anlomedad

#NoBots
I know nothing of Snow and climate change. But its complexity is fascinating.
And how should our societies live within biophysical planetary boundaries?
*322ppm

Public Key

npub1l5jvx9pac7nkef83x85eagftsr82flnqpltdpn43hrlpma7fj0hsvhqwsw

NIP-05 Address

anlomedad_at_fedifreu.de@momostr.pink

Profile Code

nprofile1qqs06fxrzs7u0fmv5ncnr6v75y4cpn4ylesql4kse6cm3lsa7lye8mcpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduqs6amnwvaz7tmwdaejumr0ds493vgz

Publishing to

relay.primal.net

Author Public Key

npub1l5jvx9pac7nkef83x85eagftsr82flnqpltdpn43hrlpma7fj0hsvhqwsw

Show more details

Last Notes

2026-10-26 16:55:49 UTC

- reply

I am intrigued that you didn't first call out the hillarious web design of the Swedish digital museum that cuts off the top half of their photos.
Here's your linked displayed in iPad Safari .
https://fedifreu.de/system/media_attachments/files/117/508/243/358/800/868/original/0f63087fa9c37e9f.jpeg

2026-10-21 17:08:14 UTC

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJyQXGynwsg
Want to chuckle? Must watch! Woody Harrelson spreads Exxon lies.
His accent is just perfect!
#ClimateChange #YellowDotStudios #ExxonKnew

2026-10-15 18:48:21 UTC

Toxic haze in South East Asia from fires in Indonesia
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ck1l3djr5d5do
They're trying to seed clouds and also use dry ice to split up the ash particles somehow so they can rise higher up in the atmosphere and not clump together near the surface so much.
But before we cry CLIMATE CHANGE, the attribution is actually different: these fires are intentionally started for agriculture purposes. As slash & burn to clear rain forest, or burning harvest residue on the fields:
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckreyq9re0n0o
Fires tend to get out of hand tho…
The area burned this year so far is said to be 900,000 ha. But no comparison to past years is given.
Mark Parrington from ECMWF, Copernicus, posted a carbon emission chart for Indonesia which puts 2026 as rather far below other El Nino years, despite El Nino strength already surpassing 2015 by a lot.
https://bsky.app/profile/mparrington.bsky.social/post/3mwvdyoykh22e
Maybe that's an indication regarding the stuff that is burning this year. Lower carbon emissions >might< mean: not so much forest is burning but rather the harvest stubble on fields.
But without the number for area burned in those other Nino years, this is impossible to say.
#ClimateChange #Indonesia #ElNino #ENSO #Wildfires #rainforest #agriculture

2026-10-15 09:54:01 UTC

- reply

Thank you, Evan! The blue line in the chart is from data by Rohling et al 2021 and shows the same skipped beat.
Data (likely) from: https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/paleo-search/study/33752
Looking at the text, they might have just taken a sea level by Westerhold and played with its age model.
The one in my plot is "Westerhold unconstrained".
The obliquity beat is also skipped in the other text file, the constrained one.
In any case, Miller is not in the chart. It just used to be my go-to study for sea level, that's why I refer to it in my toots.
So do Miller, Westerhold and Rohling use a different d18O_to_sealevel transfer functions for different time periods?
I wasn't aware that team Westerhold also has a sea level reconstruction. My Ceara Rise surface air temperature is based on their global temperature proxy "quilt" where they exclusively use Ceara Rise for the most recent 5 million years.
Their supplement has formulae to convert the deep-sea stuff into surface air temperature. See page 58 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aba6853
These formulae are split at 1.8Ma for surface air °C .
Which is also far, far away from the skipped beat in 2.73 Ma.
It's the only period split I am aware of.
And as you know: I am no expert in anything. So don't expect that I actually read or understood the papers I am quoting here and in the thread 😁 I'm just plotting along…

