A feed updated every time new reader comments are added to Almanac.com http://www.almanac.com/rss/index.php Tue, 07 Oct 2008 19:13:16 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.2 http://www.almanac.com/ofa/blogs/everything/globalwarm Thanks Janice, The question is about whether more co2 will differentially warm the atmosphere - warmer aloft relative to the surface and how this might lessen rain induced flooding when the earth naturally cools a great deal well into the future. I vaguely recall an article about how man's co2 might mitigate flooding far into the future as as the anticipated natural and substantial cooling occurs. I don't recall the author of the article nor the exact edition of the OFA My best guess is the 2003 edition give or take an edition. The article suggested possible near term glaciation. Of course, I could be entirely mistaken. The term "solar derived convection" is my term which is a lame term because there is only one kind of convection in the atmosphere, and that is generated from the sun. Yankee Publishing (rss@ypi.com) Tue, 07 Oct 2008 20:58:30 +0100 http://www.almanac.com/ofa/blogs/everything/globalwarm Bravo to you who can follow this; it is over my head, literally and figuratively, so I will add only this: Without a specific reference to an issue year and an article, preferably a page or graph, I do not understand the point or question. Sorry. I do not recall that we used the term "solar derived convection" in any context, nor addressed the molecular weight of CO2. We have published a number of articles in recent years re climate change [CC] that may or may not resolve your question(s), including in 2006: CC: The story behind the headlines?five factors that play a role (computer models, solar cycles, ash and aerosols, ocean currents, and greenhouse effects); and in 2007: the "good news" about CC?"advantages" of warm conditions. At present those articles exist only in print. During a Web site design that is now underway, we hope to have them available electronically. We will make that news available at the appropriate time. Perhaps the information available through the links at the conclusion of the Global Cooling story or other Google searches will help clarify your points. Thanks for your comments. Yankee Publishing (rss@ypi.com) Mon, 06 Oct 2008 16:45:43 +0100 http://www.almanac.com/ofa/blogs/everything/globalwarm I may have misrepresented the OFA article on co2 and more rain as the earth cools. Now that I have jogged my memory, I believe the article stated that more co2 would be better because it would warm the upper air more than air near the surface thereby moderating convection and rainfall. Less risk of flooding. I believe this requires some amount of solar derived convection given that co2 is neither a heavy nor a light molecule by weight. Can anyone set the record straight on the article I'm referring to? Yankee Publishing (rss@ypi.com) Sun, 05 Oct 2008 19:49:19 +0100 http://www.almanac.com/ofa/blogs/everything/globalwarm On the scientific side, there is no doubt that more co2 causes vegetation to grow faster with more leafy surface area. This increases transpiration which increases atmospheric water vapor...predicated on nominal air temperature. Soils dry faster. Of course, the sun is still the most potent factor in this more rapid carbon cycle. I think Doug Grandt summed it up best. Besides, I read in a recent edition of the OFA that if the planet cools which it seems to be doing slightly, the cooling is top-down. Cold over warm is a recipe for a lot of flooding rainfall. It's what the OFA stated. Unbridled human co2 may not be a losing proposition but I don't see how anyone can say it's a winning one based on more arable land. Too many uknowns. Too much risk. Yankee Publishing (rss@ypi.com) Sun, 05 Oct 2008 19:20:12 +0100 http://www.almanac.com/ofa/blogs/everything/globalwarm Whoaa. Too many pious posts here on what should be a scientific debate! No hope. No hope! Yankee Publishing (rss@ypi.com) Sun, 05 Oct 2008 19:05:05 +0100 http://www.almanac.com/ofa/blogs/everything/globalwarm Genesis 8:22 says: "As long as the earth endures, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night will never cease." No global warming or cooling catastrophes predicted in the Bible. If you believe that the Bible is God's Word then there should be no big concerns over global warming or cooling. Indeed, many scientists say that CO2 increases FOLLOW warming, not