STOP PRESS - Vast Cracks Appear in Arctic Ice

Originally posted by bkcrt

Originally posted by theRiverGoddess
I believe it is a SOLAR event.
The entire solar system is warming up, it is hotter everywhere that the sun shines.

What exactly do YOU PROPOSE that we, as small humans on this planet, do to stop the sun from having its solar event?

I could not agree more.

Narrow-mindedness allows the thought that "somehow we have to" be involved with the changes. People think too highly of themselves.

The arrogance of mankind has fueled far worse crimes against itself than this. Think "The Inquisition".

[edit on 23-5-2008 by bigfatfurrytexan]

I know how to stop all this mess...

Build a giant water cannon and aim it at the SUN!






[edit on 23-5-2008 by jimmyjackblack]

I deserve an applause for that idea.

-Jimmy

[edit on 23-5-2008 by jimmyjackblack]

Originally posted by theRiverGoddess
I believe it is a SOLAR event.
The entire solar system is warming up, it is hotter everywhere that the sun shines.

Not to mention ice is not too common in earths history..

Originally posted by centurion1211

You must have missed the meaning of RiverGoddess' post - that we are not even like ants in relation to the forces causing solar system-wide warming (or cooling).

Ants....hahahahahah you really do toe the corporate line don't you? The argument over global warming was started by big business so we could argue and never have a solution. Its the perfect plan for getting people aay from good ole pollution arguments.

To think with all our factories, cars, refineries, power plants, chemical plants the list can go on forever, that all this and we are like ants? LOL

It may be warming up all over but we are digging ourselves into a chemical soup that is shutting down all of our eco systems. WE DO have an impact and its very big, to think otherwise you have to really do some mental acrobats.

So the question is what are we going to do about it?

reply to post by pause4thought


Well I guess it would depend on the source of the electricity. Nuclear, wind or hydro generated power would be far preferable to any carbon based energy generation, wouldn't you agree?

I would agree that ethanol derived from corn is not much better than coming from oil. Brazil uses sugar cane and it generates about 5 times the ethanol that the maize crop does. Corn is just a poor choice of plant, double so as it is causing farmers not to plant Real food crops. Can someone explain to me why Brazilian ethanonl has a 54 cent per gallon tarriff strapped on to it when we are facing such high gas prices? Doesn't make much sense, especially considering the farm subsidies we are giving our own farmers to use corn for ethanol.

reply to post by InterestedObserver

The primary source of the Sun's long range effect on our climate is the very slow warming and cooling of our Oceans, specifically the Deep ocean waters. They take decades if not centuries to take place, well after the Sun has done the initial work. The most recent hot period we have just went through, while it has noticeable short term results, will also have longer range implications that will not be felt for decades. The Earth's oceans take a long time to store or dissapate heat.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

Originally posted by Locus Iste
reply to post by pityocamptes

 

Vulcanoes releases are 0.15 Gt/year of carbon, compared to about 7 Gt/year of human related sources. What is bigger we all see. Of course it can vary but huge eruptions would at first cause global cooling.

Why bother even measuring carbon emissions? It is a poor greenhouse gas. The real "money" is on methane.

Cows create the most methane. I think if they could have figured out a way to make the cows pay taxes, then they would have gone that route

Originally posted by pause4thought
reply to post by WhatTheory

 

Even if it is a natural cycle how can we "sit back and enjoy" when hundreds of millions of people will be suffering and dying as a consequence? At the very least civilized human beings should be thinking in terms of contingency measures. The humanitarian issues and consequent movement of populations could make Mexican immigration to the US look like a local family get-together.

Many thanks for the links. I'll take a look now and see what they contribute.

I just watched "Universe: The End of the Universe" on the History Channel. It talked about all of the different phases the Universe will go through as it ages, and finally goes completely dark and frozen. In each phase they entertained the idea of Humans still living and propagating. They would assume methods that we could use during each of these phases to ensure our survival. Each time there were more and more innovative yet legitimate ways for humans to exist, until the Dark Age of the Universe, after which there could be no humans because there would be no protons.

I found it very nice to consider how humans could adapt to a changing relationship with energy, be it oil or solar, and it's manifested effects on our world.

