NASA Global Warming Visualization

[semipro]

I just came across this interesting data visualization for the first time (via a short video at the link).
Given our current weather, this may not be a great time to post, especially for those that confuse weather and climate.
2 degrees F doesn't seem like much but climate change at our place has been very evident over the last 22 years.
We see way less snow and ice, ponds no longer freeze over to where we can ice skate, and resident animals and plant varieties are changing.

NASA Scientific Visualization Studio | GISTEMP Climate Spiral

The GISTEMP climate spiral 1880-2021. This version is in Celsius, see below for an alternate version in Fahrenheit. || GISTEMP_Spiral_2022-03-06_2257.01710_print.jpg (1024x576) [122.0 KB] || GISTEMP_Spiral_2022-03-06_2257.01710_searchweb.png (320x180) [43.9 KB] ||...

svs.gsfc.nasa.gov

 

[begreen]

Why the left and right scales? What do they represent? Average low temp and high temp? Summer/Winter highs?

 

[semipro]

Why the left and right scales? What do they represent? Average low temp and high temp? Summer/Winter highs?

See the video. That's actually a side view of stack radar graphs that show annual variations

 

[Newbie78]

Geoengineering Programs and Weather Modification Experiments · ClimateViewer News

This article lists active geoengineering programs, proposals, experiments, field trials, and weather modification programs worldwide!

climateviewer.com

I wonder if these programs and experiments have anything to do with climate change...

 

[EbS-P]

Global monthly temperature anomalies. So the deviation from average

I just came across this interesting data visualization for the first time (via a short video at the link).
Given our current weather, this may not be a great time to post, especially for those that confuse weather and climate.
2 degrees F doesn't seem like much but climate change at our place has been very evident over the last 22 years.
We see way less snow and ice, ponds no longer freeze over to where we can ice skate, and resident animals and plant varieties are changing.

See the video. That's actually a side view of stack radar graphs that show annual variations

 

[3650]

Too bad they can’t go back tens of thousands of years and see if it’s naturally occurring cycle. That’s my guess.

 

[begreen]

See the video. That's actually a side view of stack radar graphs that show annual variations

Ah yes, so summer/winter variance.

 

[begreen]

Too bad they can’t go back tens of thousands of years and see if it’s a naturally occurring cycle. That’s my guess.

Actually, they can. There are good clues in undisturbed ice packs. Ice cores provide a record of polar temperature going back around 250,000 years for Greenland and 800,000 years for Antarctica. Fossils and rocks serve as good temperature proxies for older periods of time. Climate clues also show up in tree growth rings, marine and lake sediments, fossilized coral, and frozen seeds.

 

[woodgeek]

Actually, they can. There are good clues in undisturbed ice packs. Ice cores provide a record of polar temperature going back around 250,000 years for Greenland and 800,000 years for Antarctica. Fossils and rocks serve as good temperature proxies for older periods of time. Climate clues also show up in tree growth rings, marine and lake sediments, fossilized coral, and frozen seeds.

Here is a fun link:

Global Warming

Global warming is happening now, and scientists are confident that greenhouse gases are responsible. To understand what this means for humanity, it is necessary to understand what global warming is, how scientists know it's happening, and how they predict future climate.

earthobservatory.nasa.gov

Bottom line... the current temps are not that high compared to interglacial periods over the last million years, but the current rate of increase is roughly 20X faster than has occurred over that period.

 

[PhilFer]

Too bad they can’t go back tens of thousands of years and see if it’s naturally occurring cycle. That’s my guess.

Pretty sure the polar ice core samples show that this is reoccurring

 

[bholler]

Too bad they can’t go back tens of thousands of years and see if it’s naturally occurring cycle. That’s my guess.

Yes it absolutely does happen naturally. But there is no evidence of it happening this fast at any time before. This is mainly due to us releasing lots of carbon that was sequestered over millions of years in a couple hundred years

 

[Prometeo]

There is speculation about this, that is problem. Nobody talks about previous cycles repeating themselves. Let us remember that in the end the earth will die from the cold, the sun is not eternal

 

[woodgeek]

There is speculation about this, that is problem. Nobody talks about previous cycles repeating themselves. Let us remember that in the end the earth will die from the cold, the sun is not eternal

My understanding is that most stars, including those like the sun, get brighter with age. This is gradual their whole lives, and then dramatically towards the end when they swell up into red giants and swallow their planets.

