Science from the other side of Climate Change

[ZenMode]

This is believed to occur over thousands of years, which isn't going to do anything about increased temperature, extreme weather, etc now or in the near future.

Earth can regulate its own temperature over millennia, new study finds

Scientists have confirmed that a “stabilizing feedback” on 100,000-year timescales keeps global temperatures in check.

The Earth’s climate has undergone some big changes, from global volcanism to planet-cooling ice ages and dramatic shifts in solar radiation. And yet life, for the last 3.7 billion years, has kept on beating.

Now, a study by MIT researchers in Science Advances confirms that the planet harbors a “stabilizing feedback” mechanism that acts over hundreds of thousands of years to pull the climate back from the brink, keeping global temperatures within a steady, habitable range.

Just how does it accomplish this? A likely mechanism is “silicate weathering” — a geological process by which the slow and steady weathering of silicate rocks involves chemical reactions that ultimately draw carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and into ocean sediments, trapping the gas in rocks.

Scientists have long suspected that silicate weathering plays a major role in regulating the Earth’s carbon cycle. The mechanism of silicate weathering could provide a geologically constant force in keeping carbon dioxide — and global temperatures — in check. But there’s never been direct evidence for the continual operation of such a feedback, until now.

Earth can regulate its own temperature over millennia, new study finds

MIT researchers have confirmed that Earth harbors a “stabilizing feedback” mechanism that acts over hundreds of thousands of years to keep global temperatures within a steady, habitable range.

news.mit.edu

 

[Into the Night]

This is believed to occur over thousands of years, which isn't going to do anything about increased temperature, extreme weather, etc now or in the near future.

Earth can regulate its own temperature over millennia, new study finds

Earth has no thermostat.

Scientists have confirmed that a “stabilizing feedback” on 100,000-year timescales keeps global temperatures in check.

Earth has no thermostat.

The Earth’s climate

There is no such thing as a global climate.

has undergone some big changes,

Climate cannot change.

from global volcanism

What global volcanism?

to planet-cooling ice ages

What 'ice age'?

and dramatic shifts in solar radiation.

What dramatic shifts in solar radiation?

And yet life, for the last 3.7 billion years, has kept on beating.

How do you know? You haven't been alive for 3.7 billion years!

Now, a study by MIT researchers in

Ah. You are confused that a 'research' or 'study' is science. It isn't.

Science Advances confirms

Science is not a magazine or journal.

that the planet harbors a “stabilizing feedback” mechanism

Earth has no thermostat.

that acts over hundreds of thousands of years to pull the climate back from the brink,

There is no such thing as a global climate. Climate cannot change. There is not 'brink'.

keeping global temperatures within a steady, habitable range.

Earth has no thermostat.

Just how does it accomplish this? A likely mechanism is “silicate weathering” — a geological process by which the slow and steady weathering of silicate rocks involves chemical reactions that ultimately draw carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and into ocean sediments, trapping the gas in rocks.

Carbon dioxide is not silicon or silica.

Scientists have long suspected that silicate weathering plays a major role in regulating the Earth’s carbon cycle.

Silica is not carbon. Silicon is not carbon.

The mechanism of silicate weathering could provide a geologically constant force in keeping carbon dioxide — and global temperatures — in check.

Carbon dioxide does not have any capability to control the temperature of Earth.

But there’s never been direct evidence for the continual operation of such a feedback, until now.

Earth has no thermostat.

Earth can regulate its own temperature over millennia, new study finds

MIT researchers have confirmed that Earth harbors a “stabilizing feedback” mechanism that acts over hundreds of thousands of years to keep global temperatures within a steady, habitable range.

news.mit.edu

So you found another random Holy Link to copy and paste. Meh.

 

[anonymoose]

Earth has no thermostat.

Earth has no thermostat.

There is no such thing as a global climate.

Climate cannot change.

What global volcanism?

What 'ice age'?

What dramatic shifts in solar radiation?

How do you know? You haven't been alive for 3.7 billion years!

Ah. You are confused that a 'research' or 'study' is science. It isn't.

Science is not a magazine or journal.

Earth has no thermostat.

