 |
| Fig. 1 Stockholm now |
I mean global warming caused by the use of fossil fuels.
Specifically, the questioning comes on the heels of observing some old sea level change (SLC) records (On The Evolution of Sea Level Change).
The use of records made long ago is becoming a popular endeavor for some situations (Citizen-Science, old whaling ship records of Arctic Ice).
 |
| Fig. 2 Stockholm "way back then" |
The graph at Fig. 2 presents those records kept as ordered, and Fig. 1 is tide gauge station records of Stockholm, from the PSMSL. database.
The graph (Fig. 1) is presented in the new Dredd Blog SLC fingerprint format which does the arithmetic for you (SLC Fingerprints R Us - 2).
Other formats of old records, such as photos, are being studied for additional insight (Aerials Records of Greenland circa 1900).
These records suggest that there was much more ice on Greenland way back then, and that it has been melting for a long time.
The indication is that the Industrial Revolution of 1750 began to have an impact on the oceans earlier than previously thought.
The concept many hold today is that thermal expansion was the only game in town that caused SLC way back then.
To the contrary, the old Stockholm SLC records indicate that only about 25 years into the revolution the oceans were being impacted by global warming (induced by a maddening increase in coal burning).
In Sweden's case, the SLC was sea level fall (SLF) caused by the melting of the Greenland Ice Sheet, and it is still ongoing (Proof of Concept - 5).
I may take a look at some of the other old records for more clues (PSMSL - Other Long Records).
The take home from this information is that the Arctic ice sheets had much more volume back then, and they were and are more sensitive to global warming than we have been led to believe (The Evolution of Models - 18).
They still are.
We are making a Titanic mistake if we fail to heed the warnings (Titanic Mistakes Using The W Compass, What Happened to the Iceberg That Sank the Titanic?).
Glaciers in motion ...
Excellent posts Dredd. I know my Biowar factors are not an exact match to SLR, but climate change does contribute to hot wars, water wars, population shifts & displacement.
ReplyDeleteArmy Seeks On-Demand Mass Casualty Biologics, Chem-Bio Closure Systems U.S. Army Small Business Innovation for CBRThe U.S. Army has released new topics for potential funding via the Department of Defense FY2016 Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program.
Focus areas related to Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) defense or biotechnology applications include: On-Demand Cell and Tissue Biologics for Mass Casualty Response
On and off the battlefield, mass casualty events involving radiation exposure, chemical or biological agents, and explosive or incendiary devices can create a diverse range of injuries requiring both urgent and continuing care. Mass casualty events place enormous logistical strain on medical infrastructure, overwhelming personnel and rapidly depleting available medical supplies. This necessitates the stockpiling of medical supplies and therapeutics for on-demand use in the event of a healthcare surge.
A capability is sought to ensure off-the-shelf, large volumes of stockpiled cell and tissue biologics that would be in high demand following a mass casualty event in military theaters of operation, in humanitarian response operations, or events on the homeland. Particulate Delivery System for Next-Generation globalbiodefense.com
Mark Austin,
Delete"I know my Biowar factors are not an exact match to SLR, but climate change does contribute to hot wars, water wars, population shifts & displacement."
Both are creations of Oil-Qaeda (Oil-Qaeda: The Indictment), which is also called "The Private Empire" (The Private Empire's Social Media Hit Squads - 2).
Their dementia keeps them inept (Why The Military Can't Defend Against The Invasion).
One of the forefathers of Oil-Qaeda is universal (The Universal Smedley - 2).
That is the way of cultures that fall in love with lies (It Takes A Culture To Raise A Compulsive Liar).
The COP21 discussions indicated that the participants may be becoming aware of the looming dangers posed by the ongoing invasion (link).
ReplyDeleteThey backed off to "well below" the 2 deg. C temperature rise that had been touted for years.
Mark: i enjoy reading your insider contributions wherever they are. Humanity will most likely be completely extinct by 2030 (no matter what occurs in the human realm, which only adds to the death toll) due to habitat loss (no food, scarce potable water, radiation sickness and poisoning, etc).
ReplyDeleteRandy: as usual, it only dawns on them when it's too late.
Tom
"If all politics are local, as the saying goes, then offshore drilling is poised to put presidential candidates in the hot seat come January, when the primaries reach South Carolina.
ReplyDeleteSouth Carolina hasn’t voted for a Democratic presidential candidate since 1976, making it one of the reddest states in the nation, but opposition to offshore drilling is increasingly looking like a bipartisan issue."
(How Offshore Drilling Could Become A Bipartisan Issue)
To assign some numbers to your essay, i found this today:
ReplyDeleteGreenland's ice loss is already massive - and now it's speeding up
https://www.adn.com/article/20151216/greenlands-ice-loss-already-massive-and-now-its-speeding
A massive new study by 16 authors has calculated just how much ice the Greenland ice sheet has lost since the year 1900. And the number, says the paper just out in the journal Nature, is astounding: 9,103 gigatons (a gigaton is a billion metric tons).
That's more than 9 trillion tons in total. And moreover, the rate of loss has been increasing, the research finds, with a doubling of annual loss in the period 2003 to 2010 compared with what it was throughout the 20th century. [lots more]
Tom
Tom,
DeleteThey are still in the dark about Greenland's loss of ice prior to 1800, and worse than that, unaware of its demise even prior to 1900. when their study begins: "The fact that Greenland was losing mass throughout the entirety of the 20th century may seem surprising. But the paper suggests that we are coming out of the Little Ice Age, a cooler period, and so glacier retreat was more or less kicked off around 1900 - and then accelerated as major human-caused global warming kicked in" (quote from your link).
They would be shocked I suppose to learn it was melting a century before 1900 as the fingerprints show.
That is what SLC fingerprinting is for, to determine where the ice melted to cause SLC.
One of these daze folks will figure out that Dredd Blog is ahead of the curve, not behind it.
This Dredd Blog post you commented on asserts that Greenland was already melting circa 1774 (126 years earlier than the year 1900).
Current conventional establishment discourse has not yet contemplated that because they still do not get SLF and SLR induced by gravitational dynamics.
Dredd Blog also did the backward calculation as to ice mass increase which the post you linked to is also in error about (The Evolution of Models - 18).
Thus, they are unaware of the great quantity of ice that existed when the Industrial Revolution commenced circa 1750, or that the ice began to melt circa 25 years after the "let's burn all the coal revolution" began.
Your linked-to-post asserts that 186 GT yr is lost from Greenland now, but NASA asserts that 287 GT yr is lost now (again, from your link).
The writers you link to evidently missed the Crosat-2 data indicating that Greenland's rate of SLC contribution recently doubled in a short five years (What Do You Mean - World Civilization? - 2).
At least they know where Greenland is, which is more than can generally be said about lots of folks on the street.
And this is what gets published, go figure . . .
ReplyDeleteTom