"Peak Water," Methane Blowholes and Ice-Free Arctic Cruises: The Climate Crisis Deepens

a reply to: Rezlooper

Well, instead of just "claiming" I am wrong prove it.

You see, first of all the largest emission of methane comes from rice fields, and cattle, among others. As people, we need both to be able to feed the population of the world, and despite the fact that methane levels have been increasing due in part to an increase in rice paddies and cattle, the levels of methane in the atmosphere have remained stable for over 10 years and hadn't increased for the most part. There was an increase in methane that planetary scientists attributed to "Earth's natural cycle" and not beause of man-made activity.

August 14, 2009


MIT Team Says "Global Warming Part of Earth's Natural Cycle" -A Galaxy Poll


A team of MIT scientists recorded a nearly simultaneous world-wide increase in methane levels -the first increase in ten years. What baffles the team is that this data contradicts theories stating humans are the primary source of increase in greenhouse gas. It takes about one full year for gases generated in the highly industrial northern hemisphere to cycle through and reach the southern hemisphere. Since all worldwide levels rose simultaneously throughout the same year, however, it is probable that this may be part of a natural cycle - and not the direct result of man's contributions.
...

MIT's Matthew Rigby and Ronald Prinn, the TEPCO Professor of Atmospheric Chemistry in MIT's Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Science, state that this imbalance has resulted in several million metric tons of additional methane in the atmosphere. Methane is produced by wetlands, rice paddies, cattle, and the gas and coal industries, and is destroyed by reaction with the hydroxyl free radical (OH), often referred to as the atmosphere's "cleanser."

www.dailygalaxy.com...


This shows we do not understand all the variables that affect the levels of methane gas in the atmosphere.

Then there is the fact that the "climate does changes", just because it does it is no excuse to try to tamper with it. The Earth is going through a natural cycle which is causing physical changes. Not only on the climate but also changes on Earth's magnetic field, alongside increases in seismic and magmatic events which include an increased activity of underwater volcanoes. This increased activity are heating many ocean areas of the world and have even been melting the ice in large areas of the Antarctic. Despite claims that "the melting has been caused by anthropogenic CO2", we know that this underground melting is being done by volcanoes, and not because of CO2.

The entire solar system has been encountering new areas of our universe which has been affecting not only Earth, but our sun, and every planet and moon with an atmosphere. This new region of space the solar system has been encountering seems to be the primary cause behind all these changes we have been seeing happening not only on Earth, but the entire Solar System.

As humans we have no say on these "natural changes", we can only adapt to them.

Sooner or later people are going to realize this, and unfortunately it seems that this realization will happen when it is too late because too many people are trying to blame these changes on mankind instead of accepting that as humans we do not control everything.

You need to understand that there is a difference between the actual toxins which are very detrimental to the environment, and which do affect ecosystems. However gases like methane and CO2 are building blocks and byproducts of life on Earth.

Are you suggesting that we stop planting rice paddies, and stop altogether the production of meat and other sources of proteis? Even if meat was "sanctioned and banned" like "some" people want, we as humans and as a CARBON based lifeform need some source of protein. Hence we would need a substitute for "meat" which would have to be other food staples such as beans, and guess what is a natural byproduct from consumption of beans? CO2 and methane...

People need to understand this. As a lifeform on this planet, and just like all other lifeforms on this planet there are essential building blocks that sustain life on Earth. We can't influence, and much less stop the natural changes that Earth is undergoing, so the only other solution would be to pretty much cull not only human population but other lifeforms on Earth as well...

People like you don't seem to realize that your opinions are being controlled by people who think, without any actual proof, that Earth should have less humans in it... Heck, some of these people, and unfortunately many of them are either powerful, or very influencial, want to reduce the population on Earth simply because they like "control". These people get high on controlling others, and they will use any, and every excuse to implement policies that would allow them to have more control over every aspect of human life.

Earth is a planet that has life, and CO2 and methane will always exist on a planet where all lifeforms are CARBON based.

Do tell me, even "IF" you were able to control all life on this planet, how would you control the natural changes such as the increased magmatic and seismic activity occurring under our oceans which are warming many ocean areas and are in fact melting glaciers? You simply "can't"... Hence the only real solution is "adaptation", instead of trying to "control" the natural processes that occur on Earth.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: Rezlooper

Unfortunately, it's people like you that will be the death of us all because of your denial. The amount of methane levels in our atmosphere are not natural. Even in the MIT study, which you cite in your post, that says a simultaneous release of methane occurred in 2007 on a worldwide scale, the scientists were baffled. In 2008, they came out with a story, which I've used many times in my threads, that said methane released globally when it should have first released in the northern hemisphere (where all the methane production occurs, such as rice paddies and cattle) and then over the course of a year, spread to the southern hemisphere.