There is no such thing as a global climate. Climate cannot change. There is not 'brink'.

Earth has no thermostat.

Carbon dioxide is not silicon or silica.

Silica is not carbon. Silicon is not carbon.

Carbon dioxide does not have any capability to control the temperature of Earth.

Earth has no thermostat.

So you found another random Holy Link to copy and paste. Meh.

I didn’t read much of the OP but it sounded like ZM is kinda on our side in that the MIT guys are saying “don’t worry the sky isn’t falling”.

 

[Into the Night]

I didn’t read much of the OP but it sounded like ZM is kinda on our side in that the MIT guys are saying “don’t worry the sky isn’t falling”.

Go read the OP.

ZenMode is a believer in the Church of Global Warming and the Church of EV (as well as the Church of Green).

This particular article he's cutting and pasting is about an MIT 'study' of how Earth effectively has a thermostat (It doesn't).
Likely in preparation for going into his belief that this 'thermostat' is now 'broken' somehow, and Earth's climate is 'changing' (in other words, Global Warming).

He believes that carbon dioxide is somehow capable of creating energy out of nothing. To him, it's a Magick Holy Gas. If you read his OP, he shows this (yet again).

 

[ZenMode]

Earth has no thermostat.

Earth has no thermostat.

There is no such thing as a global climate.

Climate cannot change.

What global volcanism?

What 'ice age'?

What dramatic shifts in solar radiation?

How do you know? You haven't been alive for 3.7 billion years!

Ah. You are confused that a 'research' or 'study' is science. It isn't.

Science is not a magazine or journal.

Earth has no thermostat.

There is no such thing as a global climate. Climate cannot change. There is not 'brink'.

Earth has no thermostat.

Carbon dioxide is not silicon or silica.

Silica is not carbon. Silicon is not carbon.

Carbon dioxide does not have any capability to control the temperature of Earth.

Earth has no thermostat.

So you found another random Holy Link to copy and paste. Meh.

Again....you claim the Earth's atmosphere has NO impact on temperature on the surface. You are either scientifically ignorant or a liar. Either way, your opinion is irrelevant as a result.

 

[Daylight63]

I didn’t read much of the OP but it sounded like ZM is kinda on our side in that the MIT guys are saying “don’t worry the sky isn’t falling”.

You'd have to be pretty dumb to assume that is the take-away. Seriously dumb.

They are talking on the scale of 100,000 years. Look at that number again. It's big.

So it won't help us much. The biggest danger from climate change (other than the massive ecosystem fucking it would represent) is basically the collapse of our society and our economy.

You think taking care of a real problem is "too costly" (while you simultaneously want people to fix voter fraud which is not real) but you don't even realize the cost you will incur from climate change. You aren't ready for it. Seriously it will fuck shit up.

You like eating? Enjoy it now, because it's gonna get a FUCKTON more expensive in the future.

 

[anonymoose]

You'd have to be pretty dumb to assume that is the take-away. Seriously dumb.

They are talking on the scale of 100,000 years. Look at that number again. It's big.

So it won't help us much. The biggest danger from climate change (other than the massive ecosystem fucking it would represent) is basically the collapse of our society and our economy.

You think taking care of a real problem is "too costly" (while you simultaneously want people to fix voter fraud which is not real) but you don't even realize the cost you will incur from climate change. You aren't ready for it. Seriously it will fuck shit up.

You like eating? Enjoy it now, because it's gonna get a FUCKTON more expensive in the future.

It’s all irrelevant actually.
In January 2019 Alexandria Occasional-Cortex said the world ends in 12 years. That gives us about 6 more until doomsday.
I’ve already made my final arrangements .

 

[Daylight63]

It’s all irrelevant actually.
In January 2019 Alexandria Occasional-Cortex said the world ends in 12 years.

She didn't say that and if she did that isn't what the science was saying. If you actually READ what was being talked about in 2019 you'd realize it was not that the earth would end in 12 years but that within about a decade we would probably pass by some tipping points that would be impossible to recover from but we may not know that for many, many years.

