Notice Climate Change fear! Greatest hoax on the youth of the world in this Century!

People seem to think being smug is an acceptable alternative for intelligence.

 

This is where I’m at. I don’t flat out deny humans being a source of pollution and helping to accelerate the inevitable. I just don’t think the “solution” is taking more money from the poor and middle class in the form of taxes. I think politicians have jumped on this issue with dollar signs in their eyes and they can go fuck themselves.

 

Yesterday was clear and 71 degrees....today is pissing rain, cloudy and dark, Climate change is for real!

 

Ah! It's a good day! Sitting here in my boat doing a bit of research on Climate Change and the why's of some ocean currents. But more to the point, the affect Climate of these currents or perhaps the lack of affect if and when these currents change.
Even more important, a possible insight into what is not being studied or taken into account by the scientist that work on Climate Change. Note, I did not say Climate or Climate Change Scientist. I ought to be working on my electrical system but
I shall this afternoon, after I type up these findings.

I sort of wondered yesterday about why the current through the Bering Strait, is always continuing, from the Pacific (Bering Sea) north through the strait, into the Arctic Ocean. I sort of assumed this is warm water warming the Arctic. But, not so!!!
So what the heck is warming the Arctic?

Well another image of the currents, it show what does warm the Arctic.


Look at that! Currents running into the Arctic Sea from both the Pacific through the Bering Strait and from the Atlantic via the Norwegian Sea. I guess I had always envisioned the Gulf Stream running to the UK and Norway.
Ah well, no wonder the so much ice melted in the Arctic, got a giant hot river up there.

But why? Currents flow in the Sea as primarily function of water seeking a common level in the basin, in equilibrium with gravity, and the cold saline, more dense waters seeking the low points as gravity dictates. This is still true
but???

Sometime back I mentioned the Sea over the earth would seek to be level with a sinusoid curve, filling to the level of the curve from the Equator, to the poles. This curve over the already, sinusoid curved earth would be Sea Level, world wide.
Local hot or cold spots and storm surges being ignored. I used these terms because I more or less just sensed the mathimatical picture, but now I find people have indeed given this some study and explain it much better and use different terminology.

I include a link here for those that wish to follow along. It does in my mind answer some questions I have about climate change, and why we have cycles. I do not find any of this in articles about Climate change therefore leaving a big question in my mind.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/centrifugal-force

 

So now the question is, why does warm currents always flow into the Arctic ocean? Well there is only one answer that would be in order with the laws of physics, The sea level there is too low in relations to the surrounding seas. Water flows down hill to the low point, period.

Now we are back to the question, what is down hill in relations to "Sea Level"

Another article.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/geoids
Ah! Our Planet is Geoid, not a sinusoid curve! Ok, I can go with that.

Now back to a paragraph from the prior link in the article about centrifugal force.

" The mathematical expression for centrifugal acceleration (force divided by density) is

centrifugal acceleration=Ω2r

where Ω is the rotation rate of Earth, equal to 2π/T where T is the length of day, and r is Earth’s radius. Because the centrifugal acceleration is nearly constant in time and points outward, away from Earth’s axis of rotation, we usually combine it formally with the gravitational force, which points toward Earth’s center. We replace g in Eq.(7.6)with an effective gravity g, which has a weak dependence on latitude. Hereafter, we do not refer separately to the centrifugal force. The surface perpendicular to this combined force is called the geoid. If the ocean were not moving relative to Earth, its surface would align with the geoid.

In short scientist use the short or condensed definition of gravity. Gravity minus the opposing force, centrifugal force. And worse yet ignoring the "weak dependence on latitude. Oh my goodness that weak dependence is the cosign of the latitude and it is hardly weak until it approaches 90 degrees where it is indeed weak at zero.

From this I can see why the currents always run to Arctic. That ocean in not full enough to complete the geoid shape of the earth with it's ocean overlay. The magma earth is complete but ocean overlay is incomplete due to insufficient water.
The centrifugal forces of the earth have spun the oceans out the maximum where the surface of water at it's density is in equilibrium with "Gravity", as is the Southern Ocean with Antarctica occupying the axial center, but not the Arctic Ocean. More ice needs to melt. Then the currents will not need to continually fill that sea while bringing much heat to Arctic.

I read much about sea level change, but it has slowed way way down and the trend is down. I read much about measurement in the Bering straits, temperatures, flows, fairly constant, but nothing about it rising. I would not expect it to rise at that point if it were at the geoid sea level. So I think we can assume it is. But not in latitude above the latitude of 67 N where the Bering Strait is. Now we do hear much about Sea level rise on the Norwegian Coast and much of it is more than 67 North, perhaps in the geiod deficit zone.
I never read where a Climate Scientist considers the filling of the geoid. But then, grants are issued to find out about CO2 and such. There might not be one grant out there to study when the Geoid might be complete in the North.

Now the question is in my mind, how close to filling this void, must we come before the currents slow enough for the Ice making machine to kick in? We toggle!

 

How much more water are we talking about. Geez, I can only speculate here from data that we currently know.
We know the Strait of Malacca is about 100 feet deep, it covered some 8000 years ago, perhaps a little less. Being on the equator, we can now assume the ocean is now at the level that represents the maximum radius the earth Geoid shape of water can take given the short form of Gravity. We do know that the full geoid level did move north during this period because the land bridge at the Bering straits closed but not to the level of 155 feet deep there yet.
So I guess the sea covered the Strait of Malacca and then topped out with 66 more feet of water to reach the maximum in equilibrium at the equator. I'll use the cosine of latitude to estimate where level should be in the North to complete the Geoid.
Not entirely right but close enough.

Bering Strait. 67 N cos of 67 equals .39 x 66= 25.8 feet that sea level rose there to complete the geoid at that latitude. We are at least filled this far north
? 70 n .34 = 22.6 feet " Unknown if we are there
80n .17 = 11.6'
85n .0857 = 5.75'

I rather doubt it will ever complete before sea level changes reverses direction. Nor can I see what men could do, to change this engine.

 

Yes it does. It is actually the reason for the deep water current draining the Arctic sea into the Atlantic deep. If it weren't for that, I think the Geoid might fill a little faster. But only as much as lessor density/thermal expansion would increase the volume of sea water available to fill the geoid.

The North Atlantic current running into the Arctic will indeed stop when the Geoid fills or gets close enough. Damned if I know how to stop this. I expect we will first notice it by a reduction in current velocity at the monitoring station in the Bering Strait. I am not sure they have another spot so closely watched.

 

Well, now that I think of it, it could be we get the news from the Norwegian's. Their coast line including some habited Fjords probably will be affected with sea levels rising. But those are still rising out of the sea from the weight of the last Ice age.
So it is yet to know.

 

Do believe TPF?

 

To me environmental management is simple and sure you can look at hundreds of millions of years of earth's changing landscape but for only a fraction of that time have humans been sucking oil out of the sub surface...testing nukes...strip mining...deforesting the canopy that scrubs CO2 and gives us oxygen supplies...wiped out countless species in the rainforest so cattle can forage....escalated the cattle industry to the highest methane levels ever..fished with mile long drift nets that don't discriminate what they catch..to study human impact you have to start pretty much at the industrial age and move forward....and some of our problems are snow balling. I can link articles about global warming but in my view folks can read on their own and talk about what they read without the cut and pasting debates some like to use.....Denny was big on those. I'm here for the conversation about these topics...not pages from textbooks. Not that there's anything wrong with those for folks who need links posted. If folks want to make beer in old lead paint cans...have at it!

 

Toilet Paper Fetish?

 

What do you think caused this escalation in the cattle industry? Not that it will have much to do with when the geoid fills.

 

Corporate ranching...with no concern for sustainable animal husbandry...pure greed …..

 

It made me laugh pretty good when Booker went on about how we need to eat less meat. Eating meat is not sustainable! WTF?

 

I see. Well that is one way to see it.
I see it as the market expanding, creating the need for more beef.

In my life time, we have increased the population of the world from less than 2 billion people to more than 7 billion.
Think of that! It took us a great chunk of the Earth's history for us to count more that a billion. Then less that a mans life to expand to 6 billion more. Takes a lot of beef to get that done.

 

Farming thrives as a small operation...it's the giant corporate operations that are ruining the culture. I buy local meat from small farmers here...the beef industry globally is a topic that could have it's own thread...but to this OP it is part of the problem and we're currently mismanaging it pretty much across the board.

 

You can produce enough meat ….it's how you produce it that is the difference maker..and more small farms will be profitable if they don't get shoved aside by corporate practices. Meat factories or Chicken factories....horrible conditions. The planet doesn't lack meat....it lacks balance.

 

Well hell man! We have so many hungary mouths to feed you know. We ran out of Wooly Mammoths way back when we were few. Now we count in the Billions. So many that Booker thinks we need to give up meat.
I think he means you and me though.