Milankovic is one of the greatest minds in human history. Because this part of science is not as "glamurous" he is less known and less apreciated when compared to other great minds that have thrived in their respective fields of science. Thank you for this video.
Sorry, he is dead wrong. His theory is disproved from many angles, especially the climate data from the ice cores. And his idea of the precession are dead wrong. Junk.
Yeah them dinos sure didnt drive EVs and didnt watch the carbon and methane output one little bit just like we dont. Perhaps thats why they went extinct. I wish if one of you new age braniacs could explain to me how exactly did dinosaurs rack up more C02 than we have managed with the entire industrial age of mankind and all of the horrible stuff we have done? Surely dinos didnt drive only diesels and each one of them kept around 20-30 cows???
@@lauchlanguddy1004 "Millions of of tons of carbon and methane" are negligible as well as the 36 billion tons of CO2 annually as the green communists promote....compared to trillions of tons in oceans.
@@saulpressman8381 Some ice core data as that of historic atmosphere is more than questionable. Ex. It needs centuries until snow becomes air tight ice. Thus the resolution is low. Second the composition of the gasses change. Some scientists assume that ice cores can give some hints about historic atmospheres while other dismiss it at all.
My grandmothers cousin was married to Milutin Milankovic.. I have a book of his signed. Guy was ahead of his time for centuries, I can say that. True scientist, gentleman and visionnare. 🙌🏻
Milankovich cycles were one of the first things we were introduced to in my geology degree. Its the driver of abnormal weather patterns and may be read in sedimentary rock formation environments. It is the most basic time references on earth and are 100% reliable.
Well, reliable until the last few decades when something seems to have broken the cycles that have been steady for nearly 1 million years. Until recently when our climate has seen quick movement opposite what the Milankovich cycles.
Cyclothems, as they have been called, are completely synchronized to these cycles according to most studies I have seen. Hundreds of recurrences of the sea transgressing and regressing central North America at a semi predictable rate
The Milankovitch "trifecta" for chilly northern summers: 1. Maximum eccentricity in the orbit (currently in a medium phase) 2. Aphelion during northern summer (currently very favorable for ice age onset!) 3. Minimum tilt of axis (currently medium) Line up all three of these, and the summer sun will be as far away as possible and as low in the sky as possible. That allows glaciation over Canada & Siberia to really take off!
the cycle will go warm first then back cold in a few thousand years, it will break the normal cold cycle that should be starting. how circular earth orbit is also affects the warming and our orbit is going to be more circular and better for warming
Excellent description. One other thing that makes things more complicated is the fact that the output of the sun is not constant. From what I have read the sun’s output can vary by as much as 11% on a cyclical basis. This further complicates the climate.
Solar forcing is considered low compared to greenhouse gases forcing. It has a 11 years cycle with no variations in infrared and high variation in UV. the UV variations has impact with ozone and may induce decadal variations of climate
May want to check out the Tychos Model before praising Copernicus too much. I don't think we fully understand the movement of our solar system, but I fully believe the earth has many different cycles that affect our climate and tranquility.
This may be one of many reasons why we haven't seen interstellar civilizations yet; not only the small chance of developing life, but also the small chance of a planet being temperately stable long enough to do much. Even if life were common, the kind of temperate stability we enjoy could be exceedingly rare on large timescales.
I think they simply know better than to get involved in our business. We watch "lower" beings and if we do interfere, we do so without their awareness. Humbling thoughts.
I think this is likely part of the answer to the Fermi paradox. If other intelligent life in the universe is anything like us then they are way to arrogant. We assume conquering the stars is the obvious next step for us. But we have never stopped and will never stop being at the mercy of Mother Nature. We could mess up our climate and cause our own extinction, or Mother Nature could just end us all by herself at any time. All of the universe is practically designed to kill life and habitable planets are no exception just because life can thrive on parts of them temporarily.
The Mojave Desert in California was once a wet and watery paradise with lakes, rivers, giant dire wolves and flamingos. The first humans in the Mojave region even experienced the large bodies of water and rivers. Paleolithic records reveal they had boats that traversed the massive lakes.
There are glyphs drawn into the rocks, many meters above the Salton Sea of ships with sails... much like early Spanish Exploration which were lost - never returned. The local Indigenous tribes have preserved these area. The rocks also show calcium life forms on the surrounding rocks like those of barnacles and basic sea life.
Earth has been through enormous changes over millions of years. The last 800,000 years have been very stable with similar cyclical glaciations... until the current anthropogenic global warming which is extreme and contrary to all cyclical trends.
@@fullbeard This refutes the Climate change money grab that is being pushed by the big big money to destroy the middle class and create the perfect top - down slave system the elites have been pushing for the last 200 years !
I've watched all your videos and while this one addresses what might seems to be the most "basic" of topics, it ended up being one of the most interesting! I was only aware of about half the cycles you reviewed. Incredible channel you have going here, thanks!
In Norse mythology, the Fimbul winter was a sign that Ragnarök was relentlessly approaching. The Fimbul winter was said to be a winter that lasted three years without any summer, thus heralding Ragnarök, the end of the world. Year 536 was as close we have come in documented times. I believ that Ragnarök was the Norse Flood myth.
The geologic arrangment of earths land and seas also play a massive part in this. Before Australia separated from Antarctica the Southern Ocean did not have Antarctic Convergence. This flow has worked to stabilize weather patterns in the southern hemisphere. Think of the effects the Rocky Mountains have on air currents, thus long term weather patterns. There are so many factors on such long time scales that humanity will likely never figure out how it works.
Likewise, I have read that if Panama was removed from the map and an equatorial ocean current was allowed to be established then a lot of weather patterns would stabilize in the northern and southern hemispheres.
This is certainly true. However, strong disturbing influences have always occurred and yet it was possible to identify patterns and regularities in the arrival of ice ages and interglacials. It is clear from this that the power of these changes is evidently greater than the power of these disturbing influences. And yes humanity as a whole has a huge impact on the earth. But if I had to bet on who is more powerful, humanity would not be among my favorites.
Remember, the tilt of the Earth determines how many hours of direct, concentrated sunlight you receive. That is what separates summer from winter, not the tiny degree of change in how close or far you are from the same. It is the angle of incoming sunlight that matters.
Not exactly but under stand when the earth wobbles it also effects the magnetic fields that protect the planet from solar radiation. An area left uncovered by this field will suffer and major impacts will occur
Kobalt is correct. The temperature difference is derived from how concentrated the sun's energy is to the surface. I.e the more perpendicular the surface is to the sun, then more heat energy per meter sq. Seasons have nothing to do with being closer to the sun. That extra closeness to the sun is irrelevant in the grand scheme....
Solar energy is mitigated by the electromagnetic layered fields that surround earth. If there is a distortion in this field, the amount of solar radiation will vary dramatically. As well, a loosening of the magnetic field leads to wavy jet streams, which obviously affect weather. The positions of planets can certainly have an effect on Earth's magnetic field. The Svensmark "Cloud Mystery" research shows that when there is a weakened magnetic field around earth, cosmic radiation leads to increased cloud condensation nuclei, which when combined with evaporated water, leads to increased rainfall. This has been cross examined all over the planet. Increased cosmic rays to the surface is very tightly correlated with increased planetary rainfall
Of course, the effect Milankovitch cycles will differ depending where you are on the planet. In ten thousand years, the Sahara Desert may become a temperate landscape with massive lakes, rivers and forests again.
Actually, it *will* be. It's been discovered that that too is one of the world's cycles. At the end of the last Ice Age, the Sahara was a lush grassland. Fossil evidence shows that it has been through that cycle several times through prehistory.
He is the one that explained why the earth has some long cold period and some short hot periods. The last glaciation ended only 10000 years ago and lasted 100 000 years. OK??
there are few additional factors, like solar cycle, cycle related to jupiter, saturn orbit, etc.... including cycle related to rotation of sun around milky way core
@2:36 The change in season or the difference between equatorial and polar weather is not related to distance from the sun here, it is related to the tilt at that location. More watts per square meter are received at any given location while the sun is directly overhead rather then off to an angle.
At winter in the UK the earth is at its closest to the sun. Looking out of my window it’s -5°. The tilt and our relationship with the moon and orbit of the sun coupled with a spinning planet of huge swathes of land and water. Fascinatingly complex, and not ‘climate change’ hysteria that dopey communist girl wants to indoctrinate into the young
It's important to note that the larger ocean area in the southern hemisphere more than offsets the effects of summer perihelion/winter aphelion down there. More ocean = less extreme seasons. It also means that the climate of the southern hemisphere cannot make or break ice ages. There are no large landmasses in the middle to subarctic southern latitudes, unlike North America and Eurasia in the north. You need subarctic land surface to support increasing snow cover.
Exactly. At most you’d get a humongous glacier and alpine permafrost in the mountains of Tasmania and New Zealand’s South Island, where the whole mountain range is frozen not just in June, July and August but year-round. But Chile would definitely be affected, and the resulting northward advancement of Argentina’s and South Brazil’s temperate zones would sap moisture from the Amazon.
Snowline in the southern hemisphere is also more stable, you can have glaciers in mountains at lower elevations, since there's not much disturbance once you reach 0° C (32 ° F) isotherm. It is the same reason why Siberia is green and forested despite having colder winters than Greenland, greenland is cold year around while Siberia gets as cold as Antarctica in winter but fairly warm in summer.
@@Marvin-dg8vj it’s not a problem it’s just the way things played out. Things change and then they have a period of more predictability for awhile, we’re lucky we’re here nor but industry is messing things up.
Also, yes the S hemisphere is in phase with being closer to the sun in their summer and further away in winter but they don't have more extreme seasons because there is much less land mass and more water which moderates their seasons.
Plus the latitude explanation given at the start is very basic. The UK and North Western parts of Europe are on the same latitude as Canada but have much milder Winters due to the gulf stream. The major Oceans are massive players in the distribution of heat and cold, Fresh water melt from glaciers spilling in the the sea is another one to.
@@mattking9974 Thought Ice mass in the North is growing Russia is building another ice breaker; check out Orca 1 twin turbo Nuclear powered ship bright red intense. Tony Hellar shows ice mass charts.
@@Hubwood "Sun activity is not higher than usual. If at all it's lower. Still it's getting warmer. FAST." That is what they say. The Earth is warming at an unprecedented rate never seen before in the history of the climate. Even the undisputed experts on everything climate, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) stated in its AR5 Synthesis Report on climate change in 2014: “Many of the observed changes since the 1950s are unprecedented over decades to millennia.” From the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University web site (2003). Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University The Earth Institute at Columbia University Open quote. Abrupt Climate Change Around 15,000 years ago, the Earth started warming abruptly after ~ 100,000 years of an "ice age"; this is known as a glacial termination. The large ice sheets, which covered significant parts of North America and Europe, began melting as a result. A climatic optimum known as the "Bölling-Allerød" was reached shortly thereafter, around 14,700 before present. However, starting at about 12,800 BP, the Earth returned very quickly into near glacial conditions (i.e. cold, dry and windy), and stayed there for about 1,200 years: this is known as the Younger Dryas (YD), since it is the most recent interval where a plant characteristic of cold climates, Dryas Octopetala, was found in Scandinavia. The most spectacular aspect of the YD is that it ended extremely abruptly (around 11,600 years ago), and although the date cannot be known exactly, it is estimated from the annually-banded Greenland ice-core that the ANNUAL-MEAN TEMPERATURE INCREASED BY AS MUCH AS 10°C IN 10 YEARS (emphasis added). Close quote. I wonder how humans dumping CO2 caused such a rapid climate change 11,600 years ago. Maybe humans are so powerful they found a way to send our CO2 back through time into the past since they are claiming that the only reason that the climate changes is because humans cause the change. Perhaps you can explain how humans burning fossil fuels caused those two sudden warming events thousands of years ago.
In 100,000,000 years, it's predicted to increase to a level that will literally scorch the Earth. Pretty scary when you think about it. But I guess that's just another reason to try to keep things as cool as possible.
It causes doubt in the dogma of the "humans cause climate change" marketing, though. You can't argue with 'the message' or you'll be considered a dissident.
I always knew about precession, etc, but never have I seen it all laid out so clearly, what it's actual effects are, and all that. Did the math and everything. Seems almost too simply explained.
Well, it is almost too simply explained, but since you did the math, you also remember your aspirin budget while doing that math. ;) What overloads many is albedo, which is counterintuitive in its effects on climate for most. Well, that and how slow radiative cooling into space actually is. Indeed, most people don't comprehend even partially how a thermos works. People tend to trust their own daily experiences, it takes a lot of education to allow one to trust the math.
So impressed by the jaw dropping brainy'ness of those folk who worked all this out, wow! What an informative, balanced and well researched piece, such a pleasure to watch - thank you.
Except...Big 🚩here with sun distance being responsible for change in temperature. It's nothing to do with distance. At 93 million miles with the distance varying a couple of thousand miles, the heat change would be hard to measure and way less than 1 degree. It has everything to do with the angle of the to the sun's rays. This is seen easily by everyone outside the tropic of Cancer and Capricorn. As the sun drops in the sky, much more area receives the same amount of radiated heat from the sun. Until in some areas, it disappears completely. I tried to explain this to my grade 10 biology teacher and got an E. The next semester, a substitute physics teacher corrected him, and he changed it to an A. I don't think this guy made it past grade 10 physics.
Simply Not Correct, Suns distance has lot to do with change in temperature and it Change Far more than "distance varying a couple of thousand miles" In Fact the distance varying 5 million kms (Minimum 147,1 Mill Kms and Maximum 152,1 Mill Kms), so you are about 1000-2000 Times wrong. Planets that are Father away from the Sun ? gets less Sun rays and energi and is Colder@@jamierose4088
Η ομορφιά του πλανήτη μας. Πόσο χαζομάρα εχει ο κοσμος που πιστεύει ολους αυτούς που το παίζουν επιστήμονες και δεν έχουν καμία σχέση με το αντικείμενο και δεν πιστεύουν τους πραγματικούς επιστήμονες που έχουν αφιερώσει χρόνια ολόκληρα ρης ζωής τους. Εμεις ευχαριστούμε για ρην εργασία σου!😊
The Norse Eddas tell the story of Fibulwinter; a winter lasting for three years and preceding Ragnorak. It is possible that this is a remnant of tales of the Younger Dryas Event. It's also possible that the death of Baldur because of a mistletoe dart given to Hodr by Loki could also be dated to when mistletoe and the oaks they rely on returned to the northern regions, about 9000 years ago.
