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.
Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Why do you think hurricane katrina grew, so strong, so quick?
The heating water in the gulf is why.
To determine if there was any quantitative trend to this pattern, the Ice Service digitized the weekly ice charts it has produced for the Canadian Arctic since 1969. By totalling the ice coverage on these charts for each summer season (June 25 to October 15) from 1969 to 2001, meteorologists were able to study differences in total accumulated coverage from one year to the next.
Their studies confirmed that the total coverage of sea ice in summer had decreased by about 15 per cent in the Arctic (north of 60° latitude), and by about 40 per cent in the sub-Arctic area of Hudson Bay. The data were then further divided to look at differences in trends between the Eastern and Western Arctic. In the Eastern Arctic, a 15-per-cent decrease in coverage was detected overall, while the three sub-regions of the Western Arctic showed declines of 10 per cent (Viscount Melville), 12 per cent (Beaufort Sea), and 36 per cent (Western Arctic Waterway). Not surprisingly, the shipping season in these regions had increased by three to nine per cent during this same period.
While confidence was lower that the trends observed in the first two sub-regions of the Western Arctic were statistically significant, confidence in the figure for the Western Arctic Waterway was 95 per cent. This is of particular importance, because ice in the Waterway is believed to be driven mainly by local thermodynamics—in that it does not circulate into or out of the area on any large scale, but rather tends to form in winter and melt each summer in situ. This may indicate that the ice decline observed in this sub-region is more reflective of rising surface temperatures than in the Beaufort Sea sub-region, where a large flux of multi-year ice from the Arctic Ocean enters and exits.
www.ec.gc.ca...
Originally posted by Agit8dChop
The debate was what has this GOVERNMENT done,
and Bush is a part of this government.
And NASA seems to agree, that bush is stopping HONEST research
www.msnbc.msn.com...
"He says there are things the White House doesn't want you to hear but he's going to say them anyway."
www.cbsnews.com...
Warming expert: Only decade left to act in time
‘We have a very brief window of opportunity,’ NASA scientist says
www.msnbc.msn.com...
Originally posted by Agit8dChop
your asking something u full well know cannot be produced.
This is not evidence of your statement.
James R. Hansen is a professor of history at Auburn University. A former historian for NASA, Hansen is the author of eight books on the history of aerospace. He lives in Auburn, Alabama.
Source
Originally posted by Agit8dChop
"Hansen WAS director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York and has twice briefed a task force headed by Vice President Dick Cheney on global warming. He was also one of the first government scientists tasked with briefing congressional committees on the dangers of global warming, testifying as far back as the 1980s."
HE MAY BE now, but what he was has merrit.
honestly but, I can see how youve been duped shots. dont take it personally.
Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Scientists were warning for years though, that the increase in water temp in the gulf would effect any hurricances then ventured that way.
Originally posted by Agit8dChop
If you had of known your companies were wrecking the earth..
would you REALLY of been employed to stand up there and tell the truth if it was nothign but negative ?
A regular hurricane that was dying, dramatically increased in size and strength purely because of the heated waters in the gulf.
this had been predicted for years, but no one headed the warnings.
Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Would you say the mining sector contributes to enviromental degredation and the artic ice sheet issue similar to say...
ocean dredging?
Industrial output?
or say...
engine emissions?
Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Stupidity:
Waiting for the effects, and the evidence before you act
Responsiblity:
Understanding your actions are changing the world, and using every means at your disposal to protect your fragile economy
Unfortunate:
We allowed a corporate enticed government to retain control and ignore global warming.
US Government:
Heartless, they care more for money in there pockets.
Why would they BLOCK reports on global warmining?
I hope you nay syers are happy, your allowing your government to sacrifice the futures of your childeren, simply to keep there rich friends ' happy '
Originally posted by Silcone Synapse
Maybe it is part of the natural cycle,but Siberia is melting now,and it wasn`t before.
So that part at least is happening and is real.
I`m not sure how much the activities of humans have contributed to the current events there but i do accept we MAY be contributing to destabilisation of the environment by our actions.
That would be a bit late,waiting until the problem is upon us....Oh it is.
Originally posted by StellarX
Until we have some reason to believe that we are somehow managing to cause global warming ( despite almost overwhelming evidence as to the insignificance of our current contribution)
Originally posted by Agit8dChop
A regular hurricane that was dying, dramatically increased in size and strength purely because of the heated waters in the gulf.