Aarde warmt op of kleine ijstijd?!

Alle wetenschappelijke topics tref je hier aan.
Gebruikersavatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 15923
Lid geworden op: za 21 aug 2010, 21:27

wo 31 aug 2011, 23:26

wat gaat dat nu weer kosten?
CERN: 'Climate models will need to be substantially revised'
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/08/25 ... t_results/

New atomsmasher research into cloud formation

By Andrew Orlowski • Get more from this author

Posted in Science, 25th August 2011 10:42 GMT

Free whitepaper – Watermelon metrics

CERN's 8,000 scientists may not be able to find the hypothetical Higgs boson, but they have made an important contribution to climate physics, prompting climate models to be revised.

The first results from the lab's CLOUD ("Cosmics Leaving OUtdoor Droplets") experiment published in Nature today confirm that cosmic rays spur the formation of clouds through ion-induced nucleation. Current thinking posits that half of the Earth's clouds are formed through nucleation. The paper is entitled Role of sulphuric acid, ammonia and galactic cosmic rays in atmospheric aerosol nucleation.

This has significant implications for climate science because water vapour and clouds play a large role in determining global temperatures. Tiny changes in overall cloud cover can result in relatively large temperature changes.

Unsurprisingly, it's a politically sensitive topic, as it provides support for a "heliocentric" rather than "anthropogenic" approach to climate change: the sun plays a large role in modulating the quantity of cosmic rays reaching the upper atmosphere of the Earth.

CERN's director-general Rolf-Dieter Heuer warned his scientists "to present the results clearly but not interpret them". Readers can judge whether CLOUD's lead physicist Jasper Kirkby has followed his boss's warning.

"Ion-induced nucleation will manifest itself as a steady production of new particles that is difficult to isolate in atmospheric observations because of other sources of variability but is nevertheless taking place and could be quite large when averaged globally over the troposphere."

Kirkby is quoted in the accompanying CERN press release:

"We've found that cosmic rays significantly enhance the formation of aerosol particles in the mid troposphere and above. These aerosols can eventually grow into the seeds for clouds. However, we've found that the vapours previously thought to account for all aerosol formation in the lower atmosphere can only account for a small fraction of the observations – even with the enhancement of cosmic rays."

The team used the Proton Synchotron accelerator (pictured here with Kirkby) to examine the nucleation using combinations of trace gasses at various temperatures, with precision. These first results confirm that cosmic rays increase the formation of cloud-nuclei by a factor of 10 in the troposphere, but additional trace gasses are needed nearer the surface.

Afbeelding
Cosmic ray particles don't just cause cloud nucleation, they also shrink the fonts CERN uses on its graphics...


Climate models will have to be revised, confirms CERN in supporting literature (pdf):

"t is clear that the treatment of aerosol formation in climate models will need to be substantially revised, since all models assume that nucleation is caused by these vapours [sulphuric acid and ammonia] and water alone.

The work involves over 60 scientists in 17 countries.

Veteran science editor Nigel Calder, who brought the theory to wide public attention with the book The Chilling Stars, co-authored with the father of the theory Henrik Svensmark, has an explanation and background on his blog, here, and offers possible reasons on why the research, mooted in the late 1990s, has taken so long.

Svensmark, who is no longer involved with the CERN experiment, says he believes the solar-cosmic ray factor is just one of four factors in climate. The other three are: volcanoes, a "regime shift" that took place in 1977, and residual anthropogenic components.

When Dr Kirkby first described the theory in 1998, he suggested cosmic rays "will probably be able to account for somewhere between a half and the whole of the increase in the Earth's temperature that we have seen in the last century."
Gebruikersavatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 15923
Lid geworden op: za 21 aug 2010, 21:27

za 17 sep 2011, 15:51

Zonnig
vrijdag 16 september 2011
http://www.stelling.nl/kleintje/actueel ... html#start


Volgende maand gaat er ergens achterin Engeland een ballon de lucht in. Met een maaltje helium in de buik en een slang van 1 kilometer eraan vast. Daarmee gaan bollebozen het antwoord zoeken op de vraag welk materiaal het beste is om in heule kleine deeltjes te verspreiden in de dampkring en zo het nodige zonlicht terug te kaatsen in de ruimte.
Waar dat voor nodig is? Nou, als je zonlicht terugspiegelt. wordt het hier niet zo warm en zet je het licht op rood voor die verrekte opwarming van de aarde.

