Discussion in 'Latest US & World News' started by MMC, Jan 8, 2018.
The wetness of North Africa is dependent on the North African Monsoon Cycle.
Global Warming is threatening our major cities and food supply and you are worried by politics and how income will be distributed? Good grief.
that wasnt what I asked
In the history of humanity, warming has always allowed for greater food production. And it will this time too, given the earth is warming due to it natural cycles and the co2 we put into the environment.
Those coastal cities would be threatened at some point due to the cyclical warming of the planet. I think the doom and gloom crowd would rather not think about that.
Can't stop the natural warming and cooling cycles, although one would get the idea that the doom and gloom crowd don't seem to believe these proven cycles exist. Only man is responsible.
We can handle much more co2 than at present, and our parts per million in co2 will not bring on doomsday. But convincing the hysterical about this seems to be rather impossible. Our real worries should be super volcanoes, big rocks from space, an untreatable, lethal virus, which mother nature will throw at us to reduce population, and nuclear war. That the planet is warming naturally and with help from man is way down on the list of possible life ending scenerios.
And of course, climatology is far too limited in knowledge and understanding to make such claims. Voodoo science, created by the very real limitation of knowledge and understanding. We simply do not know enough or understand the complexities sufficiently in order to become accurate prophets. But that does not stop the soothsayers and fortune tellers.
No, warming only allows greater food production in colder places. In hotter places it creates a lot of desertification. We have already seen what local warming does to the US. It created droughts and lowers food production. This is something we see in other places in the world like the Middle East and Africa. Things being unusually hot means big droughts.
The answer is that the North African monsoon cycle is on its drier periods which is why the lakes disappeared. I myself life in the dry side of Washington State which is desert but on the other side of the mountains its a forest. Sometimes local cycles can change which areas area desert and which are forest depending on where the water is going. Local climate often goes in cycles so no matter the global temperature the Sahara will oscillate between green and desert.
Oscillate between green and dessert?
All the articles I have seen in the last few years show that the Sahara has been a desert for a lot longer than we think and was caused more by the movement of tectonic plates than anything else.
The Smithsonian did an article about this and found out the Sahara has been a desert for like 7 million years. Hold on let me find it ...
After reading the article again, the "Green Sahara" you refer to seems to be the result of occasional "orbital wobble" more than anything else.
The lack of rainfall creates deserts. And it takes a long time for this to happen. Crops can still be grown in current areas and warming opens up more land, which in the US would be northward.
Droughts have been common for most of our history. The great drought experienced by the Mayans is said to have helped to end that civilization. And obviously, it was not caused by co2, for we were not using fossil fuels. This drought experienced by the mayans lasted for years, and imploded their civilization. So, using a drought to evidence doomsday warming is not something anyone should do. For the ground on which one would stand is not firm at all.
I would think that a warming earth generally speaking will create a wetter earth, and keep the next ice age at bay. Warming is probably so much less of a problem for us than cooling and ice age. If the earth were to start to cool, that would concern me, given ice ages and warming are cyclical and beyond our control. But a warming? I don't think it involves doomsday. Given that man has benefitted from past warming. And that is all we really have to go on, the effects upon humanity of warming. But ignore history if you must, and believe in the priests of climatology. Perhaps the most limited science we have today, even below the soft science of psychology. For it looks like they know less about climate change than a shrink knows about a psychopath.
The changes in the tilt among other things is which causes the monsoons which then affects whether the Sahara is green or not. 7 million years of being a desert doesn't disprove the oscillations because 7 million years is a blink of an eye to earth's 4.5 billion year history.
and did man have anything to do with the sahara drying up?
Nope. And because man didn't cause the Sahara to dry up before humans existed then it is impossible for humans to have any impact on the climate today. Just like because nature has caused forest fires in the past it is impossible for humans to cause them today. Got it.
Instead of guessing why don't you look at the actual research? Higher temperatures will open up more land in Canada, Greenland, and Russia but close off land in the US, Europe, Africa, and the Middle East. Higher temperatures tend to make some places wetter and others drier. Human only benefited from warming because it ended an ice age and we didn't have tens of trillions of dollars in infrastructure affected, but today global warming will result in far more deserts because we have a lot more warm area than cold area.
what does the sahara tell us about climate change?
Also forest fires do not equate to planetary climate change.
It tells us that we shouldn't just look at a single region but should look at the whole globe because regions can be affected by regional trends like the Monsoon Cycle.
and what is the major observation?
Sometimes Trump has to use shock value too get the attention on a subject. If he was gentlemanly about it no one would pay attention.
Thats it. You can't assume that the earth was warmer because the Sahara was or that the Sahara got warmer for global reasons. Also, when determining a cause for warming and cooling scientists take into account both natural and human factors, and even take into account both global and local forces.
Are you claiming the earth didnt warm and cool eons before man walked the earth?
I am worried that the whole carbon tax is a scam. You have no problems costing people trillions of dollars for this carbon tax BS all the while it will do next to nothing for the climate.
The Case against a Carbon Tax
Carbon tax doing more harm than good
Let's see you spin that!
A carbon tax discourages companies from causing excessive global warming without having to make laws and bans. The reality is that the CO2 these companies cause to be emitted are economically damaging because of more droughts and sea level rise. So it makes sense that they should at least pay for some of the damage they cause. Also we can compensate for this tax increase by cutting general business taxes to result in no net increase in taxes.
Separate names with a comma.