Climate Prediction for the Next Thirty Years.

[arabian knight]

2. Climate Prediction for the Next Thirty Years.
Based on the SSRC’s Relational Cycle Theory (RC Theory) using natural cycles as a means for climate prediction and in view of the trends demonstrated by the twenty four global climate parameters, the following climate prediction is believed to be the most accurate available for the period of 2015 to 2044:
a. Highly variable and extreme weather events are expected during the transition from the past warm period to one of rapid global cooling.
b. This next climate change to a long and deep cold era is expected to last for at least the next thirty to forty years.
c. The extent and depth of the cold weather produced in this new climate era is estimated to be the worst in over two hundred years producing a global temperature reduction of 1.0 to 1.5 degrees centigrade.
3. Likely Future Climate Scenarios.
The SSRC believes existing climate change indicators support the assessment that a new potentially dangerous cold climate age has begun. It should be emphasized that unless a significant unexpected and rapid change in the present declining solar activity trend occurs, there are only two climate scenarios that appear likely at this time over the next forty years. Each scenario results in a new cold climate era:
a. Scenario 1. A solar hibernation similar to the Dalton Minimum (1793-1830). This would result in routine establishment of new 200 year cold weather records.

http://spaceandscience.net/sitebuild...assessment.pdf

[kasilofhome]

So...in short NORMALCY in exspected. Yes, Virginia.....when there is no change then that would be abnormal.

It is better to have the ability to have energy to cool when needed and warm when need. To have light for dark times and no light when light is provided by the sun.

Adaption is the key to survival.....never let a greenie take tools away that will allow for adapting to normally expected future realistic changes.

[Fennick]

I'm ambivalent and I don't care to speculate about if the planet is going into rapid cooling or rapid warming. I'll just take a wait and see attitude about it and try to deal with whatever happens. I admit I would prefer warming to cooling.

If it's rapid cooling happening then I think that would be a civilization killer in some locations since many aspects of daily life, growth and industry that are taken for granted in today's first world societies will come to a stand still. Certainly starvation will kill off huge populations of humans, animals and plant life in the northern hemisphere. If rapid cooling means many more months annually of snow and ice and short, cold summers every year it will be interesting to see if people with means can adapt and survive without making an exodus to equatorial zones.

It will go hard for people who are accustomed to an easier way of life and aren't able to migrate to warmer regions. To not be able to use their cars, to not construct or repair things, to have industry impeded nor be able to grow food and livestock because of many more months and months of deep snow and sub-zero temperatures every year will be devestating.

Perhaps the surviving civilization that remains will survive by moving underground?

[kasilofhome]

Cars do drive at minus fifty....now,I'll give you that warm tires can melt and freeze to the road while at a stop light but everyone just rocks roles and goes on in Fairbanks each winter.

Who knows maybe palm trees will once again for here...perhaps the bread basket will be alaska.....but because of oilers and coal more people will likely love should the winter's of the mid 1800s return

[Fennick]

Originally Posted by kasilofhome

Cars do drive at minus fifty

That's not what I meant. In order for cars to drive in sub-zero and deep snow winter conditions they have to have a ploughed and cleared surface to drive on. That means there needs to be more snow removal equipment. That's easy for a little town like Fairbanks to deal with, population is less than 35,000 and plenty of snow removal equipment is already there to meet the population's needs.

But you take the population of the rest of the continent and the number of cars presently on the road - that's in the hundreds of millions. If the whole continent gets snowed in with 6 feet of snow for 7 to 9 months of every year then there will be a need for snow removal equipment nation wide.

How long will it take to manufacture that much equipment to meet the demand? How much other industry will have to get put on hold to meet the demands of people who want to drive vehicles in snow to get to work each day for 9 months of the year?

What will be more important - producing transportation for the general population, or manufacturing shelter and producing food and livestock grown under cover for the general population? There will be a lot of priorities that will have to get shifted around and that will include prioritizing transportation for the movement of food, not for people.

[kasilofhome]

You are right....the change of nature will benefit use it brings new meaning to shovel ready jobs.

[arabian knight]

Originally Posted by Fennick

How long will it take to manufacture that much equipment to meet the demand? How much other industry will have to get put on hold to meet the demands of people who want to drive vehicles in snow to get to work each day for 9 months of the year?

Well maybe what will happen like it did during war time. many manufacturers quit making domestic products and made products for war.
Take for example Presto how many here over the years had a Presto Pressure Cooker?
Well that factory went into the making of shells for the war.
And at the headquarters in Chippewa Falls, Wi. They never went back to making any Presto cookware products again. Still make shells and have a basement full of them to this day.
As a side note. I went to apply for work there back in the late 60's but the shells were very heavy and I did not weigh enough and was turned down.

[Oxankle]

A major climate change such as is predicted will result in a population shift. People will want to move South, business will move South. Agriculture will have to adapt, Oats instead of wheat, Barley, cold-weather grains. Sheep instead of cattle, Highland cattle instead of Brahman, long-haired pigs, apples instead of oranges. I hate to think of eating beets and rutabagas and cabbages when I could be eating peppers and watermelon and Summer squashes.

[Sawmill Jim]

At present I would be happy if they could just get the forecast right two days in a row or even one

[JJ Grandits]

The big question is what kind of mind numbing tax will fix this? I'm sure there's one planned.

