you tell us what is " very much possible". :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to my classic education as well it's convenient to treat the energy of the universe as fixed, and treat the universe as an isolated system. While reasonable and sound these are purely cosmological assumptions, not theoretical/experimental fact. Even so in many ways it's somewhat irrelevant to the discussion of universe entropy (I'll get to that in a bit).

 

I think your perception of entropic death and homegeneity is classically sound but actually incorrect. It's been "shown" (ie theoretically) relatively recently that universe entropy is very much dominated by black holes, and as such the future entropic state of the universe is largely unknown/uncertain and a function of the poorly understood Hawking radiation evaporation of black holes.

 

As such, the entropic analysis of the universe hinges far less on cosmological assumptions of systemic isolation. It certainly makes any theologically motivated explanations of entropy sophomoric and naive at best.

 

 

 

 

There is that, and there is also the fact that even on the cosmologically minute scale of planetary ecosystems it is unclear of that system even fluctuates towards lower entropy.

 

Remember at least our planet advects net mass out through helium loss (which isn't really negligible when you are bean counting quantum states) and there is a huge influx of solar radiation.

 

Factoring in the solar radiation and net "planetary ecosystem" entropy no longer appears to go down.

 

 

 

:P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is way, way premature to declare this years hurricane season a bust. (Actually, two storms forming between May-July IS above average). 2005 had freakishly active July. But then there has been years like 2004, highly active and destructive hurricane season, when first storm didn't form until July 31. Without knowing what factors affect the forecasts, based on past seasons, 16-18 named storms seems still very much possible.

The number of named storms in a hurricane season isn't a true measure of the overall level of storm activity in a season. The combined total energy of all the storms occurring over the course of the season must also be taken into account.

 

Let's note too that there have been accusations recently that NOAA is now much more liberal in choosing how early to name a particular disturbance as a "named storm" than it has been in the past, with the result that disturbances which, a decade ago, would not have passed muster as a named storm are now becoming named storms.

 

An analysis done by Ryan Mauie of the University of Miami indicates that the total energy content of the most recent hurricane seasons haven't increased substantially over what they were three decades ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The number of named storms in a hurricane season isn't a true measure of the overall level of storm activity in a season. The combined total energy of all the storms occurring over the course of the season must also be taken into account.

 

Let's note too that there have been accusations recently that NOAA is now much more liberal in choosing how early to name a particular disturbance as a "named storm" than it has been in the past, with the result that disturbances which, a decade ago, would not have passed muster as a named storm are now becoming named storms.

 

An analysis done by Ryan Mauie of the University of Miami indicates that the total energy content of the most recent hurricane seasons haven't increased substantially over what they were three decades ago.

 

Facts again. We're so not into facts that don't fit the narrative. Like why Mars is warming, the answer of course is all the SUV on Mars! :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Facts again. We're so not into facts that don't fit the narrative. Like why Mars is warming, the answer of course is all the SUV on Mars! :P

 

I was watching Universe last week, and they've been tracking the big red storm on Jupiter - and it's shrinking. I wonder if traffic has been a factor. :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

University of Sussex astrophysicist Dr. Robert Smith said global warming may reach a point "where all of Earth's water will simply evaporate."

 

WTF? :huh: Where did he get his degree, a Cracker Jack box?

 

Stephen Hawking: Abandon the Earth

Updated: Monday, 09 Aug 2010, 10:02 AM EDT

Published : Monday, 09 Aug 2010, 10:01 AM EDT

 

(CANVAS STAFF REPORTS) - Theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking has some advice for the people of Earth - it's time to get off.

 

"I believe that the long-term future of the human race must be in space," Hawking said to Big Think , a global forum that includes interviews with experts.

 

"It will be difficult enough to avoid disaster on planet Earth in the next hundred years, let alone the next thousand, or million. The human race shouldn't have all its eggs in one basket, or on one planet. Let's hope we can avoid dropping the basket until we have spread the load."

 

The physicist called humankind's survival "a question of touch and go" and referred to the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1963 as one time people narrowly avoided extinction. He also referred to the 22,600 stockpiled nuclear weapons, including 7,770 still operational, scattered around the planet.

 

If that doesn't drive us off, University of Sussex astrophysicist Dr. Robert Smith said global warming may reach a point "where all of Earth's water will simply evaporate." He said life will disappear on Earth long before the 7.6 billion years some say the aging sun will expand and destroy Earth.

 

CNet news said that Hawking has concerns about how humans "are eating up finite resources" and has claimed man's genetic code "carries selfish and aggressive instincts" that have helped humanity survive in the past.

 

Hawking suggests that if man can avoid disaster for the next two centuries "our species should be safe as we spread into space."

 

According to the Daily Mail , Hawking warned earlier this year that humans should be cautious in trying to contact other alien life forms because there is no way to know if they will be friendly.

 

"If we are the only intelligent beings in the galaxy we should make sure we survive and continue," he said.

 

Vernos Branco, a Las Vegas Sun reader, suggested in a letter to the editor that it may not be that easy to escape. He wrote about how humans have continued to move from one place to another as they settle in an area, use all the resources, pollute the area and move on.

 

He said now that man has technology that can destroy the environment faster, we are running out of space to live in.

 

"The planet will be fine and heal; it is man who will vanish," he wrote. "... If we develop the technology for space travel, we will do the same to that environment, until we learn not to. Man will become extinct due to his greed."

 

It may not be that easy anyway to just hop to another planet. University of Michigan astrophysicist Katherine Freese told Big Think that the closest star to Earth is Proxima Centauri. That's 4.2 light years away, which means man could reach the star in 4.2 years - if man could travel at the speed of light.

 

At this point man travels at about ten thousandth of light speed, which would make that journey about 50,000 years.

 

There is also the cosmic radiation danger unless man creates a warp drive or cryogenic freezing technology.

 

If man can develop the technology needed, she said, man could travel into the future.

http://www.myfoxnepa.com/dpps/news/stephen-hawking-abandon-the-earth-dpgoha-20100809-fc_9088678

Link to comment
Share on other sites

University of Sussex astrophysicist Dr. Robert Smith said global warming may reach a point "where all of Earth's water will simply evaporate."

 

WTF? :huh: Where did he get his degree, a Cracker Jack box?

 

 

 

 

"Dr." Robert Smith needs to familiarize himself with concepts like "condensation", "dew points", "precipitation". It's all right there in the 101 level texts. Turning the earths' water to non-precipitating steam will take a bit more energy than we can impose.

 

That said, it was entirely too damn humid today. OTOH, it's August.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...