Future of Earth - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

When the earth and sun first formed, the sun was probably 30% dimmer than it is today. Before the dawn of plants and animals 600 million years ago, when all life on earth was microbial, the Earth would have crazy ice ages... they were so severe to freeze over the oceans all the way the equator! These 'snowball earth' episodes lasted a long time, bc the ice reflected heat into space very effectively, until volcanic CO2 finally built up and the ice got melted.

Snowball Earth - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

When the ice DID melt, there was so much CO2 in the air (bc it couldn't dissolve in the ice covered ocean) that the earth got rapidly warmer. We can suppose that there was a surge in rainfall, erosion, wave action, and the seas not only warmed, they got a surge of nutrients and sunlight all at the same time. The last of these melting events was 600 million years ago, and coincided with the Cambrian Explosion and appearance of all the major Phyla of life today in a short period.

The lack of snowball episodes since then is probably due to the sun finally getting bright enough to cross a key threshold.

There is another problem. As the sun gets brighter, to keep the same climate (over hundreds of millions of years) the Earth will need to have less and less greenhouse gases. We can estimate that sometime in the next few hundred million years, it will not be possible to have the current climate even if we had ZERO CO2 and methane in the atmosphere (assuming water vapor is still present).

So the earth's climate as we know it will not last more than a few hundred million years more, even though the sun will burn 5000 million years more, remorselessly baking the earth for 90% of that time.

So, bc the sun's output is NOT constant, the Earth only gets about a billion years in its current form suited for (non-microbial) life. Before that it is too cold, and the mega ice ages would wipe out the entire ecosystem on land (glaciers everywhere) and in the oceans (no oxygen or sunlight). After that the sun is just too hot and the climate runs away. Our Earth is currently about 2/3rds of the way through this goldilocks period.

 

[Prometeo]

Time ago wikipedia said something different, if I'm not mistaken. Some argued that there would be artificial suns in the future. In recent years, despite the increase in temperatures due to the effect of pollution in the atmosphere, (I suppose) solar activity is decreasing. I also think that no one can really know after millions of years. It is already very difficult to understand 2023 what will happen. If we then consider many studies supported by rich, speculators..

 

[SpaceBus]

Actually, they can. There are good clues in undisturbed ice packs. Ice cores provide a record of polar temperature going back around 250,000 years for Greenland and 800,000 years for Antarctica. Fossils and rocks serve as good temperature proxies for older periods of time. Climate clues also show up in tree growth rings, marine and lake sediments, fossilized coral, and frozen seeds.

Indeed, there are a number of climate proxies.

 

[semipro]

Bottom line... the current temps are not that high compared to interglacial periods over the last million years, but the current rate of increase is roughly 20X faster than has occurred over that period.

This is shown clearly in the NASA chart below WRT CO2 levels.
I guess I just never expected it to hit home so obviously and quickly. Seeing significant changes where we live over a span of 22 years is scary.
Ultimately, it seems that it may be this accelerated rate of change rather than the overall amount of change that may not allow earth's natural regulating systems time to respond without some sort of major upsets.

Edit: link for graphic above: https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_re... us that levels,see fluctuations in the graph).

 

[EbS-P]

Given the size of the sun it will probably end its life as a red giant. Bad news for earth.

What will happen to the planets when the Sun becomes a red giant?

Astronomy.com is for anyone who wants to learn more about astronomy events, cosmology, planets, galaxies, asteroids, astrophotography, the Big Bang, black holes, comets, constellations, eclipses, exoplanets, nebulae, meteors, quasars, observing, telescopes, NASA, Hubble, space missions...

astronomy.com

the global climate models have predicted the larger swings in temperatures that the graph shows. The reality is rolling blackouts will be more common as temperature extremes become more frequent. High tides are getting higher.

The extra costs of climate change are real. Read what the Pentagon says about climate change and it’s destabilizing effects on world security.

https://media.defense.gov/2021/Oct/21/2002877353/-1/-1/0/DOD-CLIMATE-RISK-ANALYSIS-FINAL.PDF

 

[woodgeek]

Time ago wikipedia said something different, if I'm not mistaken. Some argued that there would be artificial suns in the future. In recent years, despite the increase in temperatures due to the effect of pollution in the atmosphere, (I suppose) solar activity is decreasing. I also think that no one can really know after millions of years. It is already very difficult to understand 2023 what will happen. If we then consider many studies supported by rich, speculators..