O, u dacht dat die opwarming kwam van de open haard, de heilige en de gewone koeien, uw stekkers op stroom houden en meer van dat CO2-gemauw? Ja, wij ook. Maar laat het nou komen omdat de zon af en toe aan de vlammende schijterij raakt.

En hoe logisch is het dan om een scherm om de aarde aan te brengen om het effect van die schijterij te minimaliseren? Heel logisch. Als dat experiment lukt, zijn we dan meteen ook af van die CO2-belasting en die handel in emissierechten? Is de paus een Godfather?
Gebruikersavatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 15923
Lid geworden op: za 21 aug 2010, 21:27

za 17 sep 2011, 16:12

Nobel Prize-Winning Physicist Resigns Over Global Warming
Published September 14, 2011
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/09/ ... er-global/

The global warming theory left him out in the cold.

Dr. Ivar Giaever, a former professor with Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and the 1973 winner of the Nobel Prize in physics, abruptly announced his resignation Tuesday, Sept. 13, from the premier physics society in disgust over its officially stated policy that "global warming is occurring."

The official position of the American Physical Society (APS) supports the theory that man's actions have inexorably led to the warming of the planet, through increased emissions of carbon dioxide.

Giaever does not agree -- and put it bluntly and succinctly in the subject line of his email, reprinted at Climate Depot, a website devoted to debunking the theory of man-made climate change.

"I resign from APS," Giaever wrote.

Giaever was cooled to the statement on warming theory by a line claiming that "the evidence is incontrovertible."

"In the APS it is ok to discuss whether the mass of the proton changes over time and how a multi-universe behaves, but the evidence of global warming is incontrovertible?" he wrote in an email to Kate Kirby, executive officer of the physics society.

"The claim … is that the temperature has changed from ~288.0 to ~288.8 degree Kelvin in about 150 years, which (if true) means to me is that the temperature has been amazingly stable, and both human health and happiness have definitely improved in this 'warming' period," his email message said.

A spokesman for the APS confirmed to FoxNews.com that the Nobel Laureate had declined to pay his annual dues in the society and had resigned. He also noted that the society had no plans to revise its statement.

The use of the word "incontrovertible" had already caused debate within the group, so much so that an addendum was added to the statement discussing its use in April, 2010.

"The word 'incontrovertible' ... is rarely used in science because by its very nature, science questions prevailing ideas. The observational data indicate a global surface warming of 0.74 °C (+/- 0.18 °C) since the late 19th century."

Giaever earned his Nobel for his experimental discoveries regarding tunneling phenomena in superconductors. He has since become a vocal dissenter from the alleged “consensus” regarding man-made climate fears, Climate Depot reported, noting that he was one of more than 100 co-signers of a 2009 letter to President Obama critical of his position on climate change.

Public perception of climate change has steadily fallen since late 2009. A Rasmussen Reports public opinion poll from August noted that 57 percent of adults believe there is significant disagreement within the scientific community on global warming, up five points from late 2009.

The same study showed that 69 percent of those polled believe it’s at least somewhat likely that some scientists have falsified research data in order to support their own theories and beliefs. Just 6 percent felt confident enough to report that such falsification was "not at all likely."
Gebruikersavatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 15923
Lid geworden op: za 21 aug 2010, 21:27

di 11 okt 2011, 05:11

De zon vlamt weer. Geen strenge winters meer?
Geplaatst op: maandag 10 oktober 2011
Door: Monique Smits
http://welingelichtekringen.nl/15803-de ... -meer.html


Dat de twee afgelopen winters behoorlijk koud waren zou wel eens met de 11-jarige cyclus van zonneactiviteit te maken kunnen hebben, zeggen onderzoekers.
De zon hield zich de afgelopen jaren uitzonderlijk kalm. En dat kan de doorstroming van de lucht in de bovenste atmosfeer hebben beïnvloed. Hierdoor kon volgens wetenschappers een koude oostenwind over het noorden van Europa en de VS blazen.

Hoewel er volgens de onderzoekers sprake zou kunnen zijn van verschillende factoren die de recente koude winters hebben beïnvloed, zoals de afname van zee-ijs en El Niño, baseren ze hun onderzoek op satellietmetingen van UV-straling in de bovenste atmosfeer.
Nasa heeft geconstateerd dat de zon weer meer activiteiten vertoont. Dat kan de opmaat zijn tot een nieuw zonnemaximum, vermoedt Nasa – een periode waarin de zon weer feller gaat schijnen dan de afgelopen jaren.
Als dat zo is, zullen de komende winters misschien niet meer zo koud zijn als die van de afgelopen jaren, schrijven Britse meteorologen in Nature Geoscience.