The Eddas we are familiar with today were transcribed by Snorri Sturluson in 13th century Iceland. The early inhabitants of Iceland were familiar with long, severe winters, often influenced by volcanic erruptions. Norse countries were uninhabited 9-12,000 years ago as they were covered in ice, and the people who now live there would have been in Eurasia alongside ancestors of other fair skinned Europeans.
Another possible explanation for the Fimbulwinter is from when a volcanic eruption in Indonesia in 536AD caused winter to last for several years in Scandinavia. From archeological records you can see villages relocating to higher ground and a massive decrease in population
To me ragnarok is a depiction of a younger dryas impact. Fenrir, a wolf with a fiery mouth that spans from the ground to the sky? Fire giants coming from the sky? Winter that precedes it? And many more details that stick out as soon as u look at it. The way Norse mythology explains the frost giants (for example, Ymir being this massive frost giant that spans the world and out of his body smaller giants break away) is to me a clear depiction of an late ice age world
@@paulvs55 You sound like one of those people that glue themselves to the walls or throw paint at art thinking they are making a difference. Go and find a life.
@@soybasedjeremy3653 I bet you don't even know how much sea levels have risen since last ice age? Try in excess of 400 feet in complete absence of man-made CO2. I bet you don't know their is ample evidence locked in the permafrost of a past with much warmer and richer life in the arctic. But how can that possibly be when we are going to destroy the planet by over-heating it with man-made CO2?
Seasons are theoretically more extreme in the Southern Hemisphere because of the amplification of the sun's rays in summer by closest approach to the sun, and their diminishment in winter by being further away. However, the Southern Hemisphere as a much lower land-to-ocean ratio than the Northern Hemisphere, so the greater amount of water buffers the theoretically more extreme seasons.
@@pl1068 About ten years ago I knew a guy who went to Chile to ski. He went during our North American winter. When he got there, he said all the ski slopes were closed because it was hotter than blazes, and this was proof of global warming. He didn't know the seasons are reversed in the Southern Hemisphere. True story.
By Tereza Pultarova published June 14, 2022 "Milankovitch cycles are periodic changes in the orbital characteristics of a planet that control how much sunlight it receives, thus affecting its climate and habitability over hundreds of thousands of years. Although Milankovitch cycles have nothing to do with the current climate change, they are believed to have dictated Earth's climate for millions of years, making the planet swing periodically between tens to hundreds of thousands-year long ice ages and warmer periods called interglacials, such as the one we live in. Today, scientists can model Earth's Milankovitch cycles millions of years into the past and future and compare their calculations with evidence found in geological sediments all over the world. Some believe that Milankovitch cycles play a key role in the habitability of planets."
The main reason we have seasons is not caused by distance from the sun, it is caused by a difference in light density. In summer, the tilt causes the respective hemisphere to receive more light energy and thus heat, per unit area than it does in winter.
2:47 Not distance, but sun angle. The distance varies by quite a bit during orbit, but it makes little difference compared to sun angle and even length of day, at least in this phase of the Milankovitch cycle. That's why the southern hemisphere's summer isn't much more or less extreme than the North in similar biomes
2:42 It's not about closeness to the sun, it's about the angle at which the rays hit the area. At 90° the cross section of radiation that hits the ground is equal to the area that it shines on. As the angle decreases, the cross section reduces with the cosine. Meaning that at angles close to 90° there is not a lot of variation, but the farther away from 90° you go, the larger the influence becomes. 7:00 As the calendar is fixed with the spring point, winter in the north in 13'000 will still be in January. We will have shifted the calendar accordingly.
Let's shift Earth & Venus positions or Earth & Pluto, distance does have a effect aside from rays of light, from minimal to more than marginal. OP is speaking relative to the average datasets and current understanding & filtering it for common layman/laywoman to understand. Situational awareness also includes speech and it's context.
@@Theeoldmann Sorry, no. The differing solar input depending on latitude has NOTHING to do with distance, and EVERYTHING with angle. Referring to distance in this context is just wrong. If we allow this, the next question is why excentricity of the earths orbit allows for seasons in the northern hemisphere to be when they are, because distance from the sun would imply the reverse.
@@HotelPapa100 Of course you are correct. The “closeness” to the sun changes far less than the diameter of the earth based on tilt. It would be warmer during summer in the northern hemisphere of an earth-like planet orbiting slightly further from the sun, than a similar planet in the southern hemisphere orbiting slightly closer to the sun. In this scenario, “closeness” is less important than angle (as you identified).
@@frankkay6457 He also suggests that the seasonal tilt of the earth means high latitudes are closer/further away from the sun in summer/winter. While technically true, such tiny differences in distance to the sun are totally irrelevant to temperatures.
@@alicesacco9329 Yea, just go inland to places like Kautokeino, or Karasjok, and the temps can get down to -50°C, though usually just between -20°C and -30°C. (the cold record in Norway was set in Karasjok in 1886, and measured at -51,4°C, though in 1999 the same place got as cold as -51,2°C)
Thank you for this video. It was very interesting! :) The "distance from the sun" from Greenland to Sahara is so tiny it does not affect the energy in the rays. In the north the rays are spread out and will have less warming effect. And if the rays comes in at an angle, in the north the rays have to pass through a longer distance of the atmosphere before it reach the earth's surface, and then reducing the energy in the rays.
I think it's about the land mass distribution as well. There's more land mass in the northern hemisphere. When the North hemisphere is facing the sun the land heats up the earth more. When the southern hemisphere is facing the sun more, the earth is cooler because its harder to heat the water.
@@RideBikes_Walkplaces Not quite. Water absorbs more sunlight than land. If the Northern Hemisphere had more water, the Earth would be warmer. Overall, the Earth having continents has a cooling effect.
@@haroldnowak2042 I've just been looking it up. So many conflicting articles! Some say the land absorbes more solar radiation, others not. 🤔 I'm sure I watched a documentary years ago which talked about land mass distribution as being a factor to this affect. Maybe its to do with ice forming on the land and reflecting the salary radiation. 🤔
@@haroldnowak2042 The north and south Pacific ocean has more area than all of the worlds land masses combined. One good reason to not deploy on a Navy ship out of San Diego. Crossing the line near the 00 lat and 00 long point is not bad. Actually meets the comfort zone that humans were designed for.
The tilt causing parts of the planet to be “closer” to the sun results in such a minor distance difference that it’s not the reason for the increased heating in the summers for a hemisphere. It’s the increase in the concentration of the solar rays over a given area due to the curve of the earth.
Alex, it's not so much being closer to the sun that is a big factor in temperature but how direct the energy from the sun is. The more tilted away from the sun a place is, the more atmosphere there is for the sun's energy to dispersed in, deflected. Plus there is an increase landmass surface area the further sloped the area becomes in relation to the 🌞
Very good! Just have one comment. I don't think it would have destroyed the general publics' brains to include the actual names of the cycles: (All approximate, of course.) Eccentricity; 100,000 yrs Obliquity; 41,000 yrs Precession; 25,700 yrs
Superb video with excellent commentary. This is probably the most well balanced, and the scientific explanation of how our seasons change and how the climate cycle works. Excellent.
When the temperate zones are reduced by 75%, land based warm blooded creatures will face harsh survival realities. I recognize that the worst case climate scenario of runaway temperature rise is a frightening prospect, but winter is indeed coming.
Loved the video! As an Earth Sciences student geology and geography content always makes me smile! It would be super awesome to see a video on the larger scale Wilson cycles that characterized the intervals of hundreds of millions of years of plate tectonics resulting in the formation and separation of the worlds ancient supercontinents and paleo oceans like Rodinia and the Iapetus or Tethys ocean. Thanks again for an interesting and cool video!
Between 13900 BC and 14000 BC, a 100 year span, Earth's temperature rose 5 degrees Celsius. This is one of many intermediate spikes in the ice core data, not including the 10-15 degree Ice Age spikes. Humanity lived through this period just fine and had no heavy polluting industry to speak of at that time. In the past 200 years, which is twice that length of time, Earth's temperature has only risen by 1.2 degree Celsius. A minor natural change in temperature that is in fact physically unstoppable and inevitable has been pathologized and blamed entirely on human activity in order to establish a carbon tax which allows governments to monitor every action of every person and tax them for it. The climate changes. Changes in local weather ARE NOT evidence of climate change, however, human activity CAN affect weather. Changes in climate, not weather, are driven by the Milankovitch cycles, primarily precession of the equinox, which changes the angle of Earth's tilt over a 25,000 year cycle, and thus changes the total amount of sunlight the poles receive, known as the insolation cycle. This insolation data from ice cores coincides directly with the rise and fall of the past 4 Ice Ages. Furthermore the temperature was higher than it is now prior to the last 4 ice ages, and also coincides with the insolation cycle and the rise and fall of the Ice Ages. That's right, the temperature was higher back when humans were hunting wooly mammoths than they are now. No heavy industry to speak of. If no other fact about climate change remains in your memory, let that be the one. This fact suggests that the warming we are experiencing now is that final spike of warming that occurs right before Ice Ages suddenly set in. Climate change is real, its not caused by humans, and we are headed into a regularly scheduled Ice Age according to every indicator, not a waterball Earth condition where the remaining icecaps in the already warm period were in fully melt away. Sea level rise cannot occur with slow melting because of isostatic rebound. Rapid melting is required to cause the floods and sea level rises that climate extremists harp on about. Rapid melting is caused by a sudden addition of lots of heat to the atmosphere. This is how the Ice Ages end. The most popular theories on how Ice Ages end are supervolcanoes, comet impacts or massive solar flares. However, comet impacts best solve the issue of regularity, as the Ice Ages seem to last a similar amount of time, every time. If we were to somehow try and affect these Milankovitch cycles, such as slowing down the rate of precession, it would spell real cataclysmic changes to Earth's surface, the likes of which climate extremists only dream of to justify the implementation of their carbon tax scheme..
@@hermestrismegistus9603ive been struggling to find any actual data supporting this, the only thingni found was the end of the last glaciation event which lasted 100,000 years and ended 25,000 years ago, with what we're currently in being the interglacial period, a particularly dangerous time to be altering the climate on the scale on 10s to 100s of years. Please do find me a source for these claims as its very interesting if true. In fact the data ive been looking at suggests that we are already at CO2 levels that should be expected to rise well past a "hothouse earth" event, especially if we keep pumping CO2 thats been trapped for 10s of millions of years into the atmosphere, in fact our CO2 levels have never risen to the levels they are today in the past 800,000 years. So please do provide sources and explain what exactly you mean
Lol you can really tell where i started to look more and more into this guy's claims and just found what seems to be mountains of evidence... *surprise* to the support of the current scientific CONSENSUS...
Beautiful production values. Love the silky 60 frames-per-second quality. Thank you for another piece of wonderful content, Alex. I hope you have a pleasant festive break.
Astonishingly I was wondering about this a few days ago. I was limiting my consideration to the fact that our orbit is not circular, and wondering if there is a gradual shift in the position of the aphelion and perihelion in relation to the sun itself and how that might affect us. This video is perfectly timed, and goes far beyond what I was considering for different variables. Good to know Milankovich and others have looked at this as well. Wonderful as always!
It's worth noting that climate is very complex and most certainly can NOT be attributed to just one factor alone: the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Even on its own, its effect is much less than is alarmingly claimed.
@@MisterHowzat According to the laws of physics, (Stefan-Boltzmann's law) Earth without an atmosphere would be a frozen planet, it is only the greenhouse effect preventing iceball Earth. What's truly alarming is the scientific ignorance displayed by the ignorant anti-science crowd. Physics dictates reality, not science deniers
@@MisterHowzat I believe we are practicing for an impending ice age. If we can warm the planet with cars and farting cows, then we can hopefully globally warm the next ice age.
@@MisterHowzat The concentration of CO2 is the only viable theory atm. Why have we never seen this rate of warming in the history of the Earth? That alone makes several hypotheses fall apart.
When describing typical annual seasons, it's not about how close or far a part of the surface is from the sun, it's about the angle. Which influences the area the same amount of light is distributed across as well as how much is reflected by the atmosphere.
I learned the hard way that you can get sunburn on a cloudy day in Capo Verde off the coast of Algeria, though cloudy days are very rare there without volcanic influences.
For a layman like me…our contributions whether good or bad seem to have a minute effect on the planet’s weather…I’m not advocating we stop caring about our footprint but respect that the planet, the solar system and universe in general couldn’t care less of what we do while we’re alive for a brief moment in time
On the contrary humans can have a large effect over a lifetime and we are seeing the entire global temperature increase by a significant amount (1.5c) so far.
@@iamthetinkerman I'd love to, except in my country (the USA), it would bankrupt me. I ended up working in IT because nobody wants to hire in geology-related stuff right now except those who would pay next to nothing and/or demand years of unpaid internship first. And teaching is worse (I know this because I'm an IT analyst II for a public university). Incidentally, the Earth Science department at my university just got disbanded due to funding issues, and I can't even go back for a Master's Degree now :/
Thank you! After learning that we're closest to the sun in January, I've often wondered if that made Southern Hemisphere summers a little hotter than a Northern Hemisphere summer. I'm glad to see you touch on that! I've never come across it mentioned elsewhere before. 🙂
Used to teach it in school. learned that in the 4th or 5th grade. But that was a long time ago. They don't teach things like that because ignorance on the subject allows them to dictate the climate change information. Which is by far the greatest transfer of wealth in the history of mankind.
Alex, you must be the best, most persuasive internet pitchman I have ever heard. Now, I'm referring to your commercial, not the Astrum content, which is, of course, even better.