2026-10-15 08:19:17 UTC

- reply

Oh!
A few years ago, when I started to get my head around paleo climate evolution, I extensively brooded over Miller et al 2020, sea level rise. It stretches 60 million years but I only focussed the last 4Ma. Which is far, far away from the mid Miocene 16Ma.
But it does cover the accepted time when the Pacific got closed off from the Gulf of Mexico.
Sea level conveniently followed Milankovic cycles so I looked at this teamwork too.
And discovered an oddity:
In 2.73Ma, which is at the very end of the Pliocene, Miller's sea level skips a full Milankovic beat.
It should have risen and fallen according to Obliquity (tilt), a 41ky cycle. But it didn't.
It just stayed low the whole time! (And resumed its 41ky rise and fall after this hiatus.)
Wow! What a mystery!
I searched for an explanation. Was it a comet like the one that killed the dinosaurs? Or a series of volcanic explosions with a lot of cooling SO2 emissions?
That alley brought no real smoking gun. So I left the topic.
A few years later in 2024, I came across this hydrogen cloud which dented the heliosphere which exposed Earth to more cloud-seeding cosmic rays.
Opher et al: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41550-024-02279-8
You can use the slider in this app https://faun.rc.fas.harvard.edu/czucker/Paper_Figures/Interactive_LxCC.html to watch our sun's yellow dots as they encounter the red cloud in 3Ma and leave the vicinity of the cloud in 500ky.
Could that be the smoking gun for Miller's cooled-down sea level hiccup in 2.73Ma ?
How very exciting!!

2026-10-14 15:41:09 UTC

- reply

Regarding the quote in #2 above,
* closure of the Central American Seaway (CAS), [ie Panama]
When did the Panama Isthmus close and lay the table for a fullblown Gulfstream contributing to AMOC heat transport?
https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/sciadv.1600883
They say "we caution against the uncritical acceptance of an isthmus before the Pliocene."
The Pliocene was from 5.3 to 2.58Ma (million years ago).
according to the paper, before 2.8Ma, the Pacific & Caribbean Sea were still connected.
The connected ocean basins also meant that the hot water/air mass from the West Pacific Warm Pool ended up near Iceland whenever the wind blew in El Nino direction?
This might partly explain how Europe's Northern North Atlantic could be 16°C warmer than today in the mid Miocene, 16Ma.
The open seaway apparently also meant that a major driver of the Gulfstream didn't even exist. Before the Isthmus closed, the so-called Loop Current into the Gulf of Mexico was absent. This Loop Current transports hot water from the Caribbean into the Gulf via the Yucatan Channel.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002532272200247X
No idea where that water went before the closure. Probably flowed Northwest because the wind and inflowing Pacific water pushed it and AMOC dragged it, or something.

2026-10-13 07:31:45 UTC

- reply

* on the west Atlantic coast 200km North of Cape Hatteras, sea surface was even 1 to 4°C cooler. …
While Tasmania's and Europe's North Atlantic's sea surface proxies recorded 16 to 20°C hotter water than today.
Which means to my un-learned mind that AMOC existed but totally without the wind-driven Gulfstream? "
The sediment core on New Jersey's coast is only 1 data point, tho. Can't use it to speculate about Gulfstream strength.
It might be an indication that the Gulfstream left the coast to flow East somewhere else, for example further South than nowadays.
Which … puts the jetstream further South than nowadays too, I guess.
Or maybe it was just sedimental pot luck? Nowadays, sea surface °C experiences ENSO-like ups and downs in that area between Cape Hatteras and New Jersey. The mood swings can be 16°C. It seems at least possible that the stretch in the sediment core was from such a negative swing while the actual regional average was about the same or warmer or hotter even.

2026-10-13 06:10:58 UTC

- reply

My other pet theory that methane concentration must have been much, much higher on that allegedly much, much warmer planet in the mid #Miocene , because more water evaporates from much warmer oceans and rains down on tropical wetlands – well, that theory is also shattered or made obsolete.
The excessive heat wasn't uniform. Low-latitude surface water was a normal ~2.5°C warmer than today, normal in that CO2 concentration of 400 to 600ppm.
So precipitation over tropical wetlands wasn't excessively high either. So wetlands weren't excessively larger. So methane…
…
oh. Uhm.
But it must have been excessive at least on the edges of the huge landmasses in the Northern Hemisphere exatropics.
Those edges that weren't submerged by sea water, of course.
Then places like Udo's swampy Swabia must have been strong CH4 producers… potentially much larger areas than today's major emitters, the tropical wetlands.
To achieve that excessive yet confined heat via ocean heat transport / currents renders juggling with a theoretical > 6000ppb CH4 unnecessary.
But it's still an interesting topic. All the more so because there are no proxies for Miocene methane. So we are free to speculate to our hearts' content. 😁

2026-10-13 05:59:02 UTC

- reply

Also, my favourite man-ape Udo frolicked in an African Jungle in Germany's Swabia 11Ma. Now learning that "Global Mean °C" wasn't uniformly excessively higher in that time, but a matter of location due to ocean currents, this shatters my tentative hypothesis in which no man-ape lived in Africa in that period for it would have been too hot for mammals if "Global Mean °C" had been uniform.
Which would have meant: precursors to homo xyz moved to Africa from Germany's latitudes once it got colder.
This paper corrects the "Global Mean °C" fallacy. Because Africa's latitudes and °C weren't included at all in the excessive heating episode, of course mammals did live there during the Miocene. The evolution of homo xyz in Africa doesn't require a German migrant as in my hypothesis.
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adz2555
Beware of "Global Mean Anything" !
CO2-temperature was not always such a clear chain of cause and effect that it is now and has been for the past 650ky.
Most of the past mass extinction events were temperature-related but not CO2-related.

2026-10-13 05:49:20 UTC

- reply

Some quotes from https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adz2555
I feel are particularly important.
Both, for understanding the #AMOC situation 17 to 11 million years ago (short: Ma), and for understanding the weaknesses in #EquilibriumClimateSensitivity when it is in part derived from such periods as the mid Miocene, in low CO2 ppm but high "global mean °C".
* open/close ocean throughways are "difficult to date with the precision"
Roughly coinciding changes:
* deepening of the Greenland-Scotland Ridge (GSR) [near Iceland; important location for today's AMOC down-welling]
* altered Canadian Arctic Archipelago (CAA) gateways
* closure of the Central American Seaway (CAS), [ie Panama]
* shallowing of the Tethys Seaway [Indian Ocean to Mediterranean]
* Antarctic ice sheet (AIS) retreated substantially during the MCO

2026-10-12 17:35:21 UTC

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adz2555
"Ocean circulation changes rather than global warming drove temperature trends across the Miocene Climatic Optimum" by Wubben et al 2026,
They solve the riddle how the middle Miocene Global Mean Temperature could have been so much warmer at only 400 to 600 CO2 ppm. So much warmer, that is Global Mean sea surface temperature 7 to 8°C warmer than today.
It's the ocean circulations. They were vastly different 15 million years ago because the land-ocean distribution was vastly different in locations where this really matters. And thus, heat transport was vastly different too.
Low latitude sea surface temperature proxies only record a warming by 2.5°C, uncertainty ±1.5.
Near Florida and on the west Atlantic coast 200km North of Cape Hatteras, sea surface was even 1 to 4°C cooler. That's the effect of a, then still open Panama-connection to the Pacific, I guess.
While Tasmania's and Europe's North Atlantic's sea surface proxies recorded 16 to 20°C hotter water than today.
Which means to my un-learned mind that AMOC existed but totally without the wind-driven Gulfstream?
And East Antarctica was ice-free which rendered Tasmania's waters a boiling kettle?
I hope I come across a Conversation piece or similar explaining a bit more.
#PaleoClimate #Miocene #MCO #OceanHeat #ClimateChange #ClimateSensitivity

2026-10-11 16:11:43 UTC

- reply

apparently the exact opposite. Wikipedia says of Russet potatoes "The flesh is white, dry, soft, and mealy, "
"Soft and mealy" – we'd call them "soft-boiling" in Germany. Those are the ones that spoil faster in my test!

2026-10-11 16:06:28 UTC

- reply

I'd use dark straw plus a lid tho, to avoid greening and shoots which are toxic.
That's how I do short-term potato storage at home. Short-term= 2 to 3 weeks. And just recently I tested and learned that … hm… what is it called in English… hard-boiling potatoes?, the ones you'd use for potato salad, they keep best.

2026-10-11 15:55:20 UTC

" This trajectory of climate-driven food price hikes – leading to social unrest and political decay – is not inevitable. The scientific consensus shows that the biggest opportunity we have for reducing food’s environmental impacts across many countries is increasing the amount of plants we eat and reducing meat and dairy intake.
This could help us better deal with shocks. "
By Paul Behrens 2025: https://theconversation.com/by-changing-our-diets-now-we-can-avoid-the-food-chaos-that-climate-change-is-bringing-256828
"leading to social unrest and political decay"
political decay … 📝

