{"id":4114,"date":"2014-04-03T21:23:32","date_gmt":"2014-04-04T02:23:32","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/?p=4114"},"modified":"2014-04-05T19:46:41","modified_gmt":"2014-04-06T00:46:41","slug":"global-warming-or-global-freezing","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/?p=4114","title":{"rendered":"Global Warming or Global Freezing?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Does it make any sense to talk about an ice age at a time when global warming makes all the headlines? According to the patterns of cold and warm eras over the past million years or so of earth history, we may be due for an new ice age<\/a>. The general pattern for the past few million years of earth history has been 100,000 years of ice age followed by 12,000 years of temperate climate (an \u201cinterglacial\u201d period). <\/p>\n

We have been in an \u201cinterglacial\u201d now for about that number of years, and thus could be due<\/a> for the start of a new ice age. There are patterns called \u201cMilankovich cycles\u201d that are thought by some to trigger the warm and cold spells<\/a>; these cycles involve the overall tilt of the earth relative to the sun (which varies over a 41,000 year period), the shape of the earth\u2019s orbit (which changes over a period of 100,000 years) and the Earth\u2019s \u2018spin wobble\u2019 (which varies the direction of the earth\u2019s axis over a period of 26,000 years). Arguably our planet is re-entering a tilt \/ orbit \/ wobble combo where cold, dry conditions become the norm; the warm inter-glacial periods that we are used to have been more of an exception to the general rule of an ice-ball planet.<\/p>\n

Recall that in the 1970s, the climate change articles were talking about the prospect of global cooling, along with the threats to human existence that it would pose. There were global cooling articles in both Time<\/a> and Newsweek<\/a> in the mid-70s. (However, that trend may have been driven by media bias for the more scary possibility, given that there were more scientific papers from that time predicting long-run warming than cooling<\/a>.) Global cooling seemed to make sense to non-experts at that time, given that from 1940 thru 1970, average world temperatures were falling (before reversing themselves in the early 1970s).<\/p>\n

So, are we humans now delaying the return to ice<\/a> by raising atmosphere CO2 and methane levels, i.e. the anthropogenic global warming process? Can global warming stop the long-term cycle and avoid a return to a cold earth? Or does it just delay the inevitable, and possibly make the crash even worse when it finally comes \u2013 like using coffee or cocaine to stay up and avoid sleep, then finally collapsing in exhaustion?<\/p>\n

Here are the possibilities, from a logical perspective (without benefit of any scientific analysis as to what is impossible, what is possible but unlikely, and what is possible and more probable):<\/p>\n

*** The ice age cycle is irrelevant, and the forces of human-caused global warming will proceed as predicted over the upcoming 100 to 300 years, causing great angst to human civilization.<\/p>\n

*** The ice age cycle is happening, but human-caused global warming is much stronger and will overwhelm the ice age trends; again, global warming proceeds and does most of its damage.<\/p>\n

*** The ice age cycle is happening, but it will slow down global warming such that for the next century or two, the two trends will cancel each other out (on average; however, there will still be an increase in weather variability as the forces \u201cbattle it out\u201d). Perhaps what we have seen over the past 20 years, i.e. a slowing of temperature increases but an increase in weather variability, is thus a taste of what is in store over the next century or so. But, some scientists who agree that another ice age is coming believe that the effect of greenhouse gasses and other human activities could delay the ice age for several thousand years<\/a>, not just a few hundred.<\/p>\n

*** The ice age cycle is starting, and within the next century it will gradually overwhelm the global warming trend such that after 200 or 300 years, humankind will need to start preparing to survive in a long era of cold and dry weather. <\/p>\n

*** And the wildcard possibility \u2013 that the ice age cycle has started, and for now is being held back by greenhouse gas increases. But at some point, the \u201cdam will break\u201d, and temperatures will drop quite suddenly and quite permanently (and quite unexpectedly \u2013 causing a huge threat to the survival of our species, at least on a civilized basis). For example, some geophysical experts say, there is a chance that human-induced warming could shut down the heat-transmitting ocean currents<\/a> that keep northern latitudes warmer than they otherwise would be. The result could be a faster descent into glacial times instead of a delay. <\/p>\n

