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.

 

the insane quest to refreeze and reice the Antarctic

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 06:56 AM
link   
there is a danger of zealots in any religion or set of beliefs. this is an example of the danger many are concerned about when it comes to the believers in "human caused global climate change". that some well meaning group or person will take drastic measures to fix what they see as a problem. and by their very actions interfere with, possibly irreversibly the natural cycle. thereby actually damaging the natural order and ecosystem.

there is a proposal to "artificially" refreeze Antarctica by pumping water up adding to the ice. basically like you would use ice to cool down and keep cool a cooler for a trip to keep food cool. not only are there astronomical costs involved (where would the money for it come from?), at $500 BILLION US dollars. but this is the type of thing that could severely negatively impact the world ecosystem, weather patterns, and temperatures. yet to a true believer in the belief system of human caused global climate change. this sounds like a really good idea. an idea that can help fix what they in their belief system feel we have broken.


there is a lot of evidence that is completely ignored by those who believe in human caused global climate change, that strongly indicates not only has the climate been changing throughout time and history, but that it can happen extremely fast. to start nobody seems to doubt that in at least one time the earth has had an ice age. a time where a fair amount of the earth was covered with ice sheets. a time where the earth was far cooler than it is today. in fact back in i believe it was the 80's and 90's the concern was that the earth was headed into another ice age. there are the woolly mammoths found far in the north like Siberia, that point not just to the climate changing, but also to it happening extremely fast. almost a flash freeze situation. this due to finds in remarkable condition due to being frozen. yet in the stomach contents there was a warm weather flower, which would not have been growing if it was cold. which of course means it went from hot to temperatures to freeze the beast exceedingly fast.

then in the lexicon of the human caused global warming fear mongering is the fear of ocean levels rising due to the melting of the polar ice caps. yet again there is proof that the ocean levels have risen even far in the past. normally this is put down to the melting of the sheets of ice from the ice age. the evidence being human settlements and works under water in coastal areas around the world. yet this is used to fuel the fear mongering of ocean levels rising due to human caused global climate change. due to oceans rising from the melting polar ice caps. and push the fear of this causing loss of human settled areas especially on the ocean island nations, to drive their cause. yet they completely ignore another real fact of the cause for the rise in ocean levels. that being that the inland fresh water systems are draining into the oceans, and always have been. lakes in northern Canada are drying out. as are the inland waterways. where is all that water going? it of course is and has been draining into the oceans following the natural river systems. this can been seen by looking at pictures of many waterways painted in the 1700' and 1800's where waterways tend to be bigger and deeper, where today the same waterways are a lot smaller with less water flow. even the Great Lakes water levels have dropped since i was a kid. one pier we used to dive off of is now surrounded by perhaps a foot and a half of water. areas where the water used to come up almost level with the ground and be fairly deep right off, is now about two feet lower with that ground now being a small cliff with a beach. i know my grandfather was very concerned with the drop of lake Ontario from when he was a kid raised in that area. in another case the water level drop in just 40 years was significant was on a canoe trip i was on as a teen. we had the logs and journals of the last known trip about 40 years before as well as an old man who had been on that trip to talk to. that route had gone out of use due to it being heavily used to drive logs down river. yet 40 years later there were a lot of areas where you could barely get a canoe through due to the shallowness and narrowness of the water. in one case what had been a low class rapids, actually more than a swift area had instead become a small falls we almost went over. yet in these areas you could still see the logs and log jams often ten feet on either side of the currant waterway where they had been in the flowing water. as well as old high water marks often several feet higher than the currant levels. but that water level drop makes sense when you remember that water flows from inland out into the oceans. in fact due to archeological evidence in school we were taught that at one time in the far past that almost all of what is currently the city of Toronto and the townships north of the city was under water. calling it lake Iroquois, a lake formed by the glacial melt, which has subsided to what we now know as lake Ontario. all that water draining into the ocean over time. again, that makes perfect sense, and is used to back up their fear mongering.

yet they ignore the evidence of LOWER WATER LEVELS. again on a canoe trip we once came upon some cliff petroglyphs. yet these petroglyphs went UNDER the water. that is evidence of human habitation with far lower water levels. they have also mapped out much of the bottom of the Great Lakes in recent times. and have found evidence of small lakes and waterways on the floors of the lakes. not only that but they have also found human works on the lake bottoms. this shows there has been a cycle of both much higher and much lower water levels in times that humans were there (before the ice age). this would mean that the oceans have also been higher and lower in that time. since if the water was not on the land, it has to be in the oceans. this shows that there is indeed a natural cycle of both high and low inland waterways and ocean water levels. unless of course you want to blame those changes on the ancient people and their pollution belching factories and automobiles, causing the climate to change.

yet in an effort to try to stop a natural cycle, that they believe to be caused by humans. and to try to stop the ocean levels rising due to the humans causing the polar ice cap to melt. they want to insanely artificially cool the Antarctic. and one has to assume that the next step would be to do the same in the Arctic. we need to insure such a plan by these zealots is not carried out. to stop the insanity of interfering with the natural cycle, possibly doing great ham to the environment.