Een Amerikaanse ruimtesonde nam dit jaar weer zonnevlammen waar. Uit de opnames blijkt dat zon weer vlamt na een periode van ongewone kalmte.


Bron: Nature Geoscience


als het afkoelt komt het door de zon,en als het opwarmt door co2. :wodan:
Gebruikersavatar
Het Dolle Eland
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 2527
Lid geworden op: zo 24 okt 2010, 17:26

di 11 okt 2011, 12:58

[quote=""combi" post=43134"]De zon vlamt weer. Geen strenge winters meer?
Geplaatst op: maandag 10 oktober 2011
Door: Monique Smits
http://welingelichtekringen.nl/15803-de ... -meer.html


Dat de twee afgelopen winters behoorlijk koud waren zou wel eens met de 11-jarige cyclus van zonneactiviteit te maken kunnen hebben, zeggen onderzoekers.
De zon hield zich de afgelopen jaren uitzonderlijk kalm. En dat kan de doorstroming van de lucht in de bovenste atmosfeer hebben beïnvloed. Hierdoor kon volgens wetenschappers een koude oostenwind over het noorden van Europa en de VS blazen.

Hoewel er volgens de onderzoekers sprake zou kunnen zijn van verschillende factoren die de recente koude winters hebben beïnvloed, zoals de afname van zee-ijs en El Niño, baseren ze hun onderzoek op satellietmetingen van UV-straling in de bovenste atmosfeer.
Nasa heeft geconstateerd dat de zon weer meer activiteiten vertoont. Dat kan de opmaat zijn tot een nieuw zonnemaximum, vermoedt Nasa – een periode waarin de zon weer feller gaat schijnen dan de afgelopen jaren.
Als dat zo is, zullen de komende winters misschien niet meer zo koud zijn als die van de afgelopen jaren, schrijven Britse meteorologen in Nature Geoscience.

Een Amerikaanse ruimtesonde nam dit jaar weer zonnevlammen waar. Uit de opnames blijkt dat zon weer vlamt na een periode van ongewone kalmte.


Bron: Nature Geoscience


als het afkoelt komt het door de zon,en als het opwarmt door co2. :wodan:
[/quote]


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Je meent het niet.....

Wat een bericht zegt!

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Gebruikersavatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 15923
Lid geworden op: za 21 aug 2010, 21:27

do 13 okt 2011, 01:33

CIA’s global warming center hidden from public, ignored by media
Jim Kouri, Law Enforcement Examiner

October 10, 2011

http://www.examiner.com/law-enforcement ... d-by-media

The government agency responsible for providing national security data to the nation’s senior policymakers, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), operates a special center dedicated to global warming, according to a recent report.

One complaint often heard privately within law enforcement circles is that the Central Intelligence Agency over the years has morphed into a liberal-left — or progressive — think tank rather than maintaining its role as a strategic and tactical intelligence agency.
An even bigger concern is that the agency has become overly politicized and prone to leaking information to the mainstream news media in order to have an impact upon the political climate within the Beltway.

The need to insulate intelligence from political pressure is a powerful argument for maintaining a strong, centralized capability and not leaving intelligence bearing on national concern up to individual policymaking departments. Competitive analysis of controversial questions can also help guard against politicization.
Advertisement

Competitive or redundant analysis needs to be carried out and conveyed to policymakers in those areas where being wrong can have major consequences. The leaders of the intelligence community must reinforce the ethic that speaking the truth to those in power is required, and defend anyone who comes under criticism for so doing even if it’s the Attorney General who is the critic.

However, the decision-makers at the CIA are once again failing to avoid politicization. That’s because CIA political appointees from the Obama Administration don’t want American citizens to know what goes on in its two-year-old Center on Climate Change and National Security.

So the exclusive unit, led by “senior specialists,” operates under a cloak of secrecy that rejects all public-records requests, despite President Obama’s promise to run a transparent government, according to a Judicial Watch blog..

When the center was launched in 2009, the CIA said it would not address the science of climate change but rather the national security impact of phenomena such as desertification, rising sea levels, population shifts and heightened competition for natural resources. The new division was touted as an important tool that would bring together in a single place expertise on an important national security topic; the effect environmental factors can have on political, economic and social stability overseas.

