• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Earth's tilt influences climate change

WCH

Believer
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2013
Messages
30,953
Reaction score
9,018
Location
The Lone Star State.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
LSU paleoclimatologist Kristine DeLong contributed to an international research breakthrough that sheds new light on how the tilt of the Earth affects the world's heaviest rainbelt. DeLong analyzed data from the past 282,000 years that shows, for the first time, a connection between the Earth's tilt called obliquity that shifts every 41,000 years, and the movement of a low pressure band of clouds that is the Earth's largest source of heat and moisture -- the Intertropical Convergence Zone, or ITCZ.

"I took the data and put it through a mathematical prism so I could look at the patterns and that's where we see the obliquity cycle, that 41,000-year cycle. From that, we can go in and look at how it compares to other records," said DeLong, who is an associate professor in the LSU Department Geography & Anthropology.
snip...

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/12/151214142053.htm







Talking with some folks who live in Alaska this past weekend and this subject came up. Simple, to the point and no one is to blame.
 

eohrnberger

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
44,164
Reaction score
28,786
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
So much still unknown about the Earth climate system. Probably premature to take any drastic action.
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
LSU paleoclimatologist Kristine DeLong contributed to an international research breakthrough that sheds new light on how the tilt of the Earth affects the world's heaviest rainbelt. DeLong analyzed data from the past 282,000 years that shows, for the first time, a connection between the Earth's tilt called obliquity that shifts every 41,000 years, and the movement of a low pressure band of clouds that is the Earth's largest source of heat and moisture -- the Intertropical Convergence Zone, or ITCZ.

"I took the data and put it through a mathematical prism so I could look at the patterns and that's where we see the obliquity cycle, that 41,000-year cycle. From that, we can go in and look at how it compares to other records," said DeLong, who is an associate professor in the LSU Department Geography & Anthropology.
snip...

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/12/151214142053.htm







Talking with some folks who live in Alaska this past weekend and this subject came up. Simple, to the point and no one is to blame.

My God! What a sneaky trick to play on us. I hate Nature and all that! :2dance:
 

jmotivator

No longer monitoring
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 24, 2013
Messages
27,319
Reaction score
13,594
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
LSU paleoclimatologist Kristine DeLong contributed to an international research breakthrough that sheds new light on how the tilt of the Earth affects the world's heaviest rainbelt. DeLong analyzed data from the past 282,000 years that shows, for the first time, a connection between the Earth's tilt called obliquity that shifts every 41,000 years, and the movement of a low pressure band of clouds that is the Earth's largest source of heat and moisture -- the Intertropical Convergence Zone, or ITCZ.

"I took the data and put it through a mathematical prism so I could look at the patterns and that's where we see the obliquity cycle, that 41,000-year cycle. From that, we can go in and look at how it compares to other records," said DeLong, who is an associate professor in the LSU Department Geography & Anthropology.
snip...

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/12/151214142053.htm

Talking with some folks who live in Alaska this past weekend and this subject came up. Simple, to the point and no one is to blame.


As I have been saying for decades, if we still don't fundamentally know all of the drivers of climate we can not extract the effect of any one driver of climate from the noise of the unknown.

For decades now the CO2 sensitivity has contained both the actual sensitivity of CO2 in the atmosphere and all of the yet unknown drivers.
 

MrT

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2015
Messages
5,849
Reaction score
2,426
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I applaud you for posting relevant information from a credible source.

I strongly disagree with the implied conclusion and the responses from those who have replied thus far.

Of course there is a need to continue researching all aspects of the climate and of course that work should and will continue regardless. With that said, we have more than enough information to realize that our impact on the climate is real and it is happening on a timescale that is MUCH MUCH faster than once every 40,000 years or so.

Drastic steps are needed. And while they were needed ten years ago, I will settle for today.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
79,162
Reaction score
35,286
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
So much still unknown about the Earth climate system. Probably premature to take any drastic action.

Drastic action like permanently altering the amount of heat the atmosphere traps?
 

eohrnberger

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
44,164
Reaction score
28,786
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Drastic action like permanently altering the amount of heat the atmosphere traps?

