Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Technology and Science News › [BBC] - Global warming 'confirmed' by independent study
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[BBC] - Global warming 'confirmed' by independent study - Page 3  

post #21 of 175
Why bother proving it over and over, we all know that the public is...

A. Not going to believe them.
B. Believe them, but do nothing about it.
Dynamix
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-860 Gigabyte GA-P55A-UD4P Radeon 7970 Corsair Domintor Twins + Other = 16 Gb 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
WD Caviar Black, 500gb OCZ Solid 3 Sony Optiarc Corsair H50 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Ultimate Samsung P2570HD + Other Logitech G110 Corsair 750W HX 
CaseMouse
Antec p183 Logitech MX Revolution 
  hide details  
Dynamix
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-860 Gigabyte GA-P55A-UD4P Radeon 7970 Corsair Domintor Twins + Other = 16 Gb 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
WD Caviar Black, 500gb OCZ Solid 3 Sony Optiarc Corsair H50 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Ultimate Samsung P2570HD + Other Logitech G110 Corsair 750W HX 
CaseMouse
Antec p183 Logitech MX Revolution 
  hide details  
post #22 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Epitope View Post
I imagine that effect should be over by now as the surface of the earth is pretty well covered by now. There are also infrared satellites that can measure the entire surface of the planet as a whole now.
Not necessarily, while continental measurements can be dense, we're missing the majority of the ocean surface even to this day. The ocean is where we still have a lot of headway to be made and have been making headway, allowing new measurements to come to light.

If you're thinking of infrared satellites in the weather sense, they mostly measure cloud top temperature and are a close estimate computed by algorithms based on the data received by the satellite. Where there are no clouds, of course it measures the ground, but the sensitivity is not high enough to capture the degree by degree differences at the ground.
post #23 of 175
~200 years is not very long in the grand scheme of things, data from the past would be useful. I cant take anything serious without more proof, and I'm not seeing enough on that graph.
MCP
(17 items)
 
Loki
(2 items)
 
Rinzler
(13 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 2700K 5GHz ~1.475v Asus P8Z68 Deluxe Gen3 EVGA GTX-1080 (4x8GB) Crucial Balistix 1600 MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
A bunch of disks LG DVD Combo Apogee Xt Rev 1.0, 360 Rad + D5 Fedora 25 
OSMonitorMonitorMonitor
Windows 10 Acer 32" 4k Acer 32" 4k Wacom Cintiq 27 QHD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Corsair AX850 Coolermaster HAF-X Corsair 
Audio
Xonar DG 
CPUGraphics
Intel i7-4558U Intel Iris 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 720QM Proprietary GTX 260M 4 gb DDR3 1066 
Hard Drive
500 GB WD Caviar Black 
  hide details  
MCP
(17 items)
 
Loki
(2 items)
 
Rinzler
(13 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 2700K 5GHz ~1.475v Asus P8Z68 Deluxe Gen3 EVGA GTX-1080 (4x8GB) Crucial Balistix 1600 MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
A bunch of disks LG DVD Combo Apogee Xt Rev 1.0, 360 Rad + D5 Fedora 25 
OSMonitorMonitorMonitor
Windows 10 Acer 32" 4k Acer 32" 4k Wacom Cintiq 27 QHD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Corsair AX850 Coolermaster HAF-X Corsair 
Audio
Xonar DG 
CPUGraphics
Intel i7-4558U Intel Iris 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 720QM Proprietary GTX 260M 4 gb DDR3 1066 
Hard Drive
500 GB WD Caviar Black 
  hide details  
post #24 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlasov_581 View Post
well then i'm not THAT far off.......the economic damage would be the tip of the iceberg.......i listed extreme temperatures because of obvious reasons........there is a recording of an ice age........it is obvious that it is responsible for killing life......core samples have proven this, we just don't have details........and there are evidence of extremly high temperatures in rocks throughout the world......but like i said "we don't have a human recorded event" because well, everything died.....this is not going to be as sudden as jumping into lava or liquid nitrogen......very gradual, spanning over centuries........sigh......sometimes i wish i lived as long as an Asari
We do have quite a few natural records that often give details on past climates.

My point was that the sort of extremes you mentioned are nearly unheard of, and not at all necissary to cause problems. The average global temperature was only 5-10C lower during the peak of the last glacial maximum (ice age).

You don't need any where near as dramatic a change (in either direction) to kill a lot of life, and have a dramatic effect.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goatboy View Post
Most likely however, the warming climate can be attributed to the natural cycles of the sun.
Most models have already taken such cycles into account.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goatboy View Post
What I want to know, and which I didn't see stated in the article is that as time has passed, we have placed sensors in more and more locations. If those locations were always warm, but were never counted before we got measurements there, that would naturally skew the graph upward as our sensor density increases.
Another thing that has been taken into consideration.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aesir View Post
~200 years is not very long in the grand scheme of things, data from the past would be useful. I cant take anything serious without more proof, and I'm not seeing enough on that graph.
There are ice and soil cores that give information going back hundreds of thousands of years, and sometimes much longer.

The reason the graph only goes back 200 years is because detailed contemporary human observations only go back so far, and more importantly because before the second industrial revolution, human output of greenhouse gases was minuscule, and we are looking for recent change due to such things.

We do know that recent changes are unusually rapid, and strongly correlated with human activity.
Edited by Blameless - 10/20/11 at 8:17pm
Primary
(15 items)
 
Secondary
(13 items)
 
In progress
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5820K @ 4.3/3.6GHz core/uncore, 1.225/1.2v Gigabyte X99 SOC Champion (F22n) 2x Sapphire R9 290X Tri-X OC New Edition (10036... 4x4GiB Crucial @ 2667, 12-11-12-27-T1, 1.37v 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Plextor M6e 128GB (fw 1.05) M.2 (PCI-E 2.0 2x) 2x Crucial M4 256GB 4x WD Scorpio Black 500GB Cooler Master Nepton 280L 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1 BenQ BL3200PT Filco Majestouch Tenkeyless (MX Brown) Corsair RM1000x 
CaseMouseAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Logitech G402 Realtek ALC1150 + M-Audio AV40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5670 @ 4.4/3.2GHz core/uncore, 1.36 vcore, 1.2... Gigabyte X58A-UD5 r2.0 w/FF3mod10 BIOS Reference R9 290X w/Stilt's MLU 1000e / 1375m E... 2x Samsung MV-3V4G3D/US @ 2000, 10-11-11-30-T1,... 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
1x Crucial BLT4G3D1608ET3LX0 @ 2000, 10-11-11-3... OCZ (Toshiba) Trion 150 120GB Hyundai Sapphire 120GB 3x Hitachi Deskstar 7k1000.C 1TB 
CoolingOSPowerCase
Noctua NH-D14 Windows 7 Pro x64 SP1 Antec TP-750 Fractal Design R5 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DS 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K @ 4.3/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.36/1.2v ASRock X99 OC Formula (P3.10) GTX 780 (temporary) 4x4GiB Crucial DDR4-2400 @ 11-13-12-28-T2, 1.33v 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Intel 600p 256GB NVMe 2x HGST Travelstar 7k1000 1TB Corsair H55 (temporary) Windows Server 2016 Datacenter 
PowerCase
Seasonic SS-860XP2 Corsair Carbide Air 540 
  hide details  
Primary
(15 items)
 
Secondary
(13 items)
 