Love the vid! Existential dread in 3…2…1… but still loved it. Sobering to realise how fragile our environment is. It’s like you’re on a plane about to take off, there’s a little panic and a part of you just wants to get off and be safe on the ground. But our planet ship is our only carriage and there’s no getting off!
Our environment is fragile, but not because of the Milankovitch cycles. It's because of the killer asteroids. Ask the dinosaurs to tell their opinion, about what is the most dangerous threat.
The greater amount of land in the northern hemisphere and the placement of that land are significant, as sea ice is vulnerable to melting from below, unlike land, and exposed water absorbs much more energy than reflective ice.
Wow, this was a great video. I confess I knew less than 20% of the information in here, so this was a wonderful (and well produced) explanation. Great graphics.
In other words, it's beautiful. Our solar system is beautiful along with every other special object out there. If you were to give one or two words to our universe it would be Beauty and chaos
Winter missed me in my part of Canada totally. We had one -30 day and not much snow. It’s mid February it should be -10c and below but it’s been above plus 5 all week.
Amazing to think that everything in the universe has its own little things that are going on without you knowing. Every planet experiences major and very minor changes, every particle on said planets experiences the same. Its beautiful
Fascinating! I haven't been this sucked into an educational video in a long time. I was soaking up every word you said and loved it, I never knew how many variables were at play affecting our seasons. I love it, keep up the great work!
Years and years ago (30 or more) I saw or read about these cycles. Never really thought about it much and forgot then remembered. It was always difficult to find affirming info as it seemed limited. I’m glad for this video and other info now publicizing the cycle theory. Excellent
One thing not mentioned: the insane amounts of energy transported by the gulf stream north to Iceland and Western Europa. This river within the ocean already has dropped 10% to 20% efficiency and i personally believe this is more of an influence on the extreme weather conditions we've seen compared to CO2 retaining some heat.
CO2 is a tiny molecule and it does not retain heat. It reflects as very small amount of radiation both ways. You should jump back off the band waggon. Extreme weather conditions in your lifetime don't match up to so much
it's not really the distance to the sun that causes the seasons but how far the sun gets above the horizon because you're a lot closer to the sun during perihelion just after NYE than at aphelion even if you're in the northern hemisphere
Yeah this one surprises me still.. A lot of people think it's a distance thing, not the angle our hemisphere is at towards the sun.. Take away Earth's 23.5 degree tilt, and bang, it's one season all year long... Which would be kinda neat in then southern and southern hemispheres..
Exactly, imagine a 1m^2 patch of light at a specific intensity shining on to a sheet of paper at precisely 90 degrees to the light source. The light patch covers an area of 1m^2. Rotate the paper so that it's now at 23.5 degrees to the light source. The same light patch is now distributed over a trapezoidal patch of the paper with a far larger surface area. The radiant flux of the light patch is just more diffuse.
Distance would make seasons happen even without axial tilt; they would just be weaker, happen in both hemispheres in unison, and be shifted in time a bit. In real life the difference in distance exacerbates seasonal extremes in the South and mellows them out in the North.
Great video. My favorite theory for what might have helped cause the ice age cycles, tens of millions of years ago, is the breakaway of Antarctica from South America and Australia, around 30 million years ago, and the formation of the isthmus of Panama, starting 15 million years ago and fully forming 3 million years ago. Both of these events dramatically changed how warm water was distributed around the planet's oceans (think gulf stream). If you study a graph that shows the PPM of CO2 in the atmosphere going back hundreds of millions of years, one trend becomes clear as you get closer to our present: The earth has been gradually cooling and essentially stuck in ice age cycles for tens of millions of years. Looking at a graph of CO2 over the eons; The first dramatic drop in CO2 happens between 30-20 million years ago (potentially due to the freezing over of the Antarctic continent after it broke away from South America and Australia). The second noticeable drop begins around 5 million years ago and continues until today. While not as dramatic as the previous drop in CO2 PPM, it is causing a gradual cooling of the earth over millions of years. Perhaps the Milankovitch cycles have a greater and greater cooling effect over millions of years, as oceans are less able to move heat around (say due to an isthmus of some sort), which then set the earth on a course of cooling. That said humanity has already reversed much of this CO2 PPM decline, bringing it back above 400 for the first time in at least 3 million years. But then again who knows WTF that means lol.
It’s an unfortunate reality that scientists cannot predict the future. It’s always possible that they have missed a variable regarding climate change; but we cannot take the chance in case they are correct. Regardless, there are many other good reasons to go Green besides climate change.
Hmm, While this Antarctica moving south and Panama land seems to cause the affect, from what i have read it is the ramming of India into Asia about the same time which scientists say caused the Milankovitch Cycles to come into effect, causing Ice ages. The rising of the mountains and plateaus of Tibet they say caused stronger weathering, which led to more of the CO2 to become limestone, pulling CO2 out of the atmosphere until it fell into such a low % that the Milankovitch Cycles could start affecting climate more causing Ice ages. Of course we are reversing things with CO2, so the Milankovitch Cycles have less affect on things. No more Ice ages are expected. That is what many scientist claim. Of course the Ocean Deep currants ARE a factor and Panama Isthmus and Antarctica position change how the Ocean Deep currants flow, otherwise the Ice ages would have happened during Pangaea (or earlier super continents were formed) when mountains were higher and weathering would have happened also. It seems we need all 3 factors to cause Ice ages - less CO2/more weathering, a specific Ocean Deep currant, and the right Milankovitch Cycles.
The causes and effects you mention are good for local weather and climate phenomenon like the fact that Europe is warmer than it should be at it's latitude, as you say distribution. But, it has no overall effect on the entire heat budget of the planet. Friction and radioactive decay in the mantel and core create heat, and solar radiation strikes the planet to warm us, so between the heat generated and that retained from the sun the planet will radiate so much of it back out into space at night. The thing most people do not get is if the radiation off the planet exceeds the amount generated or received from the sun then the planet will cool. If the amount radiated away is less than the locally produced heat or the solar radiation retained then the planet will warm. And I know people do not understand any of this because you ask them what is the #1 greenhouse gas and they will tell you it is CO2. It is not. 95% of all greenhouse gas in our atmosphere is water vapor. When the planet warms there is more of it, and while that would tend to insulate and trap heat from radiating away it also raises the albedo of the planet reflecting away solar radiation. I would ask them to do an experiment, we now have tons and tons of Baby Powder we have no use for because it has been found to cause cancer in people who smoked it or something. Take 20 or 30 tons of it out about 2 million miles and create an artificial ring of dust between the sun and Earth and see what the effect is. My bet is no matter what science either would not want this done because it would show what a scam they are running, or, it would trigger a mini ice age of it's own. No need to worry about the effects being permanent, it would blow away almost as fast as it was dispensed into space. But not before effects could be measured.
@@markwalker3499 I believe you, however I might disagree on one aspect. It is not the CO2 that everyone is complaining about as there were parts in Earths history with higher CO2, nor is it water vapour (but I do understand that this can increase as the Earth gets warmer as warmer air holds more of it). It is in fact Methane gas. We now rear so many cows/pigs/sheep/chickens etc to grow and feed the 8 billion humans (and rising) in the hundreds of millions that the rise of Methane gas in the air has now risen and Methane is 84 times worse than CO2 as a greenhouse gas, however the food industry doesn't want you to believe that. And then you may say okay let's stop eating meat, but all the vegans out there won't allow you to kill them and thus the problem of rising Methane is here to stay!
@@markwalker3499 It’s already well understood what effects blocking sunlight has. Because not only has it been hypothesized, it has been observed, multiple times. However, what importance does this hold to the current situation. Are you suggesting we make artificial clouds? I hope not. Otherwise you must be assuming more greenhouse gases mean more cooling. This may sound reasonable to our brains in a larger scale, but the absorption/reflection of heat happens on the atomic scale. The reason why this assumption fails, is it neglects the fact most greenhouse gases do reflect as much radiation they keep out compared to what they keep in; ie CO2. Global cooling is normally the result of less greenhouse gases and more ozone and oxygen which creates a thicker atmosphere that blocks radiation. We, however, have disrupted that process by introducing more carbon based greenhouse gases that trap inside heat increasing warming. This is why CO2 and other carbon emissions are used as the main indicators of warm and cool periods inEarth’s history, along with many other factors. Another important thing to note is that scientists do immense research on these topics and the majority of the information they know is not included in these simplistic explanations you read online. All scientific claims are heavily backed by extensive research and documents that support their conclusions. Which can not be denied by some random RUclips commentator that suddenly think they know better. Also “2 millions miles” is almost 10x farther away than the moon is from earth. Any baby powder you release is just going to be dispersed by cosmic wind and is unlikely to be affected by much of Earth’s gravity.
THANK YOU! Most videos of this issue I see completely leave out that we are still in an ice age. We have seen in geologic and ice core records times when the global temperature has jumped or fallen significantly in the span of centuries and on some occasions mere decades.
Yes but no, fossil records show deviation from the temperature, but not on a global level. The milankovic cycle is drawn out over 60000 years, not 100 years
There are also other, shorter cycles (decades or less) that probably have little to do with extra-planetary forces but how the Earth itself is changing. We're already aware of things like La Nina weather cycles. Other such things happen as well that we haven't yet fully categorized in part because we haven't had weather records for a long enough period to actually observe and quantify them properly.
By the way, we already reversed that slow milankovich cooling trend. Because of greenhouse gases, Earth is warming for the last 100 years and this will continue. It is very possible that with CO2 even at current levels, ice ages simply won't happen. CO2 is now highest in 4 million years at least. We know this series of glacial and interglacial periods started 2.58 Ma (million years ago). And the Milankovich cycles were the same before that. Ice age starts slowly when northern regions get colder, snow won't melt over summer and becomes ice (ice reflects sun). But today the northern regions get warmer 3 times faster than Earth average and ice is melting. We will have much different problems in a warmer world.
Perfectly true. Instead of worrying how humanity will cope in 10.000 years during the next ice-age, we should worry about man-made global warming, this one is the real and immediate threat to all of us !
@@nogreatreset8506 Feel free to look up actual science: - Hausfather, Z., Drake, H.F., Abbott, T. and Schmidt, G.A., 2020. Evaluating the performance of past climate model projections. Geophysical Research Letters, 47(1), p.e2019GL085378. - Lacis, A.A., Schmidt, G.A., Rind, D. and Ruedy, R.A., 2010. Atmospheric CO2: Principal control knob governing Earth’s temperature. Science, 330(6002), pp.356-359. - Mills, B.J., Krause, A.J., Scotese, C.R., Hill, D.J., Shields, G.A. and Lenton, T.M., 2019. Modelling the long-term carbon cycle, atmospheric CO2, and Earth surface temperature from late Neoproterozoic to present day. Gondwana Research, 67, pp.172-186. - Shakun, J.D., Clark, P.U., He, F., Marcott, S.A., Mix, A.C., Liu, Z., Otto-Bliesner, B., Schmittner, A. and Bard, E., 2012. Global warming preceded by increasing carbon dioxide concentrations during the last deglaciation. Nature, 484(7392), pp.49-54. - Supran, G., Rahmstorf, S. and Oreskes, N., 2023. Assessing ExxonMobil’s global warming projections. Science, 379(6628), p.eabk0063.
first of all, co2 is not the biggest greenhouse gas, its water vapour. second, two to five years is needed for co2 to be absorbed in to the vegetation and crops if we stop producing it. third, after co2 is absorbed, famine starts. fourth, you need one bigger volcanic eruption to disrupt regular summer season and create few years of endless winter.
@@sandal_thong8631 : Correct. In fact, there is almost no alternate version of reality they don't use. They don't agree with each other let alone the science. For the fossil fuel companies, confusion and doubt is sufficient as long as it slows progress and allows them to sell fuel to burn.
@@lrvogt1257 Some people (climate science deniers) try to use Milankovitch cycles to explain away 100% of the global temperature anomaly, and claim that greenhouse gas emissions aren't doing anything because of them. This is obviously false due to the length of the cycles and the pace of warming we're experiencing.
While it is true that the hemisphere in summer is slightly closer to the Sun than the hemisphere in winter, this is a negligible difference and is not the cause of the seasons. Due to the tilt of Earth and the curvature of the Earth, sunlight hits the surface at different angles. When sunlight hits the surface more directly (i.e. at latitudes experiencing summer), more photons hit per unit area. In other words, there is greater insolation, with a larger warming effect. When sunlight hits the surface at a lower angle (i.e. at latitudes experiencing winter), fewer photons hit per unit area. There is less insolation, and therefore less heating.
For decades I have sat on my front porch to smoke, because I don't smoke in the house. Over the decades of sitting on the porch, I have noticed the shadow from the house has always been in the same spot. 3 years ago, for some reason, the shadow moved to the north by 3 feet. 2 years ago, it moved about another 8 feet to the north. Last year, it was still in about the same place it was the year before. This year, I can't say because the time I have taken note of the shadow's placement, it has been rainy and quite gray with no sun. So, no shadow. I've tried to research this to find out exactly why the sudden change, but I haven't found anything much to it. I have found things like this that indicate to a maybe, but nothing that says yes, this is why.
I have been an amateur astronomer is I was 12 years old ang got the worst telescope ever made. I am now 55 with nice equipment but this is the first time I have seen this process explained so clearly. Thank you for posting such excellent content.
There's an interesting theory that attributes ice-age cycles to tree death. That theory suggests that minerals in the soil required to nourish the roots of trees are heavy and eventually sink further and further away from the roots, resulting in tree death, in turn resulting in lower oxygen production... and after that, I forget how it goes. The theorist suggested that tree death could be averted by actively re-mineralizing forests with "rock dust".
correct, and once the minerals drop below the root level the compounds left behind along with nasty stagnate water build up above them and suffecate the roots and the trees suffer a sort of nutrient lockout, by introducing lime dust to the top soil helps nutrients pass through the roots and soil with ease and lower ph , preventing the buildup of such compounds, and stagnate ground water created by things such as the decomp of fallen foliage from coniferous plants which is very acidic and also toxic to plants and will prevent healthy respiration and produce fatal ph levels, for example if you have a house plant that looks like its struggling to survive, yellowing, and not producing healthy foliar growth sprinkle a little lime dust in it and make sure it has proper drainage ,give the roots a good wash, feed it and presto! it will most likely come back to life. lime dust is a great way to insure great root health.this is also one of the reasons that potash left behind by forest fires helps the regrowth of the forest after its been washed by winter rain and snowmelt.🙃
This is the best video to date that I've seen about all the movements of our Earth. Thanks for making this simple to understand for so many more people!
