[TheForge] The Siberian Hole. (Was: Slack tank.) ..POL OT
Craig Schaefer
calvinjean2 at comcast.net
Sun Aug 10 20:41:20 EDT 2014
and all the guns out there.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Vida" <osan at netlabs.net>
To: "Blacksmithing List Sponsored by ABANA" <theforge at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2014 4:51 PM
Subject: Re: [TheForge] The Siberian Hole. (Was: Slack tank.) ..POL OT
> But... but...
>
> global warming...
>
> corporations...
>
> gay marriage...
>
> think of the *children*...
>
> On 8/8/14, 11:38 PM, Dave Mudge wrote:
>> I am sure that this is the stuff of a great and wonderful extended
>> discussion,
>> and I encourage you all to continue the discussion ELSEWHERE.
>> Unless you can tie this in to Siberian blacksmiths fueling their forges
>> with
>> escaping methane, then please take it off-line.
>>
>> Your ever vigilant list mom,
>> dave m
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 4:40 PM, Geoff Nelson <gjn.pub at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Don't want to start a war so all I'm going to say is I still don't
>>> believe.
>>>
>>> Have a great day.
>>>
>>> Geoff
>>>
>>> On 8/08/2014 12:37 PM, Bruce . wrote:
>>>
>>>> I posted this nearly four years ago. How time flies.
>>>>
>>>> I just thought all of you who still don't believe in climate change
>>>> ought
>>>> to catch this article:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/08/
>>>> 05/scientists-may-have-cracked-the-giant-siberian-
>>>> crater-mystery-and-the-news-isnt-good/
>>>>
>>>> The gist is that that mysterious hole in Siberia (or three holes, now,
>>>> it
>>>> seems) was apparently due to rapid release of methane trapped in frozen
>>>> soil. I reckon the methane was probably in the form of methane
>>>> clathrate
>>>> (or hydrate) that became unstable as the ground warmed. See:
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane_clathrate
>>>>
>>>> Well, we know the polar ice caps are melting. Now we find that methane
>>>> will explode out of the ground when the soil warms in those regions. I
>>>> hadn't actually expected this, but it makes sense. The hydrates in the
>>>> ocean sediment will take longer to be warmed due to the massive heat
>>>> sink
>>>> that is the ocean. That is not true of the land, however, where
>>>> temperature changes can be very local. Furthermore, methane is a
>>>> greenhouse gas, so these methane releases will exacerbate climate
>>>> change.
>>>>
>>>> I'm actually rather glad at this point I have no children or
>>>> grandchildren
>>>> to see this out. I'm rather hoping I get to live out my life before
>>>> the
>>>> next extinction event -- the one that claims humans.
>>>>
>>>> Bruce
>>>> NJ
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 12:36 PM, Bruce Freeman <freemab222 at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I am a scientist, but not a climate scientist. I have for years
>>>>> considered the world to be going the wrong way in terms of
>>>>> ever-increasing human population, continued extinctions of species,
>>>>> and every-increasing reliance on fossil fuels. Frankly, I believe the
>>>>> human race is doomed by its own stupidity, but that doesn't matter
>>>>> much to me because I will be long gone before the cataclysm. I have
>>>>> no offspring nor relatives closer by blood than a second cousin, so it
>>>>> will not be me or mine who suffers from this, but only you or yours.
>>>>>
>>>>> (Is that cold? Shouldn't I be concerned about all children, not just
>>>>> my own? Well, the entrenched powers that be have essentially decided
>>>>> that anyone interested in working with kids must be a pedophile.
>>>>> Therefore, though I do volunteer work, I refuse to do any work with
>>>>> children even though I might find it quite rewarding. Conservatives
>>>>> will blame "those Liberals" for this state of affairs, but being
>>>>> Liberal myself, I know it actually to be due to entrenched powers
>>>>> seeking to increase their power, which is about as non-Liberal as one
>>>>> can get. But all this should be saved for another flame war.)
