It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What do whales know about climate change?

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 11:31 AM
link   

More than 2 million years ago, scores of whales congregating off the Pacific Coast of South America mysteriously met their end. Maybe they became disoriented and beached themselves. Maybe they were trapped in a lagoon by a landslide or a ferocious storm. Maybe they died there over a period of a few millennia. But somehow, they ended up right next to one another, many just several yards (meters) apart, entombed over the ages as the shallow sea floor was driven upward by geologic forces and transformed into the driest place on the planet. Today, the whales have emerged again atop a desert hill more than half a mile (a kilometer) from the surf, where researchers have begun to unearth one of the world's best-preserved graveyards of prehistoric whales.

Link to source

The climate is changing. Sea levels will rise. (maybe) Landscapes will change. Just as they have, many, many times in the past.

These are the things that make me so confused as to how anyone can cling so tightly to Man Made Climate Change. When these whales died, we didn't have factories, or cars, or busses. Yet the climate changed. The landscape changed.

Our place is to adapt to change. Change is inevitable. It's the only constant we know of.

Why can't we just try to limit pollution because it's the right thing to do? Why do we all have to be tricked and lied to in order to accomplish this goal?

My fears are not being taxed too much over this, but the idiots who think we can do something about it. Their solutions will cause way more devastation than the change itself.

It's called nature.




posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 11:37 AM
link   
I would think the noise pollution and pinging from sonar from our water vessels would make it hard for them to think.

sound is weird underwater.

edit on 7-3-2014 by jazz10 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 


This doesn't have anything to do with climate change. "Scientists say the skeletons show the animals were poisoned by toxins some 5 million to 11 million years ago and "died at sea, prior to burial on a tidal flat."

I have no idea why you tried to ty this to climate change either way (evidence fo or against). You wasted what could have been a good article and thread for your own purpose. Fail.



Algae blooms can create poisons that can be ingested or inhaled causing organ failure in marine mammals. Blooms are common along coasts and are enriched by nutrients like iron carried by rivers into the ocean. Scientists say that for more than 20 million years, runoff from the iron-rich Andes mountains has created ideal conditions for harmful algae blooms along South America's western coast.
"The key for us was its repetitive nature at Cerro Ballena," Pyenson said. "No other plausible explanation in the modern world would be recurring, except for toxic algae, which can recur if the conditions are right."

edit on 7-3-2014 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 11:43 AM
link   
It's not a legitimate science ,its a control measure designed to suck treasure from the masses and kill industry.The other planets are changing too.
I agree we shouldn't pollute ourselves but this implementation of policies is ridiculous.



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 



entombed over the ages as the shallow sea floor was driven upward by geologic forces and transformed into the driest place on the planet.



Fail indeed. Reading comprehension. Seek help.



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 


Yes you do need to seek help. You tried to ty this to climate change. Do you know what geological forces are?

Look it up.



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


The whales used to live in water. They died. Now, the place they used to live is a friggin desert.
So it would seem that something "changed".

Do you know what causes the climate to change?



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 12:39 PM
link   
Humans alone are not responsible for Climate Change. However since the industrial revolution only an idiot does not realize that humans have had a negative effect on the Climate. Look at a picture of China and then tell me that we have not contributed.

IMO ANYTHING that reduces pollution is a good thing, no matter who you blame.

So freaking tired of the rabid deniers. Climate is changing and it is changing fast. YES HUMANS HAVE HELPED THIS ALONG.



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 


Yes you absolutely failed to comprehend even the piece you quoted. Even after I told you to look up what geological forces mean.




the shallow sea floor was driven upward by geologic forces




You should have learned this in school. The picture above is an example of plate tectonics and geological forces. It doesn't have anything to do with climate change. When part of the earths crust slides under the other in this case the other was driven up out of the water.

Fast forward to the 24 minute mark.


Not an example of climate change. No wonder so many people are deniers they don't understand the basics even.
edit on 7-3-2014 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 12:51 PM
link   

network dude
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


The whales used to live in water. They died. Now, the place they used to live is a friggin desert.
So it would seem that something "changed".

Do you know what causes the climate to change?

The fossilized sea shells found in high in the Himalayas also used to live in the water. Yes, things change. Sea level changes, ground level changes.


Various things cause climate to change. Orbital and axial influences, changes in solar radiation, changes in CO2 levels. Various feedback and internal effects can enhance or mitigate the level of change.

The thing is, there isn't much to account for the current warming trend other than human influences.

Can we adapt? Maybe. Somewhat. But what costs more: trying to do something about it now, or waiting until the most severe effects begin to appear? Just wait until the ocean claims highly developed coastal regions and then "adapt?" Leave it to future generations to deal with it?
edit on 3/7/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


OK, you will have to actually think on this. Not just react.

Climate change is said to make the oceans rise. It's going to completely change our landscape. Crops will die, the world as we know it will end. Do I still have your attention? So as all this "change" happens, we are expected to die, or adapt.

Now how these whales died isn't really the point. The fact that something (remember, just think change) changed from when they died and today. Just like what we are hearing the climate is going to do. Change everything.

So when I hear about how hundreds of thousands of years ago, a desert was an ocean and a rain forest is now a cold climate, it makes me wonder how that happened. All without factories. And I get that geologic factors were involved. Volcanoes erupted, the earth shook. Dinosaurs pissed themselves.

Are geological events having anything to do with our current warming? Hmm. I remember hearing something about volcano ash.....Na, I am sure that was nothing. Volcano ash sure doesn't have anything to do with Geological events. Or does it?

How about YOU LOOK THAT UP.



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Phage

Can we adapt? Maybe. Somewhat. But what costs more: trying to do something about it now, or waiting until the most severe effects begin to appear? Just wait until the ocean claims highly developed coastal regions and then "adapt?" Leave it to future generations to deal with it?
edit on 3/7/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)


What will we do to combat this inevitable event? It seems we have two choices. Try all sorts of unproven crazy ideas like putting tiny mirrors into the atmosphere, or....wait a bit and see if the Earth doesn't correct itself, or change as it will (and has).

As I have said many times. Pollution sucks and we need to try to fix that. If for no other reason that air quality and the damage we do to nature. But this whole scare-tax-lie thing seems to not be in the best interests of anyone but the tax recipients.

Ice age, warm period, Ice age, warm period...pattern? Perhaps.



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 01:06 PM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 




Are geological events having anything to do with our current warming? Hmm. I remember hearing something about volcano ash.....Na, I am sure that was nothing. Volcano ash sure doesn't have anything to do with Geological events. Or does it?

How does volcanic ash lead to warming?
Has there been an extreme level of volcanic activity in the the past 100 years? In the past 70 years?



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 01:06 PM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 




So when I hear about how hundreds of thousands of years ago, a desert was an ocean and a rain forest is now a cold climate, it makes me wonder how that happened.


If you were honestly curious you could look those things up. You have a computer don't you?




Are geological events having anything to do with our current warming?


It is possible. They can also cool the environment and have caused mini ice ages. Again you cold look those things up.




How about YOU LOOK THAT UP.


I already have. That is why I didn't call an example of plate tectonics climate change like you.



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Phage
reply to post by network dude
 




Are geological events having anything to do with our current warming? Hmm. I remember hearing something about volcano ash.....Na, I am sure that was nothing. Volcano ash sure doesn't have anything to do with Geological events. Or does it?

How does volcanic ash lead to warming?
Has there been an extreme level of volcanic activity in the the past 100 years? In the past 70 years?


It actually leads to cooling. But you knew that. Tell me this, is it supposed to change anything when a volcano erupts and spew lots of ash into the sky?

(remember, I am not stuck on warming like some) I am talking about climate change. ( the natural kind)
Which is what I think we are experiencing. As it sure does resemble the way our climate has reacted in the past. (based on science)



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Mamatus
Humans alone are not responsible for Climate Change. However since the industrial revolution only an idiot does not realize that humans have had a negative effect on the Climate. Look at a picture of China and then tell me that we have not contributed.

IMO ANYTHING that reduces pollution is a good thing, no matter who you blame.

So freaking tired of the rabid deniers. Climate is changing and it is changing fast. YES HUMANS HAVE HELPED THIS ALONG.



Are you sure? Some say it's all human driven, some say humans couldn't have anything to do with it. At this point, does it even matter?

I agree, cleanup is needed badly. Alternative fuels are needed badly.

I am so freaking tired of people making this a political thing. The climate is changing and changing fast. And NOBODY knows who to blame quite yet. But let's all sit around and bitch about it while we figure it out. I am sure the crap flowing from Fukashima will still be there while we come to an agreement.



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 


Tell me this, is it supposed to change anything when a volcano erupts and spew lots of ash into the sky?
Not really. Ash does little except on a localized and short lived basis. The climate effects of volcanic eruptions lies in the sulphates which reach the stratosphere. It was previously thought that only large eruptions would do this but it has become apparent that even smaller eruptions can do so to the extent that the concentrations of stratospheric aerosols can be affected and thus reduced radiative forcing more than had been accounted for.


Which is what I think we are experiencing. As it sure does resemble the way our climate has reacted in the past. (based on science)
Based on science, what natural processes are occurring that can account for the rate of warming seen in the past century?

edit on 3/7/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Phage
Based on science, what natural processes are occurring that can account for the rate of warming seen in the past century?

edit on 3/7/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



The IPCC prediction of global temperatures, 1° F warmer by 2011 and 2° F by 2038 (Fig. 1), stand little chance of being correct. NASA’s imagery showing that the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) has shifted to its cool phase is right on schedule as predicted by past climate and PDO changes (Easterbrook, 2001, 2006, 2007). The PDO typically lasts 25-30 years and assures North America of cool, wetter climates during its cool phases and warmer, drier climates during its warm phases. The establishment of the cool PDO, together with similar cooling of the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), virtually assures several decades of global cooling and the end of the past 30-year warm phase. It also means that the IPCC predictions of catastrophic global warming this century were highly inaccurate.

link to source.

These are the things that go against the grain. But they seem to make a lot of sense.

Ice core samples. Are they trustworthy?

And you have to admit, there have been reports both ways about volcanic ash. After all, that is what SRM is based on is it not?



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 01:51 PM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 


These are the things that go against the grain. But they seem to make a lot of sense.
Not really. I don't see any explanation for the warming trend over the past century. Just a prediction (based on "patterns", not causes), about what is going to happen. What is it that drives those "patterns?"

Easterbrook talks about a 27 year cycle. I'm not at all sure it actually exists but even if it does, temperatures have been increasing, at an increasing rate, for 100 years. For some reason he ignores that trend. For some reason he just assumes something is causing it, but it can't be CO2. For some reason he ignores the feedback effects of CO2 induced warming.

Here are Easterbrooks predictions so far. Who's doing better?
www.skepticalscience.com...



And you have to admit, there have been reports both ways about volcanic ash. After all, that is what SRM is based on is it not?
Both ways? What do you mean?

No, SRM is not based on volcanic ash.



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 02:20 PM
link   
I read the news of this whale graveyard awhile back and all it tells us is that a bunch of whales died of something non-human caused. It doesn't tell us that humans don't cause climate change though. To generalize these findings in such a way is a huge stretch.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join