Global Warming, anyone?

[Cruentus]

Ten leading US climate scientists spoke on Tuesday of the need for more urgent action to tackle global warming.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3810291.stm

Anyone see the movie "The Day After Tomorrow"? A reality or no?

Should we be worrying about Global Warming?

 

[StraightRazor]

The "scientists" that BUILT computers were so sure about Y2K.
I dont know if I can accept that they have enough real knowledge about natural systems for me to get all twisted about a new ice age.

 

[Feisty Mouse]

OK. Here we go.

Global warming is something that the vast majority of scientists who work on the issue completely agree on. Global warming will not mean that the Earth will be covered in cropland, as several energy companies have suggested for several years now. The "greening" of the Earth will not happen. Global warming really means "climate fluctuation" - the hots will be hotter, the colds will be colder.

If anyone would like to check out this website, I highly recommend it. Nonprofit.

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_environment/global_warming/index.cfm

They have complied some very good resources.

Some of the best work on this topic is some of what may possibly be the most boring to a lot of people - scientists studying tree fossils and tree core samples, and glacer core samples. (I think it's fascinating, but I am a self-proclaimed geek.)

This I have not looked through, but it's another link some might find interesting.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/abrupt/

That said, environmental groups are also critiquing the movie "The Day After Tomorrow".
http://www.grist.org/muck/muck060304.asp

The science in the movie is not all credible. I have not seen it, but from what I understand, the change happens too quickly.

But hopefully the movie will light more of a fire under the general public's *** about this issue. Pardon my French.

ETA:

I dont know if I can accept that they have enough real knowledge about natural systems for me to get all twisted about a new ice age.

Oh, they do. Estimates and projections may be argued on - will it be 200 years or 400?, for example - but the general idea has been supported by multiple veins of research.

 

[Tgace]

From what I understand, there is debate over whether this "warming" is predominately influenced by humans or through natural process. a la volcanic activity, natural climate fluctuations etc.

Ancient ice ages, floods etc, didnt seem to need any human assistance.

 

[Feisty Mouse]

From what I understand, there is debate over whether this "warming" is predominately influenced by humans or through natural process. a la volcanic activity, natural climate fluctuations etc.

Ancient ice ages, floods etc, didnt seem to need any human assistance.

Very true. There have always been fluctuations. What most researchers are agreeing on now, however, is that the changes are occurring far more dramatically and rapidly now, after large changes in the environment (fossil feul burning and so forth) that can be pinpointed to human sources.

Some of the most interesting work (again - geek) I think is in distinguishing between the two. But people are agreeing that what we are seeing now is more than what looks like normally-occuring fluctuations.

What worries me is that, although I think this is heavily involved with human activity and pollution, etc, even if it were totally "natural" and not due to human activity at all, we still should be interested in tracking it and seeing how we can slow or reverse the change. I'm kind of fond of humans, and would hate to see us possibly extinguished after a series of Ice Ages or what have you. Just slowing or reversing the Gulf Stream is going to have massive consequences for Western Europe.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Debate's over, dude, insofar as the general facts are concerned. We're dumping fossil fuels into the atmosphere, it's going to have real effects, that's it--except for major scientific minds like our curent Prez.

Anybody happen to see the stuff on a, "dead zone," off Oregon, which they suspect is caused by climate change? Or on coral reef changes? Or the fires two years ago in South America, which blanketed parts of Texas and Florida with smoke?

Problem is, a lot of our economy and our life depends on fairly delicately-balanced environmental conditions. It won't take much to cause real problems.

 

[Cobra]

Ten leading US climate scientists spoke on Tuesday of the need for more urgent action to tackle global warming.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3810291.stm

Anyone see the movie "The Day After Tomorrow"? A reality or no?

Should we be worrying about Global Warming?

I don't think Global Warming is anything we need to worry about. Even if Global Warming is occuring which I don't think it really will, it would take a long time for the polar ice caps to melt leading to another Ice Age. Thousands, maybe a millions of years.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Absolutely.

We can dump whatever crap we want into the atmosphere and onto the planet, and there Will Be No Consequences. In fact, however irresponsibly we behave, there Will Be No Consequences.

Regrettably, the actual scientific evidence says that those polar ice caps are already melting. The climate is already changing. The oceans are already in trouble, and have been for about thirty years.

But feel free to ignore reality. There Will Be No Consequences.