>>>>>
>>>>> It is a FACT that "global warming" IS occurring.* In addition, I have
>>>>> seen too much evidence NOT to believe that atmospheric carbon dioxide
>>>>> is increasing. That constitutes correlation, and any good scientist
>>>>> (which by no means includes all scientists) recognizes that
>>>>> correlation does not imply causation.**
>>>>>
>>>>> However, there is every reason to believe that an increase in
>>>>> atmospheric carbon dioxide WILL LEAD to global warming. This is due
>>>>> to the infrared absorbance spectrum of carbon dioxide and other
>>>>> atmospheric gases -- the well known greenhouse effect. Light of short
>>>>> wavelength (high energy) such as visible and UV impinge upon the
>>>>> earth, which heats up and re-radiates IR light (low energy, long
>>>>> wavelength).
>>>>>
>>>>> With no atmosphere, all this IR would radiate out into space. The air
>>>>> absorbs some small amount of IR. (I don't have the spectra in front of
>>>>> me, but I recall that oxygen in the "near infrared" -- the higher
>>>>> energy end of the IR spectrum -- whereas nitrogen doesn't absorb until
>>>>> the "far infrared".) Since we wouldn't care to do without a
>>>>> nitrogen-oxygen atmosphere, we can take that amount of absorbance as
>>>>> "baseline." (BTW, this has nothing to do with the "hole in the ozone
>>>>> layer", a common misconception.)
>>>>>
>>>>> The Wikipedia article on air gives the following tabulation:
>>>>> Gas Volume
>>>>> Nitrogen (N2) 780,840 ppmv (78.084%)
>>>>> Oxygen (O2) 209,460 ppmv (20.946%)
>>>>> Argon (Ar) 9,340 ppmv (0.9340%)
>>>>> Carbon dioxide (CO2) 390 ppmv (0.039%)
>>>>> [plus other gases at lesser amounts.]
>>>>> Not included in above dry atmosphere:
>>>>> Water vapor (H2O) ~0.40% over full atmosphere, typically 1%-4%
>>>>> at
>>>>> surface
>>>>>
>>>>> Note that water vapor absorbs a lot of IR, and some say that it cannot
>>>>> be disregarded as a contributor to the greenhouse effect. This is
>>>>> very true, but irrelevant. Water vapor varies widely due to
>>>>> temperature changes, etc., and therefore its contribution to IR
>>>>> absorbance is not constant. In any event, it is not something that
>>>>> human activity increases -- except perhaps insofar as atmospheric
>>>>> water vapor increases due to increased surface temperature.
>>>>>
>>>>> By contrast, when carbon dioxide enters the atmosphere, it pretty much
>>>>> stays there. It can be removed by dissolution in water, by absorption
>>>>> on alkali (which is probably irrelevant), or its incorporation into
>>>>> plant material by photosynthesis. Carbon dioxide is less soluble in
>>>>> warm water than in cold water, so increased ocean temperature may
>>>>> result in increased atmospheric carbon dioxide.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hence, the only ways to lower carbon dioxide in the atmosphere are to
>>>>> vastly increase plant growth or to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now, pretend for a moment that the global warming activists managed to
>>>>> convince everybody on Earth, especially those in positions of power,
>>>>> that atmospheric carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels was
>>>>> ultimately responsible for global warming, and that it continuance
>>>>> would result in severe catastrophe. What would they do? Well, they'd
>>>>> make lots of noise about doing stuff, but ultimately they would do
>>>>> nothing. Atmospheric carbon dioxide would increase till whatever
>>>>> result that causes happened.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why do I say this? Because I understand human nature. Look at the
>>>>> economy. Look at all the lip service given it. Is anything
>>>>> substantial being done by either party? Well, they'd have you think
>>>>> so, but ultimately NO politician will advocate true austerity. (It's
>>>>> not commonly appreciated that even while Nazi Germany was losing the
>>>>> war the Nazi govt. was very careful to maintain production of consumer
>>>>> goods so as to avoid austerity measures, despite the fact that
>>>>> curtailing their production would have freed up factories and workers
>>>>> for munitions production.) People don't like to confront ugly
>>>>> reality, and will make every excuse not to do so, or not to do so in
>>>>> any meaningful way. This same psychology will prevent any meaningful
>>>>> policy changes to reduce significantly the consumption of fossil
>>>>> fuels.
>>>>>
>>>>> But I've saved the real cataclysm for last. People see soda water
>>>>> every day without appreciating its implications. People paddle their
>>>>> boats through marshes, stirring up "rotten egg" smells of hydrogen
>>>>> sulfide, without appreciating its implications. Few people outside
>>>>> the petroleum industry have ever heard of hydrocarbon hydrates,
>>>>> including methane hydrate, but the end may come as a result of it.