[Darren]

That prediction fits the other reports/observations elsewhere on the internet. More than a few scientists have been trying to tell people that the Sun is entering a minimum period. It would be worthwhile to read about what happened during the last Little Ice Age.

With the media completely over the cliff promoting AGW, a lot of people are still being influenced by the mob mentality. At least those with a lick of sense can make a change. Forty years is a long time. Hopefully the cooling period will not last that long. My gut says it will be longer and eventually colder.

Those folks that were worried about the poor polar bears might get a thrill decades from now when they find one rooting through their trash in the lower 48. That would be a bite in the .

Just remember Gore is a four letter word.

[Darren]

This is from 2013. The word that's finally getting out isn't new.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/10/2...ittle-ice-age/

[greg273]

Originally Posted by kasilofhome

Who knows maybe palm trees will once again for here...perhaps the bread basket will be alaska.....but because of oilers and coal more people will likely love should the winter's of the mid 1800s return

The last time palm trees were in Alaska was 50million years ago, during the Eocene, a time of much hotter temperatures globally, when the CO2 levels in the atmosphere were around 700-900PPM,sometimes spiking even higher. Who knows, if we keep doing what we're doing, we may exceed that level sometime in the not too distant future, and your decendants can have coconuts in Wasilla.

[Darren]

Originally Posted by greg273

The last time palm trees were in Alaska was 50million years ago, during the Eocene, a time of much hotter temperatures globally, when the CO2 levels in the atmosphere were around 700-900PPM,sometimes spiking even higher. Who knows, if we keep doing what we're doing, we may exceed that level sometime in the not too distant future, and your decendants can have coconuts in Wasilla.

That's impossible, Greg. Mankind wasn't pumping CO2 into the atmosphere 50 million years ago. How could CO2 levels have been 700-900 ppm? Aliens? Maybe mastodon farts?

[poppy]

Originally Posted by greg273

The last time palm trees were in Alaska was 50million years ago, during the Eocene, a time of much hotter temperatures globally, when the CO2 levels in the atmosphere were around 700-900PPM,sometimes spiking even higher. Who knows, if we keep doing what we're doing, we may exceed that level sometime in the not too distant future, and your decendants can have coconuts in Wasilla.

It would take a while. Where are we now, about 3 ppm or so? I know it fluctuates constantly. The amount produced by nature dwarfs anything man does.

[arabian knight]

Originally Posted by Darren

That's impossible Greg. Mankind wasn't pumping CO2 into the atmosphere 50 million years ago. How could CO2 levels have been 700-900 ppm? Aliens? Maybe mastodon farts?

And the records that are breaking for the last two years are the ones going back into the 1880's Now what was going on THEN? No cars~! The population of the US was 2/3 of what it is today. I know horse poops. And if the records went back further they were then mashed 100 years before but they don't so nobody will ever know..
Yuppers same old same old and it is happening once again.

[kasilofhome]

Instead of doing rain dances.....today the there are those who picket oil and coal. Falsely believing that that man is the ruler of nature.

[greg273]

Originally Posted by poppy

It would take a while. Where are we now, about 3 ppm or so? I know it fluctuates constantly. The amount produced by nature dwarfs anything man does.

3 ppm? lol We're closer to 380PPM. And again, you seem confused about the man vs. nature thing. We're not talking about the total CO2 flux... the annual change that occurs when plants grow, take up CO2, and die, releasing it. This amounts to a truly gargantuan amount of CO2, and yes, THAT indeed 'dwarfs mans contribution'. What you fail to understand is, by releasing stored CO2 in the form of fossil fuels, we are ADDING to that natural flux, year after year, steadily increasing the amount of free CO2 in the air. The plants and oceans can only absorb so much of this new CO2, and in the case of plants, they only hold it for a season before giving it right back up to the atmosphere.
This CO2 is like an invisible blanket... transparent to visible light, but opaque to re-emitted thermal radiation.

[greg273]

Originally Posted by kasilofhome

Instead of doing rain dances.....today the there are those who picket oil and coal. Falsely believing that that man is the ruler of nature.

Nobody said man was the ruler of nature, only that our actions have consequences.

[greg273]

Originally Posted by Darren

That's impossible, Greg. Mankind wasn't pumping CO2 into the atmosphere 50 million years ago. How could CO2 levels have been 700-900 ppm? Aliens? Maybe mastodon farts?

The higher CO2 levels in the Eocene were caused by weathering and exposure of carbon rocks and outgassing of volcanoes as carbon rocks were subducted and spit out as magma and gas. Again, that is not relevant to the current situation, where volcanoes outgas roughly 300million tons of CO2 into the atmosphere... and humans, through burning of fossil fuels, account for 30 BILLION tons per YEAR. Thats anywhere from 100- 300 times the amount volcanoes are producing.

Earth’s land and ocean surfaces sit on several moving crustal plates. When the plates collide, one sinks beneath the other, and the rock it carries melts under the extreme heat and pressure. The heated rock recombines into silicate minerals, releasing carbon dioxide. When volcanoes erupt, they vent the gas to the atmosphere and cover the land with fresh silicate rock to begin the cycle again. At present, volcanoes emit between 130 and 380 million metric tons of carbon dioxide per year. For comparison, humans emit about 30 billion tons of carbon dioxide per year—100–300 times more than volcanoes—by burning fossil fuels.

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Fea...ycle/page2.php