[dohboi]

Sorry, cog. Already duked this out with various un-informed people on another thread.

It's simply a physical fact that humans can't survive wetbulb temperatures of 35C/95F for more than a few hours.

Right now, it is very rare for natural environments to reach that level for very long.

In the future, it will become more and more likely in more and more places, especially some of the currently most densely populated places in the world (north India, east China, east US...).

It's really simply basic physics.

You can look it up yourself, or you can persist in your own massive ignorance. Makes no difference to me.

On the other point: It can be a bit...difficult to grow massive amounts of crops and livestock underground.

[onlooker]

Maybe not massive as after the bottleneck we may end up with a population of less than 1 billion so perhaps some sort of laboratory-factory manufacturing of food-crop products. Anyway, I am veering off topic.

[SeaGypsy]

Sea, my girlfriend is from Phil as she attests to how bad it is there, no relief with wind or nighttime chills. In fact, from contacts there, she states things of gotten noticeably worse.

Be extremely careful of your PI GF. Unless you are OK with losing control of your money & perhaps your life. Never believe anything anecdotal coming from any Filipino, they are the worst gossipers in the world. Yes it is f'ing horrible in Manila a lot.

The comments about sourcing cooling underground relate to AGT, ambient ground temperature, which at a few meters underground is +/- 1c of the mean average outside temperature. This number of course is higher nearer the equator, lower towards the poles, sub zero through to about 32-33c. From latitude 0-15 the average outside temperature only needs to be sustained 2-4c hotter to raise AGT to WBT. You are then definitely talking billions of deaths in the tropics, mass crop failure & utterly unlivable monsoon seasons.

[onlooker]

haha, yes Sea , Filipinos are really into gossip. My girlfriend however lives in the States with me and she is my love so I got nothing to worry about. Thanks for the heads up though. As for the tropical countries oh yes they will feel it much worse much faster.

[SeaGypsy]

My filipina wife lives half an hour away with my kids & her fiance, i got nothing to worry about, he is paying for the divorce lol! (Does yours demand joint bank accounts?- standard practice in PI)

If the Clathrate gun goes off, the tropics at sea level could become mass sudden death climate zones very quickly.


(We are at latitude late 30s now, temperate/ maritime. I spent 30 years in the tropics & subtropics, she chose Melbourne, loves the cold)

[onlooker]

haha, no my girlfriend did not even require that we get married. Oh yes I think all of us here perusing the environmental forum know the Monster that is the Clathrate gun. Cid Yama did a great job with all his posts about that. So we all sit here now on Earth with a gun pointed at our head. Oh and slower but just as deadly is the widespread contamination of air, land and sea which one way or the other seems to be knocking off people left and right. Welcome to Toxic Earth circa 2015, have fun in your brief time here.

[SeaGypsy]

It wasn't until I put AGT into my mental arithmetic the mass death tropical coast scenario through inescapable WBT all made sense as a real current time threat, with the calthrate gun on top of other GHG 2-4 degrees sustained rise for a few weeks at a time could reduce Manila to mostly a ghost town, same goes for hundreds of other cities on the tropical coast too big to escape, not enough power to cool down, very high AGT and few bunkers, gridlocked roads normal times. Yeah, no thanks.

[onlooker]

I saw a video of around when the big tsunami hit PHIL and they showed Cebu City which is pretty large, people were running around like chickens without a head, no clue, no organization. I feel bad for them because I think they are ill equipped to withstand and survive natural catastrophes

[onlooker]

Based upon what has transpired so far this summer up there in the Arctic waters does anyone wish to change their timeline or projections?

[Subjectivist]

Nope, I still say next year will be lower than the record low and possibly the final collapse.

[onlooker]

Your going out on a limb Sub, only kidding.

[kiwichick]

+1 sub

[onlooker]

Well it looks like Sub may have been right considering what is happening now in the Arctic and the state of the ice being so thin, it certainly appears possible if not likely this could be the year. As per the standard definition of a sea ice free being "1 million is considered 'essentially ice free.' So, also say this will be the year we get at or below that threshold.

[Subjectivist]

Thanks, but to be fair I used the following graph to make my estimate once it was clear 2015 wasn't going to be the year. In this graph the error range extends from 2014-2016 in the most likely category.


http://neven1.typepad.com/.a/6a0133f03a ... 9a2970b-pi

[Cid_Yama]

Someone needs to fix the poll, the top 2 choices are the same.

[onlooker]

Okay since I created the Poll, I say disregard the first option "This will be the year". I think that solves it. Oh and Cid so what year do you vote for? Let me guess 2016.

[careinke]

My original guess was the year after an El Nino, which is this year or maybe next at the latest. If I have to choose, I'll go with next year, 2017.

[Cid_Yama]

Although this year will be phenomenal, I don't think it will make it to virtually ice free. I would have to say 2017, because after this year, there will only be year old ice left.

[clif]

Since the graph has been updated from 2012 to 2015;

https://14adebb0-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites.goo ... edirects=0

I'm gonna have to go with some time early in the next decade.

[dohboi]

Nice graph, but note that it is ice volume.

But of course this can be 'converted' rather easily these days, since it's almost all just a meter thick.

You'll notice that the lower shaded range goes below 1000 cubic k by the end of this melt season.

If my maths are right, that would also mean under 1 million square k of meter-thick ice. Of course, there will be some ice still that's considerably more than a meter thick, so even with your graph, a 'virtually ice free' Arctic Ocean is well within the range of probability using this rather unscientific curve-fitting approach to prognostication.

(Not that any other approaches have proven much more prescient, mind you. Note also that five of the last nine data points on that graph have fallen outside of the supposed 95% probability range...just sayin' ...

And if in this already extreme year the data point is going to once again fall outside of the 95% range, do you suppose it is more likely to be on the high or low side...???).