“Reasonably, some U.S. taxpayers want to know what exactly the center has been doing with their money. After all, Obama has repeatedly assured the country that he will run the most transparent administration in history. So why not reveal some of the CIA’s findings on the impacts of global warming? After all, the administration has dedicated huge amounts of money to combat the ills of global warming so why not make public some of the “intelligence” that could justify the investment?” asks the JW blogger.

“Because everything the CIA’s climate center does is a national security secret, according to a report published this month by a group of scientists dedicated to exposing government secrecy.”

The group Federation of American Scientists cites a categorical denial by the CIA to a benign Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for a copy of any study or report concerning the impacts of global warming. The request was made by an intelligence historian affiliated with the National Security Archive.

“If he was blown off, the average American would most certainly get the shaft from the CIA for its classified global warming records,” according to the Judicial Watch blog.

The group, the FAS, that exposed this story points out that the CIA’s response indicates a fundamental lack of discernment that calls into question the integrity of the Center on Climate Change, if not the agency as a whole. It further asks; if the CIA really thinks that every document produced by the center constitutes a potential threat to national security, who can expect the center to say anything intelligent or useful about climate change?

Interestingly, when the CIA global warming center opened the agency said it would coordinate with intelligence community partners on the review and declassification of imagery and other data that could be of use to scientists in their own climate-related research.

There are obvious reasons to doubt the value of the Center: It has adopted an extreme view of classification policy which holds that everything the Center does is a national security secret. Also, the CIA continues to morph into a secret society of Ivy League, ivory-tower dwellers.
Gebruikersavatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 15923
Lid geworden op: za 21 aug 2010, 21:27

zo 23 okt 2011, 19:08

:pope:

Nieuwe klap voor klimaatsceptici - goed nieuws voor liefhebbers van warmte
Geplaatst op: zaterdag 22 oktober 2011
Door: Gerard Driehuis
http://welingelichtekringen.nl/16016-ni ... tici2.html


De afgelopen week kwamen een paar nieuwe cijferreeksen beschikbaar over de temperatuurontwikkeling. Een daarvan was van een dissidente wetenschapper die een aantal jaren geleden, zwaar gesponsord door rechts Amerika, aan een eigen methode begon, die zou uitwijzen dat het helemaal niet warmer wordt en dat - als dat al zo zijn zijn - dat niet aan de mens ligt.
Hij is bekeerd: het wordt heel snel warmer, en het komt door de uitstoot van CO2.
Wie het niet geloofd, of er meer van wil weten 3 links: voor mensen die wantrouwig zijn is er het stuk in de Economist (het wordt warmer), voor neutrale lezers Mother Jones (Het wordt warmer) en voor de linkse kerk Think Progres (Het wordt warmer)

Afbeelding

Afbeelding

Afbeelding
Heb 't stuk in de Economist gelezen, daarin wordt duidelijk dat inderdaad met de alternatieve methode ook een flinke opwarming gemeten wordt. Echter, er wordt met geen woord gerept over de oorzaak van de opwarming. De conclusie dat het door de CO2 van de mens komt, is dus vooralsnog voorbarig. (Wat mij betreft in ieder geval).

Tevens vraag ik me af hoe ze met de berekeningen rekening gehouden hebben met het feit dat er (veel) meer meetstations op het noordelijk halfrond dan op het zuidelijk halfrond zijn. Dat probleem lijkt mij er nog steeds te zijn, er zijn gewoon nog te weinig meetpunten en zeker te weinig waar in vijftig jaar de omgeving niet flink veranderd is (lees: verstedelijkt is)
Lees voor meer kritiek de aanrader 'De staat van het klimaat' van Marcel Crok
Gebruikersavatar
Neut
Super QFF-er
Super QFF-er
Berichten: 1499
Lid geworden op: di 10 mei 2011, 15:32

zo 23 okt 2011, 19:39

Kijk eens in de spiegel en je ziet een co2 fabriek..
Gebruikersavatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 15923
Lid geworden op: za 21 aug 2010, 21:27

ma 31 okt 2011, 17:58

Joop Atsma liet bij beantwoordig kamervragen klimaatkosten méér miljarden weg; journalistiek faalt grotesk
september 20th, 2011
by Rypke Zeilmaker
http://climategate.nl/2011/09/20/klimaa ... inigingen/

Bij deze spreek ik als Climategater namens de koningin mijn welgemeende verontschuldigingen uit aan het Nederlandse volk. Mijn integriteit als blogger heb ik ernstig in diskrediet gebracht. Joop Atsma liet helemaal geen 8 miljard euro weg bij zijn beantwoording van Kamervragen over klimaatkosten, waardoor nieuwe Kamervragen volgden.

