I mean, if a Volcano can take out an entire transportation mode in such randy destinations, whats wrong with a little AGW?
That volcano is serving us up more crap than man did in all of the past century.
And like it or not, as a Super Power, we will need to get involved.
Nope. Just the opposite. The primary effect volcanoes have on climate has to do with the ash reducing incoming sunlight, a cooling effect. But that's temporary. Pinatubo cooled the Earth slightly for about a year, IIRC.
However, would any legislation lower CO2 amounts enough to counteract, at all, the odd volocano eruption like this one in Iceland? It has without a doubt spewed alot of CO2 into the atmosphere. I say no legislation would change a thing but am willing to listen.
GeneJockey's Link
Volcanoes put out a lot less CO2 than we do.
Comparison of CO2 emissions from volcanoes vs. human activities.
Scientists have calculated that volcanoes emit between about 130-230 million tonnes (145-255 million tons) of CO2 into the atmosphere every year (Gerlach, 1991). This estimate includes both subaerial and submarine volcanoes, about in equal amounts. Emissions of CO2 by human activities, including fossil fuel burning, cement production, and gas flaring, amount to about 27 billion tonnes per year (30 billion tons) [ ( Marland, et al., 2006) - The reference gives the amount of released carbon (C), rather than CO2, through 2003.]. Human activities release more than 130 times the amount of CO2 emitted by volcanoes--the equivalent of more than 8,000 additional volcanoes like Kilauea (Kilauea emits about 3.3 million tonnes/year)! (Gerlach et. al., 2002)
"Human activities release more than 130 times the amount of CO2 emitted by volcanoes--"
I wouldn't have guessed that...assuming the stat is valid. I still don't think gov't can change the direction of a warming Earth...if it's even warming. I'm a fence rider.
There is a problem though, overpopulation. It just aint talked about as much. Interesting times for sure.
And what does overpopulation lead to...?
;-)
still lotta swamp and woods up here....and that country south of Springerville.... in your back yard...imagine a man could disappear pretty well in there.... or down east of Nogales in desert and mountains..lotta places down there untouched by the human element.. ;)
Some of it you can visit, some of it you can only look at. Seeing it, knowing it's there makes me feel better on my little lot with my tiny house.
I think I prefer dense-pack with large undeveloped tracts over lower density development without open space.
Gundy's Link
agree..means a lot.
"I think I prefer dense-pack with large undeveloped tracts over lower density development without open space. "
Lesser of 2 evils for sure imo
Boots's Link
At least three of the five major mass extinctions of complex life on Earth were probably due to aerosols.
If our climate catastrophists want to twiddle the dials and stop climate change, they need to play God and change radiation in the galaxy, the Sun, the Earth's orbit, tidal cycles and plate tectonics. Once they have mastered volcanoes, then we can let them loose on climate change. "
Maybe I should patent an Ash muffler........LOL
Ya got me thinkin there gflight..
Think this summer when it gets hot..I'll fire up the ole woodstove in mancave and turn air waaay down so she smokes real good....maybe cool Minnesota down a few degrees....
Hmmmmm.... least it'd discourage skeeters some LOL
And those big skeeters like 747's and such in the UK are keeping low to the ground too....
Ice went out on Mille Lacs April 4th this year..That's the earliest EVER..for a fact.
Oddly the summers for most part have been cooler than I remember.
And send me some RAIN...March is normally second snowiest month..here in Onamia we had zero..nada..none..And so far ain't had but bout an inch of rain so far in April...
whine and snivel...I'll stop LOL
TD's Link
You can hear the tourists grumble from miles away. The unique thrill of being downwind from a real live volcano wears off very quickly. =D
Kind neat seeing a rock get born. I used to have a couple lava rocks that I embedded quarters in when I got to play with a flow back in the late 80's. Lost nearly every hair on my body on that one, lucky I was wearing a hat. Even singed my eyebrows nearly off. Looked like I had a sunburn on my front half.
Terry
December 04, 2009
Greenhouse Gas Observatories Downwind from Erupting Volcanoes
By Andrew Walden
Problems in the collection of atmospheric CO2 data parallel other absurdities in the global warming fraud. The Climategate scandal is exposing the massive and systematic fraud behind the fabrication of the worldwide temperature record necessary to make the case for global warming. But what about the record of atmospheric CO2?