When things in nature occur, over which we have no control or hope of controlling, it is normal for us to feel helpless. That helplessness turns to anger which turns us against each other.

The truth of this whole matter is that the scientists DO NOT KNOW what is happening for sure. They do know it has happened before and it will happen again. They feel as helpless as us I believe. They also are under pressure to come up with answers to validate their existence as well. So, naturally they follow the political route when science fails them.

We have a few decades of good climate data and maybe another hundred years of unreliable sparse data. It is not sciences fault they can not come up with the answers, but it is expected of them. Their funding and livelihoods depend on them having answers, so they float theories that are politically expedient to keep their lifeblood, money, rolling. It's not hard to understand. Computers do not even yet exist that could model what is happening.

The few who remain true to science and honesty are willing to say they do not know, or that those putting forth theories have no proof. Then for being honest they are torn apart by the scientists who are trying to save their own butts and the paranoid activists who could care less if they have the facts. Add to that the Al Gore types who have figured a way to profit financially and we have the mess we are in today.

We know, or seem to know, that other planets are warming which indicates an other than human cause. We also know that things like a single volcanic event can place more CFC's into the atmosphere than mankind has since we first walked on this planet. All of that is entirely out of our control. One would like to believe life is like a good Sci-Fi show, but it is not. Bruce Willis is not going to gather up a crew and save us.

This end of the world nonsense is just that; nonsense! More dramatic climate changes have happened before and yet life goes on. The only thing we can do is adapt to the changes as they come along. Destroying ourselves financially won't help and yet some are ready to destroy our Earths economy out of pure paranoia.

Then we have the radicals looking for a cause, any cause, to latch onto. If it was not this it would be some other end of the World scenario. I've known many of these individuals throughout my life. Their whole lives are caught up in turmoil and they thrive on it. There is no cause worth having that is not also worth milking for every last ounce of drama they can wring out of it. In the end, the protests, the trips to jail caught on camera and the childish temper tantrums based solely on emotions with no basis in reality make matters worse rather than better. These individuals do not care about that, they only care that their little tantrums hit the evening news and get them the attention they are really after.

They ignore the fact that nothing is happening now that has not happened before. They don't want to hear that the primary causes are out of our control and that their childish antics won't change a damn thing. They follow Guru's who are not experts in anything other than taking their money for senseless causes.

I noticed in the first page that somehow the Race Card was introduced into this Global Warming topic. That is approaching the point at which pure emotion has taken over and any semblance of common sense has long ago gone bye bye.

The facts at the moment are:

The entire Northern Hemisphere has just gone through a colder than normal Winter and Spring is not much better. The ice that disappeared from the Arctic has not only returned, there is more than there was before.

The trend is a general warming of perhaps one degree, mostly affecting the Arctic up to now, but wait a minute here; it is getting colder in the Antarctic? Confused? So are the scientists who are pretending to know what is going on.

Some glaciers are melting, while others further south are advancing?

All the planets in the Solar System are warming at the same time it seems and yet some scientists, in particular those who are on the Al Gore bandwagon, refuse to even factor that into their data. The UN's team won't even look at that information, nor have they considered it as relevant. Politics taking precedent over common sense? You betcha!

Whatever is happening is happening slowly enough we can adapt and continue along our merry way if we can just get the Politicians and the Activists out of the picture. The truth, as always, lies in the middle.

Originally posted by Blaine91555
...
The facts at the moment are:

The entire Northern Hemisphere has just gone through a colder than normal Winter and Spring is not much better. The ice that disappeared from the Arctic has not only returned, there is more than there was before.

The trend is a general warming of perhaps one degree, mostly affecting the Arctic up to now, but wait a minute here; it is getting colder in the Antarctic? Confused? So are the scientists who are pretending to know what is going on.

Some glaciers are melting, while others further south are advancing?

Did you even look at the satellite vide on the news story? They showed how there is an ebb and flow of the ice around the arctic each year, and in was always different each year, but each year, there is less and less. And last year was the worst.

You can see it for yourself, you don't need any more than the satellite data and the videos of the cracks left behind to see it.

But given your post, I would assume you would have to be completely blind. Because surely you visited the link before posting and watched the video.