Het was meer dan 18 miljard euro dat hij wegsmokkelde, zo blijkt bij nauwkeuriger lezen van het rapport van de Algemene Rekenkamer uit 2010 ‘subsidieregelingen duurzame energieproductie’.

Ik was te optimistisch
Ik rekende namelijk alleen de SDE-tender mee van 8,1 miljard euro die ons kabinet besteedt aan windmolenbouwer Bard (5,3 miljard euro) het windpark bij Urk (0,88 miljard) en openstelling SDE 2010 (1,95 miljard), maar niet de betalingsverplichting van 8,4 miljard euro MEP-subsidie die nog loopt. De bruto MEP-subsidie die de Rekenkamer noemt is zelfs 10.2 miljard euro. Daarvan is tot 2008 al 2,2 miljard euro besteed: vooral aan biomassa.

Volkskrant mist klimaatkosten volledig
De Volkskrant mistte in haar vandaag gepubliceerde enquete aan Nederlanders over de vraag ‘waarop wil je bezuinigen’de hele post van klimaatkosten volledig. Terwijl bezuinigingen overbodig waren als de klimaathype onze bestuurders niet had gegrepen.

‘Schoon en Zuinig, Nieuwe Energie voor het Klimaat‘
Ik kon me eenvoudig niet voorstellen dat Atsma zo’n groot bedrag – 18 miljard euro- wegliet, en dat ons land werkelijk zoveel geld besteedde aan klimaatbezwering/ Europese doelstellingen voor 20 procent ‘duurzame’energie. Ik dacht daarom uit optimisme dat de MEP in SDE was opgegaan.

Dikke klimaatjes
Maar een optimist is een slecht geinformeerde pessimist. Die SDE is er in de jaren Cramer BIJgekomen, onder het programma ‘Schoon en Zuinig’: nieuwe energie voor het klimaat. Dat klikt toch heel erg klimaatkosterig? Van dat miljardenbal is Arjan Dikmans programmadirecteur, de voormalig directeur van Rotterdam Climate Initiative. Dikmans is het pinautomaatje van Jan Paul van Soest. Van je klimaatjes moet je het hebben.


De SDE-tender is een NIEUWE regeling die NAAST MEP loopt. De MEP loopt nog tot 2017. De SDE wordt bekostigd via opslag op uw energierekening en is dus een directe aanslag op uw koopkracht/belastingverhoging.

koopkrachtdaling is dus geheel te wijten aan klimaatbeleid
De Telegraaf opent met chocoladeletters dat ‘de Koopkracht nog verder daalt dan gedacht’.Rara, hoe kán dat toch? Ligt men te slapen? Ik kan dit bericht aan de straatstenen niet kwijt bij de oude media. We tonen hier niets minder dan het falen van de journalistiek, om hier op zijn minst vragen over te stellen. Zoals Marcel dat ook al bij berichtgeving over klimaat deed in zijn De Staat van het Klimaat: het beste klimaatboek sinds Kroonenberg.

Duurzaam is Zuurzaam
Niettemin, namens de majesteit bied ik u – lieve melkkoeien- mijn welgemeende verontschuldigingen aan voor deze flagrante schending van mijn integriteit. (ik heb nu even een hete aardappel in de keel) Ik had die 8,4 miljard euro extra nog te besteden euro’s niet moeten weglaten. Ik ben Joop Atsma ook niet (een ex-journalist)maar een ordinaire blogger

Dus laten we duurzame energie voortaan bij haar echte naam noemen. Zuurzame energie. En ons troosten met de gedachte dat we nu een schoon geweten hebben gekocht.

Aanverwante berichten:

Financieele Dagblad vindt verdwenen 18 miljard euro klimaatsubsidies geen nieuws
Proces begint tegen fraudeurs emissierechten voor 5 miljard euro
NKPW: ’9 miljard euro gemeenschapsgeld gone with the wind’
Wat zou u voor Nederland doen met 5,1 miljard Euro?
Kabinet zicht volledig kwijt op kosten klimaatbeleid
Gebruikersavatar
dodeca
Super QFF-er
Super QFF-er
Berichten: 1297
Lid geworden op: zo 28 aug 2011, 19:54

ma 31 okt 2011, 18:50

ook best loopt de boel te besodemieteren.

