Global warming 'past the point of no return'

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 11:02 AM
link   




Global warming 'past the point of no return'

A record loss of sea ice in the Arctic this summer has convinced scientists that the northern hemisphere may have crossed a critical threshold beyond which the climate may never recover. Scientists fear that the Arctic has now entered an irreversible phase of warming which will accelerate the loss of the polar sea ice that has helped to keep the climate stable for thousands of years.

They believe global warming is melting Arctic ice so rapidly that the region is beginning to absorb more heat from the sun, causing the ice to melt still further and so reinforcing a vicious cycle of melting and heating.

The greatest fear is that the Arctic has reached a "tipping point" beyond which nothing can reverse the continual loss of sea ice and with it the massive land glaciers of Greenland, which will raise sea levels dramatically.

Satellites monitoring the Arctic have found that the extent of the sea ice this August has reached its lowest monthly point on record, dipping an unprecedented 18.2 per cent below the long-term average.

Experts believe that such a loss of Arctic sea ice in summer has not occurred in hundreds and possibly thousands of years. It is the fourth year in a row that the sea ice in August has fallen below the monthly downward trend - a clear sign that melting has accelerated.

Scientists are now preparing to report a record loss of Arctic sea ice for September, when the surface area covered by the ice traditionally reaches its minimum extent at the end of the summer melting period.

...

As more and more sea ice is lost during the summer, greater expanses of open ocean are exposed to the sun which increases the rate at which heat is absorbed in the Arctic region, Dr Serreze said.

Sea ice reflects up to 80 per cent of sunlight hitting it but this "albedo effect" is mostly lost when the sea is uncovered. "We've exposed all this dark ocean to the sun's heat so that the overall heat content increases," he explained.

Current computer models suggest that the Arctic will be entirely ice-free during summer by the year 2070 but some scientists now believe that even this dire prediction may be over-optimistic, said Professor Peter Wadhams, an Arctic ice specialist at Cambridge University.

...

"If anything we may be underestimating the dangers. The computer models may not take into account collaborative positive feedback," he said.

Sea ice keeps a cap on frigid water, keeping it cold and protecting it from heating up. Losing the sea ice of the Arctic is likely to have major repercussions for the climate, he said. "There could be dramatic changes to the climate of the northern region due to the creation of a vast expanse of open water where there was once effectively land," Professor Wadhams said. "You're essentially changing land into ocean and the creation of a huge area of open ocean where there was once land will have a very big impact on other climate parameters," he said.



Let's hope they are wrong, but this doesn't look good at all.


[edit on 16-9-2005 by loam]




posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 04:33 PM
link   
The apparent melting of the Siberian permafrost -- for the first time in 11,000 years -- seems to support this assertion (Click here for New Scientist source article). Similarly, recent and ongoing studies are finding that the carbon released from soils located in temperate zones is mroe than offsetting any progress achieved through emmissions controls (see here).

Yet somehow, some people still rather argue the extent to which our activities are speeding up the process, at the cost of realizing that the ball is already in motion, and we thus must ensure we take every reasonable action to make sure we do not exasperate the problem...

In short, I think it's a very valid concern to worry whether or not we're past the tipping point. The last time the climate underwent such changes, we were huddled in some cave, trying to keep the fire going and picking the ticks off each other's pelts... Hell, there are parts of Greenland being exposed to sunlight for the first time in "millions of years" Source).

Furthermore, none the of the current climatic change models have yet to account for the rapid release of greenhouse gasses resulting form the permafrost melt or the release of carbon from the soil.

Grab the handrails, folks... chances are we've punched our E-ticket and it's a little too late now to get off the ride...



posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 04:44 PM
link   
it isn't too late...
the world will repair itself... dont worry...
it is tougher than you think...

all this melting ice is like a huge butterflies wings flapping...

causing hurricanes, tornados, famine, flood, and drought that will soon wipe out this intolerable pest called humanity...

then the healing can begin...

the world is fine... it is us who are scre*ed



posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 07:07 PM
link   
If one believes that humans are largely to blame for the recent trend in global warming then one must by default admit that the very process has taken at least over a hundred years to bear result. This being the case, how can we expect immediate action to provide any kind of long term results, when the effects being felt are the result of over a hundred years of activity?

The very assumption is assenine, and anyone who thinks a couple of decades of intervention can offset hundreds of years of activity is sadly mistaken.

IMHO-Of course it is too late for any meaningful action, considering the fact that it took at least a century before we saw the results of our industrial revolution...would it not follow that in order to see any meaninglful corrections, that at least the same timeframe be allowed for correction?



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 12:52 PM
link   
What worried me recently was the assertion, i heard on the news, that if we try to stop climate change by decreasing our polluting emissions, we might end up accelerating climate change.