The U.S. NOAA openly admits to producing a CO2 record which "contains no actual data." NOAA temperature stations sited in ways that artificially inflate temperatures have been exposed over the past two years. CO2 observatories have similar flaws. Two of the five NOAA "baseline" stations are downwind from erupting volcanoes. All five are subject to localized or regional CO2 sources.
Climategate collaborator Dr. Andrew Manning worked with Dr. David Keeling, founder of the Mauna Loa Observatory, where atmospheric CO2 is measured. Manning, whose name appears in 37 Climategate emails, tells BBC: (emphasis added)
The goal behind starting the measurements was to see if it was possible to track what at that time was only a suspicion: that atmospheric CO2 levels might be increasing owing to the burning of fossil fuels.
To do this, a location was needed very far removed from the contamination and pollution of local emissions from cities; therefore Mauna Loa, high on a volcano in the middle of the Pacific Ocean was chosen.
Without this curve, and Professor Keeling's tireless work, there is no question that our understanding and acceptance of human-induced global warming would be 10-20 years less advanced than it is today.
Mauna Loa has been producing a readout which supports Manning's predetermined goal by showing steady growth in atmospheric CO2 concentrations since 1959. This record, highlighted in Al Gore's discredited movie An Inconvenient Truth, is known as the Keeling Curve. A graph of the curve is engraved on a bronze plaque mounted at the entrance to the Observatory’s Keeling Building, 10,000 feet above sea level on the rocky north flank of Mauna Loa. According to the Observatory website: "The undisturbed air, remote location, and minimal influences of vegetation and human activity at MLO are ideal for monitoring constituents in the atmosphere that can cause climate change."
For some reason, they fail to mention the erupting volcano next door.
In the world of global warming climate modeling, massive volcanic explosions are tied to short periods of regional or even global cooling caused by the injection of volcanic gases and particulates into the upper atmosphere. For instance, Mt. Pinatubo's 1991 explosion shot twenty million tons of sulfur dioxide into the upper atmosphere, deflecting as much as 12% of the sun's warming rays.
Just thirty miles from the observatory, Kilauea's Pu`u O`o vent sends 3.3 million metric tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year. That's enough to change local CO2 concentrations without producing the kind of SO2 volumes needed to have worldwide temperature effects. Pu`u O`o has been erupting continuously since 1983. Since 2008 it has been joined by a second eruption even closer to the Observatory -- from Halema`uma`u Crater at the top of Kilauea.
The Nature Conservancy estimate of CO2 produced by human activity is roughly 5.5 tons from each of the world's six billion people. (If you exceed this amount, the Nature Conservancy will "offset" your excess carbon for a tax-deductable $20-per-ton contribution.) Pu`u O`o sends into "the undisturbed air" near "the remote location" the equivalent to yearly CO2 production from an average city of 660,000 people. Air trajectory charts show that most of the air reaching Mauna Loa Observatory first passes over Pu`u O`o and Halema`uma`u.
A USGS fact sheet produced in 2000 describes the effect of "volcanic air pollution" from Pu`u O`o. "On the Island of Hawai`i, the trade winds blow the vog from its main source on the volcano to the southwest, where wind patterns send it up the island's Kona coast. Here, it becomes trapped by daytime (onshore) and nighttime (offshore) sea breezes. In contrast, when light 'Kona' winds blow, much of the vog is concentrated on the eastern side of the island, but some can even reach Oahu, more than 200 miles to the northwest."
Volcanologists have measured CO2 concentrations as high as 48.9% at the Kilauea summit hotspot. After Halema`uma`u began erupting, the U.S. Department of Agriculture declared the Big Island of Hawaii to be a federal disaster area. Forty-five of the forty-eight protea growers downwind of the eruptions have been wiped out by VOG.
In spite of the claims about "undisturbed air," there is a clear difference between eruption years and non-eruption years in the rate of growth of Mauna Loa CO2 readings.