BEST = Blatant Effort to Sabotage Truth.

zie bericht van combi: Nieuwe klap voor klimaatsceptici

...achgut het wordt een klap voor best

Scientist who said climate change sceptics had been proved wrong accused of hiding truth by colleague

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... eague.html

lees er alles over: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/10/29/u ... more-50286

lees ook eens voor de gein de reacties!

zijn er nog mensen op de planeet die NIET de boel besodemieteren? Wie het weet maile mij pfffffffffffff!!!!!!!!!
Gebruikersavatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 15923
Lid geworden op: za 21 aug 2010, 21:27

vr 04 nov 2011, 19:14

Major berg forming in Antarctica
By Jonathan Amos Science correspondent, BBC News

3 November 2011 Last updated at 18:51 GMT
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15580679


Scientists are monitoring the birth of a monster iceberg in West Antarctica.

A rift has formed in the shelf of floating ice in front of the Pine Island Glacier (PIG).

The surface crack in the PIG runs for almost 30km (20 miles), is 60m (200ft) deep and is growing every day.

US space agency (Nasa) researchers expect the eventual berg to cover about 880 sq km - an area the size of Berlin. It should break away towards the end of the year or early in 2012.

Pine Island Glacier is one of the largest and fastest-moving tongues of ice on the White Continent and drains something like 10% of all the ice flowing out of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet into the ocean.

In recent years, satellite and airborne measurements have recorded a marked thinning of the PIG, which may be related to climate changes.

But the team working on Nasa's IceBridge project say this latest birthing of a giant berg is part of a natural cycle seen every 10 years or so on the glacier.

"The last big calving event occurred in 2001 so in general people have been expecting something like this to happen fairly soon, and for us it is very exciting to see this while it is happening," said IceBridge project scientist Dr Michael Studinger.

An iceberg of the size expected will need to be monitored carefully, and not just because it could eventually become a hazard to shipping.

The biggest bergs can have a major impact on their surroundings.
Map of Antarctica showing Pine Island Glacier

As they crumble and melt, they dump millions of tonnes of freshwater into the local marine environment. Dust and rock fragments picked up on land act as nutrients when they fall into the ocean, fuelling life such as algae and diatoms right at the bottom of food webs. But these huge tabular blocks can also put obstacles in the way of animals trying to get to familiar feeding grounds.

"Eventually, the iceberg will move further north; it will be picked up by wind and ocean currents - and the primary ocean current there is the Antarctic Circumpolar Current. We will certainly be following it," Dr Studinger told BBC News.

IceBridge is running a series of instrumented airborne campaigns to measure the thickness of ice in Earth's polar regions. The "bridge" in its name refers to the data that must be gathered to fill the gap between Nasa's now defunct Icesat laser altimeter spacecraft and the future Icesat-2 mission due to come into operation later this decade
Gebruikersavatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 15923
Lid geworden op: za 21 aug 2010, 21:27

vr 04 nov 2011, 22:48

scientists call it the largest source of uncertainty in global sea level rise projections ===> als ik het goed begrijp drijft die ijsklont al in het water dus ....

Huge 18-mile crack in glacier opens – and New York-sized iceberg is ready to split off
Last updated at 4:33 PM on 3rd November 2011
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... opens.html


A New York-sized glacier is about to break off from Pine Island, a huge 30-mile ‘tongue’ of ice snaking out from the Hudson Mountains to the Amundsen Sea.

After an eighteen-mile long crack in the ice was photographed by NASA’s Operation Ice Bridge last month, the scientists have flown a follow-up mission over the ‘calving’ iceberg.

The result is the first-ever detailed 3D measurements of a new iceberg ‘being born’

Afbeelding
A crack forms across the Pine Island glacier – the first sign that a huge iceberg is in the process of breaking off

Afbeelding
A close-up of the crack forming in the glacier at Pine Island. NASA’s repeat journey to the glacier has meant that the scientists have the first-ever opportunity to observe the birth of such a huge iceberg

‘We are actually now witnessing how it happens and it’s very exciting for us,’ said Ice Bridge project scientist Michael Studinger, Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md.

‘To my knowledge, no one has flown a 3D laser imaging instrument over an actively developing rift such as this.’

Pine Island Glacier last calved a significant iceberg in 2001, and some scientists have speculated recently that it was primed to calve again.

