d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Nasa Makes Their Funded Studies Free To Access > Here's My Pathetic Attempt To Politicize
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 33,451
Joined: Oct 9 2008
Gold: 2,617.52
Aug 20 2016 11:01am
Link: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/funder/nasa/

The first thing that came to mind was "look up global warming research"

NASA's work obviously isn't going to argue both sides of the case, but its more objective than a lot of the peer reviewed nonsense.

1. Observation of polar ice from space (2014)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4368101/
Obervations:
-Area is slowly receding and temperatures are slowly rising, there seem to be diminishing returns
-Polar ice reduction and temperature inverse are both as much as 6x less than the pro-climate models of the past have predicted
-Ice area is becoming more seasonal, the amount of Ice that lasts multiple years without melting has decreased

2. Global temperature observations (2006)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1576294/
Observations:
-Current temperature is proposed to be the highest the Earth has experienced within 1 million years
-Climate data still falls short of their past warming estimates by as much as 6x
-Concluded that current trend of species becoming extinct is "dangerous." I can see why it could be, but there is no explanation why in this paper.

3. Nasa model calculates what amount of carbon would start the APOCALYPSE (2013)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3849278/
Observations:
-Current GtC (Gigatons of Carbon emitted per year) is 10 GtC/yr
-Amount needed for apocalypse is ~1,000 GtC CUMULATIVE

Its cool that more of this is available, but I'm actually underwhelmed. I was expecting global warming to be a huge priority for them.

One takeaway is that their apocalypse calculations are very promising for our future for at least two generations.
Member
Posts: 77,514
Joined: Nov 30 2008
Gold: 500.00
Aug 20 2016 11:11am
i wouldn't call an apocalypse in 100 years promising as a future for mankind

at some point climate change denial ought to be considered treason towards your species

as for both sides of the case, i don't have any interest in the non scientific side of the case

This post was edited by duffman316 on Aug 20 2016 11:11am
Member
Posts: 35,291
Joined: Aug 17 2004
Gold: 12,730.67
Aug 20 2016 11:12am
Quote (duffman316 @ Aug 20 2016 09:11am)
i wouldn't call an apocalypse in 100 years promising as a future for mankind

at some point climate change denial ought to be considered treason towards your species

as for both sides of the case, i don't have any interest in the non scientific side of the case


Confirmed Reptilian
Member
Posts: 65,866
Joined: May 17 2005
Gold: 17,384.69
Aug 20 2016 11:33am
Quote
apocalypse calculations are very promising for our future for at least two generations


thanks you for correcting us about the global climate change EndlessSky, i think you should inform the medias asap of your researches.

#EndlessSkypromising
Member
Posts: 63,097
Joined: Jan 11 2005
Gold: 9,765.00
Warn: 60%
Aug 20 2016 01:00pm
http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth



Carbon Dioxide Fertilization Greening Earth, Study Finds
From a quarter to half of Earth’s vegetated lands has shown significant greening over the last 35 years largely due to rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, according to a new study published in the journal Nature Climate Change on April 25.

An international team of 32 authors from 24 institutions in eight countries led the effort, which involved using satellite data from NASA’s Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer instruments to help determine the leaf area index, or amount of leaf cover, over the planet’s vegetated regions. The greening represents an increase in leaves on plants and trees equivalent in area to two times the continental United States.

Green leaves use energy from sunlight through photosynthesis to chemically combine carbon dioxide drawn in from the air with water and nutrients tapped from the ground to produce sugars, which are the main source of food, fiber and fuel for life on Earth. Studies have shown that increased concentrations of carbon dioxide increase photosynthesis, spurring plant growth.

However, carbon dioxide fertilization isn’t the only cause of increased plant growth—nitrogen, land cover change and climate change by way of global temperature, precipitation and sunlight changes all contribute to the greening effect. To determine the extent of carbon dioxide’s contribution, researchers ran the data for carbon dioxide and each of the other variables in isolation through several computer models that mimic the plant growth observed in the satellite data.