Fortunately we have a pretty solid understanding of the life cycles of stars. We can observe and measure the brightness of thousands of stars, and estimate their ages by a variety of methods (that agree with one another). What is more, we have computer models for the interiors of stars, with parameters (for fusion reactions) that have been measured in the lab which agree very well with the observed data. The first models of this type (pencil and paper, though) were written down a century ago.

All normal stars, including those with the mass and composition of the sun, get gradually brighter as they age.

Ofc we agree that this has nothing to do with climate factors over the next couple thousand years.

 

[begreen]

There is speculation about this, that is problem. Nobody talks about previous cycles repeating themselves. Let us remember that in the end the earth will die from the cold, the sun is not eternal

Well yes, neither are we eternal. But the future of a billion years forward in no way forgives the transgressions of the present.

 

[SpaceBus]

There is speculation about this, that is problem. Nobody talks about previous cycles repeating themselves. Let us remember that in the end the earth will die from the cold, the sun is not eternal

The thing is the cycles are extremely far apart in relation to human history. We, as in humans, have caused the cycle to swing very far in the positive direction, and much faster than natural changes. These changes are too fast for natural systems to adapt, and clearly too fast for humans as well.

 

[Prometeo]

Well yes, neither are we eternal. But the future of a billion years forward in no way forgives the transgressions of the present.

this would mean that there are only now imbalances, due to homo sapiens, errors but even in the past these things existed, glaciations and sharp rises in temperatures. Population has increased exponentially, too.

 

[Prometeo]

The thing is the cycles are extremely far apart in relation to human history. We, as in humans, have caused the cycle to swing very far in the positive direction, and much faster than natural changes. These changes are too fast for natural systems to adapt, and clearly too fast for humans as well.

If the greenhouse effect would be zero, the planet would be completely inhospitable, maybe in the future it will be discovered that under different conditions, the greenhouse effect is positive and not negative (I repeat, under different conditions). Nowadays it would probably be enough to plant many and many trees.

 

[SpaceBus]

If the greenhouse effect would be zero, the planet would be completely inhospitable, maybe in the future it will be discovered that under different conditions, the greenhouse effect is positive and not negative (I repeat, under different conditions). Nowadays it would probably be enough to plant many and many trees.

The greenhouse effect is always considered positive, other factors like cloud and ice albedo are negative in regards to average global temperature. Planting a lot of trees would help, but at a certain point they would reach an equilibrium point and not really do anything. It's more about the soil found in places with dense native plant cover. Think about the dustbowl, it happened because a lot of native plants were ripped up for planting giant monoculture crop fields that sit bare for part of the year. All of the carbon in the soil, and the soil itself, was released by agriculture. So it's not the trees themselves storing the carbon, but the soil. Plants, like trees and grasses, trap carbon in their growth, which falls to the ground to be broken down by microbes and animals and sequestered away. There will always be an equilibrium point, but this will always favor a warming planet in the presence of human created carbon emissions (fossil fuels, lime production, agriculture, etc.). The planet does not need humans to create a greenhouse effect, like you've mentioned several times. Currently there's a runaway greenhouse effect caused by excessive carbon production, human caused in this case.

Also keep in mind that "Ice Age" doesn't mean the whole plane is covered in ice. That has happened, but the most recent time was over 600 million years ago. Every time since then has left a huge part of the equatorial region with a temperate and tropical zone. Even at the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) the North American glaciers did not extend further south than New York State, roughly Long Island.

 

[begreen]

Planting lots of trees eventually would help, but it would take a long time and the trees would need to be able to survive higher temps and less rain in many locations. It would take a unified global effort and at least 20 yrs. We don't have that degree of cooperation or the luxury of time anymore. We as a race have killed off much of the ecosystem that would help balance out systems. Our agricultural practices for feeding the billions are compounding the issue rapidly. In spite of the starting efforts, annual emissions keep growing.

 

[Prometeo]

I'm probably saving the world👽
If every state would spend a little money to make specific large co2 filters possibly solar powered, and with sensors so as not to lower too much. And the game is done