But until an Oct. 14 IceBridge flight of NASA’s DC-8, no one had seen any evidence of the ice shelf beginning to break apart. Satellite imagery seems to show the first signs of the crack in early October.

Pine Island has scientists’ attention because it is both big and unstable – scientists call it the largest source of uncertainty in global sea level rise projections. But the calving underway is part of a natural process, NASA says.

Afbeelding
After scientists detected the crack by overflying it in a DC-8 plane, NASA has looked back at satellite imagery and found that the crack has been developing for up to a month

Afbeelding
The scientists say that no one has ever flown a 3D imaging tool over an iceberg of such a size as it’s born

The team diverted their DC-8 back over the glacier for a return scannnng mission.

The IceBridge team observed the rift running across the ice shelf for about 18 miles. The Airborne Topographic Mapper makes its precision topography maps with a laser than scans 360 degrees 20 times per second, while firing 3,000 laser pulses per second.

When flying at an altitude of 3,000 feet, as during this flight, it measures a swath of the surface about 1,500 feet wide. The rift is 250 feet wide along most of its length – so the veteran DC-8 pilot had a tricky job to keep the plane straigth along the rift.

In places, the rift is already 800 feet wide.

When the iceberg breaks free it will cover about 340 square miles (880 square kilometers) of surface area.

Radar measurements suggested the ice shelf in the region of the rift is about 1,640 feet (500 meters) feet thick, with only about 160 feet of that floating above water and the rest submerged.

It is likely that once the iceberg floats away, the leading edge of the ice shelf will have receded farther than at any time since its location was first recorded in the 1940s.

‘A lot of times when you’re in science, you don’t get a chance to catch the big stories as they happen because you’re not there at the right place at the right time,’ said John Sonntag, Instrument Team Lead for Operation IceBridge, based at Goddard Space Flight Center. ‘But this time we were.’
Gebruikersavatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 15923
Lid geworden op: za 21 aug 2010, 21:27

do 24 nov 2011, 00:42

Watts Up With That?
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/22/climategate-2-0/


Climategate 2.0 emails – They’re real and they’re spectacular!
Posted on November 22, 2011 by News Staff

A better link to where to download the new FOIA2011.zip file is posted below the fold – This will be a top post for a few days -NEW STORIES APPEAR BELOW THIS ONE – Anthony

UPDATE: 8:20 AM PST These emails have not been verified yet, and this story was posted by one of my moderating staff while I was asleep. Until such time they are verified, tread lightly because without knowing what is behind the rest of the zip file, for all we know it’s a bunch of recipes and collection of lorem ipsum text files. I’m working to authenticate these now and will report when I know more – Anthony Watts

UPDATE2: 8:45AM PST The Guardian has a story up by Leo Hickman, and this excerpt suggests they may be the real deal:

Norfolk police have said the new set of emails is “of interest” to their investigation to find the perpetrator of the initial email release who has not yet been identified.

The emails appear to be genuine, but this has yet to be confirmed by the University of East Anglia. One of the emailers, the climate scientist Prof Michael Mann, has confirmed that he believes they are his messages.

UPDATE3: 9:25 AM PST – Having read a number of emails, and seeing this quote from Mike Mann in the Guardian:

When asked if they were genuine, he said: “Well, they look like mine but I hardly see anything that appears damning at all, despite them having been taken out of context. I guess they had very little left to work with, having culled in the first round the emails that could most easily be taken out of context to try to make me look bad.”

I’m going to conclude they are the real deal. I’ve posted a BitTorrent link to the file below. One big difference between Climategate 1 and 2 is that in 1, it took days for the MSM to catch on, now they are on top of it.

UPDATE4: 9:45 AM PST I’ve changed the headline from Climategate 2.0 to Climategate 2.0 emails – They’re real and they’re spectacular! with a hat tip to Jerry Seinfeld. The relevance of that headline is particularly interesting in the context of where Dr. James Hansen of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) has his office in NYC.

UPDATE 5: 11:00AM PST In a statement, UEA doesn’t deny these emails, but posts about the whitewash investigations of the past, like they matter now.

UPDATE6: 12:08PM PST Here’s an email that collaborates a radio interview I did in Seattle with Thomas Peterson in summer 2007, yes these are 100% real emails, no doubt whatsoever now. More here: Climategate 2.0 – NCDC: “Mr. Watts gave a well reasoned position”

UPDATE7: 1:20 PM PST Phil Jones and Tom Wigley calls another scientist (The former state climatologist of California) a “jerk” for publishing his UHI results.