Results showed that carbon dioxide fertilization explains 70 percent of the greening effect, said co-author Ranga Myneni, a professor in the Department of Earth and Environment at Boston University. “The second most important driver is nitrogen, at 9 percent. So we see what an outsized role CO2 plays in this process.”

About 85 percent of Earth’s ice-free lands is covered by vegetation. The area covered by all the green leaves on Earth is equal to, on average, 32 percent of Earth’s total surface area - oceans, lands and permanent ice sheets combined. The extent of the greening over the past 35 years “has the ability to fundamentally change the cycling of water and carbon in the climate system,” said lead author Zaichun Zhu, a researcher from Peking University, China, who did the first half of this study with Myneni as a visiting scholar at Boston University.

Every year, about half of the 10 billion tons of carbon emitted into the atmosphere from human activities remains temporarily stored, in about equal parts, in the oceans and plants. “While our study did not address the connection between greening and carbon storage in plants, other studies have reported an increasing carbon sink on land since the 1980s, which is entirely consistent with the idea of a greening Earth,” said co-author Shilong Piao of the College of Urban and Environmental Sciences at Peking University.

While rising carbon dioxide concentrations in the air can be beneficial for plants, it is also the chief culprit of climate change. The gas, which traps heat in Earth’s atmosphere, has been increasing since the industrial age due to the burning of oil, gas, coal and wood for energy and is continuing to reach concentrations not seen in at least 500,000 years. The impacts of climate change include global warming, rising sea levels, melting glaciers and sea ice as well as more severe weather events.

The beneficial impacts of carbon dioxide on plants may also be limited, said co-author Dr. Philippe Ciais, associate director of the Laboratory of Climate and Environmental Sciences, Gif-suv-Yvette, France. “Studies have shown that plants acclimatize, or adjust, to rising carbon dioxide concentration and the fertilization effect diminishes over time.”

“While the detection of greening is based on data, the attribution to various drivers is based on models,” said co-author Josep Canadell of the Oceans and Atmosphere Division in the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation in Canberra, Australia. Canadell added that while the models represent the best possible simulation of Earth system components, they are continually being improved.

For more information about NASA's Earth science activities, visit:

www.nasa.gov/earthrightnow <--------------------

By Samson Reiny

NASA's Earth Science News Team

Member
Posts: 33,580
Joined: May 9 2009
Gold: 3.33
Aug 20 2016 01:02pm
Why haven't NASA taken a picture of the entire spherical Earth in one photo yet? They need to quit wasting time on stuff like this
Member
Posts: 63,097
Joined: Jan 11 2005
Gold: 9,765.00
Warn: 60%
Aug 20 2016 01:41pm
Quote (dro94 @ Aug 20 2016 09:02am)
Why haven't NASA taken a picture of the entire spherical Earth in one photo yet? They need to quit wasting time on stuff like this


good question.
Member
Posts: 33,451
Joined: Oct 9 2008
Gold: 2,617.52
Aug 20 2016 06:22pm
Quote (card_sultan @ Aug 20 2016 03:00pm)
http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth

http://i68.tinypic.com/3136efm.jpg

Carbon Dioxide Fertilization Greening Earth, Study Finds
From a quarter to half of Earth’s vegetated lands has shown significant greening over the last 35 years largely due to rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, according to a new study published in the journal Nature Climate Change on April 25.

An international team of 32 authors from 24 institutions in eight countries led the effort, which involved using satellite data from NASA’s Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer instruments to help determine the leaf area index, or amount of leaf cover, over the planet’s vegetated regions. The greening represents an increase in leaves on plants and trees equivalent in area to two times the continental United States.

Green leaves use energy from sunlight through photosynthesis to chemically combine carbon dioxide drawn in from the air with water and nutrients tapped from the ground to produce sugars, which are the main source of food, fiber and fuel for life on Earth. Studies have shown that increased concentrations of carbon dioxide increase photosynthesis, spurring plant growth.

However, carbon dioxide fertilization isn’t the only cause of increased plant growth—nitrogen, land cover change and climate change by way of global temperature, precipitation and sunlight changes all contribute to the greening effect. To determine the extent of carbon dioxide’s contribution, researchers ran the data for carbon dioxide and each of the other variables in isolation through several computer models that mimic the plant growth observed in the satellite data.