[edit on 24-5-2008 by Quazga]

reply to post by pityocamptes


1942 was the hottest year on record because of WW II, and is and of itself positive proof that global warming is caused by man. WW II heated our entire freakin planet up.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by pityocamptes

 

1942 was the hottest year on record because of WW II, and is and of itself positive proof that global warming is caused by man. WW II heated our entire freakin planet up.

You are exactly right. The world burns more petro during war, than during any other time.

This makes one wonder, if people in the oil business profit more from the US going to war.

[edit on 24-5-2008 by Quazga]

Here is a nice link to global temperature over history.

math.ucr.edu...

The funny thing is that there does appear to be numerous things contributing to global warming. The Sun is entering a period of high activity. Mankind has increased to phenomenal population levels, carbon emissions and energy consumption is at a tremendous high. All the cars and engines running, the power plants, the machines, ect., ect., add heat to the picture. Fluorocarbons have greatly reduced the ability of the Ozone to protect us against solar flares, it all adds together and to argue where the fault lies is a waste of time.

Global warming is here, and those who deny it are living in denial. The real question is what do we do about it. The whole phenomenon seems to be accelerating. Who knows, a warmer planet could turn out to be a good thing. It would be nice to hear some intelligent discussion rather than bickering.

Originally posted by Blaine91555
All the planets in the Solar System are warming at the same time it seems and yet some scientists, in particular those who are on the Al Gore bandwagon, refuse to even factor that into their data. The UN's team won't even look at that information, nor have they considered it as relevant. Politics taking precedent over common sense? You betcha!

In addition to your well thought out post, scientist will lose funding if they don't tow the line. It is not uncommon that scientists who are in dissent of the man-made global warming theory are usually threatened with loss of funding and even character assassination.

reply to post by Blaine91555


Data we have these days are quite reliable. Of course climate changes were happening and they will always be happening. Now they are happening way too fast as they did in history. Of course there were short termed changes because of vulcano eruptions (Year without summer,...)

Polar ice might be gone in another 10 years.. IPCC reports got it wrong cause they didnt predict it could happen so fast. When ice will be gone, nothern hemisphere could have lots of weather related problems.

Claiming that just few scientist are in science is completely unacceptable. There are lots of scientist i know who are really concerned about where we are heading. Also there is more and more students and others who are following changes with their own weather stations or helping to build models.

What is true is that weather is unpredidictable system. One small change on the other side can cause natural catastrophe on the other side. It's butterfly effect one of the laws in meteorology.

Your facts are completely non sense and are making people to believe what is not to believe. It's true that this winter is colder but still abouve average. Thanks to powerful La nina. If there wouldn't be La Nina we would have 2007 far the hottest year on record. That's what reliable data are saying not what you read from doubtfull sources.

Arctic ice is still far below awerage so don't say that ice has returned. It has returned but because on north pole was dark for 6 months. We had winter and it's completely normal for ice to progress. BUT we havent reached even averege.

arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu...

On the same link you can follow ice daily. Currently we have discussions that we will most likely set another record in ice minimum. You can compare ice from last year and this year on same day.

About planets/moons warming. First uranium is cooling. Second I havent seen any data from meteorological sensors on those planets. 3rd As i have read warming is on 6% of objects in our solar system. All have their own internal reasons.

Claiming that we would crash world economy is really stupid. Check oil prices. American $$$$ is worth less and less. Luckily i am from Eu and we have quite strong currency but still. Food is more and more expensive. People from 3rd world are more and more hungry. There are strikes for food. Why??? Because our economy is already crashed. Being so dependent on oil as USA is getting our economy crashed far more as scientists who are warning us about climate. Also severe weather will occur more often and also more expensive. We will be paying one way or another.

About Al Gore maybe not all facts are as he represented it but i personally feafear consequences will be far worst.

And yeah we can surely adapt to climat changes as much as those 15000 people did in France in 2003.

Originally posted by Quazga

Did you even look at the satellite vide on the news story? They showed how there is an ebb and flow of the ice around the arctic each year, and in was always different each year, but each year, there is less and less. And last year was the worst.