The tilt of the axis does not affect how close that hemisphere is to the sun, it changes how directly the sun hits an area and the length of the day. Low sun angle beam is spread out. High sun angle beam is more concentrated. I used to teach this stuff.
@@castaway123100 I feel like the effect of the earths tilt on the seasons would not be nearly as dramatic if distance were the only factor. The distance from the equator to the sun vs the distance from the poles to the sun is only a 0.004% difference (92 million miles in total vs the roughly 4,000 miles that is the radius of the earth). The current elliptical motion of the earth changes the distance of the earth to the sun much more than that; (closer to 3%) if distance were the only factor then the nearly 3 million miles closer the earth gets to the sun during the northern hemisphere’s winters would be more than enough to cancel out all of the cold weather we experience in winter. Therefore angle of sun and length of day are the only factors that can cause the dramatic temperature changes of the seasons that we know. That’s why all the diagrams explaining this have arrows of sunlight coming straight at the earth and hitting the surface at different angles (see 2:45 of this video)
I noticed Polaris is at the wrong place at 6:55. It's a small thing in the big picture but when coupled with other mistakes such as at 2:42 you say the tilt of the Earth doesn't change how far away from the Sun you are at the equator. While that's technically true, the sun's light and heat varies because it is not spread out by coming in at a low angle in the winter hemisphere, and comes in more perpendicular in the summer hemisphere. Light coming in at an angle spreads less energy .
Southern hemisphere may be closer in summer and further in winter but the southern hemisphere also has a lot more water/ocean and its much harder for the temperatures to change with so much more water present. The northern hemisphere has more land which is easier to change to the season's temperature. The seasons for the northern and southern hemisphere are actually very close in temperatures.
Your statement is mostly false as the oceans are huge heat sinks that moderate temperatures between seasons for coastal regions. Anyone who lives next to large bodies of water knows this. In southern hemisphere the effects of higher solar influx during summer months is readily measurable in the interior of large continents including South America, Africa, and Australia. Their ambient temps are higher in summer than similar latitudes in Northern hemisphere.
@Aqua Fyre Temperatures over oceans in calculating average don’t matter in comparison of Northern vs. Southern hemisphere as it RELATES to human existence. Bottom line is temp. in the interior of any large continent in southern hemisphere will be higher than northern hemisphere during summer and cooler in winter. Similarly, most of the inhabitable land mass excluding Antarctica in southern hemisphere is closer to equator as compared to northern hemisphere. Thus most in southern hemisphere experience more moderate and warmer overall conditions.
Thank you! You get it. Full-scale Ice-Ages may be a thing of the past. The formation of Central America, the English Channel Bridge, The Florida Shelf, Hawaii, New Zealand, Kergueland sunken Continent and the Baring Land Bridge between Alaska and Russia is what ended the last Ice-Age through rerouting the North Atlantic Current. Warming up North America and Europe to habitable temperatures today. There was just too much land warming things up from dark surfaces of the new land, new valleys formed through Glaciation as Fjords, new Lakes and rivers, etc. The last Snowball Earth was on a mostly Waterworld in the Neoproterozoic 650 Million years ago. The reason why Pre-Ordivician fossils are so rare. They were mostly ground to dust by every other subsequent Glaciation Event and eventually turned into Modern Fossil Fuel. The reason why short-term Climate Change is nonsense not deserving the right to be a part of science. It's "Political" Science. Even Humanity produces far far less CO2 than nature can even hold onto since Cyanobacteria has such a large apatite for it. They outnumber every other lifeform on Earth that they have found their way deep into the Earth's Crust. CO2 is a thermostat not a heater. Just tell Mars CO2 heats worlds up....
One thing I think about the Earth's Orbit going up or down and affecting the seasons the people missed is, not only are we passing through Cosmic Dust(Oort Cloud) ,but the Dust Itself is at times, Thicker and Darker in Composition. My .02 🤷
In Melbourne Australia we are currently going through the coldest summer since records began lol today was 23° and last we were seeing 16°. Normally in December it’s around 30° most days and I don’t think we’ve even seen one this year as of yet
@wall01 in central europe we were having the coldest december in years by -10°C beeing allmost the norm. Which was rare to not seen for the past years 5 years now for christmas it got a little warmer now...
I'm in Brisbane, and it's been a lot cooler the the last few days. Especially at night I can really notice it. I don't need to use air con, even during the day. Brisbane is often as hot as hell, and that's normal, but not now. I m very sceptical about "global warming".
@@DD-lt1rd can you people please stop confusing weather and climate? the climate is the average weather of a region over many many years not just one. And on average temperatures go up and up and up. But that does not mean, that cold winters won't be a thing anymore. climate change will mainly make the weather more extreme. Global warming might bring even much colder winters. It sounds paradoxical, but it is not. that's why we stopped saying global warming.
@@HeavyMetalGamingHD yes warming equals cooling, 2+2=5. Climate change has always occurred, we were in a warm cycle now entering a cool cycle. Feel free to research Valentina Zharkova and watch David Dilley and Adapt 2030 on youtube.
If to the so beautifully explained Milancovitch cycles we would add the latest studies of sun's cycles, it's temperature fluctuation and many other recent observations of its behaviour we could develop a more complete understanding of all the parameters involved in climate behaviour. Thanks for the very good presentation
There is no " if " about it. Scientists do exactly that. These natural cycles are understood well enough that we know for certain that this episode of warming is not one of them. It is the unnatural increase of CO2 to 150% it's pre-industrial levels.
Look up the land of "Doggerland". There was a huge land connection between Norway, England, France and Germany 8.200 years ago which was flooded when the ice shields of Norway and England melted, creating the north sea between the countries we know today. Doggerland was a vast grass sea where hunters and gatherers lived.
In a paper I read a few years back, from an Egyptian university I think, I don't remember the details...it was pointed out that variations in solar output and solar particles (?) coming into the atmosphere was shown to have an effect on cloud formation. And as clouds have a huge effect on light reflection and heat loss, a variation in overall percentage of cloud cover on the planet will have an enormous effect on climate, and I think the paper said that there was a clear correlation between solar output and cold/warm periods. They can't tax solar output variations though, so there probably isn't a lot of support for such research in most countries. You have to focus on carbon if you want your research grant money...
Milankovic is one of the greatest minds in human history. Because this part of science is not as "glamurous" he is less known and less apreciated when compared to other great minds that have thrived in their respective fields of science.
Thank you for this video.
wont beat millions of tons of carbon and methane.. sorry
Sorry, he is dead wrong. His theory is disproved from many angles, especially the climate data from the ice cores. And his idea of the precession are dead wrong. Junk.
Yeah them dinos sure didnt drive EVs and didnt watch the carbon and methane output one little bit just like we dont. Perhaps thats why they went extinct.
I wish if one of you new age braniacs could explain to me how exactly did dinosaurs rack up more C02 than we have managed with the entire industrial age of mankind and all of the horrible stuff we have done?
Surely dinos didnt drive only diesels and each one of them kept around 20-30 cows???
@@lauchlanguddy1004 "Millions of of tons of carbon and methane" are negligible as well as the 36 billion tons of CO2 annually as the green communists promote....compared to trillions of tons in oceans.
@@saulpressman8381 Some ice core data as that of historic atmosphere is more than questionable.
Ex. It needs centuries until snow becomes air tight ice. Thus the resolution is low. Second the composition of the gasses change.
Some scientists assume that ice cores can give some hints about historic atmospheres while other dismiss it at all.
My grandmothers cousin was married to Milutin Milankovic.. I have a book of his signed. Guy was ahead of his time for centuries, I can say that. True scientist, gentleman and visionnare. 🙌🏻
Serbs have a lot of good scientists for small nation.
Milankovic, Tesla, Pupin...
@@ПетарКарпошSlavs in general except ukrainians
Milankovich cycles were one of the first things we were introduced to in my geology degree. Its the driver of abnormal weather patterns and may be read in sedimentary rock formation environments. It is the most basic time references on earth and are 100% reliable.
You should have started with plate tectonics because location of the plates and continents are just as important or more important.
The present is the key to the past.
Well, reliable until the last few decades when something seems to have broken the cycles that have been steady for nearly 1 million years.
Until recently when our climate has seen quick movement opposite what the Milankovich cycles.
Cyclothems, as they have been called, are completely synchronized to these cycles according to most studies I have seen. Hundreds of recurrences of the sea transgressing and regressing central North America at a semi predictable rate
sure, son :D
The Milankovitch "trifecta" for chilly northern summers:
1. Maximum eccentricity in the orbit (currently in a medium phase)
2. Aphelion during northern summer (currently very favorable for ice age onset!)
3. Minimum tilt of axis (currently medium)
Line up all three of these, and the summer sun will be as far away as possible and as low in the sky as possible. That allows glaciation over Canada & Siberia to really take off!
Could this happen in our lifetime?
@@sm3675 Nope.
Tell that to Forrest Gore.
@@sm3675These cycles change on the order on 10,000s of year's.
the cycle will go warm first then back cold in a few thousand years, it will break the normal cold cycle that should be starting. how circular earth orbit is also affects the warming and our orbit is going to be more circular and better for warming
Thanks for mentioning Milutin Milanković, was an amazing scientist and a genius. Amazing testimonies about his life and work are still alive. Cheers!
He’s clearly less known than Novak Djokovic😊.
@@levvernik2590 Just shows how little the general majority of mankind has progressed in brain capacity.
@@levvernik2590 today scientist and other amazing people are in a shadow of athletes and politicians lol
@@lilly9399 Tesla was a great physicist, but not the GOAT. Novak is about to be the GOAT in tennis.
@@lilly9399 Nikola Tesla was not Serbian!!!! He has nothing to do with them!
Excellent description. One other thing that makes things more complicated is the fact that the output of the sun is not constant. From what I have read the sun’s output can vary by as much as 11% on a cyclical basis. This further complicates the climate.
Go see, videos series of suspicious observers on RUclips
We are too close to it for making it a major factor.
Solar forcing is considered low compared to greenhouse gases forcing. It has a 11 years cycle with no variations in infrared and high variation in UV.
the UV variations has impact with ozone and may induce decadal variations of climate
@@jeromejerome2492lol. Did you just make that up? That's hilarious
@@alabastardmasterson
No. ..numerous scientific publications point that.
I've been a fan of Milankovitch since I was in college. The dude is up there with Copernicus with what he did for science.
And contributed greatly to the aspirin company's income as well, when one reviews the math. ;)
May want to check out the Tychos Model before praising Copernicus too much. I don't think we fully understand the movement of our solar system, but I fully believe the earth has many different cycles that affect our climate and tranquility.
he's also on our 2000 dinar bill, and Tesla is on the 100 dinar bill! Some of the biggest scientists of history, both Serbs.
@@ignjatmarinkovic7884 -- those guys were wicked smaaart!
-- (say with Boston accent!)
@@sv_seveniron yep, totally no clue. That's why we never had a probe fly by Pluto.
Oh wait, we did!
This may be one of many reasons why we haven't seen interstellar civilizations yet; not only the small chance of developing life, but also the small chance of a planet being temperately stable long enough to do much. Even if life were common, the kind of temperate stability we enjoy could be exceedingly rare on large timescales.
I think they simply know better than to get involved in our business. We watch "lower" beings and if we do interfere, we do so without their awareness. Humbling thoughts.
Or .. they're not interested in the ghetto planets
Not really. Once formed, civilization is generally quite resistant to climate change. We are just probably the first
I think this is likely part of the answer to the Fermi paradox. If other intelligent life in the universe is anything like us then they are way to arrogant. We assume conquering the stars is the obvious next step for us. But we have never stopped and will never stop being at the mercy of Mother Nature. We could mess up our climate and cause our own extinction, or Mother Nature could just end us all by herself at any time. All of the universe is practically designed to kill life and habitable planets are no exception just because life can thrive on parts of them temporarily.
Are you trying to suggest that the earth's climate has always been favourable to supporting life forms?
The Mojave Desert in California was once a wet and watery paradise with lakes, rivers, giant dire wolves and flamingos. The first humans in the Mojave region even experienced the large bodies of water and rivers. Paleolithic records reveal they had boats that traversed the massive lakes.
There are glyphs drawn into the rocks, many meters above the Salton Sea of ships with sails... much like early Spanish Exploration which were lost - never returned. The local Indigenous tribes have preserved these area. The rocks also show calcium life forms on the surrounding rocks like those of barnacles and basic sea life.
Did you see the pics of the desert turned green in Saudi Arabia? Instead of hills of sand it was all green.
@@nobodymatters3294 Pics? Nope. Got some?
Earth has been through enormous changes over millions of years. The last 800,000 years have been very stable with similar cyclical glaciations... until the current anthropogenic global warming which is extreme and contrary to all cyclical trends.
Might want to look into that purported anthropogenic warming it correlates highly with globalized central authority.
This is the kind of stuff that almost never gets taught in schools and needs to be talked about more.
As if we don`t have enough indoctrination already?
@@D70340 What about this is indoctrination?
It undermines that anthropogenic warming belief system that currently holds sway in academia.
But don't you know this is all OUR fault LMFAO
@@fullbeard This refutes the Climate change money grab that is being pushed by the big big money to destroy the middle class and create the perfect top - down slave system the elites have been pushing for the last 200 years !
I've watched all your videos and while this one addresses what might seems to be the most "basic" of topics, it ended up being one of the most interesting! I was only aware of about half the cycles you reviewed. Incredible channel you have going here, thanks!
You are probably that guy that yells at the dude in his big pickup truck, all the while driving a prius or some other hybrid/ev.
I never saw a Prius pass a pickup truck, due to the former’s temperate behavior.
Again you're not talking about the same topic
I’m on same page. Life changing knowledge here!!!