During the 1969-74 Mauna Ulu eruption, also in Kilauea’s East Rift, Mauna Loa set two records for CO2 increase. Kilauea’s East Rift again erupted in 1977, expelling 32 million cubic meters of magma -- and the 1977 rate of increase at Mauna Loa Observatory set another record. In seven of the 25 years of continuous eruption since 1983, annual CO2 growth rates measured at Mauna Loa exceeded those of all previous years. Average CO2 concentration increase for the 17 non-eruption years is 1.00 ppm. Average CO2 concentration increase for the 33 eruption years is 1.62 ppm.
It wasn't always easy to win funding for Mauna Loa. Climategate collaborator Manning explains: "Dave Keeling suffered many sleepless nights, even as late as in the 1990s, being forced again and again to justify continued funding of his programme." A chapter of Spencer Weart’s 2008 book The Discovery of Global Warming lionizes Keeling’s efforts. Its title: "Money for Keeling: Monitoring CO2 Levels."
But the funding did start to roll in, and Mauna Loa is no longer alone. A "global network" of over one hundred CO2 stations is now headed by Mauna Loa and four other "baseline" observatories. Their readouts are used to produce a worldwide CO2 readout called GLOBALVIEW CO2.
If localized volcanic activity is affecting CO2 measurements at Mauna Loa, why would the "global network" be following along? Perhaps it's because all of the CO2 stations -- including the NOAA's other baseline stations at the South Pole; American Samoa; Trinidad Head, CA; and Pt. Barrow, AK -- are subject to localized, and in some cases regional, CO2 influences.
The American Samoa observatory is about 150 miles downwind from where the one-mile wide Nafanua volcano has emerged. The undersea volcano is described by University of Sydney marine scientist Dr. Adele Pile as producing an undersea environment with an acidic pH of 3 (similar to vinegar), carbon dioxide bubbling up "like champagne," and extremely hot venting water so toxic that "any life swimming into this pit immediately dies, except these amazing scavenging worms." Woods Hole oceanographers report they "discovered that hot, smoggy water from the crater was spilling over the top or through breaches in the crater rim and billowing outward. It formed a halo around the rim that was hundreds of feet thick and extended more than 4 miles." In addition, Samoa's lush tropical vegetation is a big daytime consumer of CO2 thus dropping CO2 levels sharply during the day and raising them sharply at night. Trinidad Head Observatory is on a Northern California peninsula jutting into the Pacific about twenty miles north of Eureka, CA. Like Samoa, Trinidad Head is subject to substantial vegetation-driven changes in CO2 levels from the surrounding temperate forests and wetlands. The prevailing winds come in off the Pacific, which are influenced by coal-happy China. The South Pole Observatory is just yards away from a power plant which burns jet fuel 365 days a year to provide electricity and heat for Amundsen Station. (Researchers claim that prevailing winds come from the opposite direction.) It is also about 800 miles from Antarctica's Mt. Erebus volcano, which has continuously erupted since 1972. Because the atmosphere's ability to carry water vapor is cut approximately in half by every ten-degree-C drop in temperature, the extremely low temperatures at the South Pole mean that only trace amounts of water vapor are in the atmosphere. CO2 mixes with water vapor in the atmosphere to form H2CO3 (carbonic acid), giving rainfall a slightly acidic pH and washing CO2 from the air. The uniquely dry and cold conditions of the South Pole prevent this from occurring, thus altering the natural atmospheric carbon elimination process and magnifying the effect of CO2 sources. Amundsen Station personnel and emissions from the 12,000-foot Mt. Erebus volcano are also implicated in the 1990s ozone hole scam.
The Observatory at Point Barrow, Alaska is about 170 miles downwind from the Prudhoe Bay headquarters of the North Slope oil industry. It is therefore subject to a localized increase in man-made air pollution, including CO2 emissions. Coincidentally, of course, the Barrow Observatory was established in 1973 -- just before construction began on the Trans-Alaska Pipeline. Barrow is also annually subject to several months of "Arctic haze," which University of Alaska Geophysicist Ned Rozell indicates is from ex-Soviet and new Chinese "iron, nickel and copper smelters and inefficient coal-burning plants."
CO2 produced by China's massive and growing reliance on coal is being used to justify CO2 controls on the U.S. and Europe. The Pacific bias of these five "baseline" locations is hard to miss. If one were seeking CO2 increases, downwind of China would be the place to go find them.
