Why Climate Change is Worse Than We Thought

The former top climate scientist at NASA, James Hansen, has headed a new study on Climate Change where the findings are not good. Apparently, the problem involves what is called "feedback loop" which is where cold water from the melting Glaciers forces warmer water to lower depths, however, warmer water needs to be in the higher latitudes of Ocean currents. If this process continues with the cold Glacial meltater pushing down the warmer water(s) Mr. Hansen says that we will have more powerful winter storms, warmer tropics, and colder poles.

James Hansen, the legendary former top climate scientist for NASA, is the lead author of a sobering new study that suggests that sea levels will rise as much as 10 feet in the next 50 to 100 years. The study, published and peer-reviewed in real time in the open-access journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, brings attention to what is called a "feedback loop" in the oceans around the glaciers in Greenland and Antarctica: cold water from the melting glaciers forces warmer, saltier water deeper into the ocean, where it warms the glaciers further, resulting in faster melting. If the process continues at this rate, the study argues, meltwater will fully shut down the transport of warmer water to higher latitudes, which creates a planet with warmer tropics and colder poles, triggering more powerful winter storms. Evidence from the study suggests that coastal cities like New York may only have a few decades of habitability left. As for whether there is anything we can do to stop or slow the process, Eric Rignot, one of the study's co-authors, wrote his own study last year that concluded that the glacial melt is now "unstoppable."

Does he have an agenda to push the Climate Change issue down our throats or is he talking "real talk?" What says ATS?

www.esquire.com...

a reply to: lostbook


Hansen is a known hack.

He is al gore with a degree in climatology.

well this summer is a bummer, so far. rain, grey skies, wind. rubbish. the climate is a dud right now.

In that quote, he is talking about the destabilization of the Gulf Stream.

This is a worrying thing; consider what latitude Europe is - where England is. You'll note that it is quite far north. What keeps these areas relatively warmer than they ought to be is the heat transfer via the Gulf Stream. This is what warms the coast of North America, as well.

This current can break down. What causes it to break down? An influx of less salty water... freshwater from melting glaciers, for example.

originally posted by: johnwick
a reply to: lostbook


Hansen is a known hack.

He is al gore with a degree in climatology.

According to whom? You. Well excuse me for thinking your opinion worthless.

originally posted by: johnwick
a reply to: lostbook
Hansen is a known hack.

Strong argument. Pretty sure you've just refuted the entire basis of his findings.

I'm curious to know why he is considered a "hack" and who it is that "knows" this?

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: johnwick
a reply to: lostbook


Hansen is a known hack.

He is al gore with a degree in climatology.

According to whom? You. Well excuse me for thinking your opinion worthless.

Lol, wow.

That was a bit much wasn't it?

Try climate gate just for starters.

Get back to me after you have done the reading.

You kids are so cute, thinking you know things when you don't, it is adorable.

The planet will always readjust, whether we Survive or not

a reply to: lostbook

Obviously the earth has a process of dealing with heat and CO2. It is easy to see how quickly heat is dissipated by the seasons, day and night. The earth doesn't hold heat at all well. The excess of CO2 is kind of thermally insulating the earth to a very small degree. If we were to stop all CO2 processes I believe the earth would deal with that excess very quickly indeed. However, we are not doing that. The problem is actually getting worse and not better. Only by a huge change in our collective world wide behaviour could we stop this process.

I think the decision makers are out to use some kind of carbon emission financial penalty system. Al Gore was a pioneer of the carbon tax concept, imposing a levy on all carbon emitting behaviours, domestically and industrially. It is a pretty rudimentary solution, something like the idea of putting a sugar tax on fizzy drinks to encourage people not to partake in that behaviour as often.

My qualm with the whole carbon taxing idea is that it will be the poorer people who end up footing the bill. For example, many richer households can afford to get solar panels and actually be paid for the electricity they produce instead of having an electricity bill. Poorer people who live in small, less permanent, crowded accommodation with no option for solar panel instalment will be paying bigger bills and left footing the bill of the carbon emission tax levied on the electricity suppliers. The same would happen with other fossil fuels like gas.

