Sunday, April 22, 2012

Visualizing Ocean Shipping 1750-1850


Detailed historical ship log data have been digitized for climatological purposes, which allowed the video above to be created by Ben Schmidt at the Sapping Attention blog.  The visualization shows 100 years of ocean shipping paths, as recorded in hundreds of ships' log books, by hand, one or several times a day, from 1750-1850.   

13 Comments:

At 4/22/2012 7:24 AM, Blogger Larry G said...

pretty cool:

1750-1850

Suez Canal = 1859
Panama Canal = 1906-8

 
At 4/22/2012 8:31 AM, Blogger A Conservative Teacher said...

Why did the Dutch seem to dominate shipping in the 1840's?

 
At 4/22/2012 9:07 AM, Blogger Michael E. Marotta said...

Why is transatlantic trade to New York, Boston, and Philadelphia so thin for the entire run?

Interesting, nonetheless. I let it load then moved back and forth in the timeline. Lots of little surprises, like the one line from Ceylon to Norway. A lot trade from Sumatra to Argentina, too... interesting...

 
At 4/22/2012 10:57 AM, Blogger juandos said...

Well now that's impressive amount of work that went into that graphic...

"Why is transatlantic trade to New York, Boston, and Philadelphia so thin for the entire run?"....

Hey mm maybe the expense...

Then again (I've not done it myself) the shipping would show up better in higher resolution...

Note the following from the Sapping Attention blog: You can watch either of these in much higher resolution by clicking around here or on YouTube--I definitely recommend 720p...

 
At 4/22/2012 11:24 AM, Blogger Che is dead said...

A preliminary study of 6,000 logbooks has produced results that raise questions about climate change theories. One paper, published by Dr Dennis Wheeler, a Sunderland University geographer, in the journal The Holocene, details a surge in the frequency of summer storms over Britain in the 1680s and 1690s.

Many scientists believe storms are a consequence of global warming, but these were the coldest decades of the so-called Little Ice Age that hit Europe from about 1600 to 1850.

Wheeler and his colleagues have since won European Union funding to extend this research to 1750. This shows that during the 1730s, Europe underwent a period of rapid warming similar to that recorded recently — and which must have had natural origins. -- The LondonTimes

 
At 4/22/2012 12:07 PM, Blogger Buddy R Pacifico said...

Interesting to note the lack of French shipping because of Napoleon's Continental Blockade -- and the follow-up blockade by the British of France.

Also, as noted by a commenter at Visualizing site, French shipping logs were full of fantome(phantom) ship sailings for much of 1750-1850. Thus, making the logs unreliable in accuracy.

 
At 4/22/2012 1:43 PM, Blogger Jon Murphy said...

Why did the Dutch seem to dominate shipping in the 1840's?

That's because they did. The Dutch had one of the largest trading empires in the world.

 
At 4/22/2012 3:04 PM, Blogger Che is dead said...

A very important "Earth Day" message: IF I WANTED AMERICA TO FAIL

 
At 4/22/2012 5:34 PM, Blogger Hydra said...

The usual route to new york/new e gland was tl sail south to pick up the trade winds to Barbados and the carribean. Pick up molasses and sugar for the states, then ride the gulf stream north to NY/NE. Pick up lumber to go to England. East to west trips direct to new York were rare and slow.

In the early years you see a number of such trips, but as the wind a d current patterns became known you see the triangular routes develop.

Also notice there is little trade northbound along the California coast, for similar reasons. From cape horn, the route to California was through Hawaii.

 
At 4/22/2012 5:42 PM, Blogger Hydra said...

Violent winter storms are not new, and beating against a parade of gales marching west to east across the north Atlantic was a losing proposition.

Global warming, if it exists makes more energy available for storms and sets up more violent clashes between warm and cold regions. The fact that it was cold during certain periods is of little significance to the theory that a warmer atmosphere will provide more energy for storms.

 
At 4/23/2012 8:08 PM, Blogger OBloodyHell said...

Good link, Che. Going to repost that one on Memorial Day and Independence Day.

 
At 4/23/2012 8:21 PM, Blogger OBloodyHell said...

>>> The fact that it was cold during certain periods is of little significance to the theory that a warmer atmosphere will provide more energy for storms.

True, it's the temperature differentials which matter, but, if the earth is warmer, then your theory still doesn't hold water, as the "cold" areas will also be warmer, so there should be little temperature differential.

The two key missing factors that essentially disprove AGW, and "greenhouse" in general, lie in the atmosphere and the oceans.

If the increased CO2 were causing a heat buildup, there is a specific, narrow layer of the atmosphere which would be heating up.

Guess what? It's not.

Moreover, the oceans are a tremendous heat sink. Water's capacity to absorb energy is readily demonstrated in a microwave oven -- Microwaves work by heating up the water molecules (hence they don't heat much above steam energy, which is why stuff doesn't caramelize and "bake"/brown as in a classic oven.).

Now, put a piece of food into a microwave of a determined volume (easiest way to estimate the volume is to use the Archimedes method). Pick something with some moisture but not a great deal. Measure how long it takes to heat up.

Now put a cup of water the same volume as the food and see how much longer THAT takes to heat up to the same temp.

So, before the atmosphere warms up significantly, the oceans will suck up a lot of the excess heat until there is an equilibrium. And I DO mean A LOT. before you warm the atmosphere a degree, you'll pretty much have to pump a lot of energy into the water.

But the water WILL heat up, so a clear prediction when you say the world is warming is that the oceans will be recognizable warmed -- especially the deeper ocean which is notable lower temperature than the surface.

Now, for the last 9 years, since 2003, the USA has had a specific new system for measuring deep ocean temps. In the 9 years it's been in operation, it's recorded no substantial change in ocean temps at any level.

So, two key predictions with regards to AGW fail.

QED -- AGW is crap.

 
At 4/23/2012 8:31 PM, Blogger Larry G said...

re: heat sink
Arctic sea ice is melting at its fastest pace in almost 40 years

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home