Author Topic: General Climate Discussion  (Read 93118 times)

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1635 on: July 09, 2008, 06:35:09 PM »
Some few centuries ago....
http://www.ultimateungulate.com/Artiodactyla/Bison_bison.html
Some estimated 60 MILLION bisons roamed the plains....
You hardly have those cattlenumbers today.
And BTW, pigs are not ruminants....
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Baitman

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 678
      • Strike Manufacturing Inc.
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1636 on: July 09, 2008, 06:52:30 PM »
Some few centuries ago....
http://www.ultimateungulate.com/Artiodactyla/Bison_bison.html
Some estimated 60 MILLION bisons roamed the plains....
You hardly have those cattlenumbers today.
And BTW, pigs are not ruminants....

I have a hard time believing that there was 60 million Bison that RANGED in the west the only way we are able to keep our numbers is intensive farming. Even then not all animals make it to the range the ranges are always used to their fullest extent.

This was from 2003 numbers today would be down slightly.
.According to USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service ( www.usda.gov/nass ), the inventory of all cattle and calves in the United States on July 1 was 103.9 million head, 1 percent below levels in 2002 and 2 percent below those in 2001. Cattle numbers in the United States have fallen for seven straight years due to drought conditions in several regions of the cattle-producing area.

In contrast, according to Statistics Canada ( www.statcan.ca ), the inventory of cattle and calves in Canada on July 1 totaled 15.728 million head, which was 2 percent larger than 2002 and a record high number.

Record high cattle numbers in the United States occurred back in 1975 at 132 million head.

Wow :O that is more than double the estimate of 60 million bison.
BTW Hogs will eat anything and they do pass gas to :D.


Even with these numbers I don't think that it would make a dent in the atmosphere.
"Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition"
You can be one but NOT both...

Fully Fledged Practising Atheist Bishop

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1637 on: July 09, 2008, 07:22:36 PM »
Looked up the number of dairy cows as well.
Only 2 states of the USA cross the million, some have less than Iceland  :devil
BTW, the mass of a Bison easily matches the cow. And they are ripe for copulation quite late, so their mass is quite some. A 100 lbs calf never equals a 2000 lbs bull.....
Either way, the plains of America were full of farting ruminants before the humans affected the whole deal and as doing such might have even addet to the...gases  :D
Will it make a dent in the atmosphere anyway?
I think that there are other factors much bigger. It's just a thing that adds...if it even does...
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Baitman

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 678
      • Strike Manufacturing Inc.
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1638 on: July 09, 2008, 08:56:25 PM »
If the bison balance out the cattle we still have the hogs and sheep :)
Our own population has increased many fold since the time of the bison. And we all pass gas :O some more than others :rofl Woman also pass gass even though they don't admit to it :rofl :rofl

I don't believe that this much will affect the carbon count too much.

Has there ever been any long term studies on the sun and how much energy is produced and how much it varies year to year. :huh I know that NASA had just started a big project on researching the sun and its spots.
"Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition"
You can be one but NOT both...

Fully Fledged Practising Atheist Bishop

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1639 on: July 10, 2008, 07:49:09 AM »
ok.. so if 60 million or so huge bisons were roaming the plains of America before man ever raised a cow... and their mass is about that of the hundred million or so cows we now raise for burgers and shoes...

Then we have done nothing to the balance of methane.  If anything we slowed it when we slaughtered the bison but didn't have the cattle herds up to full size.

No, when you consider the volcanoes and the sun and the nina and nino's...  you realize that there is nothing man can do that even comes close to the power of nature.. that swings in global climate of any significance are beyond our power..  we simply can't compete with the power of a volcano or the sun.

lazs

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1640 on: July 10, 2008, 02:38:43 PM »
And there falls one straw in the field, which is that if greenhouse gases are to blame for GW, methane from ever increasing farty cows is to blame....not humans.
Nice to see you supporting that Lazs, finally we agree on something. But there will be more :D
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1641 on: July 10, 2008, 02:50:03 PM »
angus.. not sure I get you.. if the huge herds of bison didn't fart the planet into methane hell then why would a few cows?

I thought the evil man thing was killing off all the fuzzy little animals?

lazs

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1642 on: July 10, 2008, 02:54:03 PM »
You're getting me wrong bro.
There are people who claim that there is GW due to farting cows...all of a sudden. My point was exactly that I do not belive that was the case, since the "farting" was already there...
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline avionix

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1088
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1643 on: July 10, 2008, 03:01:48 PM »
I never claimed that GW was caused by cow flatus.  Just saw some people that thought it had a large affect.  I think it's a hoax that has been given life by crackpots and Algore as a way to scam the world into their way of life.  If they can't legislate into their existence, then why not scare us with something that can't be positively proven.
treekilr in game.   
"Please. This is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let's not bicker and argue over who killed who..."

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1644 on: July 10, 2008, 03:09:04 PM »
The cow emission is a nice attempt of hiding car emission.
My point was that ruminat emission has been around for thousands of years in the quantity possible.
Cars in quantity...well, when my granddad was born, there were no running cars in the country....
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline avionix

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1088
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1645 on: July 10, 2008, 03:27:55 PM »
But volcanoes can put out more pollution in just a slow release in one day than all of the industry in one state for an entire year and cars get blamed.  I think that a catastrophic explosion could sure put out more pollution than man has created in history.  You cannot lay the blame on man alone. 
treekilr in game.   
"Please. This is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let's not bicker and argue over who killed who..."

Offline Baitman

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 678
      • Strike Manufacturing Inc.
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1646 on: July 10, 2008, 04:46:47 PM »
In doing any calculating one has to assume that the sun is producing the same energy year to year, century to century. :aok

I don't believe that it produces constant heat. :O
"Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition"
You can be one but NOT both...

