Keep global warming under 1.5C or 'quarter of planet could become arid'

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/global-warming-and-the-science-of-extreme-weather/

The planet has already warmed roughly 1 degree Celsius since preindustrial times, thanks to CO2and other greenhouse gases emitted into the atmosphere. And for every 1-degree C (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) rise in temperature, the amount of moisture that the atmosphere can contain rises by 7 percent, explains Peter Stott, head of climate monitoring and attribution at the U.K. Met Office's Hadley Center for Climate Change. "That's quite dramatic," he says. In some places, the increase has been much larger. Data gathered by Gene Takle, professor of meteorology at Iowa State University in Ames, show a 13 percent rise in summer moisture over the past 50 years in the state capital, Des Moines.

The increased moisture in the atmosphere inevitably means more rain. That's obvious. But not just any kind of rain, the climate models predict. Because of the large-scale energy balance of the planet, "the upshot is that overall rainfall increases only 2 to 3 percent per degree of warming, whereas extreme rainfall increases 6 to 7 percent," Stott says. The reason again comes from physics. Rain happens when the atmosphere cools enough for water vapor to condense into liquid. "However, because of the increasing amount of greenhouse gases in the troposphere, the radiative cooling is less efficient, as less radiation can escape to space," Stott explains. "Therefore the global precipitation increases less, at about 2 to 3 percent per degree of warming." But because of the extra moisture, when precipitation does occur (in both rain and snow), it's more likely to be in bigger events.

 

Did you just pull the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle in order to explain the global warming? Scientists created the anomaly by measuring it?

 

Record highs when averaged across the planet and for extended periods of time, like a month or a year.

Not your backyard in one day.

 

Thank you for supporting my point. Well done.

 

The evidence is quite clear that it was a global event.

Ammonium concentration in ice cores: A new proxy for regional temperature reconstruction?

We present a reconstruction of tropical South American temperature anomalies over
the last ∼1600 years. The reconstruction is based on a highly resolved and carefully dated
ammonium record from an ice core that was drilled in 1999 on Nevado Illimani in the
eastern Bolivian Andes. Concerning the relevant processes governing the observed
correlation between ammonium concentrations and temperature anomalies, we discuss
anthropogenic emissions, biomass burning, and precipitation changes but clearly favor a
temperature‐dependent source strength of the vegetation in the Amazon Basin. That given,
the reconstruction reveals that Medieval Warm Period –and Little Ice Age type episodes
are distinguishable in tropical South America, a region for which until now only very
limited temperature proxy data have been available. For the time period from about 1050
to 1300 AD, our reconstruction shows relatively warm conditions that are followed by
cooler conditions from the 15th to the 18th century, when temperatures dropped by up to
0.6°C below the 1961–1990 average. The last decades of the past millennium are
characterized again by warm temperatures that seem to be unprecedented in the context of
the last ∼1600 years.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2009JD012603/pdf

An ikaite record of late Holocene climate at the Antarctic Peninsula

Calcium carbonate can crystallize in a hydrated form as ikaite at low temperatures. The hydration water in ikaite grown in laboratory experiments records the δ18O of ambient water, a feature potentially useful for reconstructing δ18O of local seawater. We report the first downcore δ18O record of natural ikaite hydration waters and crystals collected from the Antarctic Peninsula (AP), a region sensitive to climate fluctuations. We are able to establish the zone of ikaite formation within shallow sediments, based on porewater chemical and isotopic data. Having constrained the depth of ikaite formation and δ18O of ikaite crystals and hydration waters, we are able to infer local changes in fjord δ18O versus time during the late Holocene. This ikaite record qualitatively supports that both the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age extended to the Antarctic Peninsula.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0012821X12000659

 

looks like it's time to eradicate man from the planet. Given the concern of leftists, I'm sure that they will be the first to volunteer

 

Yes, thankfully, our wondrous interglacial which so far peaked in the Roman warming period, nearly peaked again in the MWP. While we may repeat the MWP, we haven't repeated the Roman warming period, but fingers crossed that we do. Our balmy interglacial was preceeded by a 100,000 years of glacial advance and very likely will be followed by the same.

But, hopefully, not for many centuries:

"Bomb Cyclone" Expected to Hit US East Coast Tomorrow, Plunging Temperatures Lower Than Those of Mars

Global warming, y'all.

(CNN)A massive "bombogenesis" -- an area of rapidly declining low pressure -- will wreak havoc on the Northeast this week, threatening hurricane-force winter wind gusts in a region already crippled by deadly cold.
The bombogenesis will result in what's known as a "bomb cyclone." And the bomb cyclone, expected to strike Thursday, will likely dump 6 to 12 inches of snow.

By the end of this week, parts of the Northeast will be colder than Mars.

More on "bomb cyclones" and "bombogenesis:"

Bombogenesis is said to occur when a storm's central barometric pressure drops at least 24 millibars in 24 hours. (A millibar is a way of measuring pressure.) The lower the pressure, the more powerful the storm.
The word is a combination of cyclogenesis, which describes the formation of a cyclone or storm, and bomb, which is, well, pretty self-explanatory.

"This can happen when a cold air mass collides with a warm air mass, such as air over warm ocean waters," NOAA said. "The formation of this rapidly strengthening weather system is a process called bombogenesis, which creates what is known as a bomb cyclone."