IT's kind of subtle and you probably aren't smart enough to understand it but trust me: NO ONE THOUGHT THE WORD WAS GOING TO END IN 12 YEARS.

That gives us about 6 more until doomsday.
I’ve already made my final arrangements .

Are you checking yourself into a home since you can no longer read for comprehension?

 

[Yakuda]

It’s all irrelevant actually.
In January 2019 Alexandria Occasional-Cortex said the world ends in 12 years. That gives us about 6 more until doomsday.
I’ve already made my final arrangements .

This is one of my favorite climate change disaster FUBARs. The science is settled is the refrain we always hear isnt it?

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/08/us/glaciers-national-park-2020-trnd/index.html

 

[Daylight63]

This is one of my favorite climate change disaster FUBARs. The science is settled is the refrain we always hear isnt it?

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/08/us/glaciers-national-park-2020-trnd/index.html

You don't know what you are talking about.

No one claims to know with perfect knowledge when the various disasters will start hitting but you'll probably see things like increased numbers of massive storms which will cost billions of dollars every year to clean up after and they will get more common. Then places will start having less rain and after a few years something bad may happen if the drought continues (we know that droughts can be bad, just not overnight).

Basically your screams that people predicted this or that within this or that many years you can be sure that NONE OF IT came from the peer reviewed science. The peer reviewed science is quite clear: we don't know exactly what we are setting ourselves up for but we know it's likely not going to be great.

If you want to know what the ACTUAL science says about the future, be prepared for it to be much more complex than your cartoon views.

Here's what the SCIENTISTS think about future scenarios. It's deep, so put on your big boy clothes and dive in:

https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/special-reports/spm/sres-en.pdf

 

[Yakuda]

You don't know what you are talking about.

No one claims to know with perfect knowledge when the various disasters will start hitting but you'll probably see things like increased numbers of massive storms which will cost billions of dollars every year to clean up after and they will get more common. Then places will start having less rain and after a few years something bad may happen if the drought continues (we know that droughts can be bad, just not overnight).

Basically your screams that people predicted this or that within this or that many years you can be sure that NONE OF IT came from the peer reviewed science. The peer reviewed science is quite clear: we don't know exactly what we are setting ourselves up for but we know it's likely not going to be great.

If you want to know what the ACTUAL science says about the future, be prepared for it to be much more complex than your cartoon views.

Here's what the SCIENTISTS think about future scenarios. It's deep, so put on your big boy clothes and dive in:

https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/special-reports/spm/sres-en.pdf

2020.if was all supposed to be gone. When it's not gone we haven't listen to idiots explain away how stupid you are. This reminds me of you atheist twits making fun of people who predict the end of the world. You're a retarded as the people making end time predictions. You finally found people as screwy as you.

 

[Diogenes]

A discussion of "climate change" as a religion (12 minutes in):

Professor Ian Plimer on Climate REALITIES

This is "Professor Ian Plimer on Climate REALITIES" by ivor cummins on Vimeo, the home for high quality videos and the people who love them.

vimeo.com

 

[Into the Night]

Again....you claim the Earth's atmosphere has NO impact on temperature on the surface.

The atmosphere is part of Earth, Void. No gas or vapor has the capability to create energy out of nothing. You are still ignoring the 1st law of thermodynamics.

You are either scientifically ignorant or a liar. Either way, your opinion is irrelevant as a result.

Argument of the Stone fallacy. Fallacy fallacy.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

You'd have to be pretty dumb to assume that is the take-away. Seriously dumb.

They are talking on the scale of 100,000 years. Look at that number again. It's big.

So it won't help us much. The biggest danger from climate change (other than the massive ecosystem fucking it would represent) is basically the collapse of our society and our economy.

You think taking care of a real problem is "too costly" (while you simultaneously want people to fix voter fraud which is not real) but you don't even realize the cost you will incur from climate change. You aren't ready for it. Seriously it will fuck shit up.

You like eating? Enjoy it now, because it's gonna get a FUCKTON more expensive in the future.

Question: Is a "pristine" Amazon rainforest necessary for the "health of the planet?"

 

[Into the Night]

You'd have to be pretty dumb to assume that is the take-away. Seriously dumb.