The NOAA's preference for warm maritime CO2 collection sites on ocean waters between 30 degrees north and 30 degrees south -- including many reached only by boat -- means that "flask network" collections are primarily conducted in highly humid areas. When the flasks are returned to Mauna Loa, the water vapor is removed by heating. This process breaks H2O out of the carbolic acid, leaving behind the CO2 to be measured in the dry air sample. Besides the South Pole, few CO2 flasks are sent to low-humidity desert areas with less airborne carbolic acid to measure as CO2. All of these variables create the opportunity for mischief.
Local CO2 consumption by photosynthesis can produce a profound daylight decline and nighttime increase in CO2 concentrations. Calculations to account for these and other local or regional fluctuations create a lot of room for "hiding the decline," "fudge factors," and the other CRU-style techniques characteristic of politically-driven "post-normal" science.
As the Copenhagen talks approach, the November 23 AP headline blares: "Mauna Loa Observatory's carbon dioxide readings near worst-case scenario." In the midst of the Climategate revelations, the AP replicates global warming front-man Geoff Jenkins' 1996 Climategate scam by releasing "projected" CO2 concentrations of 390 ppm early -- the "highest for the past million years" -- "for the silly season."
In 2008, Mauna Loa readings of 387 ppm were supposed to be "The highest in 650,000 years," according to the U.K.'s Guardian. Can't they make up their minds?
Of course, neither the AP nor the Guardian makes note of the fact that the latest CO2 increases come in the midst of a climatic cooling cycle. Nor are the "paleo"-records of CO2 "for the past million years" questioned, even as "paleo"-temperature records are completely discredited as being the fraudulent work of politically motivated hacks at the East Anglia CRU.
Instead, AP-readers are expected to trust "[t]he Mauna Loa researchers [who] extend their measurements through their 'flask network' -- containers sent to dozens of places around the world each week or carried on commercial ships so people can fill them with air and send them back to be measured for CO2 and other gases."
The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) boldly announces the methodology behind its worldwide CO2 chart created from these "Flask Network" readings:
GLOBALVIEW-CO2 is derived using the data extension and data integration techniques described by Masarie and Tans [1995].
The impetus for the work done by the many cooperating organizations and institutions is to make atmospheric measurements of trace gas species that will facilitate a better understanding of the processes controlling their abundance. These and other measurements have been widely used to constrain atmospheric models that derive plausible source/sink scenarios. Serious obstacles to this approach are the paucity of sampling sites and the lack of temporal continuity among observations from different locations. Consequently, there is the potential for models to misinterpret these spatial and temporal gaps resulting in derived source/sink scenarios that are unduly influenced by the sampling distribution. GLOBALVIEW-CO2 is an attempt to address these issues. ...
In case readers don't get the point, the NOAA also explains (emphasis in original):
GLOBALVIEW-CO2 is derived from measurements but contains no actual data. To facilitate use with carbon cycle modeling studies, the measurements have been processed (smoothed, interpolated, and extrapolated) resulting in extended records that are evenly incremented in time.
Processed, smoothed, interpolated, and extrapolated? Data extension? Data integration? No actual data? Making atmospheric measurements that will facilitate a predetermined conclusion?
This all sounds very familiar.
GeneJockey's Link
Yes, it does, because it uses the time honored technique of telling half-truths, and outright lies to induce Fear Uncertainty, and Doubt - FUD.
Note especially how Walden tries to convince you that the CO2 data aren't publicly available from NOAA. They are.
Walden's lying, Rhody. He thinks you're too stupid or lazy to check out his lies.
Are you?
"Yes, it does, because it uses the time honored technique of telling half-truths, and outright lies to induce Fear Uncertainty, and Doubt - FUD. "
And who do we learn this from, the AlGore and his religious mindless minions?
Yes I made wild claims, and you responded yet again with the same.
We can argue about this for years while hundreds of thousands of people die from serious terrestrial events.
And then there is the extra terrestrial events, such as comets, asteroids and sun spots.
Whats a Warmer to do?
"I regret I have but two hands to wring for my country!"
The little girl, who had just opened her book, closed it slowly and said to the total stranger, 'What would you like to talk about?'
'Oh, I don't know,' said the congressman. 'How about global warming or universal health care', and he smiles smugly.
'OK,' she said. 'Those could be interesting topics. But let me ask you a question first.