In progress
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5820K @ 4.3/3.6GHz core/uncore, 1.225/1.2v Gigabyte X99 SOC Champion (F22n) 2x Sapphire R9 290X Tri-X OC New Edition (10036... 4x4GiB Crucial @ 2667, 12-11-12-27-T1, 1.37v 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Plextor M6e 128GB (fw 1.05) M.2 (PCI-E 2.0 2x) 2x Crucial M4 256GB 4x WD Scorpio Black 500GB Cooler Master Nepton 280L 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1 BenQ BL3200PT Filco Majestouch Tenkeyless (MX Brown) Corsair RM1000x 
CaseMouseAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Logitech G402 Realtek ALC1150 + M-Audio AV40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5670 @ 4.4/3.2GHz core/uncore, 1.36 vcore, 1.2... Gigabyte X58A-UD5 r2.0 w/FF3mod10 BIOS Reference R9 290X w/Stilt's MLU 1000e / 1375m E... 2x Samsung MV-3V4G3D/US @ 2000, 10-11-11-30-T1,... 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
1x Crucial BLT4G3D1608ET3LX0 @ 2000, 10-11-11-3... OCZ (Toshiba) Trion 150 120GB Hyundai Sapphire 120GB 3x Hitachi Deskstar 7k1000.C 1TB 
CoolingOSPowerCase
Noctua NH-D14 Windows 7 Pro x64 SP1 Antec TP-750 Fractal Design R5 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DS 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K @ 4.3/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.36/1.2v ASRock X99 OC Formula (P3.10) GTX 780 (temporary) 4x4GiB Crucial DDR4-2400 @ 11-13-12-28-T2, 1.33v 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Intel 600p 256GB NVMe 2x HGST Travelstar 7k1000 1TB Corsair H55 (temporary) Windows Server 2016 Datacenter 
PowerCase
Seasonic SS-860XP2 Corsair Carbide Air 540 
  hide details  
post #25 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goatboy View Post
Where there are no clouds, of course it measures the ground, but the sensitivity is not high enough to capture the degree by degree differences at the ground.
But that's the entire point. It's going to catch the overall average of the surface. That's what really matters. They will also measure ocean temps. Ocean temps are much more important in my opinion because water has such a high heat capacity. It will fluctuate much less than land temps and be a better indicator of a true average temperature. If the oceans also continue to show a rise in temp (which they have) it means global warming is real.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 950 3.2 GHz at 1.0V Asus Rampage III Formula Asus HD6870 6GB Mushkin Redline 1600MHz 6-8-6-24 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 250 GB SSD,2X 1TB F3, 250GB WD Blue, 1T... Asus BD Megahalems black chrome edition Windows 7 Professional 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
2x Asus 24" Mac keyboard Enermax ERV950EWT Silverstone FT02 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech MX518 Steelseries I-2 Onkyo 1000W 7.1 surround through HDMI 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 950 3.2 GHz at 1.0V Asus Rampage III Formula Asus HD6870 6GB Mushkin Redline 1600MHz 6-8-6-24 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 250 GB SSD,2X 1TB F3, 250GB WD Blue, 1T... Asus BD Megahalems black chrome edition Windows 7 Professional 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
2x Asus 24" Mac keyboard Enermax ERV950EWT Silverstone FT02 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech MX518 Steelseries I-2 Onkyo 1000W 7.1 surround through HDMI 
  hide details  
post #26 of 175
The problem with almost all of the global warming articles and research that you see out there is how and where they collect the test data. We have known for several decades that parking lots and cities increase local ambient tempratures. Yet at the same time where is the vast majority of the test data collected? We can give slightly more credit to data collected from ocean temps but still, once you look at the the "change" versus margin of error in collection there is next to no change. The poster that stated we have to take a longer term view of monitoring the change is exactly correct. Look at the original graph that was posted and the change is less than an increase of a degree per 100 years; and that is without factoring in any margin for error or how accurate the instruments used to collect the data was over 50 years ago.

This leads into the conversation of people fixating on green house gases. Human beings directly contribute a relatively small amount of global green house gases through machinery/industry, less than 10% of the global amount according to the last research I read. Cows put out more than humans but we see no effort to reduce the amount of livestock. Harmful gas emissions, especially those harmful to ozone layers, need to be controlled but perspective is needed.

I am not trying to encourage people not care about the environment but the gloom and doom reactions of a lot of people is rather annoying. In typical fashion the news is more interested in entertainment value and making money than accurate reporting. Sadly a majority of scientist are focused on getting/justifying money for research than honest research and discovery. The media and the decline of the scientific community are completely seperate conversations though.
post #27 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Epitope View Post
But that's the entire point. It's going to catch the overall average of the surface. That's what really matters. They will also measure ocean temps. Ocean temps are much more important in my opinion because water has such a high heat capacity. It will fluctuate much less than land temps and be a better indicator of a true average temperature. If the oceans also continue to show a rise in temp (which they have) it means global warming is real.
If the satellite can't determine an accurate temperature, it will also not get an accurate estimate. For example, if there is a 5 degree threshold before the satellite notices a difference, the detail is lost and then cannot get a good representation of the average.
post #28 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goatboy View Post
If the satellite can't determine an accurate temperature, it will also not get an accurate estimate. For example, if there is a 5 degree threshold before the satellite notices a difference, the detail is lost and then cannot get a good representation of the average.
Satellites are much more accurate than that, they are not perfect but they are very good. Granted they only measure radiation (of various frequencies) that then must be converted to a given quantity (be it soil moisture, wind speed, temperature, etc.) which involves some inaccuracies but these are documented and minimized. It is all part of the process of creating remotely sensed observations.

