I thought these things might be clues.

Questions for the Syngas Troll

Vote 0 Votes

I won't bother to refute the latest trash from the Daily Mail - at least not until Syngas answers the following:

(!) What part of the biosphere is responsible for 93% of the biosphere's heat capacity and what data concerning that part of the biosphere makes all other discussion of global warming a sideshow (including, even, arctic ice melting)? (2) What data did the NASA Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment gather? (3) What are the best estimates available for continental groundwater depletion over the past 50+ years? (4) How do you think a liquid thermometer works?

14 Replies

  • !a. Oceans !b. rise 2. Not sure what you're wanting here, but feel free to look for yourself: 3. Best estimates? You're kidding right? 4. As a liquid warms, it will expand in a column, and assuming that column is graduated, it will indicate the liquid's temperature.

  • OK then, since the oceans are responsible for 93% of the heat capacity of the biosphere, then warming of the oceans pretty much settles whether global warming is occurring. Basically, sea level rise data shows that while sea level has been rising for about a century, it has accelerated for the past twenty years: 3.2 ± 0.4 cm per decade.

    GRACE data shows that together, Greenland and Antarctic land ice (mostly the former) are responsible for about 0.9 ± 0.1 cm in the last decade, but their melting is accelerating (the data is actually better than my errors bars, the precision is astonishing in fact).

    Ground water depletion has been an independent area of study, mostly by agricultural types, and over the past twenty years is responsible for 0.6 ± 0.2 cm of ocean sea level rise. Going back 50 years, total ground water depletion looks like 1.1 ± 0.3 cm.

    Since melting of Greenland & Antarctic land ice and continental ground water depletion are the only way the ocreans can get more water, and they are collectively responsible for maybe 35% of sea level rise, the remaining sea level rise has only one explanation: thermal expansion - just like a liquid thermometer (unlike fresh water, sea water has a positive thermal expansion coefficient at all temperatures above 32 F). The liquid doesn't have to confined to a column, a column just makes the effect more easily observed.

    There is no doubt: the earth is warming. The oceans are getting almost all the heat because they have almost all the heat capacity. Naturally, they also have much greater thermal inertia and provide much less "noisy" data. Since sea level rise has continued unabated for the past twenty years - in fact, it has accelerated to some extent, any claims that "global warming has paused" are pure bullshit.

    Now, what about the Daily Mail? Well, here is the monthly arctic ice volume data up to Feb 2014. The "comeback" in ice volume for 2013 was no more "dramatic" than what was observed in 2008, 1996, 1994, 1992, or 1983. If you can look at the data and tell me that the trash "journalists" at the Daily Mail are right and he "alarmists" are wrong - well, I've got nothing for you - you're hopeless.

  • Tell me Tim, what happens if I squeeze the column? Will the water level rise? What will happen if I drop a marble in the column?

    That's what I love about political hacks posing as scientists Tim, you are so determined to prove yourself right to justify erasing people's freedoms you've made yourself blind to any other possibilities.

    Remember when we were blaming man for most of the methane in the atmosphere? Then someone discovered forests emit methane. I'm not saying the oceans haven't warmed or that they haven't risen, I'm saying we've got to be pretty damn conceited to think we know all the reasons why. Of course we don't.

  • As far as your graph, I'd like to point out we've really only been monitoring this since 1979 which just happens to be the same time we were experiencing an unusually cold period. It makes sense that as we came out of that unusually cold period, ice levels would drop. be sure to read that last paragraph. You sound just like that guy.

  • "political hacks posing as scientists"

    Project much?

    Peer-reviewed journals all have a section in the Instructions to Authors that ask the reviewers to evaluate the manuscript they are reviewing on whether the conclusions reached in the paper are justified by the data presented. I have gone through the publication process many times. People who actually do climate science have too. Every member of the National Academy of Sciences, the American Chemical Society, the American Physical Society, the American Goephysical Union, and the many other scientific organizations - all of whom find the scientific case for AGW to be convincing - have all gone through the peer-reviewed publication process. If there is a politically motivated hack here. it is you.

    What an ass.

  • Now hold on just a minute Tim, I didn't say the scientists that have determined the sea levels have risen, or the amount of ground water that has empties into the ocean are hacks. I'm only saying you are a political hack. As far as I can tell, you are the only one saying these are the only possible reasons for sea level rise. Have your theories on sea level rise been peer reviewed? I'm sure it passes muster on ThinkProgress, but they've got some pretty low standards.

  • The information I gave you came from the primary literature. Zhang's group (UW) is the source the the ice volume data, for GRACE data see; GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL. 40, 3055–3063, doi:10.1002/grl.50527, 2013). If you think any other hypothesis (I have no idea what the marble comment meant) is responsible for sea level rise other than the factors I mentioned, do what I've suggested to you many times: write up a paper, submit it for publication. I've done just than many times - and I don't sit on the sidelines in any area where I don't publish and spew bullshit that contradicts the conclusions of people who are doing the work in that area. No - that is what YOU do.

    BTW, no one who likes to cite the Daily Mail and drags out a Newsweek article that is 39 years old (and is famous as bullshit since the idea that the world is cooling wasn't even the prevalent view 40 years ago) has no business worrying about the standards of ThinkProgress.