2026-10-09 03:34:13 UTC

Of the 13,000 viewers surveyed,"…93% said the public was not being fully informed about the climate crisis and nature loss.
89% of people said the government should respond to the crisis with emergency-level mobilisation, similar to the Covid-19 pandemic or the second world war."
Itemised rations 🖖
In our societies, itemised rationing to reduce unnecessary production and consumption can cull day-to-day CO2 emissions by 30-40% immediately. A drop in methane emissions by a third is possible too, as well as reduction in NO2.
Our rationing here also impacts far-away-societies and their GHG output. To prevent societal upheaval from sudden job losses, itemised rationing can be adopted there too.
The freed-up manpower from company shutdowns helps to speed up climate and ecological projects which would otherwise take too long.
A period of 15 years of planned war-time-like economy and itemised rations , like the Brits did it 1939-1956, saves civilisation.
And in that time, we can cut all dependencies to harmful misorganisation in our society and debate how to go forward in a permanent system change. Such a liberation is impossible from within the running system.
Sounds doable? Yeah, it's historically proven to work !!!!
Talk about it. Spread the word. Repeatedly.
Everybody should know how relatively easy it is to save civilisation, I think.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/oct/08/britons-kept-in-dark-scale-of-climate-crisis-first-of-its-kind-emergency-briefing

2026-10-06 08:37:00 UTC

"Reminds me of all the de-crufting you’ve always needed to do when you install Windows. Looks like we’ve gotten to the point on macOS too, where you need to run third-party scripts on a new OS installation to gain back control of your system resources and remove unwanted crapware."
https://arstechnica.com/apple/2026/10/command-line-tool-quickly-removes-apple-intelligence-from-macos-27/?utm_brand=arstechnica&utm_social-type=owned&utm_source=mastodon&utm_medium=social
🤭
#MacOS

2026-03-26 07:16:49 UTC

- reply

Oh, I just found Zack's Bering Sea daily ice extent with 2012 highlighted in orange
https://zacklabe.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/nsidc_sie_regionals_v2_lines-5.png
So in 2012, ice extent was exceptionally high in your neck of the wood.
And it naturally dropped to zero in summer – which made the sea ice loss exceptionally large.
Hm. Is that why 2012 was bonkers regarding Arctic loss in extent? Because it started with huge extent and had so much to lose?

2026-03-26 07:04:41 UTC

- reply

Thank you!
Could you also highlight 2012?
I am curious how the Bering Sea ice maximum in that year compares to 2026 because 2012 was the year with the bonkers sea ice loss.

2026-03-01 07:05:38 UTC

- reply

Maybe one for your SolarPunk? https://graz.social/@c_ozwei/116152535973704878
#note1um3…pwm4

2026-02-23 10:32:11 UTC

- reply

There's that of course.
But before we get older and benefit from increasing the font in an ebook,
our brain gets amputated. Taking up the physical book creates a memory connection with the cover, author name, title and conent. Holding the book, feeling different paper types, seeing a crease, a smudge, smelling the pages – it all adds to memory creation.
And it all gets amputated from the reading experience with an eReader or tablet.
I read E exclusively since 2010.
Since 2023 exclusively as read-aloud or as audio book.
And I am unable to tell you what I have read, which writer left a memorable impression.
But I can still describe the book cover and content of a semi-interesting paper novel I owned, even where it stood on my shelf 20 years ago.
All gone.
Replaced by a void.
If it were only novels, ie entertainment ... but it's the same with the climate science papers I exclusively read in E form. This is an area where E really bugs me. And I can't imagine what this E-dependency does to today's aspiring actual scientists who grew up with tablets and computers in their class rooms already...

2025-09-05 14:12:58 UTC

- reply

Thanks.
I have problems imagining how #sealevel rising by a few centimetres can be a problem for societies.
Yes, by now I know that corrosive saltwater is bad for built infrastructure and drinking water pipes and such, and that soil inundated by saltwater becomes unusable at some stage for growing veggies.
But how bad is this? What's the scale, what's the temporary tech fix, if any?
I have no idea.
Now I saw someone doing this simple equation:
50cm (global) #sealevelrise on a beach with 30° angle means 86cm less beach.
A beach with a 15° angle loses 186.6cm.
Don't know whether this is correct.
But our beach where I live is very shallow before it gets into higher, steeper dune landscape. I guess, 50cm from an AMOC collapse basically vanishes the beach within 150years.
That is, if the global 50cm rise were be the same at our beach! ... can't imagine how this would play out for real...