Edit: Flayle, they directly account for sensor locations and environment. All of the datasets in the graph posted here do.
 
HTPC
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-3930k MSI X79MA-GD45 Powercolor 7950 G Skill 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung 830 Swiftech Apogee XT Rev. 1 EK-FC HWLabs Black Ice GTX 240 and a Koolance HX-CU72... 
CoolingCoolingOSOS
MCP 35X and a MCP 350 Koolance 401x2 Opensuse 12.1 Windows 7 
KeyboardPowerCase
Ducky OCN with cherry blues Antec True Power New 650W Cooler Master CM690 II 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-750 Gigabyte p55-ud2 GTX 430 G Skill 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
Samsung HD204UI Fedora 15 Corsair CX-430 Silverstone GC04 
  hide details  
 
HTPC
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-3930k MSI X79MA-GD45 Powercolor 7950 G Skill 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung 830 Swiftech Apogee XT Rev. 1 EK-FC HWLabs Black Ice GTX 240 and a Koolance HX-CU72... 
CoolingCoolingOSOS
MCP 35X and a MCP 350 Koolance 401x2 Opensuse 12.1 Windows 7 
KeyboardPowerCase
Ducky OCN with cherry blues Antec True Power New 650W Cooler Master CM690 II 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-750 Gigabyte p55-ud2 GTX 430 G Skill 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
Samsung HD204UI Fedora 15 Corsair CX-430 Silverstone GC04 
  hide details  
post #29 of 175
Wait wait. Berkeley released findings that agree with Al Gore completely?

post #30 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goatboy View Post
If the satellite can't determine an accurate temperature, it will also not get an accurate estimate. For example, if there is a 5 degree threshold before the satellite notices a difference, the detail is lost and then cannot get a good representation of the average.
Do you really think that expert scientists haven't thought of these things? You can buy infrared thermometers at the hardware store that are accurate to less than 1 degree. I'm pretty sure NASA has access to ones 100X more accurate than that.

EDIT: "The data from the six channels is simultaneously sampled at a 40 kHz rate and digitised to 10 bits within the instrument. In-flight calibration for the IR channels is provided by deep space view and an internal warm target whose temperature is monitored to an accuracy better than 0.1 K."

http://www.eumetsat.int/Home/Main/Sa...153142514?l=en



Quote:
Originally Posted by Segovax View Post
Wait wait. Berkeley released findings that agree with Al Gore completely?
Just because Al Gore is a tool doesn't mean he is wrong...
Edited by Epitope - 10/20/11 at 8:48pm
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 950 3.2 GHz at 1.0V Asus Rampage III Formula Asus HD6870 6GB Mushkin Redline 1600MHz 6-8-6-24 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 250 GB SSD,2X 1TB F3, 250GB WD Blue, 1T... Asus BD Megahalems black chrome edition Windows 7 Professional 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
2x Asus 24" Mac keyboard Enermax ERV950EWT Silverstone FT02 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech MX518 Steelseries I-2 Onkyo 1000W 7.1 surround through HDMI 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 950 3.2 GHz at 1.0V Asus Rampage III Formula Asus HD6870 6GB Mushkin Redline 1600MHz 6-8-6-24 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 250 GB SSD,2X 1TB F3, 250GB WD Blue, 1T... Asus BD Megahalems black chrome edition Windows 7 Professional 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
2x Asus 24" Mac keyboard Enermax ERV950EWT Silverstone FT02 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech MX518 Steelseries I-2 Onkyo 1000W 7.1 surround through HDMI 
  hide details  
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Technology and Science News
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Technology and Science News › [BBC] - Global warming 'confirmed' by independent study