EnviroLink Forum http://www.envirolink.org/forum/ |
|
Runaway warming http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=24792 |
Page 2 of 6 |
Author: | Wayne Stollings [ Tue Jan 13, 2015 6:56 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Runaway warming |
Author: | Dingo [ Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:44 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Runaway warming |
Author: | Wayne Stollings [ Wed Jan 14, 2015 8:36 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Runaway warming |
Author: | Dingo [ Thu Jan 15, 2015 2:56 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Runaway warming |
If the whole business of runaway warming is subjective, obscure and unprovable then why assert it? It seems the concept simply lends itself to the one criticism that seems to stick to a lot of folks associated with promoting concern for AGW; some seem to have an addiction to catastrophic scenarios beyond what the evidence presents. Again, it doesn't have to be Wayne, but if anyone can steer me to scientifically sound evidence for a self-generated runaway scenario I'd be interested in seeing it. Wayne wants to make it about me but as far as evidence he comes up with nothing. |
Author: | Johhny Electriglide [ Thu Jan 15, 2015 4:29 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Runaway warming |
Author: | Wayne Stollings [ Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:47 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Runaway warming |
Author: | Dingo [ Thu Jan 15, 2015 6:33 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Runaway warming |
Author: | Dingo [ Thu Jan 15, 2015 7:25 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Runaway warming |
Since the sudden burst of methane is the scenario that is generally presented by the runaway catastrophe folks this link from the National Academy of Sciences that JE offered is interesting. They pretty much have warming causing methane to dribble out over a long period of time, consistent with a more normal feedback scenario, not a runaway scenario. Read it at your leisure. http://www.pnas.org/content/106/49/20596.full |
Author: | Wayne Stollings [ Thu Jan 15, 2015 7:54 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Runaway warming |
Author: | Wayne Stollings [ Thu Jan 15, 2015 8:11 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Runaway warming |
Author: | Snowy123 [ Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:13 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Runaway warming |
I agree with Dingo. Runaway warming would imply that the equilibrium climate sensitivity would be much higher than the accepted mainstream values between 1.5 and 4.5 K/doubling. Positive feedbacks eventually reach an equilibrium. Each additional "loop" becomes weaker than the positive feedback loop before it. If an initial increase of Carbon Dioxide caused 1.5 K of warming, and positive feedbacks from that initial warming caused an additional 0.8 K, then those additional positive feedbacks from the warming would cause an additional 0.4 K, and those would cause additional warming of 0.2 K, then 0.1 K, 0.05 K, 0.025 K etc. So even though net feedbacks are weakly to strongly positive in the climate system, runaway warming is unlikely. This is why we get a value between 1.5 to 4.5 K for ECS, and not infinity Kelvin. And there are additional positive feedbacks that we have yet to uncover, like the permafrost feedback. But those would work in the same way as described above. |
Author: | Snowy123 [ Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:15 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Runaway warming |
I don't like linking to blogs, but Skeptical Science has a really good article on why net positive feedback does not imply runaway warming. http://www.skepticalscience.com/positiv ... vanced.htm |
Author: | Wayne Stollings [ Thu Jan 15, 2015 10:53 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Runaway warming |
Author: | Wayne Stollings [ Thu Jan 15, 2015 10:58 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Runaway warming |
Author: | Dingo [ Fri Jan 16, 2015 4:36 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Runaway warming |
Page 2 of 6 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |