Slashdot Mirror
Climate Change Will Boost Plane Turbulence, Suggests Study
sciencehabit writes "Get used to a bumpy ride. The strength and frequency of atmospheric turbulence affecting transatlantic flights will increase by midcentury, a new study suggests. During winter months, 16 of the 21 often-used ways in which scientists measure turbulence suggest that the average intensity of the plane-rattling phenomenon will be between 10% and 40% stronger when CO2 concentrations are double their preindustrial value. Accordingly, the frequency of moderate-or-greater turbulence—intensities at which passengers will experience accelerations of 0.5 g or more, which are strong enough to toss items about the cabin—will rise by between 40% and 170%. As a result of pilots needing to dodge strong turbulence, flight paths will become longer, and fuel consumption and carbon dioxide emissions will increase—possibly leading to even more turbulence."
or, alternatively, none of those things will happen. Since the mid 90s billions of dollars and euros and yen have been wasted on climate models, most of which have been utterly useless. Even this year major factors have been discovered that render all previous models void, and the "climatologists" cherry-pick, cook the books, from the pile of models after the fact to try to justify their existence. This pseudo-science should have its plug pulled, it serves no purpose other than pumping "cap and trade" scams.
citation needed
I'm god, but it's a bit of a drag really...
That depends on how hot the coffee on your lap is.
or, alternatively, none of those things will happen. Since the mid 90s billions of dollars and euros and yen have been wasted on climate models, most of which have been utterly useless. Even this year major factors have been discovered that render all previous models void, and the "climatologists" cherry-pick, cook the books, from the pile of models after the fact to try to justify their existence. This pseudo-science should have its plug pulled, it serves no purpose other than pumping "cap and trade" scams.
Definiton of bull shit:
Bullshit is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising.
"Bullshit" does not necessarily have to be a complete fabrication; with only basic knowledge about a topic, bullshit is often used to make the audience believe that one knows far more about the topic by feigning total certainty or making probable predictions. It may also merely be "filler" or nonsense that, by virtue of its style or wording, gives the impression that it actually means something.
This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
This is yet another reason to build high speed rail wherever it makes sense, between city pairs at least 100 miles apart where it starts to become too far to drive, and up to 500 miles apart where flying starts to become faster (curb to curb) and more cost-effective.
Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
Global warming involves temperature changes on the scale of a couple of degrees over decades... it's not something you'll really notice on a personal scale even over 25 years. It's more likely your beach water is part of a fairly localized change that may or may not be the result of the overall GW picture.
Keep going back. I can remember from my childhood in the '70s, the warnings about the new ice age that was coming if we kept burning fossil fuels. Funny how the solution for warming (Global Warming) and cooling (Ice Age) were exactly the same. Remarkable stuff, this CO2, it can make things hotter and colder, must be some kind of molecular thermos. :P
How do researchers know what turbulence was like in the pre-industrial era? Unless Ancient Astronomers took the readings and handed them down to us in carved stone tablets, we are merely GUESSING what the turbulence was like.
sudo make me a sandwich
Pretty obvious when there's a sentence like this " Even this year major factors have been discovered that render all previous models void"
ALL? Really?
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
[citation needed]
There was some concern that we might be entering a natural cooling cycle or that if aerosol emissions continued to increase we could trigger an ice age (they decreased), however, even as far back as 1969 global warming was the more widely published and accepted theory. You might be confusing "scientifically illiterate reporters" with "scientists".
Citation provided
Fanatically anti-fanatical
I was studying ecology in the mid-1970s, and the panic then was certainly "the ice age is coming NOW!"
If you're "remembering" the predictions as being 3000-5000 AD, then you're probably recalling the "normal" ice age predictions of the time. The panic-mongers were claiming that the ice age was already starting to happen in the 1970s, and that we'd be well frozen over by 2000 or so.
If the high summer temps ever get around to climbing like the AGW folks claim, high speed rail will be pretty tough.
You see, even with those highly-engineered rails, too much heat can cause expansion that warps the metal.
Of course, we haven't seen an increase in such warming-caused warping.
Odd, that.
(No, it's not because the rails are so much better - HSR uses welded, continuous rail, which is more susceptible to that sort of thing)
I could see two ways in which these studies are/will be wastes:
1. By now, the studies are telling us what we already know, and aren't convincing policymakers or lobbyists to change because their opposition to curbing carbon dioxide emissions wasn't ever really based on skepticism of the science.
2. When most of the developed world starts feeling the negative consequences, they'll do something to alleviate the problem. And it will be some short-sighted solution that no one really fully investigated. Like iron injection. To deal with the consequences of that will be a chain of other decisions terminating in gorillas freezing to death. The bill will be sent to people who weren't involved in the decision to ignore the early warnings about climate change anyway.
Shilling is not a bad existence. You get paid by your masters to argue in favor of their position, and you can ignore whatever other facts may make that position seem harmful over the long term, because you are able to spend their money today.
He doesn't have to be directly in their pockets, of course. Perhaps he believes that by shilling for the Koch Brothers that he'll get cheaper gas or lower taxes. Maybe he prefers their flavor of John Birch racism. Whatever the reason, for him it's "profitable" in the short term, and he truly doesn't care about the long term. So he's not going anywhere. Best tactic is to ignore him.
John
Climate change will ruin the crops.
Climate change will ruin crabs.
Climate change will kill all the coral.
Climate change will benefit or kill insects (whether they're considered pests or beneficial in that particular article, respectively).
Climate change will cause areas to get wetter (if that would be bad).
Climate change will cause other areas to desertify (if that would be bad).
Climate change will make some places warmer (if that would be bad) or colder (if that would be bad).
Climate change will cause (whatever animal or vegetable species is held fondly) to die off.
Climate change will cause (whatever animal or vegetable species is nasty, disliked, or hated) to flourish.
Climate change will cause your airline rides to be bumpier.
Climate change will cause weather patterns to "change".
Climate change will cause widespread war.
Climate change will cause famine.
Climate change will increase the rate of disease.
Specifically, Climate change will cause more diarrhoea.
Climate change will cause more snowfall (where that's bad), or reduce it (where that's bad).
Climate change will cause more, bigger hurricanes and extreme weather events.
Climate change will increase the number of volcanoes and earthquakes. (My personal favorite.)
Climate change will increase the incidence of stress-related behaviors* and mental illness.
*presumably, more mass killings since that's the fear-du-jour?
Climate change will increase the level of particulates in the air, and generally decrease air quality everywhere.
Climate change will raise the cost of (everything), including internet services and cable television.
Did I miss any?
I haven't yet heard how climate change will increase meteorite impacts, but I'm almost certain there's someone, somewhere working on a rationalization to "explain" that too.
This list was assembled from the news reports I've paid attention to in JUST THE LAST 4 months.
-Styopa
As far as I can remember
So how many kilos of bullshit is your memory worth?
As for me, I find it interesting how much of the most alarmist climate research comes out of two places, the University of East Anglia (this research) or the Goddard Institute for Space Studies in NASA (particularly, the James Hansen stuff).
It's plain that the plain the plane is flying above serves as a base for an infinite number of planes; which plane is it that the increased turbulence is in? Can the plane not fly above or below this plane? Can't a fella go off on a tangent around here?
--Geometrically Challenged Guy
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Bullshit is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising.
Bullshit. Bullshit is just a non-PC way of saying citation needed.
Yes, the climate changes over time naturally. There have been cyclic ice ages and warmings.
But now the amount of change over time is increasing more than the historical records show occurred naturally in the past.
Instead of looking just at your beach thermometer (which is only one set of data points on a very large globe), try reading up on paleoclimatology, and see how the history of planetary weather has been preserved in ice, rocks, and plants, and how researchers use the different forms of evidence to cross check their measurements. There is a lot of evidence out there if you know where to look.
John
About page 280 he discusses the problem of modeling the future, given huge computer power.
There are 2 choices of models : either one models the physical reality in careful detail or one has averaging functions. Detailed models necessarily have chaos built in, in which case the results vary wildly and the modeler has to apply averaging or a selection function.
The choice of averaging or selection functions, in both approaches to modeling, determines the actual real-world usefulness of the models. There is no a priori way of knowing what averaging functions are useful.
It seems to me there is little discussion of the effects of different averaging functions in climate model, and not enough history to know which will be useful.
In any case, it is easy to build models, and very difficult to know their relationship to external reality.
I don't give a flying fuck about the environmentalist lobby. I'm talking about the overwhelming majority of climatologists and what they say. Trying to assert that climatologists are part of some evil liberal conspiracy to destroy the economy makes about as much as sense as Creationists claiming biologists are part of some evil liberal conspiracy to destroy Christianity.
In short, you're picking the low hanging fruit (which is the green movement), and insisting that the actual scientists are somehow part of a large political cabal. I reject that completely, just as I reject Creationists' claims that biologists are part of some atheistic cabal to bring down religion.
Again, I repeat, the universe doesn't give one fucking shit about your political leanings. They are utterly meaningless. If releasing hundreds of millions of years of sequestered carbon in the space of three centuries of industrial activity is seriously influencing global climate, then that's what is happening, and that's the end of the sentence. How we choose to deal with it is the political aspect, but we are gravely stupid species if we somehow think that any particular economic system is somehow favored by the universe, and that seems to be where your problem lies. The universe will kill a Libertarian just as quickly as it will kill a Conservative, a Liberal, a Socialist or a Communist. It does not fucking care about politics.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
i first read about global warming sometime around 1990. have any of the original predictions come true?
so far i have noticed that the water at the beach in NYC is colder compared to the 80's
Yes, sea levels have risen due to there being less ice covering the poles of the planet.
Also, a local temperature of water in one place going down does not actually preclude the planets average temperature having gone up as it is quite big.
The real thing to remember about climate change though is that there is only really one certainty and that is that the already extreme weather events you experience will become far more extreme due to there being more energy in the atmosphere (even cold weather events as increased wind chill causes temperatures to feel colder even if the are actually slightly warmer)
I dont read
Bring back airships! - Perhaps equipped with jet engines... They are not susceptible to air turbulence as far as I know.
"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --