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.
The Meridian Report “The Feedback Crisis in Climate Change”, outlines a new conceptual
model of the complex, interactive set of positive feedback mechanisms which are already
driving runaway climate change, initially triggered by the still-accelerating emission of
greenhouse gases. The analysis indicates that there is a critical threshold beyond which the
process becomes self-sustaining and can no longer be brought back under control by any
reduction in GHG emissions. Should that threshold be crossed, the resultant “extreme event”
in the climate system could lead to the extinction of life as we know it within the global
In his lead article preparing for the Summit in the
current issue of Climate Alert, John Topping (The Director of the Climate Institute and
Summit Chair) noted: "We will need something far more ambitious than the Kyoto
mechanisms if the world is to meet the climate change challenge...... It may well be that
we are already experiencing positive feedbacks as warming begets more warming.....
There is a real chance of the rapid climate change underway spiraling out of control
with devastating implications for humanity and countless other species."
The situation raises several critical issues. Strategically, if the scientific community fails to hold
its ground, and waters down its understanding of reality to a level that is politically and
economically acceptable, then it fails to provide any context in which significant learning can
take place. It removes the tension between the skeptics’ defense of vested interests and the
scientific delineation of a reality that demands significant change. In so doing it colludes in
repressing evidence of system boundaries and constraints within which economic,
technological, social, cultural and political decisions must be kept if environmental sustainability
is to be achieved. The pressures to compromise are immense, and the costs of sustaining
scientific integrity can be very high, but we do our civilization a great disservice if we abdicate
our responsibility at this juncture.
originally posted by: FPV2015
The problem, Mama, is the ice ISN'T melting. Global ice coverage is pretty well unchanged since the satellite record began.
Sea levels are rising around the world, and the latest satellite data suggests that three feet (one meter) or more is unavoidable in the next 100-200 years, NASA scientists said Wednesday.
Read more at: phys.org...
Ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica are melting faster than ever, and oceans are warming and expanding much more rapidly than they have in years past.
Rising seas will have "profound impacts" around the world, said Michael Freilich, director of NASA's Earth Science Division.
"More than 150 million people, most of them in Asia, live within one meter of present sea level," he said.
Low-lying US states such as Florida are at risk of disappearing, as are some of the world's major cities such as Singapore and Tokyo.
"It may entirely eliminate some Pacific island nations," he said.
There is no doubt that global coastlines will look very different in years to come, US space agency experts told reporters on a conference call to discuss the latest data on sea level rise.
"Right now we have committed to probably more than three feet (one meter) of sea level rise, just based on the warming we have had so far," said Steve Nerem of the University of Colorado, Boulder and leader of NASA's sea level rise team.
"It will very likely get worse in the future," he told reporters.
"The biggest uncertainty is predicting how quickly the polar ice sheets will melt."
Read more at: phys.org...
We are in the midst of a big money dupe, and there is no financial incentive to over turn it because all the money is going in the pockets of researches willing to do anything to shore up the thesis that man's co2 is destroying the world
But it is insufficient to determine sea ice extent.
You also asked about ice prior to 1950. To go further back, we have to rely on direct observation and experience. Things like the Northwest Passage being open long enough for Amundson to discover it, or accounts from the 1920's of a rapidly retreating arctic ice front from mariners. There is all kinds of this, and it is instructive.
1979 is a disingenuous start date for ice tracking graphs because it is the high point in the record.
If we go back further, to the pre-satelite record, we can see that ice was lower than it is today through most of the 1960's and 1970's.
Co2 is the least of our concerns.
Calling that goal post shifting is also disingenuous.
Thus, what we are left with is building a case from what evidence we have, and what evidence we have lends the realist argument more favours than the alarmist
Not sure if it was his or not, but it was funny all the same.