precede it. All of the warming and cooling of the last century plus is within "normal" parameter's. The Earth has been cold and the Earth has been warm. So it shall be until the end of the Earth. You have God's Word on it! Yankee Publishing (rss@ypi.com) Sun, 05 Oct 2008 13:12:11 +0100 http://www.almanac.com/ofa/blogs/everything/blueberries Thank you for the nice articles on blueberries. I have just this year planted about 10 blueberry bushes. There are several varities and at least 4 died despite great care and a wet summer. I need to know a good reliable variety because I must already have several varities. Some are growing great but other seem to be standing still. I live in the Toronto area. Yankee Publishing (rss@ypi.com) Wed, 01 Oct 2008 01:51:00 +0100 http://www.almanac.com/ofa/blogs/everything/globalwarm "God created the heavens and the earth and it will continue to thrive with or without us." (Karri) Which do we prefer, WITH us or WITHOUT us? ... and by "us" we mean "human beings". Yankee Publishing (rss@ypi.com) Wed, 24 Sep 2008 20:39:32 +0100 http://www.almanac.com/ofa/blogs/everything/globalwarm A few observations: I see vegetation growing faster undoubtedly from co2 nourishment contributed by human emission of co2. I see my neighbors tired of cutting their lawns and relegating this chore to landscape companies who emit even more co2. I see what appears to be a positive feedback loop of co2 and plant growth...potentially drying our soil faster and making our air more humid. Of course temperature is part of the cycle that contributes to plant growth and transpiration. Thankfully the temperatures this summer were not too high. On a personal note: I'm partial to a hospitable climate that is not tugged by man one way or another...which means I don't like the global experiment with co2 I believe this a reasonable position for anyone to take. Yankee Publishing (rss@ypi.com) Wed, 24 Sep 2008 17:42:21 +0100 http://www.almanac.com/ofa/blogs/everything/globalwarm It would be nice if God were our salvation as in the world of vp select Sarah Palin and many like her. Clearly the matters of co2 buildup and environmental degradation require more than waiting for God's intervention. I guess it was God that introduced the asian long-horned beetle that is menacing the hardwoods in central MA. I suppose if we blame everything on God, He will eventually get the message? This should not be viewed as the audacity of our species to destroy/alter but rather the audacity to meliorate and correct. It's this kind of positive thinking that we need more of, not the head in the sand approach that seems to be embodied in the thinking; "It is God's will" and He will not allow Earth to be destroyed. Only degraded to a certain extent? Here's an audacious statement: global warming is on the wane, God willing! Yankee Publishing (rss@ypi.com) Wed, 24 Sep 2008 16:50:50 +0100 http://www.almanac.com/ofa/blogs/everything/globalwarm Check the facts at www.SNOPES.com for "Waves freezing solid as they break over the ice" http://www.snopes.com/photos/natural/antarcticwave.asp ... it is bogus ... original 2002 Antarctic photos and the scientific explanation were altered by somebody in March 2008 with an ulterior motive ... read the actual explanation. The ice formations were formed by melting shards (icicles) in a glacier melting, then being compacted and uplifted by glaciation -- shaped by exposure to the elements. http://www.snopes.com/photos/natural/antarcticwave.asp gives the full explanation and all the beautiful photos. Yankee Publishing (rss@ypi.com) Tue, 23 Sep 2008 19:30:43 +0100 http://www.almanac.com/ofa/blogs/everything/globalwarm What I find amusing about all of this Global warming/cooling poppycock is this. It is God's earth. Do we (humans) actually have the audacity to believe we can ruin what God has made? Yes, we do need to be responsible for how we act (keep earth litter free, find multiple sources of fuel etc..). We do have to be accountable for what we (humans) have ruined or withered. Also, they show us that the arctic is melting. Ironically, what they neglect to tell us is this. On the other end of the world, they have recorded record COLD. The waves freeze solid as they break over the ice. My only real point is this, God created the heavens and the earth and it will continue to thrive with or without us. It is and always was God's earth. Yankee Publishing (rss@ypi.com) Tue, 23 Sep 2008 18:36:37 +0100