Drastic action like huge transfers of wealth from first world to third world. That's all that this is about anyway. Follow the money.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
79,162
Reaction score
35,286
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Drastic action like huge transfers of wealth from first world to third world. That's all that this is about anyway. Follow the money.

Ahhh, so it's totally ok to **** with the climate when we don't understand it. What's not ok is for us to stop ****ing with the climate. Because that's "drastic action."
 

eohrnberger

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
44,164
Reaction score
28,786
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Ahhh, so it's totally ok to **** with the climate when we don't understand it. What's not ok is for us to stop ****ing with the climate. Because that's "drastic action."

From my view, the research has determined that something is happening, but when it starts attributing that to human actions, it gets far more murky.

So the "**** with the climate" part isn't proven really, but of course, you've already made up your mind, and even challenging this assumption gets an AG on your ass.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
79,162
Reaction score
35,286
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
From my view, the research has determined that something is happening, but when it starts attributing that to human actions, it gets far more murky.

So the "**** with the climate" part isn't proven really, but of course, you've already made up your mind, and even challenging this assumption gets an AG on your ass.

But you've admitted that we don't fully understand climate. So why are you willing to fiddle with dials we don't understand?
 

WCH

Believer
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2013
Messages
30,953
Reaction score
9,018
Location
The Lone Star State.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
If this oscillation is responsible for climate changes, there's not a damn thig we can do about it. Letting eggheads fool with trying to change it could lead to worse outcomes.
 

eohrnberger

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
44,164
Reaction score
28,786
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
But you've admitted that we don't fully understand climate. So why are you willing to fiddle with dials we don't understand?

That's based on the assumption that we (humans) are and even can 'fiddle with dials'. That's where the research is the murkiest with the greatest assumptions.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
79,162
Reaction score
35,286
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
That's based on the assumption that we (humans) are and even can 'fiddle with dials'. That's where the research is the murkiest with the greatest assumptions.

Carbon dioxide content in the atmosphere is a dial. You say we don't know what it does. We're fiddling with it. That's provable.
 

eohrnberger

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
44,164
Reaction score
28,786
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Carbon dioxide content in the atmosphere is a dial. You say we don't know what it does. We're fiddling with it. That's provable.

It's pretty obvious what additional CO2 does in the atmosphere. Whether humans are the cause of it or not, I think is debatable.

It is rather unrealistic to think that climate doesn't change at all, and it's just as unrealistic to believe that the carbon from the carboniferous period would have remained buried for all of time as well.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
79,162
Reaction score
35,286
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It's pretty obvious what additional CO2 does in the atmosphere. Whether humans are the cause of it or not, I think is debatable.

It is rather unrealistic to think that climate doesn't change at all, and it's just as unrealistic to believe that the carbon from the carboniferous period would have remained buried for all of time as well.

Wait. You don't think humans are causing CO2 levels to rise?

P.S. Who thinks climate doesn't change at all? Nobody thinks that. Why do you people always insist that someone is arguing "climate never changes naturally?" Nobody in history has ever made that claim.
 

Threegoofs

COVID survivor
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
53,857
Reaction score
19,747
Location
The birthplace of Italian Beef
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Carbon dioxide content in the atmosphere is a dial. You say we don't know what it does. We're fiddling with it. That's provable.

I hope you realize that facts and logic don't really apply here.

You can't reason a man out of a position he didn't reason himself into.
 

humbolt

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2013
Messages
26,266
Reaction score
17,596
Location
SW Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I hope you realize that facts and logic don't really apply here.

You can't reason a man out of a position he didn't reason himself into.

If you were interested in facts and logic, you'd embrace the research mentioned in the OP as an attempt to possibly further our understanding of climate.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
79,162
Reaction score
35,286
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
If you were interested in facts and logic, you'd embrace the research mentioned in the OP as an attempt to possibly further our understanding of climate.

Nobody is rejecting that research.
 