 

[Taimishu]

Of course there is no problem or people would give up their cars, air travel, refridgerators and other things that cause or have pollutants involved in them or their manufacture.
Most of the so called greenhouse gasses are heavier than air and so hang aroung close to the ground but we are not happy with this and pump tons out of the exhausts of planes, the shuttle, and other rockets. And this is dumped right in the weather factory up there.

Nature can and will heal itself but needs a little help from us and I feel that the cutting down of forests and pollution of the seas which help absorb co2 and produce O2 is not going to help.

Nothing will happen because people are not prepared to give up things that help to cause the problem. Will you give up your car, air travel and so on?
I think not.
Leave this planet alone and it will heal itself but keep up the way we are going and its bye bye.(however not in my lifetime so sod it)

David

 

[jeffbeish]

Absolutely.

We can dump whatever crap we want into the atmosphere and onto the planet, and there Will Be No Consequences. In fact, however irresponsibly we behave, there Will Be No Consequences.

Regrettably, the actual scientific evidence says that those polar ice caps are already melting. The climate is already changing. The oceans are already in trouble, and have been for about thirty years.

But feel free to ignore reality. There Will Be No Consequences.

Let me ask, what will happen if the north polar cap melts?

 

[Feisty Mouse]

Even if Global Warming is occuring which I don't think it really will, it would take a long time for the polar ice caps to melt leading to another Ice Age. Thousands, maybe a millions of years.

It's already happening. In the 1980's scientists started noticing that the Arctic tundra is getting greener, and releasing CO2 (rather than acting as a CO2 sink, as it historiclly has). The ice caps ARE ALREADY melting. Scientists who study both in the Arctic and Antarctic have been recording the retreat of glaciers (melting), as well as the ice sheets that cover so much of the land. Which, as they continue to melt, will lead to a great rising of the oceans - meaning coastal areas will get flooded. I don't want to see Boston under 6 (or 20, or 40) feet of water, thank you very much. We'll lose a great deal of our landmass, and our coastal areas will be lost.

And people who live in island nations (and I'm sure we all can think of a few pivotal ones just for martial artists) will lose their homes, essentially.

Native people living in the Arctic ("Eskimos") are already seeing the effects of global warming on the deterioration of their hunting practices, and their traditional way of life is going to have to end, probably.

One person wrote a book about it

http://www.grist.org/books/books060204.asp

here's a link to a book review.

Polar bears are starving, since the ice sheets that they live on during the winters are no longer holding up, so they cannot feast in the winters on seal as they usually do.

These are just some examples. We may, in that unbelievable arrogance that it seems only humans are capable of sometimes, toss our heads and laugh about losing valuable ecosystems. (Which is stupid.) But once you talk about flooding, you can see the direct human impact.

 

[michaeledward]

Let me ask, what will happen if the north polar cap melts?

Much of the polar ice cap is on land (although the north pole does not have land) ... Canada, Greenland, Russia, and in the south, Antarctica. As that Ice melts, the liquid form of water will be added to the oceans. This could lead to changes in ocean level and alterations of the ocean currents.

Changes in the ocean levels will destroy low-lying land masses around the globe (the outer banks of North & South Carolina, Florida). Many of our cities are built on the waterfronts, what happens if the ocean levels rise, say 6 feet ... 12 feet? Might that affect your beach front property?

Changes in the Ocean current could have a devistating effect on the European continent. Currently, the Gulf Stream keeps Ireland green, and the British Isles warm (relatively). Change that, and Northern Europe will all be moving south.

Yes, the planet has the ability to 'heal' itself. But it will do so on its own timetable, and now ours; as it has every other time in its history it was struck with a disaster. The problem is, like the dinosaurs, we may not be around to see the planet get better.

Mike

 

[someguy]

There have been times when the Earth has had much more CO2 in the atmosphere. An example of this would be the formation of the Decan plateau. We will probably survive. We will also adjust to it. The future generations won't miss it as much as the younger generations of today. If the problem occurs. But here is one to add in just for fun. This planet has gone through cycles like this before. SO is it are fault? Are we just simply encouraging something that would happen anyways.

 

[michaeledward]

There have been times when the Earth has had much more CO2 in the atmosphere. An example of this would be the formation of the Decan plateau. We will probably survive. We will also adjust to it. The future generations won't miss it as much as the younger generations of today. If the problem occurs. But here is one to add in just for fun. This planet has gone through cycles like this before. SO is it are fault? Are we just simply encouraging something that would happen anyways.