@@Marin3r101 What irrelevant nonsense are you rambling on about?
In Norse mythology, the Fimbul winter was a sign that Ragnarök was relentlessly approaching. The Fimbul winter was said to be a winter that lasted three years without any summer, thus heralding Ragnarök, the end of the world.
Year 536 was as close we have come in documented times.
I believ that Ragnarök was the Norse Flood myth.
Yeah basically the norske extinction myth
@@Uncle_pepsi the *NORSE* extinction myth
The geologic arrangment of earths land and seas also play a massive part in this. Before Australia separated from Antarctica the Southern Ocean did not have Antarctic Convergence. This flow has worked to stabilize weather patterns in the southern hemisphere. Think of the effects the Rocky Mountains have on air currents, thus long term weather patterns. There are so many factors on such long time scales that humanity will likely never figure out how it works.
Likewise, I have read that if Panama was removed from the map and an equatorial ocean current was allowed to be established then a lot of weather patterns would stabilize in the northern and southern hemispheres.
@@CharlesHuse what about the channel?
@@Kenshiroit it doesn't connect the two oceans directly. There's segments to it that are separated by massive dams
Plus it's just too small overall
Yes the oxygenation of earth also played a huge role in the particular ice age that followed.
This is certainly true. However, strong disturbing influences have always occurred and yet it was possible to identify patterns and regularities in the arrival of ice ages and interglacials. It is clear from this that the power of these changes is evidently greater than the power of these disturbing influences. And yes humanity as a whole has a huge impact on the earth. But if I had to bet on who is more powerful, humanity would not be among my favorites.
Remember, the tilt of the Earth determines how many hours of direct, concentrated sunlight you receive. That is what separates summer from winter, not the tiny degree of change in how close or far you are from the same. It is the angle of incoming sunlight that matters.
Nope.
Not exactly but under stand when the earth wobbles it also effects the magnetic fields that protect the planet from solar radiation. An area left uncovered by this field will suffer and major impacts will occur
Kobalt is correct. The temperature difference is derived from how concentrated the sun's energy is to the surface. I.e the more perpendicular the surface is to the sun, then more heat energy per meter sq.
Seasons have nothing to do with being closer to the sun. That extra closeness to the sun is irrelevant in the grand scheme....
@@John...44... Thank you. Though we should also add that the length of the day also impacts seasonal temperatures
Solar energy is mitigated by the electromagnetic layered fields that surround earth. If there is a distortion in this field, the amount of solar radiation will vary dramatically. As well, a loosening of the magnetic field leads to wavy jet streams, which obviously affect weather.
The positions of planets can certainly have an effect on Earth's magnetic field.
The Svensmark "Cloud Mystery" research shows that when there is a weakened magnetic field around earth, cosmic radiation leads to increased cloud condensation nuclei, which when combined with evaporated water, leads to increased rainfall. This has been cross examined all over the planet. Increased cosmic rays to the surface is very tightly correlated with increased planetary rainfall
Of course, the effect Milankovitch cycles will differ depending where you are on the planet. In ten thousand years, the Sahara Desert may become a temperate landscape with massive lakes, rivers and forests again.
Omg that would be amazing
Actually, it *will* be.
It's been discovered that that too is one of the world's cycles.
At the end of the last Ice Age, the Sahara was a lush grassland. Fossil evidence shows that it has been through that cycle several times through prehistory.
@@teabearchurchill5600 that’s so true that
We could make it happen in five years. We just have to doit.
@@teabearchurchill5600 It's called the 'Sahara Pump Theory', in case anyone else is interested.
This is my favorite video of all-time explaining the Milankovitch Cycles. Really amazing job.
What an honor to see Milutin Milankovic's thesis addressed here
Why is it an honor to you? Are you related?
@@demodemoncrat441 embarrassing, right?
@@SameAsAnyOtherStranger Why is it embarrassing?
All the great people come from Serbia :)
He is the one that explained why the earth has some long cold period and some short hot periods. The last glaciation ended only 10000 years ago and lasted 100 000 years. OK??
there are few additional factors, like solar cycle, cycle related to jupiter, saturn orbit, etc.... including cycle related to rotation of sun around milky way core
The whole global warming, climate change thing is about money, control and power and ensuring you have none.
@2:36 The change in season or the difference between equatorial and polar weather is not related to distance from the sun here, it is related to the tilt at that location. More watts per square meter are received at any given location while the sun is directly overhead rather then off to an angle.
And, shorter days, so less exposure.
At winter in the UK the earth is at its closest to the sun. Looking out of my window it’s -5°.
The tilt and our relationship with the moon and orbit of the sun coupled with a spinning planet of huge swathes of land and water.
Fascinatingly complex, and not ‘climate change’ hysteria that dopey communist girl wants to indoctrinate into the young
Yeah, a few hundred/thousands km of distance do not make that much of a difference. Angle does all the difference:)
That and the hours of daylight are longer in the summer.
@@ericpmoss Yes, that too, but even in the summer the equatorial regions will be getting much more intense sunlight then polar areas.
It's important to note that the larger ocean area in the southern hemisphere more than offsets the effects of summer perihelion/winter aphelion down there. More ocean = less extreme seasons.
It also means that the climate of the southern hemisphere cannot make or break ice ages. There are no large landmasses in the middle to subarctic southern latitudes, unlike North America and Eurasia in the north. You need subarctic land surface to support increasing snow cover.
Well said . The bigger problem though is why in the last 10 million years the milankovitch cycles only started producing ice age 2.4 million years ago
Exactly. At most you’d get a humongous glacier and alpine permafrost in the mountains of Tasmania and New Zealand’s South Island, where the whole mountain range is frozen not just in June, July and August but year-round. But Chile would definitely be affected, and the resulting northward advancement of Argentina’s and South Brazil’s temperate zones would sap moisture from the Amazon.
Snowline in the southern hemisphere is also more stable, you can have glaciers in mountains at lower elevations, since there's not much disturbance once you reach 0° C (32 ° F) isotherm. It is the same reason why Siberia is green and forested despite having colder winters than Greenland, greenland is cold year around while Siberia gets as cold as Antarctica in winter but fairly warm in summer.
@@Marvin-dg8vj it’s not a problem it’s just the way things played out. Things change and then they have a period of more predictability for awhile, we’re lucky we’re here nor but industry is messing things up.
All Hail, Milutin Milankovic! He completed all the calculations, accurately, without the aid of a calculator or computer and he was right!
Why do people write Milankovitch tho? I know hes Serbian.
Also, yes the S hemisphere is in phase with being closer to the sun in their summer and further away in winter but they don't have more extreme seasons because there is much less land mass and more water which moderates their seasons.
Fair point 👍
Plus the latitude explanation given at the start is very basic. The UK and North Western parts of Europe are on the same latitude as Canada but have much milder Winters due to the gulf stream. The major Oceans are massive players in the distribution of heat and cold, Fresh water melt from glaciers spilling in the the sea is another one to.
Land mass both north and southern hemisphere is equal
Also the icy polar eye is blocked almost completely and no freezing air breaks out north, like in the northern hemisphere the polar air is doing.
@@mattking9974 Thought Ice mass in the North is growing Russia is building another ice breaker; check out Orca 1 twin turbo Nuclear powered ship bright red intense. Tony Hellar shows ice mass charts.
Thank you.
This is the best explanation of Milankovitch Cycles I've seen in my lifetime.
The other thing that people often overlook is that the sun's energy output is not constant. A small variation can have a huge impact on climate.
Sun activity is not higher than usual. If at all it's lower. Still it's getting warmer. FAST.
@@Hubwood
"Sun activity is not higher than usual. If at all it's lower. Still it's getting warmer. FAST."
That is what they say. The Earth is warming at an unprecedented rate never seen before in the history of the climate. Even the undisputed experts on everything climate, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) stated in its AR5 Synthesis Report on climate change in 2014: “Many of the observed changes since the 1950s are unprecedented over decades to millennia.”
From the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University web site (2003).
Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University
The Earth Institute at Columbia University
Open quote.
Abrupt Climate Change
Around 15,000 years ago, the Earth started warming abruptly after ~ 100,000 years of an "ice age"; this is known as a glacial termination. The large ice sheets, which covered significant parts of North America and Europe, began melting as a result. A climatic optimum known as the "Bölling-Allerød" was reached shortly thereafter, around 14,700 before present. However, starting at about 12,800 BP, the Earth returned very quickly into near glacial conditions (i.e. cold, dry and windy), and stayed there for about 1,200 years: this is known as the Younger Dryas (YD), since it is the most recent interval where a plant characteristic of cold climates, Dryas Octopetala, was found in Scandinavia.
The most spectacular aspect of the YD is that it ended extremely abruptly (around 11,600 years ago), and although the date cannot be known exactly, it is estimated from the annually-banded Greenland ice-core that the ANNUAL-MEAN TEMPERATURE INCREASED BY AS MUCH AS 10°C IN 10 YEARS (emphasis added).
Close quote.
I wonder how humans dumping CO2 caused such a rapid climate change 11,600 years ago. Maybe humans are so powerful they found a way to send our CO2 back through time into the past since they are claiming that the only reason that the climate changes is because humans cause the change.
Perhaps you can explain how humans burning fossil fuels caused those two sudden warming events thousands of years ago.
@@Hubwood correct.
In 100,000,000 years, it's predicted to increase to a level that will literally scorch the Earth. Pretty scary when you think about it.
But I guess that's just another reason to try to keep things as cool as possible.
@@VVayVVard
being scared of something that will happen in 100 million years is just hilarious 😂
This is definitely something that needs to be taught in schools more
it would go against the climate change hoax. so they never will
it was briefly mentioned in my school
@@GOATMENTATOR Not in mine. First heard of the Milankovitch cycles in university when studying geography. Been hooked by them since.
It causes doubt in the dogma of the "humans cause climate change" marketing, though. You can't argue with 'the message' or you'll be considered a dissident.
@@TexZenMaster Strange, the people who understands Milankovitch cycles tend to really worried about AGW...
I always knew about precession, etc, but never have I seen it all laid out so clearly, what it's actual effects are, and all that. Did the math and everything. Seems almost too simply explained.
Well, it is almost too simply explained, but since you did the math, you also remember your aspirin budget while doing that math. ;)
What overloads many is albedo, which is counterintuitive in its effects on climate for most. Well, that and how slow radiative cooling into space actually is. Indeed, most people don't comprehend even partially how a thermos works.
People tend to trust their own daily experiences, it takes a lot of education to allow one to trust the math.
So impressed by the jaw dropping brainy'ness of those folk who worked all this out, wow! What an informative, balanced and well researched piece, such a pleasure to watch - thank you.
Except...Big 🚩here with sun distance being responsible for change in temperature. It's nothing to do with distance. At 93 million miles with the distance varying a couple of thousand miles, the heat change would be hard to measure and way less than 1 degree. It has everything to do with the angle of the to the sun's rays. This is seen easily by everyone outside the tropic of Cancer and Capricorn. As the sun drops in the sky, much more area receives the same amount of radiated heat from the sun.
Until in some areas, it disappears completely.
I tried to explain this to my grade 10 biology teacher and got an E. The next semester, a substitute physics teacher corrected him, and he changed it to an A.
I don't think this guy made it past grade 10 physics.
Simply Not Correct, Suns distance has lot to do with change in temperature and it Change Far more than "distance varying a couple of thousand miles" In Fact the distance varying 5 million kms (Minimum 147,1 Mill Kms and Maximum 152,1 Mill Kms), so you are about 1000-2000 Times wrong. Planets that are Father away from the Sun ? gets less Sun rays and energi and is Colder@@jamierose4088
Η ομορφιά του πλανήτη μας. Πόσο χαζομάρα εχει ο κοσμος που πιστεύει ολους αυτούς που το παίζουν επιστήμονες και δεν έχουν καμία σχέση με το αντικείμενο και δεν πιστεύουν τους πραγματικούς επιστήμονες που έχουν αφιερώσει χρόνια ολόκληρα ρης ζωής τους. Εμεις ευχαριστούμε για ρην εργασία σου!😊
The Norse Eddas tell the story of Fibulwinter; a winter lasting for three years and preceding Ragnorak. It is possible that this is a remnant of tales of the Younger Dryas Event. It's also possible that the death of Baldur because of a mistletoe dart given to Hodr by Loki could also be dated to when mistletoe and the oaks they rely on returned to the northern regions, about 9000 years ago.
The Eddas we are familiar with today were transcribed by Snorri Sturluson in 13th century Iceland. The early inhabitants of Iceland were familiar with long, severe winters, often influenced by volcanic erruptions. Norse countries were uninhabited 9-12,000 years ago as they were covered in ice, and the people who now live there would have been in Eurasia alongside ancestors of other fair skinned Europeans.
Another possible explanation for the Fimbulwinter is from when a volcanic eruption in Indonesia in 536AD caused winter to last for several years in Scandinavia. From archeological records you can see villages relocating to higher ground and a massive decrease in population
Never doubt ye Olde Runes and Rymes, For they be right, most of the time.
To me ragnarok is a depiction of a younger dryas impact. Fenrir, a wolf with a fiery mouth that spans from the ground to the sky? Fire giants coming from the sky? Winter that precedes it? And many more details that stick out as soon as u look at it. The way Norse mythology explains the frost giants (for example, Ymir being this massive frost giant that spans the world and out of his body smaller giants break away) is to me a clear depiction of an late ice age world
It is referring to the Younger Dryas era! The Anunnaki have recorded this! When they first arrived here earth was mostly a frozen planet.
As a Serbian, I approve this video! Thank you for remembering our great scientist.
@@paulvs55 You sound like one of those people that glue themselves to the walls or throw paint at art thinking they are making a difference. Go and find a life.
@paul snor Big coastal countries are yapping about global warming because they are afraid of massive flooding so the make it everyone's problem.
@paul snor Yes glow like that
@@soybasedjeremy3653 I bet you don't even know how much sea levels have risen since last ice age? Try in excess of 400 feet in complete absence of man-made CO2.