>>>>> Carbon dioxide (which will suffocate you and will cause enhanced
>>>>> greenhouse effect), hydrogen sulfide (which not only stinks, but is
>>>>> more toxic than cyanide gas), and methane (believe to exist in vast
>>>>> amounts as a hydrate at the bottom of oceans) may someday upwell from
>>>>> the oceans into the atmosphere as a result of changes in the earths
>>>>> temperature, global or local. If this occurs in a modest way, it WILL
>>>>> increase the greenhouse effect and may lead to a further accelerating
>>>>> increase thereto. If it occurs massively in one fell cataclysm, it
>>>>> will poison the atmosphere or perhaps even render it explosive.
>>>>>
>>>>> Meanwhile, even if humanity recognizes this probability, we are NOT
>>>>> going to make any changes to policies because it might cause true
>>>>> austerity and, heaven forbid, cut into corporate (and fat cats')
>>>>> profits. It is as certain as 1+1=2 that we will continue to blunder
>>>>> on until we run out of fossil fuel. If we manage to last that long,
>>>>> there's some hope. At that point, starvation and war for the
>>>>> remaining resources would reduce the human population to sustainable
>>>>> levels (which may be only a few hundred thousand by then) , evolution
>>>>> would adapt humans or other life forms to tolerate what remains of the
>>>>> ecosystem, and life would go on -- in some form or other.
>>>>>
>>>>> But YOU -- you're doomed, folks. Or rather, your grandchildren are
>>>>> doomed, as I doubt this will happen sooner than a lifetime from now.
>>>>>
>>>>> Happy Holidays, everybody,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --------------------
>>>>> *In a a room at normal "room temperature", place a thermometer and an
>>>>> ice cube or two in a cup of water and stir well. The thermometer WILL
>>>>> read 32*F (0*C). (This is a fact and is not subject to debate.) Keep
>>>>> stirring and watch the ice and the thermometer. The thermometer will
>>>>> continue to read 32*F until the ice is GONE. (This is also a fact,
>>>>> not subject to debate.)
>>>>>
>>>>> At that point the water temperature will begin to rise (at a rate
>>>>> dependent upon many things) until it eventually reaches room
>>>>> temperature. Note that while ice is present in the glass, the
>>>>> temperature does not change despite the fact that warming is clearly
>>>>> occurring. This is due to the distinction between heat (which is
>>>>> increasing) and temperature (which does not increase until the ice is
>>>>> melted).
>>>>>
>>>>> Now apply this to the Earth. The average temperature on earth will
>>>>> not increase significantly till all the ice is melted. (Due to
>>>>> inhomogeneity of mixing, this statement is not such an absolute as the
>>>>> statements about the ice water, but in general it is true.)
>>>>> What this means is that "global warming" refers to an overall increase
>>>>> in the BTU content of the Earth, and NOT to an overall increase in its
>>>>> temperature.
>>>>>
>>>>> ----------------------
>>>>> **E.g., hem lines are correlated to the stock market. If that were
>>>>> true we would have long ago mandated that hem lines not drop below the
>>>>> clavicle -- a result I'd support for all the wrong reasons.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Bruce
>>>>> NJ
>>>>>
>>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>> TheForge mailing list
>>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/theforge
>>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>>> Post: mailto:TheForge at mailman.qth.net
>>>>
>>>> TheForge mail list group photo site is
>>>> http://www.shutterfly.com
>>>> Login: blacksmithblacksmith at hotmail.com
>>>> Password: anvil
>>>>
>>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Kind regards
>>>
>>> Geoff
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> TheForge mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/theforge
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:TheForge at mailman.qth.net
>>>
>>> TheForge mail list group photo site is
>>> http://www.shutterfly.com
>>> Login: blacksmithblacksmith at hotmail.com
>>> Password: anvil
>>>
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>
>>
>>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> TheForge mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/theforge
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:TheForge at mailman.qth.net
>
> TheForge mail list group photo site is
> http://www.shutterfly.com
> Login: blacksmithblacksmith at hotmail.com
> Password: anvil
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
More information about the TheForge
mailing list