They are talking on the scale of 100,000 years. Look at that number again. It's big.

So it won't help us much. The biggest danger from climate change

Climate cannot change, Twilight.

(other than the massive ecosystem fucking it would represent)

Buzzword fallacy 'ecosystem'. This buzzword comes from the Church of Green.

is basically the collapse of our society and our economy.

Your Doom and Gloom predictions are rather pointless, Twilight.

You think taking care of a real problem is "too costly"

What "problem"?? You have never been able to state the "Problem".

(while you simultaneously want people to fix voter fraud which is not real)

No. Fixing election fraud. DON'T TRY TO DENY DEMOCRAT ELECTION FRAUD!

but you don't even realize the cost you will incur from climate change.

Climate cannot change, Twilight.

You aren't ready for it. Seriously it will fuck shit up.

Ready for what, Twilight??

You like eating? Enjoy it now, because it's gonna get a FUCKTON more expensive in the future.

Only because of inflation, generally enhanced by DEMOCRATS.

 

[Into the Night]

Again....you claim the Earth's atmosphere has NO impact on temperature on the surface. You are either scientifically ignorant or a liar. Either way, your opinion is irrelevant as a result.

You are still trying to ignore the 1st law of thermodynamics. No gas or vapor or atmosphere can create energy out of nothing. You are also now ignoring Kirchoff's law. The atmosphere is part of Earth.

 

[Into the Night]

It’s all irrelevant actually.
In January 2019 Alexandria Occasional-Cortex said the world ends in 12 years. That gives us about 6 more until doomsday.
I’ve already made my final arrangements .

You're too late!!

In 1985, Democrats were claiming the world was going to end in 20 years.

 

[ADreamOfLiberty]

The actual publication: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adc9241

They fit the 'official' temperature history to a specific differential equation. That's all they did.

It suggests that there are multiple stabilizing (equilibrium finding) feedbacks over different timescales. Not very surprising but not proof of any particular theoretical feedback loop.

"We suggest that this is strong observational evidence for the importance of silicate weathering as a climate stabilizer."

I suggest they think again, the precarboniferous was carbon dioxide hot spot for millions of years. Where was all the silicate then? Volcanic introduction of buried carbon would need to be a stronger factor to explain.

This all assumes that the causal relationship between carbon dioxide and temperature is a fixture but that is bad science.

Scientists have confirmed that a “stabilizing feedback” on 100,000-year timescales keeps global temperatures in check.

Bullshit sensationalism. Nothing was confirmed, there was no experiment.

But there’s never been direct evidence for the continual operation of such a feedback, until now.

Fitting a math model is not "direct evidence".

 

[Into the Night]

She didn't say that and if she did that isn't what the science was saying.

Science is not a religion, Twilight.

If you actually READ what was being talked about in 2019 you'd realize it was not that the earth would end in 12 years but that within about a decade we would probably pass by some tipping points that would be impossible to recover from but we may not know that for many, many years.

There are no 'tipping points', Twilight. Buzzword fallacy.

IT's kind of subtle and you probably aren't smart enough to understand it but trust me: NO ONE THOUGHT THE WORD WAS GOING TO END IN 12 YEARS.

Oh? I hear this prediction from Christians, from the Church of Global Warming, from the Church of Green, from the Church of Covid, and from the Church of No God.

Are you checking yourself into a home since you can no longer read for comprehension?

Inversion fallacy. Mantra 1a.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

You're too late!!

In 1985, Democrats were claiming the world was going to end in 20 years.

Of late, the head ditz of the Democrat party, AOC, said in 2009 the world will end in 12 years if we don't fully address "climate change" (aka Gorebal Warming). Well, it's been 6 years since she said that...

https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/426353-ocasio-cortez-the-world-will-end-in-12-years-if-we-dont-address/

Video: AOC believes 'the world could end' because of climate change | Daily Mail Online

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says Millennials like her believe 'the world is gonna end in 12 YEARS' if climate change is ignored. She made this comment during an interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates at the Riverside Church in Manhattan, New York City.

www.dailymail.co.uk