It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


NEWS: Northern Hemisphere Nearing Point of No Return on Global Warming.

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 12:02 AM
Scientists are afraid that the Arctic has reached an irreversible point of no return on warming. One which will accelerate the loss of polar sea ice which has helped keep the climate stable for millenia. Global warming is melting the Arctic very rapidly, absorbing more heat from the sun, and reinforcing a cycle of heating and melting.
Experts believe such a loss has not occurred in hundreds and possibly thousands of years. It is the fourth year in a row the sea ice in August has fallen below the monthly downward trend - a clear sign melting has accelerated.

Sea ice naturally melts in summer and reforms in winter but for the first time on record, this annual rebound did not occur last winter.

Scientists analysing the latest satellite data will announce a significant shift in the stability of the sea ice, the Northern Hemisphere's major "heat sink" that moderates climatic extremes.
"The feeling is we are reaching a tipping point or threshold beyond which sea ice will not recover."

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

According to the article, it is believed such a loss of ice has not occurred in hundreds possibly thousands of years, marking the fourth consecutive year in a row where the sea ice in August has fallen below the normal trend, a clear sign melting has accelerated.

I keep seeing more and more signs that we are already in a climate shift, and it seems it will only get worse. We can expect more Katrinas and other extreme weather around the world.

Let's hope we all can learn from past mistakes and that at least people prepare, instead on relying on the governments of the world to prepare for everyone.

Related News Links:
Is Global Warming Making Hurricanes Worse?

[edit on 20-9-2005 by Muaddib]

posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 02:19 AM
I think it is a natural process that we are speeding up and i also think it will result in a sort of ice age. Everything in life is backwards, remember that.

posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 04:40 AM
After the movie Day After Tomorrow it seems that many mainstream scientists and the like are taking that seriously. Who knows... maybe Hollywood got this right...

If they got that right, what about other movies?

posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 05:19 AM
What about other movies?

Spiderman had to take out a scene which had spiderman hanging between the twin towers and blowing up a helicopter or something.

Then we have this new film which has to have a scene change because they were going to film New Orleans being flooded.

And we have The Day After Tommorrow which in my opinion is becoming very real very fast. (Asian Tsunami,Katrina,Double Tornadoes in France etc)

Film makers make Cayce,Nostradamous look bad when it comes to predicting the future.

Its happening people the climate IS changing, and theres nothing we can do except sit back and take it all in.

posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 05:27 AM
really how does any one know this isnt just a little annomanly. it is 4 years out of a hundred thousand, .0004 percent of the whole time it doent follow the trend. it is a little early to leap to conclusions.

posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 06:33 AM

Originally posted by tiddly54
really how does any one know this isnt just a little annomanly. it is 4 years out of a hundred thousand, .0004 percent of the whole time it doent follow the trend. it is a little early to leap to conclusions.

There are a variety of ways sicientists track global changes...deep ice core samples off of glaciers in the Antartic and Greenland is one, which helps give a sedimentiary record going back (I believe) roughly 100,000 years. And tree growth rings is another. No thoughtful scientist I have read even attempts to claim that humans are the sole reason for global warming, but that we are definately contributing to it. I personally believe (and I am a certified tree hugger LOL) that (1) we only came out of the little ice age (1300 to roughly 1830) 175 years ago so the climate is still adjusting to that (2) Chances are the true cause of ice ages and warming periods are intergalatic dust clouds which the sun and its planets periodically pass through...they wouldn't have to be very thick to affect our weather, just thick enough to cool the planet by a couple degrees (3) fluxes in the output of the sun. All that being said however we do affect the climate and it would not do us ill to change our polluting ways, global warming or not, its the only planet we got and once its gone we will be up S--ts creek without a poodle...unfortuanately this administration will never address the problem.

posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 06:39 AM
P.S. I have to disagree with the statement past the point of no return...the climate is constantly in flux and if the sun does vary in its output and dims, or we pass though a dust cloud or we do curtial air pollution, then the process could very well turn around. I highly recommend reading (its only 22 pages) the 2003/04 Pentagon Climate Change report....goggle it. It is really eye opening and far more thought out than simple news reports.

posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 06:41 AM

Experts believe such a loss has not occurred in hundreds and possibly thousands of years.