MIT study says methane begins increasing again

MIT scientists couldn't explain it, they called it a mystery in 2008, but then, according to your article (in 2009), they decided it was "probable" that it was a natural cycle. Ya see, scientists always gotta come up with something if they don't understand it, which in this case, they don't. It makes them feel better. God forbid, they don't have control of the situation. Scientists don't know why methane, which had leveled off for ten years (from 1997 to 2007) suddenly began releasing all across the planet. It's not a natural cycle, because in 400,000 years, methane levels haven't been near the level they are now. Whether it's man made or not, matters none, the simple fact remains, methane levels have increased beyond a livable stage that's safe for our existence to continue.

a reply to: Rezlooper

That's a great report and you've provided some great information. Thanks for the reference materials.

Of course, its all rather academic since nothing can be done about it. But it is interesting to watch. We've noted cooler than usual temperatures in our area along with more than the usual rain fall. And the entire circuit of the weather pattern seems different in that we're getting much more of our weather off the pacific this year.

If the sea level starts rising precipitously we'll see coastal areas such as the north east coast, New York, Boston, etc. start to be severely affected. Its really just a matter of time I suppose.

Because you're opposed to methane, have you become a vegan? Because that dead animal on your plate is one of the largest contributers to a future will less natural resources available.

originally posted by: Rezlooper

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: Rezlooper

Unfortunately, it's people like you that will be the death of us all because of your denial. The amount of methane levels in our atmosphere are not natural. Even in the MIT study, which you cite in your post, that says a simultaneous release of methane occurred in 2007 on a worldwide scale, the scientists were baffled. In 2008, they came out with a story, which I've used many times in my threads, that said methane released globally when it should have first released in the northern hemisphere (where all the methane production occurs, such as rice paddies and cattle) and then over the course of a year, spread to the southern hemisphere.

MIT study says methane begins increasing again

MIT scientists couldn't explain it, they called it a mystery in 2008, but then, according to your article (in 2009), they decided it was "probable" that it was a natural cycle. Ya see, scientists always gotta come up with something if they don't understand it, which in this case, they don't. It makes them feel better. God forbid, they don't have control of the situation. Scientists don't know why methane, which had leveled off for ten years (from 1997 to 2007) suddenly began releasing all across the planet. It's not a natural cycle, because in 400,000 years, methane levels haven't been near the level they are now. Whether it's man made or not, matters none, the simple fact remains, methane levels have increased beyond a livable stage that's safe for our existence to continue.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: Rezlooper

The entire solar system has been encountering new areas of our universe which has been affecting not only Earth, but our sun, and every planet and moon with an atmosphere. This new region of space the solar system has been encountering seems to be the primary cause behind all these changes we have been seeing happening not only on Earth, but the entire Solar System.

Do we know anything about this new area of the universe? Have you seen anything that explains in what way its different and how that difference is affecting the earth?

originally posted by: Rezlooper

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: Rezlooper

Unfortunately, it's people like you that will be the death of us all because of your denial.

Truthfully, you could both be correct and it wouldn't matter; we're all going to die anyway, its just a matter of time. For that matter, you could step out the house tomorrow and be run over by a bus. Both of you could be wrong and we're just as good as fried dead anyway. The earth has a carrying capacity; that capacity has been exceeded and the excess only grows each day a person in China and/or India buys a new car. The Chinese complete the equivalent of a new coal fired power plant each week. Their air is so polluted you can cut it with a knife and their supply of potable water is dwindling fast. We could shut down the entire United States and let everyone starve to death in the dark and it wouldn't eliminate the excess carrying capacity.

BTW, the excess methane is coming from recently unfrozen areas in the Bearing straits according to NPR reporters last year. There's a huge area of rotting vegetable matter a mile thick that's been thawed out and as it thaws the release of methane accelerates. That will greatly accelerate the climate change problem. Or...some hapless septuagenarian tourist on an Alaskan cruise ship, glass of wine in hand, will stand off by the rail in the smoking section, fire up his zippo and ignite the worlds most extreme fireball. Just think of the insurance claim on that one!

originally posted by: Iamthatbish
Because you're opposed to methane, have you become a vegan? Because that dead animal on your plate is one of the largest contributers to a future will less natural resources available.

originally posted by: Rezlooper

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: Rezlooper

Unfortunately, it's people like you that will be the death of us all because of your denial. The amount of methane levels in our atmosphere are not natural. Even in the MIT study, which you cite in your post, that says a simultaneous release of methane occurred in 2007 on a worldwide scale, the scientists were baffled. In 2008, they came out with a story, which I've used many times in my threads, that said methane released globally when it should have first released in the northern hemisphere (where all the methane production occurs, such as rice paddies and cattle) and then over the course of a year, spread to the southern hemisphere.