In the 1940s, some meteorologists began informally calling some big coastal storms "bombs" because they develop "with a ferocity we rarely, if ever, see over land," said Fred Sanders, a retired MIT professor, who brought the term into common usage by describing such storms in a 1980 article in the journal Monthly Weather Review

Snow has hit Florida and Georgia already. And it apparently will be worse in the northeast.

 

Gasoline has nothing to do with the post I made. I referenced Obama’s “under my cap and trade plan, electricity rates will necessarily skyrocket” (which I am certain he said as a candidate)

 

FACTS:

The U.S. is one of the least polluters on Earth. Our technological progress made that possible. Remember what cars were like before computer controlled machining, computer controlled engines, and catalytic converters?

There have been times in the past when there was a "year without a summer" caused by volcanic eruptions blowing stuff into the atmosphere and blocking sunlight. Am I the only one that thinks that mankind can duplicate that effect with our technology?

We have nonpolluting nuclear power to replace all coal, oil, and gas fired power plants. We just lack the will to use it. Our technology has already created reactor designs that are totally safe and our technology is capable of developing a system with which we could dump all undesirable waste into the Sun.

Instead, we have a mentally deficient group led by the likes of Al Gore that run around screaming that the sky is falling. A large portion of humanity thinks with its glands.

 

I’ll wait til one of the alarmists’ predictions come true before I listen to their doomsday scenarios.

 

It's better if you just don't listen to alarmists at all. That includes Al Gore and the rest of the media. Listen to real climate scientists who actually know what they're talking about.

 

I do. The consensus I always hear about is that man is causing the world to get warmer. What there isn’t a consensus on is the implications of the warming.

 

Troll post dismissed.

 

While true, the implications pretty much range from bad to very bad if no efforts to mitigate/reverse are undertaken.

 

Or very little at all.

Climate refugees, terrible hurricanes, and completely melted Arctic were all predicted by 2015.

Get one right then we’ll listen to you.

 

Two out of three is pretty darn good...

The Syrian civil war was linked to a climate change induced famine - there's your climate refugees.

And the strongest hurricane to ever appear in the Atlantic basin dumped an all time record rainfall on Texas. And the strongest hurricane on record did happen in 2015.

 

Climate science did not make any of these predictions. Alarmists made those predictions. And they didn't use science when doing so. Or perhaps they twisted or misinterpreted it.

Take the Arctic ice melt out for example. Al Gore said the Arctic would be ice free by 2013. But the scientific consensus says there is a 50% chance the Arctic will be "ice free" by 2050 whee "ice free" is defined as < 1 million sq km. of extent during the summer melt out. So we still have awhile before that happens. Al Gore misinterpreted what he read when he made that prediction.

Or regarding hurricanes the science says tropical cyclones will become less frequent. However, when they do occur they may be more intense on average. And seasonally the total integrated kinetic energy released by all tropical cyclones will probably increase some. The exact nature of the frequency and intensity is still matter of intense debate in the academic community. By the way, several of the most intense cyclones ever recorded (Patricia, Haiyan, etc.) have occurred recently.

 

Another day, another dollar, another peer reviewed garbage in peer reviewed garbage out model.


“The principle of science, the definition, almost, is the following: The test of all knowledge is experiment. Experiment is the sole judge of scientific truth.” - The Feynman Lectures on Physics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Feynman

Garbage scientists have no experiment demonstrating the claimed property of CO2 therefore they all lie.

There is nothing to discuss, no science, but only feelings and beliefs.

Another tread belonging to phyloshophy and religion.

 

This is lunacy. You are burying your head in sand. There's no possible way you can't find even a single experiment showing the absorption spectrum of carbon dioxide. Like, how can you not know about John Tyndall's experiments in the 1860's demonstrating CO2's longwave absorption properties? How about Herzberg 1953, Burch 1962, Miller 2005, Toth 2008? Or what about the HITRAN database? We've known that CO2 is a greenhouse gas for almost 120 years!

 

Question: did scientists say: "Greenhouse gases are transparent to incoming shortwave radiation but opaque to outgoing longwave radiation. That's just how the physics of the CO2 molecule works. More radiation comes in than goes out."

http://politicalforum.com/index.php...year-on-record.517168/page-24#post-1068466857

or they did not?

Not even one experiment to demonstrate the claim to be true.

All I need is one.

Just one.

And another question: What CO2's longwave absorption properties at night?

 

But 0 out of 3 is terrible.

Lol....even climate literature attributes the civil war primarily to al-Assad’s regime. It’s far from the first bad drought ever, but they all didn’t result in civil wars.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.th...t/2005/oct/12/naturaldisasters.climatechange1

Where are my 50 million refugees?

The strongest Atlantic Hurricane ever was Wilma in 2005 son. The same year that Katrina and Eita hit, and that was supposed to be the tip of the iceberg because of global warming.

 

Those are my words. But yes that's the general gist of it.

I literally just gave you more than one.

The same as it is during the day.

 

And none of them confirm your words even loosly.

I stand all correct.

Smart &*s.

But still an &*s.

 

Troll post dismissed.

 

What will “Paris” do about all this ??