You can see it for yourself, you don't need any more than the satellite data and the videos of the cracks left behind to see it.

But given your post, I would assume you would have to be completely blind. Because surely you visited the link before posting and watched the video.

[edit on 24-5-2008 by Quazga]

I did not contradict the article. If you read it - it mentioned there was more ice than the year before this started. That just adds to the confusion I was alluding too.

I am guilty of reading and weighing all sides of the stories. One thing is very clear; there is no consensus. That tells me that they do not know exactly what is going on at the moment. Both sides exaggerate and that also adds to the mess.

I won't pretend to know what is going on. I was just pointing out how confused it is. Throw Politics in the mix and see what we get. Garbage going in equals garbage coming out.

How many threads do you suppose there are now that are just repeating the same arguments over and over again. Common sense tells me there are elements of truth on all sides and that science has become a part of the political realm.

I find it most interesting that often people who accuse the Government's of lying about everything else embrace nonsense coming from the worst of all Government Bodies; The UN.

I think the changes we are seeing would have happened had we never evolved. I also see that what we put in the air may add to it, but on a far smaller scale. No matter which side we are on, we all want a clean environment. The question is, should we panic and act like a bunch of fools about it while we destroy ourselves financially, or; should we approach this calmly and rationally.

Our economy is truly a world economy and if the West fails the domino's will fall.

reply to post by Locus Iste


You are arguing with yourself. I have not contested any evidence. I only point out that there are multiple points of view, being put forth by science at the moment. It may be many decades before what is happening is truly understood.

As far as my experience where I live, there have been no years that fall outside the norm. I've taken the time to often visit the NOA site and compare. I even discovered that the averages given by the weather site I use do not match the available data from the NOA. Even I can manage a simple average. The error was in favor of warming. Why do I not find that surprising.

Activists who pretend there are not plenty of scientists on both sides of this argument are being just as dishonest, as they are accusing the other side of being.

Originally posted by pavil
You speak in circles of logic. Global warming is bad as it will kill many humans yet the sheer number of humans is making feeding and sheltering all of them too much of a strain on the Earth and helping cause Global Warming. Which is it? Pretty much sounds as if we are all doomed no matter what we do in your world view.

As the Human species continues it's growth, more and more resources will be consumed by us, leaving less and less for other species. You can't have both: maximum bio-diversity and massive growth of the human population. Something has to give.

I'll grant that as humans we do some pretty stupid things but you have to see that you can't have it both ways. As a species, perhaps we are TOO Successful. Nature has a way of taking care of Uber species like that eventually.

No I am not speaking in circles of logic, you just don't seem to understand the concept of change. It needs to encompass every aspect of our lives and the impact that we have on the planet and its ecosystem, including measures to control population growth. It is all possible but it needs to collective.

reply to post by Blaine91555


Your facts are totally rubbish and surely not scientist points of view. Read what YOU wrote again and check current data. You might see the truth or i can't help you.

Originally posted by pityocamptes
We have already exceeded the Earths carry capacity, why make it worse?

But what measure have we exceeded the worlds 'carry capacity'? Is it going to implode from any added weight? If your talking about food production or fresh water i would like to ask how you arrived at that conclusion as in all fairness i have never seen anyone use much in the way of logic to try prove it.

At what point to we continue to amass people, only to find that their was no solid base to sustain it?

Since humans constitute organizational energy the more humans there are the more productive and organizing work can be done; more humans are unlikely to soon become a fundamental problem. If anyone can show me proper. not the usual incoherent/ignorant drivel, arguments proving the opposite i would be most interested to hear them.

The end becomes worse than the initial, unpalatable, solution...

Even the very poorest people could and did sustain themselves before various governmental systems stole their land and forced them to move to wherever they can get a job or at least beg from others. Since various states are still the majority owners of real estate it would still be easy to solve this problem and i have no doubt that fresh water and land resources in general could easily sustain a world population in the hundreds of billions. It's a question of cleaner sustainable technologies and the most important one's required to sustain such population numbers have been on the patent roles for at least a century. If your serious about the overpopulation problem, and wish to discuss it, you can at start by explaining why you haven't contributed to the solution by jumping off the nearest bridge.

Stellar