UPDATE8: 140PM PST Mike Mann shows his true colors:

email 1680.txt

date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:03:05 -0400
from: “Michael E. Mann”..
subject: Re: Something not to pass on
to: Phil Jones
Phil,

I would not respond to this. They will misrepresent and take out of context anything you give them. This is a set up. They will certainly publish this, and will ignore any evidence to the contrary that you provide. s They are going after Wei-Chyung because he’s U.S. and there is a higher threshold for establishing libel. Nonetheless, he should
consider filing a defamation lawsuit, perhaps you too.

I have been talking w/ folks in the states about finding an investigative journalist to investigate and expose McIntyre, and his thusfar unexplored connections with fossil fuel interests.Perhaps the same needs to be done w/ this Keenan guy.

I believe that the only way to stop these people is by exposing them and discrediting them….

UPDATE9: 2:25PM PST Josh weighs in with the first satirical cartoon here

UPDATE10: 4:30PM PST Some thoughts on cracking the big remaining all.7z file here

UPDATE11: 4:45PM PST Kevin Trenberth gets all misty eyed and sing-songy at Christmas here

UPDATE 12: 9:30 PM PST We’ve known for some time that Al Gore made up a bunch of claims in his AIT movie that simply weren’t true. Now this revelation in the new email batch shows that in the case of Kilimanjaro’s disappearing snows, even Phil Jones and Dr. Lonnie Thompson don’t believe global warming is the cause, even though Thompson put out a press release nearly a year ago saying just that. Told ya so. Pants on fire and all that. Anything for “the cause” right?

UPDATE13: 12:05AM 11/23 Craig Stone writes:

I have published a searchable database of the emails at http://foia2011.org

All email addresses and phone numbers are automatically redacted. It’s extremely rudimentary right now, but I’ll be refining the functionality and improving the search capabilities and navigation over the course of the next week.

UPDATE14: 2:45 AM PST 11/23 Willis Eschenbach offer a guest post here explaining how his FOIA requests went astray. Mr. David Palmer was the Freedom of Information Officer for the CRU at the time. In the newly released emails, he expresses his frustration with the whole procedure.

UPDATE: 15: 7:50AM 11/23 Ric Werme found an email from the late John L. Daly to Mike Mann and the team – it is well worth a read here – Anthony
Gebruikersavatar
Qvic
Senior QFF-er
Senior QFF-er
Berichten: 101
Lid geworden op: za 07 mei 2011, 22:51

do 24 nov 2011, 06:33

Weet je waarmee de mens mee helpt om de aarde (landmassa) mee opwarmt?
Door kunstmatige turbulentie te veroorzaken, hierdoor rem je de windsnelheid, die anders door de snelheid van de wind juist afkoelt. Dit doen we door o.a. met vliegtuigen in de lucht met alle transportmiddelen over land en zee, windmolens op het land en in zee, hoge gebouwen en eigenlijk alle bebouwingen en met energie opwekkingen. En niet te vergeten de kunstmatige opgewekte frequenties zoals radio, TV, GSM e.d. Daarom is het in steden warmer dan in het buitengebied, maar daar hoor je niets over in de reguliere media. Mede omdat deze informatie de cooperaties tegen zouden werken i.p.v. alle schuld op de burgers kunnen schuiven met daar aan verbonden de extra belastingen. Bossen zorgen voor de natuurlijke turbulentie, maar zijn tevens ook de natuurlijke water oppompers, vandaar een tropische bos zo vochtig is.
Tevens door het veelvoudig gebruik van de HAARP installaties over de wereld die kunstmatig nu het weer enigszins zijn gaan bepalen, ontstaat er een manmade klimaat, alleen dit hebben ze nog niet helemaal 100% in de hand, want de natuur zelf speelt ook nog een hoofdrol in. Dit is ook een reden waarom het IPCC ons nu al waarschuwd over extreem weer. (alleen zeggen ze niet dat ze zelf aan de knoppen zitten, die dat extreme weer veroorzaken)
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: FreeElectron
Omhoog
Gebruikersavatar
blackbox
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 6239
Lid geworden op: za 21 aug 2010, 16:09

do 24 nov 2011, 06:36

:blink: ..thx Qvic!...geeft inderdaad te denken.
illuminati of my own reality
Plaats reactie

Terug naar “Wetenschap”