But ultimately it has to be better that we do cut pollution and fast. I can’t see that it should take us 100 years to correct our emissions now that we have a greater understanding and technology.

Guess were all just going to have to adapt to whatever is coming our way. Makes me angry though that people wont wake up to what’s happening. Recycling and green living is just a fad to some people. And there is not enough done to ensure that people do start living greener lives.



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 01:17 PM
link   
Yeh kode I think your refering global dimming, each year less light is reaching earth and nobody the knows whole story as to why.Theres been a 10% drop in sunlight reaching earth in the last 30 years, tiny particles of soot or chemical compounds like sulphates reflect sunlight and they also promote the formation of bigger, longer lasting clouds leading to a reduction in light reaching earth.

Now heres the interesting bit ,since we've been fitting scrubbers to our factorys and cars the "sooty" stuff from emissions has been cut out leaving the pure gas essentially reversing global dimming leading to increasing sunlight again.The point is global dimming has hidden the extent of global warming.Most of the models for global warming do not include this.

I think this is one of the most pressing issue's mankind faces at this time.It may be already ready to late to stop or reverse, and if this is the case we must adapt to survive.



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Merkeva
Yeh kode I think your refering global dimming,


Thanks Merkeva, that is what i was referring to. We have put ourselves potentially in a no win situation.


Originally posted by sdrumrunner
The last time the climate underwent such changes, we were huddled in some cave, trying to keep the fire going and picking the ticks off each other's pelts... (


Guess I’ll be getting myself a mini digger and doing some excavation.lol mmm maybe there is a little truth in the hollow earth conspiracy.



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Merkeva

Yeh kode I think your refering global dimming, each year less light is reaching earth and nobody the knows whole story as to why.



Here's a possibility, Merkeva...

www.space.com...

It talks about a dust cloud our solar system has entered and won't exit until about 2012. The heaviest portion of this space dust comes toward the very end.

This could explain the global dimming to certain degree. I'm wondering what effects it will cause to our sun.



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by sdrumrunner
The apparent melting of the Siberian permafrost -- for the first time in 11,000 years -- seems to support this assertion


Why was it warm enough to melt the permafrost 11,000 years ago?



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark

Originally posted by sdrumrunner
The apparent melting of the Siberian permafrost -- for the first time in 11,000 years -- seems to support this assertion


Why was it warm enough to melt the permafrost 11,000 years ago?


I don't believe it did melt at that point. That was when the ice sheets receded at the end of the last ice age. The ground would have remained frozen until now.


...has started to melt for the first time since it formed 11,000 years ago at the end of the last ice age.


www.guardian.co.uk...



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 04:17 PM
link   
Masqua, I think the dust cloud your talking about would have little effect on the atmosphere here on earth,if anything the dust in space would reflect more light on earth.The effect on our sun would be very little if anything,the sun would more lightly have an effect on the dust cloud,forcing it away with solar winds and its massive magnetic field.

We can argue all we want about global warming and its causes,but the sheer amount of greenhouse gases we output have to have an impact on the biosphere as a whole, there are so many self-regulating systems we are disrupting in nature.Pollouting the water cycle,chopping down rain forests,increasing CO2 emissions are just some of many examples.

Ask yourself how long can this go on without repercussions?



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 12:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark

Originally posted by sdrumrunner
The apparent melting of the Siberian permafrost -- for the first time in 11,000 years -- seems to support this assertion


Why was it warm enough to melt the permafrost 11,000 years ago?


Could you entertain the possibility that we *might* have accelerated a/the cycle, potentially returning us to those caves?


[edit on 19-9-2005 by loam]



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 02:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by phoenixhasrisin
The very assumption is assenine, and anyone who thinks a couple of decades of intervention can offset hundreds of years of activity is sadly mistaken.



It will take generations of Holy men living high in mountain caves performing endless righteous deeds to see to it that this world is again safe for the masses. Intergenerational karma can be rough... but it is no reason to give up hope.

Sri Oracle



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 04:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by masqua

Here's a possibility, Merkeva...

www.space.com...

It talks about a dust cloud our solar system has entered and won't exit until about 2012. The heaviest portion of this space dust comes toward the very end.

This could explain the global dimming to certain degree. I'm wondering what effects it will cause to our sun.


Very interesting. The Mayans supposedly calculated the calendar by watching when the earth would be at a certain point in space and counting backwards. Could this cloud have been what ended other ages in the past? And could this dust be what is making the sun not come out of its solar maximum as it’s supposed to (spaceweather.com and NASA had an article on it, but its now gone again called something like: “Solar Minimum Explodes”)? Then if we calculate in the reversing/weakening magnetic field, all told none of this looks good IMHO…



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 05:40 AM
link   
This dust cloud aint big news,our solar system faces alot worse on its galatic merry go round.We come into proximity of things like black holes, supernovae and other solar systems as our sun orbits the galatic center.