Threegoofs

COVID survivor
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
53,857
Reaction score
19,747
Location
The birthplace of Italian Beef
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
If you were interested in facts and logic, you'd embrace the research mentioned in the OP as an attempt to possibly further our understanding of climate.

Who says I haven't?

But it's not really relevant to the next hundred years, which is where we should be most concerned about.
 

humbolt

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2013
Messages
26,266
Reaction score
17,596
Location
SW Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Who says I haven't?

But it's not really relevant to the next hundred years, which is where we should be most concerned about.

You haven't shown the current research is relevant for the next hundred years yet. The predictions so far haven't been accurate at all. Why don't you try to predict the climate for the next 20 years? At least see if you can get that much right before you extend the time period beyond the average life span.
 

Threegoofs

COVID survivor
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
53,857
Reaction score
19,747
Location
The birthplace of Italian Beef
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
You haven't shown the current research is relevant for the next hundred years yet. The predictions so far haven't been accurate at all. Why don't you try to predict the climate for the next 20 years? At least see if you can get that much right before you extend the time period beyond the average life span.

Again, I dont do this, highly trained scientists do.

And they pretty much got it right 30 years ago, and basic scientific competence in the field tells us that they will pretty much get it right over the longer term too.

There is some concern that the models have been significantly underestimating the rate of change we have actually seen for things like arctic icecap melt and Greenland melt, as well as potentially irreversible changes in Antarctic ice, so you should be worried that the estimates are too cautious.

I can dig up all kinds of links for you, but they are relying on scientists interpreting scientific data, which requires critical thinking skills, and I'm sure you think they are part of the giant conspiracy anyway.

How Accurate are Future Projections of Climate Change? A Look at Past IPCC Reports Provides Some Answers - The Equation
IPCC model global warming projections have done much better than you think | Dana Nuccitelli | Environment | The Guardian
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...s-arent-too-alarmist-theyre-too-conservative/
 

humbolt

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2013
Messages
26,266
Reaction score
17,596
Location
SW Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Again, I dont do this, highly trained scientists do.

And they pretty much got it right 30 years ago, and basic scientific competence in the field tells us that they will pretty much get it right over the longer term too.

There is some concern that the models have been significantly underestimating the rate of change we have actually seen for things like arctic icecap melt and Greenland melt, as well as potentially irreversible changes in Antarctic ice, so you should be worried that the estimates are too cautious.

I can dig up all kinds of links for you, but they are relying on scientists interpreting scientific data, which requires critical thinking skills, and I'm sure you think they are part of the giant conspiracy anyway.

How Accurate are Future Projections of Climate Change? A Look at Past IPCC Reports Provides Some Answers - The Equation
IPCC model global warming projections have done much better than you think | Dana Nuccitelli | Environment | The Guardian
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...s-arent-too-alarmist-theyre-too-conservative/

I might take a look, but considering your viewpoint and the very mention of CO2, I have pretty much placed you in the category of a zealot. As such, I doubt seriously your commitment to science and I seriously doubt your understanding of it as well. You have a primarily political agenda, and that causes you to respond critically to any mention of a non-CO2 driver. You may continue to pretend that the prediction track record is on the money, but the facts demonstrate that the track record is abysmal. And yes, I can post links as a testament to AGW prediction failures.
 

bubbabgone

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
Messages
30,661
Reaction score
15,825
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
If you were interested in facts and logic, you'd embrace the research mentioned in the OP as an attempt to possibly further our understanding of climate.

If it didn't start with a conclusion and strive to prove it then it's not reliable research. I think that's how the process is supposed to go these days.
 

bubbabgone

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
Messages
30,661
Reaction score
15,825
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
i might take a look, but considering your viewpoint and the very mention of co2, i have pretty much placed you in the category of a zealot. As such, i doubt seriously your commitment to science and i seriously doubt your understanding of it as well. You have a primarily political agenda, and that causes you to respond critically to any mention of a non-co2 driver. You may continue to pretend that the prediction track record is on the money, but the facts demonstrate that the track record is abysmal. And yes, i can post links as a testament to agw prediction failures.

ewwww suh-mack
 
Top Bottom