| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
pointster
Joined: 22 Jul 2010
Posts: 376
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
J64TWB
Joined: 24 Dec 2013
Posts: 1685
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17748
Location: Berkeley, California
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GURGLETROUSERS
Joined: 30 Dec 2009
Posts: 2643
|
 Posted: Tue Feb 23, 2016 12:08 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Some interesting research.
Recent sediment research validates historical records of an unusually severe and protracted sequence of storms in the 13th and 14th centuries. The long established ancient town of Dunwich on our east coast, which at that time was similar in size to London, succombed to a succession of 'unprecedented' storms over that long period, and had to be abandoned. It now lies up to 30feet beneath the North Sea. (Modern Dunwich is not in the same place,)
Prof Sear (university of Southhampton) told the B.B.C. that their findings(underwater scans showed streets and buildings) offered a marvellous history of CLIMATE CHANGE, and coastal erosion.
Needless to say, this was a naturally, if very severe, occurring climate cycle. I can't help thinking that, had this natural cycle struck today, and had set in for such an extended period of time, it undoubtedly have been cited as proof positive of man made global warming climate change.
A timely warning perhaps, that all may not be quite what it seems., in climate matters. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pointster
Joined: 22 Jul 2010
Posts: 376
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 23, 2016 2:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GURGLETROUSERS wrote: | Some interesting research.
Recent sediment research validates historical records of an unusually severe and protracted sequence of storms in the 13th and 14th centuries. The long established ancient town of Dunwich on our east coast, which at that time was similar in size to London, succombed to a succession of 'unprecedented' storms over that long period, and had to be abandoned. It now lies up to 30feet beneath the North Sea. (Modern Dunwich is not in the same place,)
Prof Sear (university of Southhampton) told the B.B.C. that their findings(underwater scans showed streets and buildings) offered a marvellous history of CLIMATE CHANGE, and coastal erosion.
Needless to say, this was a naturally, if very severe, occurring climate cycle. I can't help thinking that, had this natural cycle struck today, and had set in for such an extended period of time, it undoubtedly have been cited as proof positive of man made global warming climate change.
A timely warning perhaps, that all may not be quite what it seems., in climate matters. |
Well, no, it would not, by itself, be cited as proof positive of man made climate change. Scientists would have to show how the events fit in with their models, and even if they did, it would not be proof positive, but rather confirmatory evidence of the accuracy of their models. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17748
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 23, 2016 4:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rahmstorf is as bright as they come in coastal engineering, my graduate field.
| Quote: | The oceans have heaved up and down as world temperatures have waxed and waned, but as new research tracking the past 2,800 years shows, never during that time did the seas rise as sharply or as suddenly as has been the case during the last century.
The new study, the culmination of a decade of work by three teams of farflung scientists, has charted what they called an “acceleration” in sea level rise that’s triggering and worsening flooding in coastlines around the world.
The findings also warn of much worse to come.
The scientists reported in a paper published Monday in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that they have greater than 95 percent certainty that at least half of more than 5 inches of sea level rise they detected during the 20th century was directly caused by global warming.
“During the past millennia, sea level has never risen nearly as fast as during the last century,” said Stefan Rahmstorf, a physics professor at Potsdam University in Germany, one of 10 authors of the paper. “That was to be expected, since global warming inevitably leads to rising seas.”
By trapping heat, rising concentrations of atmospheric pollution are causing glaciers and ice sheets to melt into seas, lifting high tides ever higher.
Globally, average temperatures have risen about 1°C (nearly 2°F) since the 1800s. Last year was the hottest recorded, easily surpassing the mark set one year earlier. The expansion of warming ocean water was blamed in a recent study for about half of sea level rise during the past decade. |
Quote from Scientific American. Could it just be possible that the scientists are right and big carbon is lying? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GURGLETROUSERS
Joined: 30 Dec 2009
Posts: 2643
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 4:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
'Confirmatory evidence of the accuracy of their models.'- and there's the rub! If naturally occurring climate cycles have not all been discovered and accounted for, predictions are dubious.
For example, Macs citing of Rhamstorf as the real answer could be challenged. A recent publication by Terence Mills, Professor of Applied Statistics (Macs speciality subject) at Loughborough University, and on behalf of the Global Warmong Policy Foundation claims that average global temperature is likely to remain relatively unchanged by the end of the century.
His statistical study found that temps had fluctuated over the past 160 years with long periods of cooling after decades of warming. he used his statistical method to forecast future British temperatures, taking into account all recorded fluctuations since 1850. He found that average temps in central England (records as far back as 1659) had increased by about 1degree centigrade in 350 years. He then forecasts an additional increase of only 0.25 degrees centigrade by 2100.
His analysis, unlike the IPCC does not (he claIms, include assumption about rate of rise caused by rising emissions. (An obvious criticism.)
While accepted as ' an interesting academic contribution' by a leading 'warmer' who pointed out 'you cannot ignore the physics of the atmosphere that show that increasing emissions will lead to higher global temperatures', he could well counter that you also cannot ignore the effect of as yet unacounted for natural climatic cycles will have on future predictions, and that statistical analysis is a vital tool in discovering such! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17748
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 10:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
A citation and a summary would be helpful GT. I studied coastal engineering, flood mechanics and sediment transport. Knowing what the downstream elevation is, or may be, is essential. So I started paying attention to sea level rise mechanics in the mid 1980's.
Statistics? Too hard for me--but I know enough to know when statistical approaches are being manipulated in time series analysis. So I am concerned about approaches that clip the data set (virtually all of the deniers use this trick), or elongate it selectively to get the result they just wanna believe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GURGLETROUSERS
Joined: 30 Dec 2009
Posts: 2643
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 12:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, I cannot comment on his motives, if any other than the pursuit of accurate research in his own field of expertise. Some people are concerned with maintaining their reputation for integrity. As for cherry picking to manipulate a result, one can only work with whatever evidence is available, in his case reliable (ish) records going back to 1659.
I don't read too much into the fact that he carried out his analysis on behalf of the Global Warming Policy Foundation. It would be up to them to either accept or reject his findings. That foundation was set up to counteract the way too many politicians may be manipulating the warming agenda for their own ends. The Foundation will be well aware of that - it's most prominent member (Lawson) is an ex Chancellor of the Exchequer of the British government, so he should know! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GURGLETROUSERS
Joined: 30 Dec 2009
Posts: 2643
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 2:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
P.S. I should have cited
Google Terence C Mills New Paper On Climate Change, where (under The Global Warming Policy Foundation ) his research paper is laid out in full, (pdf.), along with his reasoning in doing so. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|
Search
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Register