I bet you don't know their is ample evidence locked in the permafrost of a past with much warmer and richer life in the arctic. But how can that possibly be when we are going to destroy the planet by over-heating it with man-made CO2?
Seasons are theoretically more extreme in the Southern Hemisphere because of the amplification of the sun's rays in summer by closest approach to the sun, and their diminishment in winter by being further away. However, the Southern Hemisphere as a much lower land-to-ocean ratio than the Northern Hemisphere, so the greater amount of water buffers the theoretically more extreme seasons.
We are beginning the opposite process.
Summer has just started down here, was 27 degrees Celsius today, great for swimming in the lake.
@@pl1068 About ten years ago I knew a guy who went to Chile to ski. He went during our North American winter. When he got there, he said all the ski slopes were closed because it was hotter than blazes, and this was proof of global warming. He didn't know the seasons are reversed in the Southern Hemisphere. True story.
@@alansewell7810 😅
That's now, that is also cylcal.
All of this is very interesting, there’s another factor and that’s the cycle of the sun, which does get hotter or colder as well.
Yes, solar minima and maxima. I believe we are in a maximum right now that is due to shift towards a minimum in a few years time.
WOW! Not only did I learn something, but your graphics were outstanding! An awesome video.
This is by far the most informative and easily understable video about the earth and its orbit I have ever seen. Fantastic effort!!
totally agree!
Check out Suspicious Observers.
Yes, I found things that in the Video and the comments I had been pondering about for years
By Tereza Pultarova
published June 14, 2022
"Milankovitch cycles are periodic changes in the orbital characteristics of a planet that control how much sunlight it receives, thus affecting its climate and habitability over hundreds of thousands of years.
Although Milankovitch cycles have nothing to do with the current climate change, they are believed to have dictated Earth's climate for millions of years, making the planet swing periodically between tens to hundreds of thousands-year long ice ages and warmer periods called interglacials, such as the one we live in.
Today, scientists can model Earth's Milankovitch cycles millions of years into the past and future and compare their calculations with evidence found in geological sediments all over the world. Some believe that Milankovitch cycles play a key role in the habitability of planets."
The main reason we have seasons is not caused by distance from the sun, it is caused by a difference in light density. In summer, the tilt causes the respective hemisphere to receive more light energy and thus heat, per unit area than it does in winter.
"angle of insulation"
But you wouldn't be siuggesting that the intensity of sunlight reaching unit area is unrelated to distance Sun to earth surely ?
True including the earth's rotation.
How did an educational channel get something so incredibly basic so wrong? Especially one focused on astronomy, jesus.
@@phobics9498 He didn't get it wrong. 1:56 is where he talks about how the tilt of the earth causes seasons.
2:47 Not distance, but sun angle. The distance varies by quite a bit during orbit, but it makes little difference compared to sun angle and even length of day, at least in this phase of the Milankovitch cycle. That's why the southern hemisphere's summer isn't much more or less extreme than the North in similar biomes
Thank you was looking for this. It has everything to do with angle of incidence and length of day not distance
Exactly!!
My school teacher did a science test on this, he used over-head projectors to show temps via angle difference via closeness
I was going to say it. It was a very big mistake in my opinion. It shows lack of very basic knowledge. I learnt that in school.
he SAID ANGLE...DERP
Milankovich's name will be remembered for tens of thousands of years into the future because of the time line of ice ages.
These videos are so therapeutics as they are educational. Thr space ambient music and the soft spoken British accent narration. I feel reborn again.
2:42 It's not about closeness to the sun, it's about the angle at which the rays hit the area. At 90° the cross section of radiation that hits the ground is equal to the area that it shines on. As the angle decreases, the cross section reduces with the cosine. Meaning that at angles close to 90° there is not a lot of variation, but the farther away from 90° you go, the larger the influence becomes.
7:00 As the calendar is fixed with the spring point, winter in the north in 13'000 will still be in January. We will have shifted the calendar accordingly.
Yeah, he overused the same term, "closeness", and conflated angle towards the sun with distance from the sun.
Let's shift Earth & Venus positions or Earth & Pluto, distance does have a effect aside from rays of light, from minimal to more than marginal. OP is speaking relative to the average datasets and current understanding & filtering it for common layman/laywoman to understand. Situational awareness also includes speech and it's context.
@@Theeoldmann Sorry, no. The differing solar input depending on latitude has NOTHING to do with distance, and EVERYTHING with angle. Referring to distance in this context is just wrong. If we allow this, the next question is why excentricity of the earths orbit allows for seasons in the northern hemisphere to be when they are, because distance from the sun would imply the reverse.
@@HotelPapa100 know so much, but understanding little... Good for you
@@HotelPapa100 Of course you are correct. The “closeness” to the sun changes far less than the diameter of the earth based on tilt. It would be warmer during summer in the northern hemisphere of an earth-like planet orbiting slightly further from the sun, than a similar planet in the southern hemisphere orbiting slightly closer to the sun. In this scenario, “closeness” is less important than angle (as you identified).
Tromso is at a higher latitude, not altitude. There a few more little mixups in this video. Usually flawless, keep them coming.
I noticed too. 🧐
@@frankkay6457 He also suggests that the seasonal tilt of the earth means high latitudes are closer/further away from the sun in summer/winter. While technically true, such tiny differences in distance to the sun are totally irrelevant to temperatures.
Tromso is not that cold. I have been there in winter. Is about like north Italy.
I was impressed by the power of the Gulf Stream.
@@alicesacco9329 Yea, just go inland to places like Kautokeino, or Karasjok, and the temps can get down to -50°C, though usually just between -20°C and -30°C. (the cold record in Norway was set in Karasjok in 1886, and measured at -51,4°C, though in 1999 the same place got as cold as -51,2°C)
@@budawang77 I thought the seasons were more to do with the angle of the sun rather than the distance from the sun.
Thank you for this video. It was very interesting! :)
The "distance from the sun" from Greenland to Sahara is so tiny it does not affect the energy in the rays. In the north the rays are spread out and will have less warming effect. And if the rays comes in at an angle, in the north the rays have to pass through a longer distance of the atmosphere before it reach the earth's surface, and then reducing the energy in the rays.
I think it's about the land mass distribution as well. There's more land mass in the northern hemisphere. When the North hemisphere is facing the sun the land heats up the earth more. When the southern hemisphere is facing the sun more, the earth is cooler because its harder to heat the water.
@@RideBikes_Walkplaces Not quite. Water absorbs more sunlight than land. If the Northern Hemisphere had more water, the Earth would be warmer. Overall, the Earth having continents has a cooling effect.
@@haroldnowak2042 I've just been looking it up. So many conflicting articles! Some say the land absorbes more solar radiation, others not. 🤔 I'm sure I watched a documentary years ago which talked about land mass distribution as being a factor to this affect. Maybe its to do with ice forming on the land and reflecting the salary radiation. 🤔
@@haroldnowak2042 The north and south Pacific ocean has more area than all of the worlds land masses combined.
One good reason to not deploy on a Navy ship out of San Diego.
Crossing the line near the 00 lat and 00 long point is not bad.
Actually meets the comfort zone that humans were designed for.
@@RideBikes_Walkplaces Pythagorean theorem just may also have a pronounce effect. It is just math?
The tilt causing parts of the planet to be “closer” to the sun results in such a minor distance difference that it’s not the reason for the increased heating in the summers for a hemisphere. It’s the increase in the concentration of the solar rays over a given area due to the curve of the earth.
Alex, it's not so much being closer to the sun that is a big factor in temperature but how direct the energy from the sun is. The more tilted away from the sun a place is, the more atmosphere there is for the sun's energy to dispersed in, deflected. Plus there is an increase landmass surface area the further sloped the area becomes in relation to the 🌞
Very good! Just have one comment. I don't think it would have destroyed the general publics' brains to include the actual names of the cycles:
(All approximate, of course.)
Eccentricity; 100,000 yrs
Obliquity; 41,000 yrs
Precession; 25,700 yrs
Noooooo....... My brain has been destroyed.
Superb video with excellent commentary. This is probably the most well balanced, and the scientific explanation of how our seasons change and how the climate cycle works. Excellent.
When the temperate zones are reduced by 75%, land based warm blooded creatures will face harsh survival realities. I recognize that the worst case climate scenario of runaway temperature rise is a frightening prospect, but winter is indeed coming.
Loved the video! As an Earth Sciences student geology and geography content always makes me smile! It would be super awesome to see a video on the larger scale Wilson cycles that characterized the intervals of hundreds of millions of years of plate tectonics resulting in the formation and separation of the worlds ancient supercontinents and paleo oceans like Rodinia and the Iapetus or Tethys ocean. Thanks again for an interesting and cool video!
Did you notice the dozens of errors?
@@eedobee What errors?
Between 13900 BC and 14000 BC, a 100 year span, Earth's temperature rose 5 degrees Celsius. This is one of many intermediate spikes in the ice core data, not including the 10-15 degree Ice Age spikes. Humanity lived through this period just fine and had no heavy polluting industry to speak of at that time. In the past 200 years, which is twice that length of time, Earth's temperature has only risen by 1.2 degree Celsius.
A minor natural change in temperature that is in fact physically unstoppable and inevitable has been pathologized and blamed entirely on human activity in order to establish a carbon tax which allows governments to monitor every action of every person and tax them for it. The climate changes. Changes in local weather ARE NOT evidence of climate change, however, human activity CAN affect weather.
Changes in climate, not weather, are driven by the Milankovitch cycles, primarily precession of the equinox, which changes the angle of Earth's tilt over a 25,000 year cycle, and thus changes the total amount of sunlight the poles receive, known as the insolation cycle. This insolation data from ice cores coincides directly with the rise and fall of the past 4 Ice Ages. Furthermore the temperature was higher than it is now prior to the last 4 ice ages, and also coincides with the insolation cycle and the rise and fall of the Ice Ages. That's right, the temperature was higher back when humans were hunting wooly mammoths than they are now. No heavy industry to speak of. If no other fact about climate change remains in your memory, let that be the one.
This fact suggests that the warming we are experiencing now is that final spike of warming that occurs right before Ice Ages suddenly set in. Climate change is real, its not caused by humans, and we are headed into a regularly scheduled Ice Age according to every indicator, not a waterball Earth condition where the remaining icecaps in the already warm period were in fully melt away. Sea level rise cannot occur with slow melting because of isostatic rebound. Rapid melting is required to cause the floods and sea level rises that climate extremists harp on about.
Rapid melting is caused by a sudden addition of lots of heat to the atmosphere. This is how the Ice Ages end. The most popular theories on how Ice Ages end are supervolcanoes, comet impacts or massive solar flares. However, comet impacts best solve the issue of regularity, as the Ice Ages seem to last a similar amount of time, every time.
If we were to somehow try and affect these Milankovitch cycles, such as slowing down the rate of precession, it would spell real cataclysmic changes to Earth's surface, the likes of which climate extremists only dream of to justify the implementation of their carbon tax scheme..
@@hermestrismegistus9603ive been struggling to find any actual data supporting this, the only thingni found was the end of the last glaciation event which lasted 100,000 years and ended 25,000 years ago, with what we're currently in being the interglacial period, a particularly dangerous time to be altering the climate on the scale on 10s to 100s of years. Please do find me a source for these claims as its very interesting if true. In fact the data ive been looking at suggests that we are already at CO2 levels that should be expected to rise well past a "hothouse earth" event, especially if we keep pumping CO2 thats been trapped for 10s of millions of years into the atmosphere, in fact our CO2 levels have never risen to the levels they are today in the past 800,000 years. So please do provide sources and explain what exactly you mean
Lol you can really tell where i started to look more and more into this guy's claims and just found what seems to be mountains of evidence... *surprise* to the support of the current scientific CONSENSUS...
Beautiful production values. Love the silky 60 frames-per-second quality. Thank you for another piece of wonderful content, Alex. I hope you have a pleasant festive break.
You mean Christmas? The celebration of our only Saviour coming down to pur sinful level on a rescue mission involving forgiveness and payment for sin?
Have a really good CHRISTMAS, and stop pandering to non-Christians when refering to a Christian celebration.
@@user-or9cj3vk6t well he’s taking forever on this rescue mission. Tell him to hurry up.
@@user-or9cj3vk6t ironic to post an overtly religious comment on a specifically scientific video! 😆
@@Monkey80llx Ironic, but definitely not surprising lol.
Astonishingly I was wondering about this a few days ago. I was limiting my consideration to the fact that our orbit is not circular, and wondering if there is a gradual shift in the position of the aphelion and perihelion in relation to the sun itself and how that might affect us. This video is perfectly timed, and goes far beyond what I was considering for different variables. Good to know Milankovich and others have looked at this as well. Wonderful as always!
Every 25771.5 years, perihelion precession repeats, it's the only one of the three cycles that is perfectly repeatable and has the same period.
It's worth noting that climate is very complex and most certainly can NOT be attributed to just one factor alone: the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Even on its own, its effect is much less than is alarmingly claimed.
@@MisterHowzat According to the laws of physics, (Stefan-Boltzmann's law) Earth without an atmosphere would be a frozen planet, it is only the greenhouse effect preventing iceball Earth. What's truly alarming is the scientific ignorance displayed by the ignorant anti-science crowd. Physics dictates reality, not science deniers
@@MisterHowzat I believe we are practicing for an impending ice age. If we can warm the planet with cars and farting cows, then we can hopefully globally warm the next ice age.
@@MisterHowzat The concentration of CO2 is the only viable theory atm. Why have we never seen this rate of warming in the history of the Earth? That alone makes several hypotheses fall apart.
6:56 damn that’s so crazy, I never had any idea and can hardly imagine the northern hemisphere having summer in January that’s so weird to think about
Yay for brief interglacial cycles! I have a snowboard AND a surfboard, so either way, I'm good.
Food?
@@medicmike4906There's always bugs!🐜🐛🦗🪱🐝🪲
Yummy surfboard
@@HansSchulze Nah bro, the board is for riding, the BUGS are for eating. In fact, I had a deliciously roasted Beetle grub just the other night!
This has far more impact on climate than man made fears of of human caused climate change those proclaiming about also weirdly make money from.