A group of researchers has proposed using wind-powered pumps to refreeze the Arctic. The proposal seems ambitious: it involves 10 million devices deployed over 10 per cent of the Arctic, at a cost of $500 billion US. Lead author of the paper, astrophysicist Steven Desch, concerned about what some climatologists predict to be an ice-free Arctic by 2030, challenged a group of his students at Arizona State University to develop a method to refreeze the Arctic. Without ice to reflect sunlight into space, heat continues to be absorbed in the region. This, in turn, causes further warming and accelerates global climate change. While cutting down on carbon dioxide emissions is the solution various companies, researchers and governments are aiming for, Desch was concerned that it wasn't a "real-world" solution.
www.cbc.ca...
edit on 17-2-2017 by generik because: fix headline




posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 07:04 AM
link   
a reply to: generik




there is a proposal to "artificially" refreeze Antarctica by pumping water up adding to the ice

What?

The Antarctic pole is actually gaining ice.

According to the new analysis of satellite data, the Antarctic ice sheet showed a net gain of 112 billion tons of ice a year from 1992 to 2001. That net gain slowed to 82 billion tons of ice per year between 2003 and 2008.

source



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 07:12 AM
link   
a reply to: generik

Something smells foul here...

Half a trillion dollars to "refreeze" a continent?

In an attempt to undo the environmental damage that humans did? Fat chance.

How much is spent to clean up massive oil spills again?



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 07:12 AM
link   
a reply to: generik

My short paper on the problem of the disappearance of arctic offers a quite different solution.

Simply paint the newly exposed earth with a white paint. Thus, the desired reflective surface. It actually could be sprayed from the air and could save billions of those dollars. Besides, even the Chinese couldn't produce out of their sweatshops enough wind turbines to pump the water required.

My forthcoming next paper will suggest that cloud machines be installed, pumping out clouds to cover the ground surface below and proving the required reflective surface.



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 07:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

i don't disagree with you on that. yet for the human caused global climate change people that is "fake news", and is ignored. pretty much just because it counters their aims, so it can't be true. we see this all the time for both the Arctic and Antarctic. we are constantly being told both are gaining ice, while those in support of human caused global climate change continually rebuttal and say, no they are loosing ice. therefore since they believe they are loosing ice, they need to "fix" it. that is a part of the problem which leads well meaning zealots to actually want to interfere and harm the natural cycle.



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 07:17 AM
link   
Unlike pretty much all of AGW this would actually be proof of humans interfering with the earth's climate.



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 08:28 AM
link   
a reply to: generik

Just read it a bit better, it's speaking of the Arctic, not Antarctic.

I don't think we have enough icemakers to handle that task.




posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 09:12 AM
link   
Well that's the dumbest thing I ever heard.

The real life Sispyphus.

Scam.

Gotta be a Scam.



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Why dont they send millions of freezers?
who know that at the back of the freezer is a HEAT radiator?
so you get as Much heat as cold!

so instead spend the 500 million on ways to
NOT make heat in the first places .
washing the ice with water would melt it to!!! crazy.



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 10:24 AM
link   
a reply to: buddha

bro, it's harvard, and it's no easy to make harvard look stupid, but then again, there is this



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 10:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
Well that's the dumbest thing I ever heard.
The real life Sispyphus.
Scam.
Gotta be a Scam.


Its the Clinton's!
just put up some cheap glass sheets to look like solar panels.



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 03:11 PM
link   
a reply to: generik

Source, CBC and it says "Arctic" which is not the "Antarctic".

Anyway, climate change has been happening for all times. But the level since we started pumping hydrocarbons out of the earth and combusting it for energy has been increasing. "Plant more plants" will not account for billions of tons pumped in the air (that is just power plants). Doing nothing is not an option.

Beside calling this a "money hole" what do you suggest?

There is a pilot plant in Canada that is pulling CO2 out of the air, cleaning it, and... since there is no market, releasing it back. I envision using supercritical CO2 turbines using the "waste" CO2 already in our atmosphere to generate electricity. The spent CO2 can be turned into other useful substances. This sh1t takes money and commitment. Will you ridicule that idea when it become demonstrable to the world?

I ask because it is going to happen this year. Our world is changing regardless of what Orange Guy says. We do not need him to make our world a better place. We actually would be better without OG! Old dinosaurs being anchors to the past slowing the pace of change and all that...



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 04:14 PM
link   
You can always defeat global warming with nuclear winter, but I hardly think it's worth it.



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 05:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nickn3
You can always defeat global warming with nuclear winter, but I hardly think it's worth it.


A good sized volcano going off will have a similar effect..........but without the radiation. Why don't we set one off and see what happens?



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 09:52 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



new topics

top topics



 
7

log in

join