We're losing light from the sun?

[CMartin]

I just read this silly article today, and was wondering if anyone had discussed the subject here.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatecha...109374,00.html


It also got me thinking, what about the water shortage? You know, if humans are supposed to consume 4 glasses of water a day, times what, 6 billion humans, how long before we deplete the oceans?!

link fixed by The Bad Astronomer

[ToSeek]

What's silly about it? Apparently it's a legitimate finding. This article covers it in more detail than the very brief one above. I thought about posting about it here, but evidently it has nothing to do with astronomy, so I refrained.

[ObiWan377]

Great, there goes my idea of building a solar-powered home.

[Diamond]

So we're both dimming the Sun (and therefore cooling the planet) and suffering from Global Warming?

Am I the only person who finds these two statements mutually exclusive?

[tjm220]

So we're both dimming the Sun (and therefore cooling the planet) and suffering from Global Warming?

Am I the only person who finds these two statements mutually exclusive?

Look at Venus, not much light gets through to the surface and it is a tad warm too.

[Alex W.]

It also got me thinking, what about the water shortage? You know, if humans are supposed to consume 4 glasses of water a day, times what, 6 billion humans, how long before we deplete the oceans?!

The world has to go to the bathroom some time.

[ToSeek]

It also got me thinking, what about the water shortage? You know, if humans are supposed to consume 4 glasses of water a day, times what, 6 billion humans, how long before we deplete the oceans?!

The world has to go to the bathroom some time.

Usually just before I want to.

[Ari Jokimaki]

Here in Finland we have quite enough darkness at this time of year already, so please, no more! It will be interesting to see what kind of argumentation those global warming deniers are going to use to deny this.

[eburacum45]

Let's see if we can make any sense of this strangely vague statistic.

The amount of insolation reaching the Earth's surface seems to be dropping, right? This implies that the cloud cover is increasing. which would increase the albedo of the Earth, which would tend to cool the planet.

However the increasing cloud cover is probably related to the small observed rise in temperature worldwide, which may or may not be related to anthropogenic global warming.

This warming tends to increase the evaporation of water from the seas, increase the high level water vapour and cloud, and increase the whiteness/reflectivity/albedo of the Earth, thereby cooling it.

It seems to be a self-regulation system that keeps the Earth within a certain range of temperatures; this kind of explains how the Earth has been capable of supporting a biosphere for the last few hundred million years.

The question is; will these self regulating processes cope with the activity of Mankind as it increases in scale?
Since the Earth's biosphere has survived periods of intense volcanic activity and massive meteor impact, I expect that it will.

[Kaptain K]

As I see it, while clouds water droplets) are reflective, water vapor and particulates are absorbtive. So, if less visible light is getting through, the question is: What percentage is being reflected and what is being absorbed?

[Diamond]

So we're both dimming the Sun (and therefore cooling the planet) and suffering from Global Warming?

Am I the only person who finds these two statements mutually exclusive?

Look at Venus, not much light gets through to the surface and it is a tad warm too.

It has no weather either. 8)

[Diamond]

Let's see if we can make any sense of this strangely vague statistic.

The amount of insolation reaching the Earth's surface seems to be dropping, right? This implies that the cloud cover is increasing. which would increase the albedo of the Earth, which would tend to cool the planet.

However the increasing cloud cover is probably related to the small observed rise in temperature worldwide, which may or may not be related to anthropogenic global warming.

This warming tends to increase the evaporation of water from the seas, increase the high level water vapour and cloud, and increase the whiteness/reflectivity/albedo of the Earth, thereby cooling it.

It seems to be a self-regulation system that keeps the Earth within a certain range of temperatures; this kind of explains how the Earth has been capable of supporting a biosphere for the last few hundred million years.

In short, a whole series of negative feedbacks.

The question is; will these self regulating processes cope with the activity of Mankind as it increases in scale?
Since the Earth's biosphere has survived periods of intense volcanic activity and massive meteor impact, I expect that it will.

Yes, but what would all those bureaucrats and global warmers do if people take a pragmatic, long-term view like that?

I have to say that the skeptic in me is waiting for the next "Global Cooling" scare to appear. It will be blamed on "sulphate aerosols" and will be accompanied by lots of pictures of chimney stacks and car tailpipes. No volcanoes will be implicated. It will cause the shutdown of the North Atlantic Drift (again), shorter growing seasons. Paul Erlich will write another book on it. Stephen Schneider will republish "The Genesis Strategy" with a dust jacket that says "This time its going to be worse than previously thought!". No-one will have heard of rising carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

...or maybe that's the cynic in me. You decide.

[Espritch]

I took this to mean that increased clouds were reflecting more visible light (the kind of radiant energy used by plants) while greenhouse gases and water vapor continue to trap infrared radiation (heat), thus allowing for dimming and global warming. So global warming and global dimming aren't necessarily contradictory findings.