MIT study says methane begins increasing again

MIT scientists couldn't explain it, they called it a mystery in 2008, but then, according to your article (in 2009), they decided it was "probable" that it was a natural cycle. Ya see, scientists always gotta come up with something if they don't understand it, which in this case, they don't. It makes them feel better. God forbid, they don't have control of the situation. Scientists don't know why methane, which had leveled off for ten years (from 1997 to 2007) suddenly began releasing all across the planet. It's not a natural cycle, because in 400,000 years, methane levels haven't been near the level they are now. Whether it's man made or not, matters none, the simple fact remains, methane levels have increased beyond a livable stage that's safe for our existence to continue.

You're missing my point and you still haven't heard anything I'm saying. It's not the every day common things we've been used to that caused methane to start shooting up in 2007. Like I said, rising methane since the 1750's (the beginning of the Industrial Age) had leveled off in 1997, but was still at an acceptable and livable stage. First, scientists didn't know why it had stopped, but it was most likely something we (governments) had done. Maybe, it was geoengineering (chemtrails) which started in the early 90's. Maybe those aluminum oxide particles were meant to reflect sun light.

Anyways, in 2007, the rate of methane escalation started rising again and much more rapidly than at any other time in recorded history. Why? What changed? IMO, there is one major thing that happened, at least here in the United States, as well as many other countries....FRACKING!

In 2005, George Bush signed into law the Clean Water Act that allowed fracking to begin. How many hundreds of thousands of wells were drilled in that short period of time between 2005 and 2007, or 08 or beyond? And how many were left abandoned and not even used?

It was said that fracking was supposed to be cleaner than coal and in order for that to happen, oil and gas companies could only lose up to 3% of the methane extracted from below or it would be worse than coal. Well, guess what, numerous studies, including admissions from the EPA, have proven now that they are losing more than 3% and it ranges all the way up to 9%. This is gas that is supposed to be captured, but it's "fugitive" and is escaping before they capture it. This is just the gas during the extraction process, not to mention how much gas escapes when these sights are first drilled.

Fracking was supposed to be our savior, cutting down carbon emissions from coal use. Well, the one thing they ignored in these original studies was methane, a far worse threat to our atmosphere than carbon because it is 25 times more efficient at trapping the sun's heat. It's like carbon was a sheet over the planet and now we've thrown a quilt on top of that. Not good at all!

a reply to: Rezlooper

Unfortunately, it's people like you that will be the death of us all because of your denial.

Go overboard much?

Grandstand much?

Accuse people of things much?

Starting to sound like a 2012 thread.........

There is having concerns, wanting to share those concerns, and then accusing other ATS members of being "the death of us all".

I know the first two are good for discussions and debates on here.....not sure what the last one helps with......

originally posted by: eriktheawful
a reply to: Rezlooper

Unfortunately, it's people like you that will be the death of us all because of your denial.

Go overboard much?

Grandstand much?

Accuse people of things much?

Starting to sound like a 2012 thread.........

There is having concerns, wanting to share those concerns, and then accusing other ATS members of being "the death of us all".

I know the first two are good for discussions and debates on here.....not sure what the last one helps with......

But it's true. We are very close to the tipping point and not many want to hear that. Unfortunately, the more people choose to come up with excuses rather than admit the obvious, the further we travel down a dark road. Sorry for being so melodramatic, but yes, it's true. All it takes is a simple google for methane hydrates, or methane release, or methane levels, and you get countless articles, information, data, statistics, graphs, news, and more, that you couldn't possibly read it all before Christmas. How much more evidence is needed that methane is a serious threat?

a reply to: Rezlooper

You mean it's "true" "in your opinion".

I fail to see how certain people will be "the death of us all".

Rather I've seen that claim before, for many different situations, over many decades of my life and.....

I'm still waiting.

People want to do good. That is a good thing. People want to help our world. That too is a good thing.

People want to go around pointing fingers and screaming accusations.....that's not a good thing as in it does not help in any way, shape or form.

Try doing constructive and positive things instead: continue your research. continue showing your findings. continue to show your side of the story. In a calm, and educated way.

Going around accusing people that they are going to "be the death of us all", is not exactly what I call having a positive and constructive attitude.

Win people over with logic, data and statistics.

Not insults, name calling, and wild accusations. Those tend to turn people off and make them quite defensive.

Or just continue to do those things I guess, it really is your posts here, and I guess you can address people however you want.