There is also the concern that it would be turned into a money making scheme for profit. On top of that richer nations might buy up poorer nations' carbon credit. The poorer nations, run by more corrupt governments, might sell their carbon credits for a quick buck and bring on a carbon famine and build up huge carbon debts. Certainly these nations have been abused by their governments and corporations in a like manner with other commodities.

Global warming is very real. It will have deadly consequences, anything from creating famines and droughts in some areas, flooding in other areas, crop failures, eco system changes, etc. Yet how can states force behaviour changes to counteract this?

originally posted by: johnwick
Lol, wow.

That was a bit much wasn't it?

Try climate gate just for starters.

Get back to me after you have done the reading.

You kids are so cute, thinking you know things when you don't, it is adorable.

When you refer to others as 'kids' we must infer that you are the one who is a child.

Simple logic, really.

Also? Climate Gate was a manufactured scandal and you are really bloody behind if you don't know that.

originally posted by: SPECULUM
The planet will always readjust, whether we Survive or not

There's the question then - do you wish to see humanity survive?

People say this all the time, that it will carry on... as if we do nothing to this world. That we do not dig holes visible from space (we do). That we do not alter the rotation of the planet (we have). That what we do does not matter (it does).

What is your end logic here - that we should not do anything? You vastly underestimate humanity.

originally posted by: johnwick

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: johnwick
a reply to: lostbook


Hansen is a known hack.

He is al gore with a degree in climatology.

According to whom? You. Well excuse me for thinking your opinion worthless.

Lol, wow.

That was a bit much wasn't it?

Try climate gate just for starters.

Get back to me after you have done the reading.

You kids are so cute, thinking you know things when you don't, it is adorable.

If "he's a hack" and "climate gate" is all you got, I'm not too worried.. what else you got? You made the claim, convince me I should not believe Mr Hansen.

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: johnwick
Lol, wow.

That was a bit much wasn't it?

Try climate gate just for starters.

Get back to me after you have done the reading.

You kids are so cute, thinking you know things when you don't, it is adorable.

When you refer to others as 'kids' we must infer that you are the one who is a child.

Simple logic, really.

Also? Climate Gate was a manufactured scandal and you are really bloody behind if you don't know that.

Yes because Hansen didn't say " hide the decline" in relation to the fact his already bs fudged numbered model was showing the same 20 plus year decline in temps that has been recorded at present right?

And that is the way grown folks talk.

You know, facts, quotes numbers......

Nvm you believe the bs, I'm just banging my head against the wall.

So how much will it cost to fix?

(beezzer pulls out his checkbook. Again.)

originally posted by: johnwick
Yes because Hansen didn't say " hide the decline" in relation to the fact his already bs fudged numbered model was showing the same 20 plus year decline in temps that has been recorded at present right?

And that is the way grown folks talk.

You know, facts, quotes numbers......

Nvm you believe the bs, I'm just banging my head against the wall.

You can provide quotes or references for this claim, right?

Do so. Now.

originally posted by: beezzer
So how much will it cost to fix?

(beezzer pulls out his checkbook. Again.)

How much carbon tax have you paid now?

I mean, that's what people who are against warming even happening seem to object to at the root. Hard numbers, please.

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: beezzer
So how much will it cost to fix?

(beezzer pulls out his checkbook. Again.)

How much carbon tax have you paid now?

I mean, that's what people who are against warming even happening seem to object to at the root. Hard numbers, please.

Say I paid a dollar.

Out of that dollar, how would it be spent to save the world?

originally posted by: beezzer
Say I paid a dollar.

Out of that dollar, how would it be spent to save the world?

But you haven't paid a dollar, so stop crying about it.

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: beezzer
Say I paid a dollar.

Out of that dollar, how would it be spent to save the world?

But you haven't paid a dollar, so stop crying about it.

How is the money spent in saving the planet?

Is it spend in altering the jet stream?
Re-capping the poles?

How much is spent on reversing solar radiation?