A-L-E-X Posted May 2, 2011 Share Posted May 2, 2011 AGW Theory? I'll try not to turn this into an AGW debate, but come on dude, that is a Terrible Comparison to Stopping Tornadoes. Well first there is no "proof" CO2 has ever "driven" climate, but more or less responded to it, (has always lagged)....Since the AGW theory relies on Positive feedbacks OF warming itself (negative feedbacks would cancel it out)...................during the Previous Interglecial, Global Temperatures were Higher than those of today by ~ 2-3C, there was no "Runaway feedback" from Temperature/Water Vapor, which todays Climate Models assume would occur out of Control after 1.5C of warming ( on avg). This is because the Climate System is not a Giant Positive Feedback, otherwise it would have imploded long ago. AGW relies on Positive Feedback... not the Forcing of CO2 (directly in manifestation), which is very well understood... that is indeed settled science..but Feedback isn't. If the Climate System were a Negative Feedback (more likely), warming from CO2 would be minimal...........So..........As you said Yourself, the climate system creates these Storms to Maintain equilibrium......Internal Equilibrium is what the Climate system has always done.... Negative Feedbacks internally from the climate system. You are correct and Incorrect at the Same Time. A change in INCOMING energy alters the entire energy budget of the Planet at all levels, so thats where I'd expect to Find the Positive Feedback mechanism (to an extent) and Change in "Temperature". As for Altering Tornadoes, 1) It probably would be millions, if not Billions of Dollars wasted for a Busted Experiment. 2), If you're gonna get rid of energy release (hurricanes/storms, etc) in One Area of the Globe, the Climate system will Manufacture them elsewhere, its not like we can stop that... 3) If we somehow were to Alter the physics of the Climate system, the ramifications could be immense and deadly for all of Society. So I'm against it. I'd rather Create Jobs thru NWS emplyees, and let us humans, and our brilliance, actually avoid tornadoes, instead of Driving into them! Are we really the Smartest Species on Earth??? Last time I checked, You're supposed to avoid tornadoes, am I right? The last part of what you said made me chuckle.... you know, while SETI was looking for signs of intelligent species on other worlds, maybe we should have been trying to determine if one actually exists on Earth To your other point, about how we might damage the earth by trying to geoengineer climate, I too highly doubt it can be done with our level of technology, or any level of technology we might attain for the next 200 years or so-- but let's say we are able to do this one day.... hopefully, it will be when we have the ability to mimic what nature does "naturally" (in other words, the processes that naturally weaken these storms).... and thereby not cause problems elsewhere. Our first goal should be creating a reasonably accurate climate model before we go trying to tinker with something we don't really understand..... thereby causing effects we can't predict. For now, I think it would be a better idea to build structures as resistant as possible to the effects of very high winds. Dome-like structures might offer some protection-- from what some have said on here, aren't there such structures in south Florida that can withstand 200 mph winds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted May 2, 2011 Share Posted May 2, 2011 Oh, great, you guys just can't help yourself, leave it alone for once. Don't worry I'm not going to respond here. I think most informed posters here know that there is a vast body of scientific evidence contradicting his little rant. Go to CC for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted May 2, 2011 Share Posted May 2, 2011 Don't worry I'm not going to respond here. I think most informed posters here know that there is a vast body of scientific evidence contradicting his little rant. Well, it's a good thing the discussion didn't get derailed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted May 2, 2011 Share Posted May 2, 2011 Skier, aren't there some geoengineering concepts out there to supposedly negate global climate change (if it's occurring?)-- the problem is we don't know what problems geoengineering climate will cause down the line. To argue the other side though, if we do "take over" for mother nature, you'd think that we'd find a way to redistribute heat ourselves in a less violent way-- by mimicking natural processes like shear and capping. Some of the same methods we might use to terraform other planets (i.e., Mars.) BTW solar power will not be enough-- we would need controllable fusion. What we're talking about will be feasible one day.... but not any of our lifetimes I'm afraid. But not "never." Yeah there are lots of geoengineering concepts out there to negate the AGW that will occur.. but most of these make me much more nervous because they are on a much larger scale. The most feasible is carbon sequestration but that doesn't have nearly as many unpredictable consequences since it is just removing the CO2 we are adding, going straight to the root of the problem. Dumping iron in the oceans would definitely work but has all sorts of unpredictable consequences for the oceans. The whole mirrors thing could work but would be too expensive in the foreseeable future and would have lots of unpredictable consequences by drastically altering the flow of energy in the atmosphere and to the surface. I generally am against interfering in a complex interconnected system like the atmosphere or ecological systems, but this is on such a small scale (especially if you are just targeting the most severe long track tornadoes) that the effect would be negligible compared to what we are already doing to the climate. I totally agree this is unfeasible anytime soon .. this is all just hypothetical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtRosen Posted May 2, 2011 Author Share Posted May 2, 2011 Don't worry I'm not going to respond here. I think most informed posters here know that there is a vast body of scientific evidence contradicting his little rant. Go to CC for that. I think there's a plethora of evidence for and against that can be construed towards ones political motivation when in fact no one really knows the truth. If you guys would like to go to CC and debate what you think you might know, go for it, but please don't hijack my thread here. I have no idea if stopping tornado formation is good or bad for the Earth - maybe someone who has far more knowledge than I do should do a paper and analyze this? What would happen if tornado formation was stopped? I cannot remember a time period that had so many tornado outbreaks in such a short period of time. 2008 and 2011 are record tornado seasons. How many people have died in those seasons as a direct result of tornadoes? What if we could save their lives? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amped Posted May 3, 2011 Share Posted May 3, 2011 How about tunnels? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcalvert Posted May 3, 2011 Share Posted May 3, 2011 How about tunnels? Actually, I was going to suggest "underground homes". The upfront costs are steep due to excavation and reinforcement of the structure, but they use less energy because the ground surrounding them moderates the temperature year-round. There are some limits to their practicality, but for a portion of the southeast that has hilly terrain (a portion that seems to have a lot of tornado deaths), they would limit exposure of dwellings to strong winds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BethesdaWX Posted May 3, 2011 Share Posted May 3, 2011 Don't worry I'm not going to respond here. I think most informed posters here know that there is a vast body of scientific evidence contradicting his little rant. Go to CC for that. Are we making up our own laws of physics again Andrew? Respond here http://www.americanw...olar-magnetism/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted May 3, 2011 Share Posted May 3, 2011 I think there's a plethora of evidence for and against that can be construed towards ones political motivation when in fact no one really knows the truth. If you guys would like to go to CC and debate what you think you might know, go for it, but please don't hijack my thread here. Oh, ok. Thanks for the heads up on that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcalvert Posted May 3, 2011 Share Posted May 3, 2011 For now, I think it would be a better idea to build structures as resistant as possible to the effects of very high winds. Dome-like structures might offer some protection-- from what some have said on here, aren't there such structures in south Florida that can withstand 200 mph winds? It's fairly easy to build a structure that can withstand 200 mph winds. Domes, tetrahedral structures, or pyramids (all have relatively low form drag to horizontal winds) that have a sturdy frame and are secured firmly to prevent any lifting could probably withstand 200 mph winds. The real problem is withstanding projectiles that are travelling at even 10% of that speed. Unless one lives somewhere without trees or normal structures, even a wind-resistant structure may not survive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nwohweather Posted May 3, 2011 Share Posted May 3, 2011 Or we could spend money on useful things like, I don't know, improving forecasts. Very stupid even proposing such an idea. Until we understand every nanometer of atmospheric movements, such that we "understand" chaos, we have no clue what we're doing when we tamper with things. Ha exactly. You'd think after the dust bowl we'd learn to never mess with the environment again. I mean we basically destroyed the land and skewed the Great Plains and the climate across the whole country for a few years. And that was just really messing with evaporation. The force a tornado carries is unreal and trying to stop it could be disasterous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.