Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Global Warming Twice as Bad as Previously Thought
Topic Started: Jan 27 2005, 09:32 AM (511 Views)
gvok
Unregistered

Global warming is 'twice as bad as previously thought'

By Steve Connor, Science Editor
27 January 2005


Global warming might be twice as catastrophic as previously thought, flooding settlements on the British coast and turning the interior into an unrecognisable tropical landscape, the world's biggest study of climate change shows.

Researchers from some of Britain's leading universities used computer modelling to predict that under the "worst-case" scenario, London would be under water and winters banished to history as average temperatures in the UK soar up to 20C higher than at present.

Globally, average temperatures could reach 11C greater than today, double the rise predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the international body set up to investigate global warming. Such high temperatures would melt most of the polar icecaps and mountain glaciers, raising sea levels by more than 20ft. A report this week in The Independent predicted a 2C temperature rise would lead to irreversible changes in the climate.

The new study, in the journal Nature, was done using the spare computing time of 95,000 people from 150 countries who downloaded from the internet the global climate model of the Met Office's Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research. The program, run as a screensaver, simulated what would happen if carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere were double those of the 18th century, before the Industrial Revolution, the situation predicted by the middle of this century.

David Stainforth of Oxford University, the chief scientist of the latest study, said processing the results showed the Earth's climate is far more sensitive to increases in man-made greenhouse gases than previously realised. The findings indicate a doubling of carbon dioxide from the pre-industrial level of 280 parts per million would increase global average temperatures by between 2C and 11C.

Mr Stainforth said: "An 11C-warmed world would be a dramatically different world... There would be large areas at higher latitudes that could be up to 20C warmer than today. The UK would be at the high end of these changes. It is possible that even present levels of greenhouse gases maintained for long periods may lead to dangerous climate change... When you start to look at these temperatures, I get very worried indeed."

Attempts to control global warming, based on the Kyoto treaty, concentrated on stabilising the emissions of greenhouse gases at 1990 levels, but the scientists warned that this might not be enough. Mr Stainforth added: "We need to accept that while greenhouse gas levels can increase we need to limit them, level them off then bring them back down again."

Professor Bob Spicer, of the Open University, said average global temperature rises of 11C are unprecedented in the long geological record of the Earth. "If we go back to the Cretaceous, which is 100 million years ago, the best estimates of the global mean temperature was about 6C higher than present," Professor Spicer said. "So 11C is quite substantial and if this is right we would be going into a realm that we really don't have much evidence for even in the rock [geological] record."

Myles Allen, of Oxford University, said: "The danger zone is not something we're going to reach in the middle of the century; we're in it now." Each of the hottest 15 years on record have been since 1980.
| Quote | ^
 
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
Back to your old baiting ways, I see...

Hang on a second.


:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Quote:
 
Globally, average temperatures could reach 11C greater than today,

Then again, they could not.

Quote:
 
The new study, in the journal Nature, was done using the spare computing time of 95,000 people from 150 countries who downloaded from the internet the global climate model of the Met Office's Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research. The program, run as a screensaver,

Great, the UK is pegging their "research" on a screen saver.

Quote:
 
Mr Stainforth said: "An 11C-warmed world would be a dramatically different world...

No $h!t, Sherlock, but you haven't done A THING to prove that this could happen. What next? Are you going to announce that the Thames COULD rise between 9 and 88 centimeters between now and 2100? I could say that Klingons could land in my back yard with the same level of accuracy.


THIS IS PATHETIC.

I've written better fiction than this "article." More believable, too.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
gvok
Unregistered

Quote:
 
Back to your old baiting ways, I see...


Huh? I just posted an article. I did not editorialize.

Let's be friends Admiral. Come on. :)
| Quote | ^
 
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
Admiralbill_gomec
Jan 27 2005, 09:49 AM
Back to your old baiting ways, I see...

Hang on a second.


:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Quote:
 
Globally, average temperatures could reach 11C greater than today,

Then again, they could not.

Quote:
 
The new study, in the journal Nature, was done using the spare computing time of 95,000 people from 150 countries who downloaded from the internet the global climate model of the Met Office's Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research. The program, run as a screensaver,

Great, the UK is pegging their "research" on a screen saver.

Quote:
 
Mr Stainforth said: "An 11C-warmed world would be a dramatically different world...

No $h!t, Sherlock, but you haven't done A THING to prove that this could happen. What next? Are you going to announce that the Thames COULD rise between 9 and 88 centimeters between now and 2100? I could say that Klingons could land in my back yard with the same level of accuracy.


THIS IS PATHETIC.