There is a particular part of the galaxy we pass through every so often, its packed with stars and their gravity usually disturbs the oort cloud hurling comets into our solar system.The last time we passed through here was, oh about 65 million years ago..im not quite sure when we pass this spot again,Ill try find out though.



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 06:29 AM
link   
I understand about the back holes and such, but not knowing a whole heck of a lot about the Mayans and their calendar, I do recall that it had to do with the solar system hitting a certain point in the Milky Way at a certain time. So what I am saying is could it be the dust in this area of the Milky Way that has caused problem in the past, and hence their predicting that the end of the last age would come about in 2012? I believe they called that area the tree of life, or something. That article states that we will not exit the dust until 2013, and that the last half will by far be the worst. It also seems to go along with the biblical end time’s prophecy of the Moon looking like blood and the Sun being covered in sackcloth. I do not believe that the dust comes from the Ort cloud, but the dust may perturb it and cause NEO’s, another thing that is predicted in the end times, “falling stars, mountains or fire falling in the ocean, etc…”



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 07:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by loam




Global warming 'past the point of no return'

A record loss of sea ice in the Arctic this summer has convinced scientists that the northern hemisphere may have crossed a critical threshold beyond which the climate may never recover. Scientists fear that the Arctic has now entered an irreversible phase of warming which will accelerate the loss of the polar sea ice that has helped to keep the climate stable for thousands of years.

They believe global warming is melting Arctic ice so rapidly that the region is beginning to absorb more heat from the sun, causing the ice to melt still further and so reinforcing a vicious cycle of melting and heating.

...


...

"If anything we may be underestimating the dangers. The computer models may not take into account collaborative positive feedback,"



Let's hope they are wrong, but this doesn't look good at all.


[edit on 16-9-2005 by loam]


my view, along with a few of youse, is that the sun itself is more of the culprit than either the industrial revolution or the european & north american vehicle emmissions and refrigeration CFCs going into the 'green-house' atmosphere of our planet.

as china enters the consumer madness zone, & the icecaps melt faster,
then china will be made the bad-guy by the western media....watch & see if china and 3rd world asia & muslim nations aren't labled as waging war thru enviromental terrorism.

lets see if an active sun, producing massive CMEs, solarflares, isn't finally
recognized as the primary source of rapid bio-sphere changes...
and then a multinational project to construct a 'screen' in stationary place between the earth-sun alignment...so as to decrease the ammount of sunlight striking the planet.

the green-house gas model is a factor, no doubt....
but i don't think it is the First & Foremost Factor, on which all earth changes branch out from.
............

re: that computer model remark->....
the reliable & ultimate computer models, sure weren't worth TOO much,
as far as the New Orleans-Katrina, hurricane damage projections...
were they??




[edit on 19-9-2005 by St Udio]



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sri Oracle
Intergenerational karma can be rough... but it is no reason to give up hope.


Don't get me wrong, I do believe that we need to stop polluting our environment, but that is neither here nor there.

Once upon a time man thought he could tame nature....since seeing the error of his ways, he is finally able to admit that it can not be done.

Is the arrogance really gone though, when we now believe that we are signifigant enough to cause a global change in temperature?

Or has it just taken a new form?

Think about it for a second....



posted on Oct, 25 2005 @ 02:01 PM
link   
This is a great article - and free for the next seven days. (New York Times)


The Big Melt

In 1969 Roy Koerner, a Canadian government glaciologist, was one of four men (and 36 dogs) who completed the first surface crossing of the Arctic Ocean, from Alaska through the North Pole to Norway. ...Now, he said, such a trek would be impossible: there is just not enough ice. In September, the area covered by sea ice reached a record low. "I look on it as a different world," Dr. Koerner said. "I recently reviewed a proposal by one guy to go across by kayak." ...At age 73, Dr. Koerner, known as Fritz, still regularly hikes high on the ancient glaciers abutting the warming ocean to extract cores showing past climate trends. And every one, he said, indicates that the Arctic warming under way over the last century is different from that seen in past warm eras.

"Everything we are seeing shows things can move more and faster than we think," he added, referring to geologic and glacial records of past Arctic changes.

The current increase in greenhouse gases, he continued, is similar to past natural changes that profoundly altered the world.

"We have not seen such fast carbon dioxide rises as we have now other than in extreme cases in the past," Dr. Brinkhuis said, including periods like one about 50 million years ago that turned the Arctic Ocean into a warm, weed-covered lake.




posted on Oct, 25 2005 @ 06:35 PM
link   
People seem to be saying recently, like this, that we're at or going beyond the environmental point of no return.

Frankly, I think we blew past that so long ago that no one can remember what it even looked like.





top topics
 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join