When describing typical annual seasons, it's not about how close or far a part of the surface is from the sun, it's about the angle. Which influences the area the same amount of light is distributed across as well as how much is reflected by the atmosphere.
There is a distance component when there's large eccentricity, but at our current 0.016, it's not remotely an issue.
Yeah I was very surprised to hear this bit of misinformation in the video. Sorry creator, this one is going to sting a lot for you haha
I learned the hard way that you can get sunburn on a cloudy day in Capo Verde off the coast of Algeria, though cloudy days are very rare there without volcanic influences.
that's like saying Pythagorean theorem isn't about A it's about B
@@rlibby404 yea, if B was 1000 times longer than A
For a layman like me…our contributions whether good or bad seem to have a minute effect on the planet’s weather…I’m not advocating we stop caring about our footprint but respect that the planet, the solar system and universe in general couldn’t care less of what we do while we’re alive for a brief moment in time
All we are is dust in the wind. Kansas.
But what of the Buffalo? _(Then...)_ What of Polar Bears? _(Next...)_ ...Humans are Locusts.
Life sure is a beautiful scary f****** place.
Correct
On the contrary humans can have a large effect over a lifetime and we are seeing the entire global temperature increase by a significant amount (1.5c) so far.
Its getting colder already. Record snowfall and low temperatures this Winter.
Regional weather is irrelevant.
yeah lets ignore the constant breaking of heat records all over the world year after year after year and focus on some snowfall somewhere.
@@DJ-ov2it One that comes to mind are temps going over 100F in the Canadian Arctic.
@@DJ-ov2it LOL. Heat is climate change and COLD is weather.
😄😆😅🤣😂🐷🐷🐷🐷
As someone with a degree in geology, this video got me giddy. Good stuff! This needs to be common knowledge for more people.
Use your degree to help make that happen my friend ☺️
@@iamthetinkerman I'd love to, except in my country (the USA), it would bankrupt me. I ended up working in IT because nobody wants to hire in geology-related stuff right now except those who would pay next to nothing and/or demand years of unpaid internship first. And teaching is worse (I know this because I'm an IT analyst II for a public university).
Incidentally, the Earth Science department at my university just got disbanded due to funding issues, and I can't even go back for a Master's Degree now :/
The tilt of the Earth’s rotation is referred to as the wobbling of the elliptical.
Wobbling of the Elliptical even rolls off the tongue nicer
@Castaway....isn't there another term called PRECESSION? PLS ADVISE? Thanks.
I prefer to call it elliptical wobbling
There are loads of solutions for a wobbling elliptical on Google search! ;-)
I used to play with a top and wonder about the wobbling effect. Little did I know my whole life was on a ball experiencing that wobbling effect 😅
Thank you! After learning that we're closest to the sun in January, I've often wondered if that made Southern Hemisphere summers a little hotter than a Northern Hemisphere summer. I'm glad to see you touch on that! I've never come across it mentioned elsewhere before. 🙂
It’s the tilt of the earth and I’m sure you came across this subject in school if you paid attention
@@SticksAndStoners007 Omg, you really need to read that again a few times
@@Pao234_ omg you really need to calm down professor
A lot of radiation is reflected by Antarctica and a lot more hits the Southern Ocean.
Used to teach it in school. learned that in the 4th or 5th grade. But that was a long time ago. They don't teach things like that because ignorance on the subject allows them to dictate the climate change information. Which is by far the greatest transfer of wealth in the history of mankind.
Alex, you must be the best, most persuasive internet pitchman I have ever heard. Now, I'm referring to your commercial, not the Astrum content, which is, of course, even better.
Love the vid! Existential dread in 3…2…1… but still loved it. Sobering to realise how fragile our environment is. It’s like you’re on a plane about to take off, there’s a little panic and a part of you just wants to get off and be safe on the ground. But our planet ship is our only carriage and there’s no getting off!
I've been getting off...
Our environment is fragile, but not because of the Milankovitch cycles. It's because of the killer asteroids. Ask the dinosaurs to tell their opinion, about what is the most dangerous threat.
Dont worry. A thousand years from now we'll have enough space mirrors to decide our climate on earth.
@@fredrika2359 worst idea ever
@@fredrika2359 Pfft. I doubt humans will be here in another 200 years at the rate we're going.
This was a fantastic, if not the best explained I have ever seen on Milankovitch cycles. Kudos.
The greater amount of land in the northern hemisphere and the placement of that land are significant, as sea ice is vulnerable to melting from below, unlike land, and exposed water absorbs much more energy than reflective ice.
Wow, this was a great video. I confess I knew less than 20% of the information in here, so this was a wonderful (and well produced) explanation. Great graphics.
Glad you made this vid, I really wanted to know how the seasons worked with the orbit of the Earth, thanks.
The Pole shift is differently a major factor in this as well
💯💯💯💯💯☝️☝️
In other words, it's beautiful. Our solar system is beautiful along with every other special object out there. If you were to give one or two words to our universe it would be Beauty and chaos
Winter missed me in my part of Canada totally. We had one -30 day and not much snow. It’s mid February it should be -10c and below but it’s been above plus 5 all week.
Just to be clear, it's not Tromso's "high altitude" (2:17) that makes it cold and dark. It is its high latitude.
Amazing to think that everything in the universe has its own little things that are going on without you knowing. Every planet experiences major and very minor changes, every particle on said planets experiences the same. Its beautiful
But if a tree falls in the forest and there is no one to hear it, does it make a sound?
Makes me think of some old Alan Watts talk where he talks about things having perfect harmony in disharmony
Fascinating! I haven't been this sucked into an educational video in a long time. I was soaking up every word you said and loved it, I never knew how many variables were at play affecting our seasons. I love it, keep up the great work!
So much for "climate change" horseshit
Pure, factual, and unadulterated theoretical scientific data.
I firmly concur and subscribe in Milankovitch theory.
Years and years ago (30 or more) I saw or read about these cycles. Never really thought about it much and forgot then remembered. It was always difficult to find affirming info as it seemed limited.
I’m glad for this video and other info now publicizing the cycle theory.
Excellent
One thing not mentioned: the insane amounts of energy transported by the gulf stream north to Iceland and Western Europa. This river within the ocean already has dropped 10% to 20% efficiency and i personally believe this is more of an influence on the extreme weather conditions we've seen compared to CO2 retaining some heat.
CO2 is a tiny molecule and it does not retain heat. It reflects as very small amount of radiation both ways. You should jump back off the band waggon. Extreme weather conditions in your lifetime don't match up to so much
Exactly. Thank you.
That's from fresh water mixing with sea water.
@@ElPinitch caused by increasing fresh water melt from primarily Greenland due to the rising temperatures...
@@spaceman9599 Correct! A process which was set to happen regardless of human activity.
Love the explanation in this video; really puts things into perspective.
it's not really the distance to the sun that causes the seasons but how far the sun gets above the horizon
because you're a lot closer to the sun during perihelion just after NYE than at aphelion even if you're in the northern hemisphere
Yeah this one surprises me still.. A lot of people think it's a distance thing, not the angle our hemisphere is at towards the sun.. Take away Earth's 23.5 degree tilt, and bang, it's one season all year long... Which would be kinda neat in then southern and southern hemispheres..
Was looking for this comment.
Exactly, imagine a 1m^2 patch of light at a specific intensity shining on to a sheet of paper at precisely 90 degrees to the light source. The light patch covers an area of 1m^2. Rotate the paper so that it's now at 23.5 degrees to the light source. The same light patch is now distributed over a trapezoidal patch of the paper with a far larger surface area. The radiant flux of the light patch is just more diffuse.
True, the seasons are caused by the tilt but the distance from the Sun exaggerates the warmth and coolness of the seasons.
Distance would make seasons happen even without axial tilt; they would just be weaker, happen in both hemispheres in unison, and be shifted in time a bit. In real life the difference in distance exacerbates seasonal extremes in the South and mellows them out in the North.
I do love the way when referring to CO2 levels, you display a coal fired power station - cooling towers, so that is steam (H2O) not smoke (CO2).
Great video.
My favorite theory for what might have helped cause the ice age cycles, tens of millions of years ago, is the breakaway of Antarctica from South America and Australia, around 30 million years ago, and the formation of the isthmus of Panama, starting 15 million years ago and fully forming 3 million years ago. Both of these events dramatically changed how warm water was distributed around the planet's oceans (think gulf stream).
If you study a graph that shows the PPM of CO2 in the atmosphere going back hundreds of millions of years, one trend becomes clear as you get closer to our present: The earth has been gradually cooling and essentially stuck in ice age cycles for tens of millions of years.
Looking at a graph of CO2 over the eons;
The first dramatic drop in CO2 happens between 30-20 million years ago (potentially due to the freezing over of the Antarctic continent after it broke away from South America and Australia).
The second noticeable drop begins around 5 million years ago and continues until today. While not as dramatic as the previous drop in CO2 PPM, it is causing a gradual cooling of the earth over millions of years.
Perhaps the Milankovitch cycles have a greater and greater cooling effect over millions of years, as oceans are less able to move heat around (say due to an isthmus of some sort), which then set the earth on a course of cooling.
That said humanity has already reversed much of this CO2 PPM decline, bringing it back above 400 for the first time in at least 3 million years. But then again who knows WTF that means lol.
It’s an unfortunate reality that scientists cannot predict the future. It’s always possible that they have missed a variable regarding climate change; but we cannot take the chance in case they are correct. Regardless, there are many other good reasons to go Green besides climate change.
Hmm, While this Antarctica moving south and Panama land seems to cause the affect, from what i have read it is the ramming of India into Asia about the same time which scientists say caused the Milankovitch Cycles to come into effect, causing Ice ages.
The rising of the mountains and plateaus of Tibet they say caused stronger weathering, which led to more of the CO2 to become limestone, pulling CO2 out of the atmosphere until it fell into such a low % that the Milankovitch Cycles could start affecting climate more causing Ice ages.
Of course we are reversing things with CO2, so the Milankovitch Cycles have less affect on things. No more Ice ages are expected.
That is what many scientist claim.
Of course the Ocean Deep currants ARE a factor and Panama Isthmus and Antarctica position change how the Ocean Deep currants flow, otherwise the Ice ages would have happened during Pangaea (or earlier super continents were formed) when mountains were higher and weathering would have happened also.
It seems we need all 3 factors to cause Ice ages - less CO2/more weathering, a specific Ocean Deep currant, and the right Milankovitch Cycles.
The causes and effects you mention are good for local weather and climate phenomenon like the fact that Europe is warmer than it should be at it's latitude, as you say distribution. But, it has no overall effect on the entire heat budget of the planet. Friction and radioactive decay in the mantel and core create heat, and solar radiation strikes the planet to warm us, so between the heat generated and that retained from the sun the planet will radiate so much of it back out into space at night. The thing most people do not get is if the radiation off the planet exceeds the amount generated or received from the sun then the planet will cool. If the amount radiated away is less than the locally produced heat or the solar radiation retained then the planet will warm. And I know people do not understand any of this because you ask them what is the #1 greenhouse gas and they will tell you it is CO2. It is not. 95% of all greenhouse gas in our atmosphere is water vapor. When the planet warms there is more of it, and while that would tend to insulate and trap heat from radiating away it also raises the albedo of the planet reflecting away solar radiation. I would ask them to do an experiment, we now have tons and tons of Baby Powder we have no use for because it has been found to cause cancer in people who smoked it or something. Take 20 or 30 tons of it out about 2 million miles and create an artificial ring of dust between the sun and Earth and see what the effect is. My bet is no matter what science either would not want this done because it would show what a scam they are running, or, it would trigger a mini ice age of it's own. No need to worry about the effects being permanent, it would blow away almost as fast as it was dispensed into space. But not before effects could be measured.
@@markwalker3499 I believe you, however I might disagree on one aspect. It is not the CO2 that everyone is complaining about as there were parts in Earths history with higher CO2, nor is it water vapour (but I do understand that this can increase as the Earth gets warmer as warmer air holds more of it). It is in fact Methane gas. We now rear so many cows/pigs/sheep/chickens etc to grow and feed the 8 billion humans (and rising) in the hundreds of millions that the rise of Methane gas in the air has now risen and Methane is 84 times worse than CO2 as a greenhouse gas, however the food industry doesn't want you to believe that.
And then you may say okay let's stop eating meat, but all the vegans out there won't allow you to kill them and thus the problem of rising Methane is here to stay!
@@markwalker3499 It’s already well understood what effects blocking sunlight has. Because not only has it been hypothesized, it has been observed, multiple times. However, what importance does this hold to the current situation. Are you suggesting we make artificial clouds? I hope not. Otherwise you must be assuming more greenhouse gases mean more cooling. This may sound reasonable to our brains in a larger scale, but the absorption/reflection of heat happens on the atomic scale. The reason why this assumption fails, is it neglects the fact most greenhouse gases do reflect as much radiation they keep out compared to what they keep in; ie CO2. Global cooling is normally the result of less greenhouse gases and more ozone and oxygen which creates a thicker atmosphere that blocks radiation. We, however, have disrupted that process by introducing more carbon based greenhouse gases that trap inside heat increasing warming. This is why CO2 and other carbon emissions are used as the main indicators of warm and cool periods inEarth’s history, along with many other factors.
Another important thing to note is that scientists do immense research on these topics and the majority of the information they know is not included in these simplistic explanations you read online. All scientific claims are heavily backed by extensive research and documents that support their conclusions. Which can not be denied by some random RUclips commentator that suddenly think they know better.
Also “2 millions miles” is almost 10x farther away than the moon is from earth. Any baby powder you release is just going to be dispersed by cosmic wind and is unlikely to be affected by much of Earth’s gravity.
THANK YOU! Most videos of this issue I see completely leave out that we are still in an ice age. We have seen in geologic and ice core records times when the global temperature has jumped or fallen significantly in the span of centuries and on some occasions mere decades.
He does mention it just after the 10 minute mark
@@robertkonczal7406 Which is why I did the big "THANK YOU!". I am sorry that was not obvious.