A horse, a cow, and a deer all eat the same stuff - grass. Yet a deer excretes little pellets, while a cow turns out a flat patty, and a horse produces clumps of dried grass. Why do you suppose that is?'
The legislator, visibly surprised by the little girl's intelligence, thinks about it and says, 'Hmmm, I have no idea.'
To which the little girl replies, "Do you really feel qualified to discuss global warming or universal health care when you don't know s**t."
Walden's lying, Rhody. He thinks you're too stupid or lazy to check out his lies.
Hmmm... looks to me like a report on activities that had happened while processing data. I never extrapolated out of that article that the data was never available. It seems that this statement from NOAA:
GLOBALVIEW-CO2 is derived from measurements but contains no actual data. To facilitate use with carbon cycle modeling studies, the measurements have been processed (smoothed, interpolated, and extrapolated) resulting in extended records that are evenly incremented in time.
... is the clincher for you that somehow he is lying. What I see here is a statement that breeds confusion.
CO2 is derived from measurements but contains no actual data...
... and Walker didn't author that statement. And the rest just adds to the fact that the gatekeepers of data NOAA have 1.raw uninterpreted measurements (data actually) 2. measurements that has been smoothed, interpolated, and extrapolated and called raw data 3. statistically processed data 4.projected data, that is extended records that are evenly incremented in time.
Walker does research as to why that last statement from NOAA is what it is. The NOAA statement reads like that NOAA isn't even sure their raw measurements is actually data that can be used with any accuracy. Walker finds in his research that there may be reason for that statement to be actually true. Thus, the article.
Of course... it's all lies.
Data are ALWAYS processed, in every field. NOAA makes the raw data available online. Want to do your own analysis? Knock yourself out.
That's how science works, Rhody - people generate their own data and analyze it by their own method, or they take the same data and analyze it by their own method.
The NOAA actually says so right in the same paragraph!
GLOBALVIEW-CO2 is derived from measurements but contains no actual data. To facilitate use with carbon cycle modeling studies, the measurements have been processed (smoothed, interpolated, and extrapolated) resulting in extended records that are evenly incremented in time. Be aware that information contained in the actual data may be lost in this process. Users are encouraged to review the actual data in the literature, in data archives (CDIAC, WDCGG), or by contacting the participating laboratories.
So, what,then, is Walden's point?
But, you'll have to ask him, I can only infer that's how he reacted to that paragraph. The article is his, you're free to demonstrate the parts that are lies... as you say, show your work. I see the piece as a contrarian POV.. that really ticks off the Algorian AGW crowd about CO2...
Considering your reaction, you attacking me as a believer of his ascertains is rather childish on your part. He may or may not be correct, I don't know. What I do know is, you're working the wrong person to vet this guys work. You're the one who has a problem with it.
I don't see this as a scientific paper at all, but questions about how data is collected.
Sorry, but that's nonsense. Walden didn't do any research. All he did was to trim the quote to make you think that 'globalview CO2' is the only CO2 data available from NOAA, that they don't let you see the raw data, whereas in fact they not only link to it, they ENCOURAGE you to review it.
So, raw data available, others encouraged to do their own analysis.
"Sounds familiar" he says? Sure does.
Then there are the lies he lards up the article with:
"Of course, neither the AP nor the Guardian makes note of the fact that the latest CO2 increases come in the midst of a climatic cooling cycle."
Every year of the last decade was hotter than all but one year of the previous decade. Last year was one of the three warmest in 130 years. We're not in a 'climatic cooling cycle'.
"even as "paleo"-temperature records are completely discredited as being the fraudulent work of politically motivated hacks at the East Anglia CRU. "
Who have just been exonerated. Twice. So, un-discredited.
Cripes, Rhody - can't you tell a hit piece when you see one? Usually, it requires that dozens, hundreds, even thousands of scientists all tell exactly the same lie, and all fudge their data exactly the same way.
Report That Exonerated CRU, Also Said Global Warming Hockey Stick Exaggerated
Posted by jeff dunetz
Friday, April 16th at 11:50AM ED
Another (non flatulent) sacred cow of the climate change moonbats has been taken down a peg, Professor Michael Mann’s hockey stick In the same report exonerating the CRU scientists for Climate-gate, the data compiled for the Hockey stick was bashed because the data it used was compiled through inappropriate methods.
