Your first article makes this claim, but does not explain it. On the face of it, one would expect vigorous stirring to facilitate absorption of CO2 from the atmosphere. and lack of circulation to impede it. Any explanation? — unenlightened
The second link is not accessible to the Institute for Retired Busybodies, unfortunately. — unenlightened
All in all, the more I find out, the more the whole affair looks like humanity as a mad scientist in the process of blowing up his laboratory and speculating about whether he will be roasted or frozen or both. — unenlightened
When water absorbs CO2, it makes carbonic acid. A bottle of soda water has a high carbonic acid content until it's either warmed or shaken, both of which will make the water lose it's ability to dissolve CO2. — Tate
Yes so the effect of circulation is to cool surface water and allow increased absorption. So why the claim that it does the opposite? — unenlightened
You seem to be suggesting that the slowing of the circulation may trigger re-glaciation. but this looks to be backwards. Rather it is the melting sea ice that is reducing the salinity and thus the density of the water and so slowing the circulation. Re-glaciation would increase the salinity and thus strengthen the circulation. — unenlightened
It's slowing down now. here — Tate
The AMOC is driven by two vital components of ocean water: temperature and salt. In the North Atlantic, warm, salty water flows northward off the U.S. coastline, carrying heat from the tropics. But as it reaches the middle latitudes, it cools, and around Greenland, the cooling and the saltiness create enough density that the water begins to sink deep beneath the surface.
Read this article, exploring the possibility that the THC (thermohaline circulation) is responsible for longer and shorter term changes in climate. It also talks about the debate about how the Younger Dryas actually started. — Tate
All in all, the more I find out, the more the whole affair looks like humanity as a mad scientist in the process of blowing up his laboratory and speculating about whether he will be roasted or frozen or both. — unenlightened
I think the situation is a lot more complex than this. — Metaphysician Undercover
The THC cannot shut itself off. — Metaphysician Undercover
It's slowing down now. here
— Tate
That's highly speculative — Metaphysician Undercover
Read this article, exploring the possibility that the THC (thermohaline circulation) is responsible for longer and shorter term changes in climate. It also talks about the debate about how the Younger Dryas actually started.
— Tate
The problem with this sort of so-called "science" — Metaphysician Undercover
Pay attention to his solution, which I find interesting as it acknowledges an almost impossibility of universal political agreement. That is, it's not clear that complete elimination of green house gasses from the West will do anything without the same by China and Russia. You can't dam half a river. — Hanover
You can't dam half a river. — Hanover
But that's what I was saying earlier; that sea ice formation increases salinity and drives circulation and sea ice melting reduces salinity and slows circulation (other things being equal). — unenlightened
Sad though to see how clear it was 37 odd years ago, and how very little has been done in that time. — unenlightened
Having the moral higher-ground is of what value if our efforts don't ultimately matter? — Hanover
Folks have been looking for a real world example ever since whichever pedant it was raised the 'grue' thing, and you have found it! My heartiest commiserations! — unenlightened
Having the moral higher-ground is of what value if our efforts don't ultimately matter? — Hanover
The Chinese are building lots of nuclear power plants, which everyone should be doing. If Europe actually does wean itself off Russian oil and gas, that would help. — Tate
What he says needs to be done can happen only through universal cooperation, which is the panacea that will cure far more imminent threats than global warming. — Hanover
The solution remains more political than scientific. Most of Europe is aligned, but not so much the US, and surely not beyond the West. — Hanover
I'm going to push back on this. Climatology is science. — Tate
That's how science rolls, though. Speculate, model, test, repeat. — Tate
But the stuff you've presented and referenced, in this thread, if it is claimed to be science, is really pseudoscience — Metaphysician Undercover
So some published support is required for your pontifications as much as for the rest of us. — unenlightened
As it turns out, recent research on the detailed configuration of surface and deep currents shows that circulation is much more complex than the GCB. Floats deployed in the ocean don’t always follow expected pathways in the GCB model. Wind actually plays a more significant role in causing downwelling than previously thought. Moreover, mixing by small systems or eddies plays a large role in driving surface currents.
The THC (GCB) will not stop, the principles are simple. The earth's surface is heated unevenly by the sun. The earth spins therefore the Coriolis effect. Warm water will be moved from equator toward the poles, and cold water dropped to the depths, and moved by other forces toward the equator, to replenish surface water moved out from there by the Coriolis effect. The positioning of land masses has the greatest influence over how and where this occurs. Other factors also play a role. — Metaphysician Undercover
The principles are not at all simple in their interaction and you have entirely omitted the role of salinity. — unenlightened
However, radical changes in circulation can certainly happen due to climate change, that will in turn have a large influence on the climate. — unenlightened
Models of complex systems are always simplifications, and always inexact. Like weather forecasts, climate forecasts are subject to error that increases with the timescale. But this does not make them unscientific. — unenlightened
I disagree. — Metaphysician Undercover
What are you saying here? We shouldn't have any opinions about anything scientific?I might be the only one, but I don't think a mere metaphysician should be getting involved in matters of science — Changeling
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.