An ice age has not occured in thousands of years either. In fact, we are far overdue and one should be coming any day (decade?) now. That should cool things off a little.

The fact of the matter is... we really don't have enough data to say what is or isn't normal for the earth to do. We may be slightly adding to the "problem" (read: natural occurance), but we haven't caused it. It is also good to note that the ocean produces a hugely higher amount of carbon dioxide than all of the cars in the entire world.

posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 06:50 AM

Originally posted by Yarcofin
The fact of the matter is... we really don't have enough data to say what is or isn't normal for the earth to do. We may be slightly adding to the "problem" (read: natural occurance), but we haven't caused it.

Correct me if I am wrong here, but aren't you saying to opposite things here? In the first case you say that we don't have enough information to know anything - then you go on to say we "may" be contributing to it "slightly" - How can we "may be" adding to anything if there isn't enough date, or for that matter to suspect that it is only "slightly" - unless we do have enough data to make a fairly good, reasonable, guesstimate of what should happen. Which is happening as many scientists predicted it would. Isn't it really closer to the truth to say we do have enough data, it is just that we don't like what that data is telling us and what it means for our economy and so we hide from the fact?

Besides, even if we are merely adding to it. Adding to a system in balance leads to imbalance, which is what this is all about itsn't it? We are the problem, but we can also be the solution if we are willing to make the changes needed. But we won't, because this will get politicized and partisaned until it is just another election platform instead of a matter of life or death....

Man, you are a strange animal. - Gowan

posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 07:02 AM
Global and local weather tracking has only been scientifically studied since approximately 1870. Before this time we relied on essentially anecdotal farm journals and the like. Ice cores of the poles indicate that like acid rain, cyclic cooling and heating of the earth may be a natural pattern. In fact the geological activity has contributed more carbon molecules to the atmosphere than man on his worst day. Effectively, there is no credible, hard and conclusive evidence man’s activities contribute more to global warming than sunspot activity. While Helios activity is still in its infancy, indeed, preliminary evidence suggests that sunspot activity has much to do with geological and meteorological results on earth than originally thought.

If this should be the case than we must conclude that earth warming, if it exists as presented by the media, is a natural phenomenon, as man has no power to direct the activities of the sun.

While this may touch on conspiracy theories found elsewhere on ASTNN, the current atmosphere of near hysteria of “global warming” is a deliberate device of the globalists, international and domestic to forge onerous agreements, legislation, laws, and regulations designed to keep the masses, restricted, manipulated and limited. As evidence of this I cite the multitude of Executive Orders, the Patriot Acts (I & II), the militarized police, the role of the USA as international policemen, etc. These acts and policies give the Executive Branch of Government sweeping powers that trample on our rights and negate the Constitution, in the event of natural disasters, terrorism and other national emergency. Global warming and the emotional groundswell of government to do something about this could be the catalyst for enacting these now dormant but awaiting E.O. and the initialization of the Patriot Acts.

Action based on haste and emotion is detrimental as we can see from Katrina/ New Orleans, 911 and the reactionary responses of the Afghanistan and Iraq situations. Indeed, now is the time for observation and measured but cautious action. To be part of the frenzy of this unproven man-made “global warming” only exacerbates the problem. Liberal and true Conservative alike realize the ramification of this situation so let us leave emotion behind and first conclusively determine if the situation is in the hands of man or if it is a natural event.

Richard of Danbury

posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 07:02 AM

Originally posted by markjaxson
What about other movies?

Spiderman had to take out a scene which had spiderman hanging between the twin towers and blowing up a helicopter or something.

This is a little off topic, but you reminded me of something kind of ironic...

Those of you in or were in the Air Force should know about the Airman's Manuals. The revision before the current one that they had in 2001 has a page about terrorism that shows a picture of the twin towers with a target crosshair over it. All of us on September 12th that noticed thought it was a bit odd.

Meanwhile a little more on topic....

As for us being the problem, if you step back and look at the Earth as a whole, the entire planet is always in flux. It's changing and adapting all the time. There are so many different variables controlling the weather that it's impossible to tell what is the one cause of global warming. It's not just the vehicle and factory toxins, it's not just humans causing it. Yes I believe we're contributing, there's data to show on this. Since the industrial revolution greenhouse gasses have increased exponentially compared to before according to the ice cores and various other methods of aquiring that data.