Yes but no, fossil records show deviation from the temperature, but not on a global level. The milankovic cycle is drawn out over 60000 years, not 100 years
@@DiederikCA I think you are mistaken
There are also other, shorter cycles (decades or less) that probably have little to do with extra-planetary forces but how the Earth itself is changing. We're already aware of things like La Nina weather cycles. Other such things happen as well that we haven't yet fully categorized in part because we haven't had weather records for a long enough period to actually observe and quantify them properly.
By the way, we already reversed that slow milankovich cooling trend. Because of greenhouse gases, Earth is warming for the last 100 years and this will continue. It is very possible that with CO2 even at current levels, ice ages simply won't happen.
CO2 is now highest in 4 million years at least. We know this series of glacial and interglacial periods started 2.58 Ma (million years ago). And the Milankovich cycles were the same before that.
Ice age starts slowly when northern regions get colder, snow won't melt over summer and becomes ice (ice reflects sun). But today the northern regions get warmer 3 times faster than Earth average and ice is melting.
We will have much different problems in a warmer world.
Perfectly true. Instead of worrying how humanity will cope in 10.000 years during the next ice-age, we should worry about man-made global warming, this one is the real and immediate threat to all of us !
Feel free to look up Adapt 2030, Valentina Zharkova and David Dilley. Ice ages won't happen because of CO2, your funny.
@@nogreatreset8506 And when is that global cooling going to happen? You jerks say that since 2000 so I wouldn't like to miss it.
@@nogreatreset8506 Feel free to look up actual science:
- Hausfather, Z., Drake, H.F., Abbott, T. and Schmidt, G.A., 2020. Evaluating the performance of past climate model projections. Geophysical Research Letters, 47(1), p.e2019GL085378.
- Lacis, A.A., Schmidt, G.A., Rind, D. and Ruedy, R.A., 2010. Atmospheric CO2: Principal control knob governing Earth’s temperature. Science, 330(6002), pp.356-359.
- Mills, B.J., Krause, A.J., Scotese, C.R., Hill, D.J., Shields, G.A. and Lenton, T.M., 2019. Modelling the long-term carbon cycle, atmospheric CO2, and Earth surface temperature from late Neoproterozoic to present day. Gondwana Research, 67, pp.172-186.
- Shakun, J.D., Clark, P.U., He, F., Marcott, S.A., Mix, A.C., Liu, Z., Otto-Bliesner, B., Schmittner, A. and Bard, E., 2012. Global warming preceded by increasing carbon dioxide concentrations during the last deglaciation. Nature, 484(7392), pp.49-54.
- Supran, G., Rahmstorf, S. and Oreskes, N., 2023. Assessing ExxonMobil’s global warming projections. Science, 379(6628), p.eabk0063.
first of all, co2 is not the biggest greenhouse gas, its water vapour.
second, two to five years is needed for co2 to be absorbed in to the vegetation and crops if we stop producing it.
third, after co2 is absorbed, famine starts.
fourth, you need one bigger volcanic eruption to disrupt regular summer season and create few years of endless winter.
Milankovic and Tesla both from Serbia. Great scientist!
Thank you for sticking to the facts & remaining unbiased. Very educational
But Liberals still say, cow farts = climate change
How or why would one be biased about Milankovitch cycles?
@@lrvogt1257 Global Warming deniers sometimes say false things like we really need to worry about Global Cooling.
@@sandal_thong8631 : Correct. In fact, there is almost no alternate version of reality they don't use. They don't agree with each other let alone the science. For the fossil fuel companies, confusion and doubt is sufficient as long as it slows progress and allows them to sell fuel to burn.
@@lrvogt1257 Some people (climate science deniers) try to use Milankovitch cycles to explain away 100% of the global temperature anomaly, and claim that greenhouse gas emissions aren't doing anything because of them. This is obviously false due to the length of the cycles and the pace of warming we're experiencing.
Love all of your content man... keep them coming ... always!!
While it is true that the hemisphere in summer is slightly closer to the Sun than the hemisphere in winter, this is a negligible difference and is not the cause of the seasons. Due to the tilt of Earth and the curvature of the Earth, sunlight hits the surface at different angles. When sunlight hits the surface more directly (i.e. at latitudes experiencing summer), more photons hit per unit area. In other words, there is greater insolation, with a larger warming effect. When sunlight hits the surface at a lower angle (i.e. at latitudes experiencing winter), fewer photons hit per unit area. There is less insolation, and therefore less heating.
I thought you misspelled insulation but then I realized you're just a genius, thank you for the knowledge kind stranger! 😃
@@ALmaN11223344 Hahaha all good. Thanks for the funny compliment!
For decades I have sat on my front porch to smoke, because I don't smoke in the house. Over the decades of sitting on the porch, I have noticed the shadow from the house has always been in the same spot. 3 years ago, for some reason, the shadow moved to the north by 3 feet. 2 years ago, it moved about another 8 feet to the north. Last year, it was still in about the same place it was the year before. This year, I can't say because the time I have taken note of the shadow's placement, it has been rainy and quite gray with no sun. So, no shadow. I've tried to research this to find out exactly why the sudden change, but I haven't found anything much to it. I have found things like this that indicate to a maybe, but nothing that says yes, this is why.
Do you live in a mobile home?
@@BaristaBob99 No. Why? That's an odd question.
@@outdoorslifesurvivecraft5078 If the shadow has moved, it may be because the home had moved.
@@BaristaBob99 No. My house hasn't moved. It's not a mobile home.
I have been an amateur astronomer is I was 12 years old ang got the worst telescope ever made. I am now 55 with nice equipment but this is the first time I have seen this process explained so clearly. Thank you for posting such excellent content.
I can only find Orion's belt
@@gregoryeverson741 I can't even find my own belt, I'll have to get myself a telescope
@@petertaylor3446😄
There's an interesting theory that attributes ice-age cycles to tree death. That theory suggests that minerals in the soil required to nourish the roots of trees are heavy and eventually sink further and further away from the roots, resulting in tree death, in turn resulting in lower oxygen production... and after that, I forget how it goes. The theorist suggested that tree death could be averted by actively re-mineralizing forests with "rock dust".
We could also help the health of forests by stopping cutting them down.
correct, and once the minerals drop below the root level the compounds left behind along with nasty stagnate water build up above them and suffecate the roots and the trees suffer a sort of nutrient lockout, by introducing lime dust to the top soil helps nutrients pass through the roots and soil with ease and lower ph , preventing the buildup of such compounds, and stagnate ground water created by things such as the decomp of fallen foliage from coniferous plants which is very acidic and also toxic to plants and will prevent healthy respiration and produce fatal ph levels, for example if you have a house plant that looks like its struggling to survive, yellowing, and not producing healthy foliar growth sprinkle a little lime dust in it and make sure it has proper drainage ,give the roots a good wash, feed it and presto! it will most likely come back to life. lime dust is a great way to insure great root health.this is also one of the reasons that potash left behind by forest fires helps the regrowth of the forest after its been washed by winter rain and snowmelt.🙃
The quality of your content and the way you make things simplify is really remarkable and I hope to see some more of these knowledgeable videos :)
He thinks that our seasons are affected by our distance from the sun.
That's not even close to true
This is the best video to date that I've seen about all the movements of our Earth. Thanks for making this simple to understand for so many more people!
The tilt of the axis does not affect how close that hemisphere is to the sun, it changes how directly the sun hits an area and the length of the day. Low sun angle beam is spread out. High sun angle beam is more concentrated. I used to teach this stuff.
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Hope Alex will see this and add a correction in the comments
Incorrect.
@@castaway123100 I feel like the effect of the earths tilt on the seasons would not be nearly as dramatic if distance were the only factor. The distance from the equator to the sun vs the distance from the poles to the sun is only a 0.004% difference (92 million miles in total vs the roughly 4,000 miles that is the radius of the earth). The current elliptical motion of the earth changes the distance of the earth to the sun much more than that; (closer to 3%) if distance were the only factor then the nearly 3 million miles closer the earth gets to the sun during the northern hemisphere’s winters would be more than enough to cancel out all of the cold weather we experience in winter. Therefore angle of sun and length of day are the only factors that can cause the dramatic temperature changes of the seasons that we know. That’s why all the diagrams explaining this have arrows of sunlight coming straight at the earth and hitting the surface at different angles (see 2:45 of this video)
I noticed Polaris is at the wrong place at 6:55. It's a small thing in the big picture but when coupled with other mistakes such as at 2:42 you say the tilt of the Earth doesn't change how far away from the Sun you are at the equator. While that's technically true, the sun's light and heat varies because it is not spread out by coming in at a low angle in the winter hemisphere, and comes in more perpendicular in the summer hemisphere. Light coming in at an angle spreads less energy .
This is a very nice video. Seen other explanations of Milankovitch but this one sticks out. Congratulations!
Get use to "record broken" and "unprecedented" , you will be hearing those terms constantly.
Southern hemisphere may be closer in summer and further in winter but the southern hemisphere also has a lot more water/ocean and its much harder for the temperatures to change with so much more water present. The northern hemisphere has more land which is easier to change to the season's temperature. The seasons for the northern and southern hemisphere are actually very close in temperatures.
This is often overlooked. Well done for bringing it to peoples attention.
Your statement is mostly false as the oceans are huge heat sinks that moderate temperatures between seasons for coastal regions. Anyone who lives next to large bodies of water knows this. In southern hemisphere the effects of higher solar influx during summer months is readily measurable in the interior of large continents including South America, Africa, and Australia. Their ambient temps are higher in summer than similar latitudes in Northern hemisphere.
@Aqua Fyre Temperatures over oceans in calculating average don’t matter in comparison of Northern vs. Southern hemisphere as it RELATES to human existence. Bottom line is temp. in the interior of any large continent in southern hemisphere will be higher than northern hemisphere during summer and cooler in winter. Similarly, most of the inhabitable land mass excluding Antarctica in southern hemisphere is closer to equator as compared to northern hemisphere. Thus most in southern hemisphere experience more moderate and warmer overall conditions.
Thank you! You get it. Full-scale Ice-Ages may be a thing of the past. The formation of Central America, the English Channel Bridge, The Florida Shelf, Hawaii, New Zealand, Kergueland sunken Continent and the Baring Land Bridge between Alaska and Russia is what ended the last Ice-Age through rerouting the North Atlantic Current. Warming up North America and Europe to habitable temperatures today. There was just too much land warming things up from dark surfaces of the new land, new valleys formed through Glaciation as Fjords, new Lakes and rivers, etc. The last Snowball Earth was on a mostly Waterworld in the Neoproterozoic 650 Million years ago. The reason why Pre-Ordivician fossils are so rare. They were mostly ground to dust by every other subsequent Glaciation Event and eventually turned into Modern Fossil Fuel. The reason why short-term Climate Change is nonsense not deserving the right to be a part of science. It's "Political" Science. Even Humanity produces far far less CO2 than nature can even hold onto since Cyanobacteria has such a large apatite for it. They outnumber every other lifeform on Earth that they have found their way deep into the Earth's Crust. CO2 is a thermostat not a heater. Just tell Mars CO2 heats worlds up....
@@kannermw lie down in the heat of the afternoon
One thing I think about the Earth's Orbit going up or down and affecting the seasons the people missed is, not only are we passing through Cosmic Dust(Oort Cloud) ,but the Dust Itself is at times, Thicker and Darker in Composition. My .02 🤷
In Melbourne Australia we are currently going through the coldest summer since records began lol today was 23° and last we were seeing 16°. Normally in December it’s around 30° most days and I don’t think we’ve even seen one this year as of yet
Global warming 😂😂
@wall01 in central europe we were having the coldest december in years by -10°C beeing allmost the norm. Which was rare to not seen for the past years 5 years now for christmas it got a little warmer now...
I'm in Brisbane, and it's been a lot cooler the the last few days. Especially at night I can really notice it. I don't need to use air con, even during the day. Brisbane is often as hot as hell, and that's normal, but not now. I m very sceptical about "global warming".
@@DD-lt1rd can you people please stop confusing weather and climate? the climate is the average weather of a region over many many years not just one. And on average temperatures go up and up and up. But that does not mean, that cold winters won't be a thing anymore. climate change will mainly make the weather more extreme. Global warming might bring even much colder winters. It sounds paradoxical, but it is not. that's why we stopped saying global warming.
@@HeavyMetalGamingHD yes warming equals cooling, 2+2=5. Climate change has always occurred, we were in a warm cycle now entering a cool cycle. Feel free to research Valentina Zharkova and watch David Dilley and Adapt 2030 on youtube.
If to the so beautifully explained Milancovitch cycles we would add the latest studies of sun's cycles, it's temperature fluctuation and many other recent observations of its behaviour we could develop a more complete understanding of all the parameters involved in climate behaviour. Thanks for the very good presentation
There is no " if " about it. Scientists do exactly that. These natural cycles are understood well enough that we know for certain that this episode of warming is not one of them. It is the unnatural increase of CO2 to 150% it's pre-industrial levels.
Milankovic. Milutin Milankovic. There is no such surname as milancovitch in Serbia. Dude was named Milankovic. Respect his name.
Look up the land of "Doggerland". There was a huge land connection between Norway, England, France and Germany 8.200 years ago which was flooded when the ice shields of Norway and England melted, creating the north sea between the countries we know today. Doggerland was a vast grass sea where hunters and gatherers lived.
Yes and the Baltic sea was a fresh water lake.
I hear dogging is still quite popular in Britain.
@@snorfallupagus6014 indeed bet its popular where you live too eh
This was extremely informative of a subject I wasn't even aware of. Great video
100 000 years cycle. That is the scale these cycle affect us.
In a paper I read a few years back, from an Egyptian university I think, I don't remember the details...it was pointed out that variations in solar output and solar particles (?) coming into the atmosphere was shown to have an effect on cloud formation. And as clouds have a huge effect on light reflection and heat loss, a variation in overall percentage of cloud cover on the planet will have an enormous effect on climate, and I think the paper said that there was a clear correlation between solar output and cold/warm periods.
They can't tax solar output variations though, so there probably isn't a lot of support for such research in most countries. You have to focus on carbon if you want your research grant money...