Results showed that carbon dioxide fertilization explains 70 percent of the greening effect, said co-author Ranga Myneni, a professor in the Department of Earth and Environment at Boston University. “The second most important driver is nitrogen, at 9 percent. So we see what an outsized role CO2 plays in this process.”

About 85 percent of Earth’s ice-free lands is covered by vegetation. The area covered by all the green leaves on Earth is equal to, on average, 32 percent of Earth’s total surface area - oceans, lands and permanent ice sheets combined. The extent of the greening over the past 35 years “has the ability to fundamentally change the cycling of water and carbon in the climate system,” said lead author Zaichun Zhu, a researcher from Peking University, China, who did the first half of this study with Myneni as a visiting scholar at Boston University.

Every year, about half of the 10 billion tons of carbon emitted into the atmosphere from human activities remains temporarily stored, in about equal parts, in the oceans and plants. “While our study did not address the connection between greening and carbon storage in plants, other studies have reported an increasing carbon sink on land since the 1980s, which is entirely consistent with the idea of a greening Earth,” said co-author Shilong Piao of the College of Urban and Environmental Sciences at Peking University.

While rising carbon dioxide concentrations in the air can be beneficial for plants, it is also the chief culprit of climate change. The gas, which traps heat in Earth’s atmosphere, has been increasing since the industrial age due to the burning of oil, gas, coal and wood for energy and is continuing to reach concentrations not seen in at least 500,000 years. The impacts of climate change include global warming, rising sea levels, melting glaciers and sea ice as well as more severe weather events.

The beneficial impacts of carbon dioxide on plants may also be limited, said co-author Dr. Philippe Ciais, associate director of the Laboratory of Climate and Environmental Sciences, Gif-suv-Yvette, France. “Studies have shown that plants acclimatize, or adjust, to rising carbon dioxide concentration and the fertilization effect diminishes over time.”

“While the detection of greening is based on data, the attribution to various drivers is based on models,” said co-author Josep Canadell of the Oceans and Atmosphere Division in the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation in Canberra, Australia. Canadell added that while the models represent the best possible simulation of Earth system components, they are continually being improved.

For more information about NASA's Earth science activities, visit:

www.nasa.gov/earthrightnow <--------------------

By Samson Reiny

NASA's Earth Science News Team


That's interesting. Thanks!

If you ask me, there's a lot of details at play here that we can't yet quantify.
Member
Posts: 30,815
Joined: Mar 12 2008
Gold: 252.29
Aug 21 2016 02:08pm
Quote (EndlessSky @ Aug 20 2016 05:01pm)
Link: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/funder/nasa/

The first thing that came to mind was "look up global warming research"

NASA's work obviously isn't going to argue both sides of the case, but its more objective than a lot of the peer reviewed nonsense.

1. Observation of polar ice from space (2014)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4368101/
Obervations:
-Area is slowly receding and temperatures are slowly rising, there seem to be diminishing returns
-Polar ice reduction and temperature inverse are both as much as 6x less than the pro-climate models of the past have predicted
-Ice area is becoming more seasonal, the amount of Ice that lasts multiple years without melting has decreased

2. Global temperature observations (2006)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1576294/
Observations:
-Current temperature is proposed to be the highest the Earth has experienced within 1 million years
-Climate data still falls short of their past warming estimates by as much as 6x
-Concluded that current trend of species becoming extinct is "dangerous." I can see why it could be, but there is no explanation why in this paper.

3. Nasa model calculates what amount of carbon would start the APOCALYPSE (2013)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3849278/
Observations:
-Current GtC (Gigatons of Carbon emitted per year) is 10 GtC/yr
-Amount needed for apocalypse is ~1,000 GtC CUMULATIVE

Its cool that more of this is available, but I'm actually underwhelmed. I was expecting global warming to be a huge priority for them.

One takeaway is that their apocalypse calculations are very promising for our future for at least two generations.


They know it is fake.

That's why they don't care.
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Add Reply New Topic New Poll