The term “hockey stick” was coined by the head of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, Jerry Mahlman, to describe the pattern of historical temperatures in the northern hemisphere (it kind of looks like a hockey stick on its side). The chart, created by Dr. Michael Mann (now at Penn State University) shows relatively stable temperatures until around 100 year ago when we see a spike up. It is one of the key pieces of information the global warming moonbats use to prove that global warming is about to destroy the world.
The Chart became the center of the IPCC’s argument that man-made global warming was real, even though (as memos released as part of the Climategate scandal revealed) the CRU at the University of East Anglia , had serious problems with the Hockey Stick chart, but it was pushed through by the chart’s creator Dr. Mann.
…there were two competing graphs – Mann’s hockey stick and another, by Jones, Briffa and others. Mann’s graph was clearly the more compelling image of man-made climate change. The other “dilutes the message rather significantly,” said Folland. “We want the truth. Mike [Mann] thinks it lies nearer his result.” Folland noted that “this is probably the most important issue to resolve in chapter 2 at present.
Briffa believed that the world’s temperature heated up about 1,000 years ago (the Medieval Period) as much as they seemed to in the 1990s, and was upset that Mann’s chart did not reflect that climate change. Even the co-creator of Mann’s paper on the hockey stick began to walk way from it. That missing warming trend from 1,000 years ago has been criticized from many directions.
As part of the investigation of Climate-gate, Professor David Hand, president of the Royal Statistical Society, said that the hockey stick:
“…used a particular statistical technique that exaggerated the effect [of recent warming],” he said
“…It is very surprising that research in an area that depends so heavily on statistical methods has not been carried out in close collaboration with professional statisticians,” the report concluded.
Other than the hockey stick, Professor Hand takes the “corporate line.”
Prof Hand said his criticisms should not be seen as invalidating climate science. He pointed out that although the hockey stick graph – which dates from a study led by US climate scientist Michael Mann in 1998 – exaggerates some effects, the underlying data show a clear warming signal.
Even so, this “crack’ in the wall of those skeptical that global warming is a hoax, is a first. As the anti-global warming consensus continues to build expect that crack to become a major breech
eek... we're all gonna die!!!
Why are you re-posting blog posts from political blogs? I mean, do I post things from DailyKos to support AGW?
Here's a question - you want to talk DATA, and ANALYSIS OF DATA? Or do you want to talk personalities and horseraces, innuendo and character assassination?
It's to irritate you... ;^]
You're so serious about this.
And I'd bet some of these guys have never read jeff dunetz.
And I didn't start this thread.... ;o]
:-P
Iceland ranks #1 for having a little over 80% of the population accepting that evolution is true (the US ranks next to last with 40%...just ahead of Turkey)
Miller JD, Scott EC, Okamoto S (2006) Public acceptance of evolution. Science 313:765-766.
So I could see Robertson blaming Iceland's volcanic eruption as punishment from god.... but he's being quiet on this one as far as I can tell. It must because Iceland has lots of white folks.
Does he speak for you?
;o]
If it's presumptuous of non-Christians to think Robertson represents all of Christianity, isn't it also presumptuous for a Christian to claim to know what most non-Christians think?
Most non-Christians I talk to see Robertson not as representative of Christianity, but rather as a self-serving bigot who uses the shield of Christianity to further his ambition. Certainly, few if any of my Christian relatives, friends, and acquaintances are anything like THAT.
Nope, as far as THIS non-Christian is concerned, Pat Robertson represents only himself.
;-)
another hide the decline (from the dust in the air),
whiles the dust on the snow and glaciers will accelerate the melt, and thus justify their claims..
LOOK! the glaciers are melting! the glaciers are melting!
We are all going to die.. Send Money quick... BUY time... the end is near...
Youlto's Link
I ran the Western States 100 Mile Endurance Run in the high Sierras that year and we experienced the coldest temperatures in the history of the race as a result.
The race is the last weekend of June, in CA, in the heat of the summer.
Thanks to that volcano and the cooling it created, I ran my best time ever in that race.
As Boots noted, that volcano, all by itself, blew more CO and other crap into the atmosphere than all of mankind did in several years!