I've written better fiction than this "article." More believable, too.

I would , and will actually , be reading the paper in NATURE before I decide I agree. I would like to see the evidence and analysis .

Have you (ABG) read the NATURE article or are you just tossing one of your fits again ?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Minuet
Member Avatar
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
Administrative Comment

Admiralbill - simply posting an article that you do not agree with does NOT constitute baiting.

Gvok has the right to post articles he feels are of interest. If you don't want to discuss without flaming then just ignore the articles.

End Adminstrative Comment
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ds9074
Member Avatar
Admiral
UK temperatures 20 degrees higher than today would mean the temperature rarely got below around 10 degrees, the winter average would be around 25-30 degrees, the summer average around 35-40 degrees with potential to hit 50-60 degrees in hot periods. If that is the temperature 54 degrees north of the equator what would it be like further south?

Its such an terrible possibility that I am not prepared to take risks about whether this growing body of evidence is later shown conclusivley to be true or false. We must act now.

Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
gvok
Unregistered

I think that is a reasonable approach. At the very least the possibility of human contributions to global warming should not be rejected out of hand merely for political reasons.
| Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
Admiralbill_gomec
Jan 27 2005, 09:49 AM
Back to your old baiting ways, I see...

Hang on a second.


:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Bill Gvok has not done anything wrong by posting this article, it is you who is out of line as is baiting him. He has been gone for quite a while and the minute he gets back it is you who has started things up again. He has been acting on his best behavior (to prove a point most likely) but the point is true none the less. You will desist from making such comments in the future or disciplinary actions will have to be considered.

This place has been quit and running smoothly since Gvok left, and now that he is back I will not let you bring it back down again.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
gvok
Jan 27 2005, 09:32 AM
Researchers from some of Britain's leading universities used computer modelling to predict that under the "worst-case" scenario, London would be under water and winters banished to history as average temperatures in the UK soar up to 20C higher than at present.

Isn’t this whole artical just scare mongering? I can take a computer and run "worst-case" scenario modeling to predict what would happened if a tornado where to hit my house. But does that justify me spending a lot of money tornado proofing my house even though I live in a virtually tornado free area of the country. Showing what COULD happen if global warming where real does not make it real and passing off information like this as if the logic did fit is nothing but scare mongering. Its just as bad as those who put their heads in the sand over this issue.

Like with every other major issue we face the single biggest reason we will never find solutions is that booth sides feel that if they are extreme enough in their points of view they will win the argument. But unfortunately all it does it cause a stalemate where nether sides is unwilling to work with the other, and arguments turn away form, global warming, educations, terrorism, and ect to “you’re just a tree hugging lefty in la la land” - “oh yea, well you’re just a selfish money hungry rightist”
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Hoss
Member Avatar
Don't make me use my bare hands on you.
ds9074
Jan 27 2005, 12:37 PM
UK temperatures 20 degrees higher than today would mean the temperature rarely got below around 10 degrees, the winter average would be around 25-30 degrees, the summer average around 35-40 degrees with potential to hit 50-60 degrees in hot periods. If that is the temperature 54 degrees north of the equator what would it be like further south?

Its such an terrible possibility that I am not prepared to take risks about whether this growing body of evidence is later shown conclusivley to be true or false. We must act now.

I prefer a more moderate approach. We should make every reasonable effort to be as efficient as possible in our use of energy and other natural resources. I will not support causing personnal hardships, economic hardships, &c. on the speculations of those whose political motivations are suspect.

Yes, the EU and China want the USA to roll over for them. The whole purpose that the EU seems to have is to challenge the power of the USA and viewed in this light I prefer moderation and not jumping to wild conclusions.

We still can't adequate predict the weather next week.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
gvok
Unregistered

I think there's some truth to your POV Dan. I suppose I personally fall on the more cautious side of the fence when it comes to environmental issues, especially ones with potentially very negative consequences. I suppose we'll know soon enough if some of these predictions are true or not.
| Quote | ^
 
Minuet
Member Avatar
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
Dandandat
Jan 27 2005, 12:49 PM
Admiralbill_gomec
Jan 27 2005, 09:49 AM
Back to your old baiting ways, I see...

Hang on a second.


:rotfl:  :rotfl:  :rotfl:

Bill Gvok has not done anything wrong by posting this article, it is you who is out of line as is baiting him. He has been gone for quite a while and the minute he gets back it is you who has started things up again. He has been acting on his best behavior (to prove a point most likely) but the point is true none the less. You will desist from making such comments in the future or disciplinary actions will have to be considered.