Fully Fledged Practising Atheist Bishop

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1647 on: July 10, 2008, 05:29:27 PM »
 I doubt that any of you volcanoe promotants as a cause for GW have ever seen a volcanic eruption, nor experienced ashfall or seen flowing lava at all.
I did, (many times) and I live with a nice view of a highly active volcanoe right out the windows, be it the bedroom or the kitchen....
Looking out the living room I can see something that used to be an underseas volcanoe, - for as long as i took from eruption until it reached the surface and built an island. (already on UNESCO list for preservation :D)
And then, I must inform you with two facts of volcanic eruptions....
1. The pollution instantly released into the atmosphere causes quite some global ... cooling.
2. There is nothing that mankind can do to stop this.
Anyway, avionix, I challenge you to pit up.....say mt Hekla vs Detroit...or Seattle.
Last time she smoked was in 2000, and I never smelled it. Did get some ash though. The whole deal lasted for some days. Since then, there was not a puff. Not that you could do much about it...

Oh, and Baitman....if you dig into the NOT constant solar energy output, you might find out that it does not entirely fit the GW by measure....even au contraire.
Nice bait....man.

It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Baitman

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 678
      • Strike Manufacturing Inc.
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1648 on: July 10, 2008, 08:32:51 PM »
Angus I am not saying its the only cause but for your reading. :D


NASA STUDY FINDS INCREASING SOLAR TREND THAT CAN CHANGE CLIMATE
 
Since the late 1970s, the amount of solar radiation the sun emits, during times of quiet sunspot activity, has increased by nearly .05 percent per decade, according to a NASA funded study.

"This trend is important because, if sustained over many decades, it could cause significant climate change," said Richard Willson, a researcher affiliated with NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Columbia University's Earth Institute, New York. He is the lead author of the study recently published in Geophysical Research Letters.
 
"Historical records of solar activity indicate that solar radiation has been increasing since the late 19th century. If a trend, comparable to the one found in this study, persisted throughout the 20th century, it would have provided a significant component of the global warming the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports to have occurred over the past 100 years," he said.

NASA's Earth Science Enterprise funded this research as part of its mission to understand and protect our home planet by studying the primary causes of climate variability, including trends in solar radiation that may be a factor in global climate change.

The solar cycle occurs approximately every 11 years when the sun undergoes a period of increased magnetic and sunspot activity called the "solar maximum," followed by a quiet period called the "solar minimum."

Although the inferred increase of solar irradiance in 24 years, about 0.1 percent, is not enough to cause notable climate change, the trend would be important if maintained for a century or more. Satellite observations of total solar irradiance have obtained a long enough record (over 24 years) to begin looking for this effect.
 
Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) is the radiant energy received by the Earth from the sun, over all wavelengths, outside the atmosphere. TSI interaction with the Earth's atmosphere,oceans and landmasses is the biggest factor determining our climate. To put it into perspective, decreases in TSI of 0.2 percent occur during the weeklong passage of large sunspot groups across our side of the sun. These changes are relatively insignificant compared to the sun's total output of energy, yet equivalent to all the energy that mankind uses in a year. According to Willson, small variations, like the one found in this study, if sustained over many decades, could have significant climate effects.
 
In order to investigate the possibility of a solar trend, Willson needed to put together a long-term dataset of the sun's total output. Six overlapping satellite experiments have monitored TSI since late 1978. The first record came from NASA's Nimbus7 Earth Radiation Budget (ERB) experiment (1978 - 1993). Other records came from NASA's Active Cavity Radiometer Irradiance Monitors: ACRIM1 on the Solar Maximum Mission (1980 - 1989), ACRIM2 on the Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite (1991 - 2001) and ACRIM3 on the ACRIMSAT satellite (2000 to present). Also, NASA launched its own Earth Radiation Budget Experiment on its Earth Radiation Budget Satellite (ERBS) in 1984. The European Space Agency's (ESA) SOHO/VIRGO experiment also provided an independent data set (1996 to 1998).

In this study, Willson, who is also Principal Investigator of NASA's ACRIM experiments, compiled a TSI record of over 24 years by carefully piecing together the overlapping records. In order to construct a long-term dataset, he needed to bridge a two-year gap (1989 to 1991) between ACRIM1 and ACRIM2. Both the Nimbus7/ERB and ERBS measurements overlapped the ACRIM 'gap.' Using Nimbus7/ERB results produced a 0.05 percent per decade upward trend between solar minima, while ERBS results produced no trend. Until this study, the cause of this difference, and hence the validity of the TSI trend, was uncertain. Willson has identified specific errors in the ERBS data responsible for the difference. The accurate long-term dataset, therefore, shows a significant positive trend (.05 percent per decade) in TSI between the solar minima of solar cycles 21 to 23 (1978 to present). This major finding may help climatologists to distinguish between solar and man-made influences on climate.

NASA's ACRIMSAT/ACRIM3 experiment began in 2000 and will extend the long-term solar observations into the future for at least a five-year minimum mission


Not much of an increase at .05% per decade but it could be one factor of many :aok but 10 decades would = .5% increase :O

"Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition"
You can be one but NOT both...

Fully Fledged Practising Atheist Bishop

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1649 on: July 11, 2008, 02:28:32 AM »
So this is why the N-Icecap disappears every 11 years..... :devil
Anyway, the next Maximum is in the maps in 2012...and the forecast for 2025 is a weak maximum. And the newest temp records are being set at the solar minimum.
2012 is predicted to be a strong one though.
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)