Well . . . global warming certainly is already happening, and the scientific community seems extraordinarily united in forecasting very strong and disadvantageous effects from its continuation over the next century or two. And yet, we know from our day to day lives that weather is an extremely complex and chaotic phenomenon, something that science can still predict only with limited accuracy despite burgeoning computer power, expansive real-time inputs from ground stations and satellites, and growing knowledge and understanding of what drives the overall daily weather patterns and dynamics of the planet as a whole. This past winter the NY area had several \u201cviral\u201d social-media scares<\/a> regarding huge blizzards approaching, based on the misinterpretation of computer-model forecasting runs which the experts knew enough not to take seriously.<\/p>\n

I now believe that the scientific community’s growing consensus regarding global warming and the effects it may have cannot be ignored (despite some previous reservations on my part<\/a>). Our leaders should start doing something about it now; and we peons may have to make some sacrifices (gradually higher taxes, temporarily stagnant living standards) to allow realistic preparations to be made. It’s best to be ready for the worst. But we also need to realize that the scientific community can also fall prey to \u201cgroup-think\u201d, that we still are in the early stages of studying and scientifically understanding complexity and chaotic phenomenon<\/a>, and that long term weather patterns and processes might not be any better understood right now than the forces driving next month’s weather. The unanswered questions regarding ice age cycles certainly must be thrown into the mix when considering just how sure we are or aren’t about global warming, and just how much should be done about it. Bottom line, in my view: global warming is now a pretty good bet, but not good enough yet to bet the whole farm on. We need to know a little bit more about those tilt, wobble and orbit cycles, among other things (such as strange attractors in the carbon dioxide cycle and ocean current\/temperature patterns).<\/p>\n

So let the US and other industrial nations start spending more and more on climate and geophysical research aimed at better monitoring, understanding, and forecasting the evolving long-run climate trends. We should take the mainstream science community and its warnings seriously (despite the fact that its scare tactics and snobby, dismissive attitudes toward anyone who dares not agree 100% with them have backfired, as Clive Crook recently pointed out<\/a>). However, the boffins need to know that the public expects them to double and triple-check all their assumptions, and to find ways and develop options for stopping and for mitigating the damaging things that could happen (and in the most cost-effective manner possible; which may well include \u201cgeo-engineering\u201d<\/a>, despite ecologists’ prejudices against it). And then let the business community have the benefit of the technologies that they will develop in the search for truly actionable answers. Greedy and undeserving people will then get rich as a side-effect, but the economy will grow as a result.<\/p>\n

Here’s a side-thought on just how badly we here in the developed world will \u201csuffer\u201d if our governments begin a gradual but focused effort on mitigation and prevention strategies for global warming. In the short run, yes, most of us will need to get by on a bit less, or things won’t be getting better anytime soon. But in the longer run (not really all that long), the new technologies that will be derived from addressing previously unknown climate problems may well return much more in wealth than they cost (if my recommendation that greedy capitalists be given full and free access to all the new technologies being developed on the public’s dime is followed). <\/p>\n

Remember that the Cold War spurred the technological productivity and corresponding wealth of the United States after World War 2, especially from the \u201cSpace Race\u201d of the 1950s thru 1970s. Sometimes it takes a global crisis to inspire humankind to stop sipping lemonade all day on the hammock and really apply itself. Just trying to find out how real the threat of global warming truly is, in itself, will reap large technological benefits . . . assuming that the search is pursued in the labs and computer-banks of science, and not in the political arena (where too much of the debate is now focused).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Does it make any sense to talk about an ice age at a time when global warming makes all the headlines? According to the patterns of cold and warm eras over the past million years or so of earth history, we may be due for an new ice age. The general pattern for the past […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[11,8,9],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4114"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=4114"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4114\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4116,"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4114\/revisions\/4116"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4114"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4114"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4114"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}