This place has been quit and running smoothly since Gvok left, and now that he is back I will not let you bring it back down again.

NIce to see we are in agreement Dante :angel:
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Wichita
Member Avatar
The Adminstrator wRench
Make that three out of three.

If you think that he is baiting you, the response is easy. Don't respond.

If not one is interested, the topic drops off the page. If people are and can discuss things rationally, it stays.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
Has anyone managed to get their hand on the full scientific paper yet ?

My local university library hasn't got the relevant issue of Nature yet.

Oh - for those of you who aren't familiar with massive-parallelism (in computing)
and responding to
Quote:
 
QUOTE 
The new study, in the journal Nature, was done using the spare computing time of 95,000 people from 150 countries who downloaded from the internet the global climate model of the Met Office's Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research. The program, run as a screensaver, 


Great, the UK is pegging their "research" on a screen saver.

This is a very good example of the application of massive parallelism , ie lots of CPUs all working at once , via TCP , on the tiny parts of a huge calculation problem , a poor man's SUPERCOMPUTER.

This approach has also been used in other studies requiring huge numbers of computations to solve a problem , to model something , to scan huge data bases for something that is hard to find. One that comes to mind immediately is SETI .
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dwayne
Profanity deleted by Hoss
Quote:
 
Alarm at new climate warning

By Richard Black - BBC environment correspondent 

Temperatures around the world could rise by as much as 11C, according to one of the largest climate prediction projects ever run.

This figure is twice the level that previous studies have suggested.

Scientists behind the project, called climateprediction.net, say it shows that a "safe" upper limit for carbon dioxide is impossible to define.

The results of the study, which used PCs around the world to produce data, are published in the journal Nature.

Climateprediction.net is run from Oxford University, and is a distributed computing project; rather than using a supercomputer to run climate models, people can download software to their own PCs, which run the programs during downtime.

More than 95,000 people have registered, from more than 150 countries; their PCs have between them run more than 60,000 simulations of future climate.

Each PC runs a slightly different computer simulation examining what happens to the global climate if levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere double from pre-industrial levels - which may happen by the middle of the century. [Stress the phrase 'may happen']

What vary most between the simulations are the precise nature of physical processes like the extent of convection within tropical clouds - a process which drives the transport of heat around the world.

Lowest rise

So no two simulations will produce exactly the same results; overall, the project produces a picture of the possible range of outcomes given the present state of scientific knowledge. [Now the cat is out of the bag ... the truth is known.  This isn't a study that says the temps will rise 11c, but a series of individual studies in which one predicted a 11c increase in temps.]

The lowest rise which climateprediction.net finds possible is 2C, ranging up to 11C.

The timescale would depend on how quickly the doubling of CO2 was reached, but large rises would be on a scale of a century at least from now.

"I think these results suggest that our need to do something about climate change is perhaps even more urgent," the climateprediction.net chief scientist David Stainforth told BBC News.

"However, with our current state of knowledge, we can't yet define a safe level in the atmosphere."

On Monday, the International Climate Change Taskforce, co-chaired by the British MP Stephen Byers, claimed it had shown that a carbon dioxide concentration of over 400 ppm (parts per million) would be 'dangerous'.

The current concentration is around 378 ppm, rising at roughly 2ppm per year.

Dangerous warming

Next week the UK Meteorological Office hosts an international conference, Stabilisation 2005, announced by Tony Blair late last year.

Its aim is to discuss what the term "dangerous" global warming really means, and to look at ways to stabilise greenhouse gas levels.

Myles Allen, the principal investigator of climateprediction.net, said the focus on stabilisation might not be appropriate.

"Stabilisation as an exclusive target may not be adequate," he told BBC News.

"Stephen Byers claims to know that 400 ppm is the maximum 'safe' level; what we show is that it may be impossible to pin down a safe level, and therefore we should not focus exclusively on stabilisation."

Distributed computing has been used before, notably by the Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence or Seti, where several million people have downloaded software enabling them to analyse data from observations of distant galaxies for signs of alien life.

The scientists behind climateprediction.net believe their project, because it is distributed to individual PCs, can help inform people about climate change - and that, in turn could bring political change. [Are they scientist or politicians?  Neither I'd suspect, but a modern day version of John Cumming.]

"It's very difficult to get politicians to collaborate, not only across the globe but also over sustained lengths of time," Bob Spicer from the Earth Sciences Department at the Open University, told BBC News.

"The people who can hold politicians to account are the public; and with this project we are bringing cutting-edge science to the stakeholders, the public."
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community.
Learn More · Sign-up for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Tweet
comments powered by Disqus