[edit on 20-9-2005 by Shaker]

posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 07:12 AM

you reminded me of something else...

There was an album supposed to be released before 9/11 and for their album cover they had an image of the twin towers on fire.

I forgot who the artist/s were but i do remember.

Seems like everything around us has some sort of prophecies and coincidences.

posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 09:18 AM
Some comments here........

Movies............they immate science....not the other way around and as a result in taking their clues from scientific research for the point of corporate generated entertainment dollars they often end up twisting real scienfic fact into borderline psydo-science...........or at least lose some of the accuracy in the transfer of the knowledge onto the big screen........(i.e. space movie depecting actual events that have "sound" in outerspace) don't think hollywood is privy to anything here.......

Scientists and Research.............most scientist I know have their allegience to expose and search for the truth no matter what the consequences may be............therefore, a scientist is not concerned with any manipulated conspiracies of a one world power plays here..........they are sending warning signs to governments and institutions based on their best research estimates in the hope that those governments and institutions will side to the favor of caution in our stewartship of the Earth's natural resources and the ability of its biosphere to sustain life on this planet........

Sure that information can be manipulated improperly in attempts by some parties to coherce others of an agenda but the practice of the scientific method is not an agenda but to observe, test and formulate conclusions (and in the case of this subject........conclusions of our environment)..........what we do with those results are truly not in the hands of the scientific is really the messenger here......

Finally, there are over 3,000 scientists.....including 22 Nobel prize winners who are becoming convinced that human manipulation of the environment is resulting in Earth changing events that could compromise and/or threaten many species (including us) to extinction...............

Their observations should be taken with great prudence in our approach to how we conduct our economic, governmental and civic affairs on this planet.........

On look at history has shown us that economic, governmetal, societal and religious institutions have all had at one time or another reconsider a more accurate World view based on objective truths derived from the scientific methodology....................(i. e. flat Earth to round in ship trading routes.........God's voice to lightening discharges of static electricity.........etc........)

There is no reason to consider that the majority of scientists and their results of studying the biosphere are arranged for any reason other than providing the truth as they currently find it..............of course it is subject to revision based on any results that would supercede any current understanding no matter how distrubing the consequences...........( i.e. Newton's classic mechanical universe....revised to Enstein's relativity model for example)

All this stated..........the recent find and conclusions drawn about the Artic ice melting at alarming rates is news that should not be ignored whether it is a long term natural environmental flux and/or in part due to humankind's manipulation of the environment.........

May I point out that scientists are very concerned of the rate of species extinction on this planet as a result of human activities of an ever increasing population?

Traditional extinction rates have been at 30 to 300 species a year has accelerated to a rate of 1000 to 30,000 species a year starting with the industrial revolution in the mid to late 1800's

Everything is interdependant within this biosphere of ours to sustain life......and it does not surprise me when I hear of news that global warming may be substainiated by more evidence such as the artic ice adds up to so many other alarming conclusions that have been found in this past century...........

If you really want to think about what is going on with the extinction rate of amphibians and then study about the use of canaries in coal mines...............then do the math and see what you might coorelate out of those two observations.............

Well that's my 2 cents anyway.........hope it helps.....

posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 10:18 AM
Hi and welcome to life on a dynamic planet. Of course the climate is changing. The occurence of ice of the surface of this planet is not a normal state for Earth. The event or events that caused this deposit of massive Ice sheets will likely continue to spur an attempt to normalize just as it has done for thousands of years.

What all this boils down to is, the scientists are telling us the Earth is dynamic and changing, the political spin doctors are adding their own little scar-mongering icing on that cake.

My point is this, if you want to live on a planet where you think its possible to preserve any natural state of being, this one is likely not for you. You will go insane. Floral, Fawna, and climate have always, are still, and will always change regardless of the best intentions to stop them. Because we have lived in one most calm periods in Earth's climate, we assume any change must have been caused by someone willfully. Thats not the case. The so-called build up of C02 is a red herring for those who cannot accpet that their environment is beyond they're control and beyond their means to preserve. In fact, anyone who ever used the word preserve in conjunction with an environmental issue of any kind has got some serious mis-conceptions about where they live and some very grand illusions about the extent of their own power.

