It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: pikestaff
Are you sure about that? Looks to me like satellite data indicates that it has gone up about 0.4º since 2000. That seems like a significant "budge." A "budge" that would result in an increase of more than 2º by the end of the century, if it continues at that rate.
Satellite information says that for the last 16 years, the earth's mean temperature has not budged
All continental states cold last winter? Are you sure? Yes, part of North America was cold. So were a couple of other places. So what?
North America's shocking winters, all continental states COLD last winter, "Oh there just blips" really? 3 years in a row?
Are you sure about that?
Both poles with above 'average' sea ice? year on year?
Arctic sea ice extent for March 2015 averaged 14.39 million square kilometers (5.56 million square miles). This is the lowest March ice extent in the satellite record. It is 1.13 million square kilometers (436,000 square miles) below the 1981 to 2010 long-term average of 15.52 million square kilometers (6.00 million square miles). It is also 60,000 square kilometers (23,000 square miles) below the previous record low for the month observed in 2006.
Air temperatures reached record high levels at two Antarctic stations last week, setting a new mark for the warmest conditions ever measured anywhere on the continent. On March 23, at Argentina’s base Marambio, a temperature of 17.4° Celsius (63.3° Fahrenheit) was reached, surpassing a previous record set in 1961 at a nearby base, Esperanza. The old record was 17.1° Celsius (62.8° Fahrenheit). However, Esperanza quickly reclaimed the record a few hours later on March 24, reaching a temperature of 17.5° Celsius (63.5° Fahrenheit).
While it is true that sea ice extent in the Antarctic has increased, it is also true that land ice is dramatically decreasing. That is problematic.
originally posted by: CranialSponge
a reply to: jrod
Like I said, there are natural factors at play that can change the C14 ratio, not just fossil fuel burning.
Changes in solar activity.
Changes in our magnetosphere.
Changes in volcanic activity.
The list goes on and on.
originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: tkwasny
The reason for the argument is that we have a window, well a now closing window to decrease the impact of our ignorance... yes, prepare but let's lessen the thing we're preparing for.
originally posted by: Cauliflower
The massive industrialization that has increased C02 levels in our atmosphere has only been around for about 100 years.
They dumped a lot of coal smoke into the atmosphere in the 1800's which might have blocked some of the UV radiation.
Its too soon to find any clear patterns in the data because global cooling and warming cycles are thousands of years long.
All it would take is super volcano activity or an asteroid strike and we could find ourselves in the next ice age.
I agree with Gray the global warming debate is probably more about funding and politics.
It's what we are doing right now. We just need to ensure there is more energy and a better delivery system for that energy.
originally posted by: Phage
You shouldn't rely much on mainstream news. For anything.
As for your earthquake question....i dont know of athropogenic earthquaqes. Its not talked about in mainstream news. Feel free to educate me...
originally posted by: CJCrawley
a reply to: Phage
How do we know that the Earth isn't still warming up after the Little Ice Age?
Human CO2 makes up a tiny proportion of the whole, and there's supposed to be an 800-year time lag between warming and release of CO2...which would correspond unremarkably to the Medieval Warm Period.
certain political faction does not want to accept the rational consequences of actual scientific results, which in the large scale on this issue are confirmed and certain.
originally posted by: DavidWright
I'm at a point now where Climate Change talk just pisses me off..........its all people pointing fingers at each other and isnt productive......If the planet is such a threat to flood the coastlines then why arent we fortifying them now? Why arent we pushing clean vehicles by force.....clean industry by force?
When the United States needs to get something done......WE DO IT........at least we used to. I want people to stop telling me 100 years from now that the sea level will rise by a few feet and other things MAY happen to the planet.
WE know a lot that IS happening to the planet and it keeps going unchecked while people bicker.......take California.......running out of water and yet only just recently decided they should take a serious look at it.
America is such a reactive country and the government is so bloated that by the time we do react......its much harder to fix the problem at hand.
...but we are having an impact that is generally more negative than positive
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: CranialSponge
I'm not quite sure what your asking...
I'm asking how you account for the decline in the ratio of 14C to 12C.
Any evidence for that? But I thought you said that the increase in CO2 was due to plants. How does volcanic activity account for the change in 12C/13C?
More volcanic activity ?
Any evidence for that?
Less cosmic rays ?
Wouldn't that increase the amount of 14C?
Neverending wars and uranium enriched weapons blasting everyone to Timbuktu ?
We know. It is because fossil fuels (plant material) are depleted of 14C because they are millions of years old. When fossil fuels are burned they do not release 14C because they do not contain 14C. When modern plants decay they release 14C because they contain 14C. When modern plants decay they do not change the ratio of 14C to 12C in the atmosphere because they are release the same 14C they absorbed from the atmosphere. When fossil fuels are burned they decrease the ratio of 14C to 13C because they are releasing mostly 12C, no 14C. This has been known since before warming (anthropogenic or otherwise) became an issue.
The rise in atmospheric CO2 is due to the combustion of fossil fuels.