To suggest that the planet is at 'fault' is to blame a natural process ... which of course does not make sense. When the magnetic pole shifts next, there will be no one to blame (for those who don't know, it is expected that all the compasses on the planet will stop working for a couple of hundred years, while the magnetic pole shifts to the south ... the all the arrows will point the other way. - this happens every 60,000 years or so, I believe).

However, that homo sapiens have discovered how to convert the stored energy in fossil fuels is affecting the natural process of climate change in an unnatural way. To combine the increased, and unnatural, output of CO2 with what might occur naturally, with the increased demands a global population that has tripled in the 150 years we since we have discovered fossil fuels is to invite problems. Those problems may become insurmountable. At which point, our survival should be questioned.

I am quite certain that the every civilization thought that it would survive for ever. And if different species throughout the planets history could be surveyed, I bet most of those species would think that nothing would effect their grand rule of the planet either.

Mike

 

[Feisty Mouse]

We will probably survive. We will also adjust to it.

Really? How? Is it perfectly fine that some people lose their native lands entirely - i.e. islands disappearing?

I tend to take natural selection pretty seriously.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

The "scientists" that BUILT computers were so sure about Y2K.
I dont know if I can accept that they have enough real knowledge about natural systems for me to get all twisted about a new ice age.

Going into Y2K the computer scientists I knew were all pretty calm about the whole thing. City officials (here, anyway) were concerned, but not panicky.

The disaster scenarios weren't propogated by scientists, but by conspiracy theorists and paranoids who were writing books and buying duct tape by the truckload.

Insofar as the mini-ice age scenario...it will happen. It isn't speculative, they know for a fact the Great Ocean Conveyor is shutting down. But, as with Y2K, it isn't going to be the disaster many envision. The Eastern seaboard and Europe are going to get very, very cold here in about twenty years...but we're not going to see snow storms in New Dehli, and New York isn't going to be buried in ice.

Global warming is a very real phenomenon. It isn't a hypothesis. The Ross Ice shelf is disintergrating. The polar caps are shrinking. In fifty years there might be a "Northwest Passage" from New York to Russia. And as Mike pointed out, beachfront property lines are going to move somewhat inland.

If I live to be seventy, I should see the beginning of this.


Oh, and Cobra, it isn't going to take thousands or millions of years for the polar caps to melt. Do a Google search and you'll find pictures of the North Pole in 1970 compared to today. The text in the photo I saw said a ten percent reduction in ice...it looked more like a third. The North Pole is turning into slush.


Try it. Do a Google search on "global warming" and "Ross Ice Shelf".


Regards,


Steve

 

[jeffbeish]

Much of the polar ice cap is on land (although the north pole does not have land) ... Canada, Greenland, Russia, and in the south, Antarctica. As that Ice melts, the liquid form of water will be added to the oceans. This could lead to changes in ocean level and alterations of the ocean currents.

Changes in the ocean levels will destroy low-lying land masses around the globe (the outer banks of North & South Carolina, Florida). Many of our cities are built on the waterfronts, what happens if the ocean levels rise, say 6 feet ... 12 feet? Might that affect your beach front property?

Changes in the Ocean current could have a devistating effect on the European continent. Currently, the Gulf Stream keeps Ireland green, and the British Isles warm (relatively). Change that, and Northern Europe will all be moving south.

Yes, the planet has the ability to 'heal' itself. But it will do so on its own timetable, and now ours; as it has every other time in its history it was struck with a disaster. The problem is, like the dinosaurs, we may not be around to see the planet get better.

Mike

You are certainly a product of the failed education system.
LINK REMOVED

 

[michaeledward]

You are certainly a product of the failed education system.

Based on what are you making this statement?

Curiously, Michael

 

[Feisty Mouse]

Michael, you are more kind than I.

You are certainly a product of the failed education system.

Jeff, get your s**t together and argue facts and research. Comments like this are unproductive, silly, and pointless.

 

[Cobra]

Even if an ice age happens very quickly, humans are very adaptable creatures. Dinos where just too big and they were not nearly as smart as humans were. If it does happen, we will survive through it.

In any case, the previous ice ages have only happend in the North, right? That means places like South America, Africa, India, or Australia won't be effected so our species will never go. Even if it was to happen right NOW really quickly the and the ice flows over our place in a few seconds, there will be people still living in the South.