[edit on 20-9-2005 by astrocreep]

posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 01:45 PM
Did you know that our temperatures have gone up over 10 degrees c and our sea levels have gone up over 100 feet? This is what has happened since the height of the last glacial covering. The ice has retreated significantly. Remember most of Canada and a good portion of the U.S. was under ice. The sea levels were much lower. Global temperatures were significantly lower. I am supposed to worry about 1 degree of temperature change and a few inches in sea level rise?

posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 05:01 PM
im not here to argue about global warming and its causes, i just think its a terrible risk not to take seriously that humans are adding to it. humans should have tackled this apparent problem years ago just based on such assumptions from scientist. who cares if we were just paranoid and the earth was going through a natural cycle. that looks better then being wrong 50 years from now, and destroying the earth as we knew it. its like building levees in new orleans rated category 3 just assuming a 5 would never happen.would it not have been better and cheaper to b paranoid that a catagory 5 could have hit new orleans, like some scientist said would b catastrophic. i dont care about any politics involved with only having levees just capable of a catagory 3 in NO, it just takes us back to the politics involved with global warming.

posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 05:35 PM
So now we are saying that the Day After Tommarow is becomming fact?

Thats like saying we can send Oil Drillers to a Asteroid to blow it up if it comes toward Earth... Oh wait, that was a movie too.

I will agree that the Climate has changed.. but I do not think Hollywood got it right and should be the basis for any discussion on the matter. They are in the buisness of escapism.. not fact.

posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 05:36 PM
With all due respect to everyone on here with all different views, we are not talking about some exoteric thing here - this is life and it is happening. We are having an effect on the plant, how much and in which ways may be debated, but what can not be is we are having an effect and we better grow up and start accepting some responsibility in cleaning it up, regardless on how it may hurt someone's livelyhood.

I just find it to be very sad comment on humanity when the economics of a small group of people outweigh the llives of everyone.

posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 07:22 PM

Originally posted by Passer By

I just find it to be very sad comment on humanity when the economics of a small group of people outweigh the llives of everyone.

Well, I agree with the general premise of that ideology but this topic doesn't relate. It may be sad that an uncontrollable natural cycle outweigh the lives of everyone but such is life on a DYNAMIC planet. I don't think there is a thing mankind can do except to adapt.

posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 07:35 PM
It is getting hotter, but the Earth is in a cycle of heating caused by the Sun lately:

The next peak in the Sun cycle should be a hot one.

Humans evolved during an Ice Epoch dotted w/ glaciations(iceages) and interglacial times. we may pay dearly for our belief that the climate will always remain the same. How simple are we? Until 25 years ago it was generally thought the Sun never fluctuated in radiance.

80% of Earth's history there were no icecaps on the poles.

Test your assumptions

This global warming could very well be a natural occurance. Man might be enhancing the effect, but not the main cause. Nature produces many times more CO2 each season than man could hope to.

A general summary of the recent climate fluctuations(recent meaning last 60 million years):'GEOL1260_12_MesoCeno_Clim.html

Here is a list of glacial and interglacial Periods

Wisconsinan/Weichsel (or Vistula) (glacial period, 70-15)
Sangamon/Eem (interglacial, 130-70)
Illinoian/Saale (glacial, 180-130)
Yarmouth/Holstein (interglacial, 230-180)
Kansan/Elster (glacial, 300-230)
Aftonian/Cromer (interglacial, 330-300)
Nebraskan/Gunz (glacial, 470-330)
-/Waalian (interglacial, 540-470)
-/Donau II (glacial, 550-540)
-/Tiglian (interglacial, 585-550)
-/Donau I (glacial, 600-585

If this interglacial is long like some in the past all glaciers may retreat and half of Antarctica may melt.

Scientist now believe this may be a 50-70,000 year(we're only 15,000 yrs into it) interglacial. It could get quite toasty in Alaska.

There is a group of people who want to point to man as the culprit in every turn of events. This same group fears the future, and sees man as the harbinger of his own doom. This may be so. Time will tell, but I don't think we'll decide to go back to a pioneer existence to counter something that we may not be able to counter. In 40,000 years we may say we should have burned more coal. especially when the Ice sheets are bearing down on everything we hold near and dear.

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in