  • Fantastic Tim! I can't wait to see your peer reviewed papers on sea level rise! When you get to school tomorrow, take a graduated cylinder, partially fill it with water, drop a marble (any size) in it and write down what you observe. I know, this is more of a math experiment than chemistry, but it may be an eye opener for you.

  • You get increasingly childish as you get older - it is waste of time to continue this.

  • Seriously Tim, let's go back to this statement of yours:

    "Since melting of Greenland & Antarctic land ice and continental ground water depletion are the only way the ocreans can get more water, and they are collectively responsible for maybe 35% of sea level rise, the remaining sea level rise has only one explanation: thermal expansion"

    All I'm trying to do here is point out to you that your conclusion is faulty. Land erosion, undersea volcanic activity, and shifting plates are three other possibilities could effect sea level rise. Did your research rule these possibilities out, or has your tunnel vision prevented you from even considering them?

    Why do you get so angry with me Tim? Talking with people who disagree with you is healthy. I happen to think it's the best way to gain knowledge.

    Tunnel vision is something all humans are vulnerable to, and political ideology can exacerbate it. Exposing yourself to people with different ideas can prevent tunnel vision, and for me at least eliminate the hatred of people who don't think like me.

    I'm not saying you should stop reading ThinkProgress. Only that if those are the only kind of opinions you will expose yourself to, hatred and anger towards diversity is the likely result. I think you've demonstrated that here.

    Step outside of the echo chamber on a regular basis, and I think you'll find life more enjoyable.

  • Oh! I thought of another one! Melting ice and ground water drainage are not the only source of water. What about combustion? We keep hearing about all that CO2 from fossil fuels, well CO2 is not the only byproduct of burning fossil fuels, we also get H2O, or as Penn and Teller like to say 'dihydrogen monoxide' Yes? No? Maybe?

  • Okay Professor Hughbanks, I'm gonna try to figure this one out. It's been over 20 years since I did any molar equations, so forgive me if I get this wrong, but my curiosity demands I find the answer:

    1 barrel of gasoline is about 130 kg (yes this can vary)

    1 gram of gasoline is .0087543811304mol

    .0087543811304*130000= 1138mol/barrel

    each mole of gasoline produces 9 mole of H20

    9 mol(h2o) * 1138 mol(C8H18) = 10242.6 mol(h2o)

    10242.6 mol(h2o)*18g/mol= 184367g/barrel h2o

    So each barrel of gasoline produces about 184.3kg of water or about 184 liters.

    184*85million barrel = 1,564,000,000 liters of new water per day.

    I probably did that wrong, and I know 1 barrel of crude oil is not the same as 1 barrel of gasoline, but since crude oil contains so many different hydrocarbons, I could never figure that one out.

    Also, I know I didn't include coal.

    I really have no idea how to visualize what that much water looks like, but it sounds like a lot!

    Pass or fail?

  • I'm sorry if I've hurt you Tim. That really wasn't my intention. I'll check back periodically, in hope that you'll change your mind.



You can use markdown in your comments and posts.


Support This Site


Google Ads


43 813

Last Topic: Does America hate minorities? by pedantsareus on Sep 19, 2013

19 24

Last Topic: Queen To Play by Norm on Oct 24, 2009

40 217


32 118

Last Topic: Samuel Clemens by Syngas on Jan 5, 2011

161 1310

Last Topic: ISIS/ISIL by Syngas on Sep 12, 2014

56 376

Last Topic: Geologist on Global Climate Change by Syngas on Jan 8, 2015


Advertise Liberally Blogroll

All Spin Zone
The Bilerico Project
Bluegrass Roots
Blue Indiana
Blue Mass.Group
Brendan Calling
Buckeye State Blog
Chris Floyd
Clay Cane
David Corn
Dem Bloggers
Deride and Conquer
Democratic Underground
Drudge Retort
Ed Cone
ePluribis Media
Ezra Klein
Fired Up
First Draft
GreenMountain Daily
Greg Palast
Horse's Ass
Hughes for America
In Search of Utopia
Is That Legal?
Jesus' General
Jon Swift
Keystone Politics
Kick! Making PoliticsFun
Lawyers, Guns and Money
Left Coaster
Left in the West
Liberal Avenger
Liberal Oasis
Loaded Orygun
Media Girl
Michigan Liberal
MinnesotaCampaign Report
Minnesota Monitor
My Left Nutmeg
My Two Sense
Nathan Newman
Nevada Today
News Dissector
News Hounds
Oliver Willis
Pam's House Blend
Political Wire
Poor Man Institute
Prairie State Blue
Progressive Historians
Raising Kaine
Raw Story
Reno Discontent
Republic of T
Rhode Island's Future
Rochester Turning
Rocky Mountain Report
Rod 2.0
Rude Pundit
Sadly, No!
Satirical Political Report
Suburban Guerrilla
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo
Tattered Coat
The Albany Project
The Blue State
The Carpetbagger Report
The Democratic Daily
The Hollywood Liberal
The Talent Show
This Modern World
Town Called Dobson
Watching the Watchers
West Virginia Blue
Young Philly Politics
Young Turks