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 North Pole becomes an 'island' for the first time in history as ice melts

page: 5
7
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 12:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by wecomeinpeace
Just when you thought they couldn't find anything else to tax you for, they tax you for ...air. Next we'll have Fart-O-Meters strapped to our arses and we'll be taxed on how much methane we produce.

Save the Panet. Stop farting. Say NO to Cabbage!

...and Beans!


Well guess what....
Carbon tax a threat to farming viability

Hororata farmer Gavin King would rather slaughter his sheep and cattle than pay an estimated $168,000 a year in carbon tax for belching and farting livestock.


King calculated his "conservative" carbon cost for his livestock based on Meat & Wool New Zealand figures for methane and nitrous oxide rates of 360kg for sheep and 350kg for cattle.

If carbon traded at $25 a tonne, he estimated that he would pay $9 in tax for each sheep stock unit, comprising a wintered ewe and a store lamb (36% of $25/t is $9) and double that if it was $50/t.

Each beef cow, equivalent to six sheep stock units, would cost $52.50 ($8.75 a stock unit) at $25/t or $105 at $50/t.

King has 8840 sheep stock units and 1595 cattle stock units, so his yearly tax could range from $93,525 to $187,050, he said.


Kick the farmers while they are down I say!!!




posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 12:29 AM
link   
reply to post by VIKINGANT
How many times have I mentioned a tax on breathing? Here we are, one step closer, a tax on livestock breathing.

Can anyone say 'incrementalism'? If so, you owe carbon tax.


TheRedneck



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 02:37 PM
link   
You know, one thing we could all do, whether you believe in CO2 causing global warming, or not, is go out and plant a few trees. There are about 220,000,000 million adults in the US. If 100,000,000 of them each planted 1 tree, the effect would be:


Planting 100 million trees could reduce the amount of carbon by an estimated 18 million tons per year and at the same time, save American consumers $4 billion each year on utility bills.

For every ton of new wood that grows, about 1.5 tons of CO2 are removed from the air and 1.07 tons of life-giving oxygen are produced. During a 50-year life span, one tree will generate $30,000 in oxygen, recycle $35,000 worth of water, and clean up $60,000 worth of air pollution or $125,000 total per tree without including any other values!

1 acre of new forest will sequester about 2.5 tons of carbon annually. Trees can absorb CO2 at the rate of 13 pounds/tree/year. Trees reach their most productive stage of carbon storage at about 10 years.

n its "Reforesting the Earth" paper, the Worldwatch Institute estimated that our planet needs at least 321 million acres planted to trees just to restore and maintain the productivity of soil and water resources, meet industrial and fuel-wood needs in the third world, and annually remove from the atmosphere roughly 780 million tons of carbon as the trees grow. This 780 million tons represents the removal of about 25 percent of the 2.9 billion tons of carbon currently going into the earth's atmosphere.

The link:
www.treelink.org...

Instead of talking about it, go out and plant a few trees. Even if CO2 doesn't cause the massive global warming that the alarmists claim, there ARE at least 28 other reasons to plant trees. Please see the link, and see how a simple act by each American could vastly improve the Earth.

Imagine what the effect would be if everyone(220,000,000 people) planted 2 trees. It would remove ALL of the current carbon going into the ENTIRE earth's atmosphere. (Most states have agricultural extensions that give away free trees to be planted-usually in the spring. It wouldn't even cost you a penny.)
Of course, you could go too far:

Without the greenhouse gases, the temperature on Earth would be approximately 33C colder than it is now, covering the Earth with ice.

www.sanjaydhokia.com...



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 02:54 PM
link   
thread-on-thread crime!


www.abovetopsecret.com...





posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by ItsTheQuestion
thread-on-thread crime!


www.abovetopsecret.com...



Is this an accusation of a crime or a confession of a crime?


posted on 2/9/2008 @ 10:13

The North Pole becomes an 'island' for the first time in history as ice melts


The North Pole becomes an 'island' for the first time in history as ice melts


VS


posted on 5/9/2008 @ 05:34

"Arctic Sees Massive Gain in Ice Coverage"


"Arctic Sees Massive Gain in Ice Coverage"


Either way they are different stories on the same issue so no harm no foul in my eyes.....



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by VIKINGANT
 


Merely the suggestion that these two treads could battle it out...although, based on your: avatar; views; replies; and great line [DENY ARROGANCE!]...your thread wins.





posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by ItsTheQuestion
reply to post by VIKINGANT
 


Merely the suggestion that these two treads could battle it out...


OK. your on...Lets have at it!!!



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 08:19 PM
link   
As I stated in my post above, we should all stop talking and plant some trees. We wouldn't have to worry about "carbon credits". The trees are the CO2 removers. Let's get those 400,000,000 trees planted, and we can stop debating whether CO2 will cause the Second Great Flood.



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 11:54 AM
link   
That's an idea I can get behind, Prof. As a matter of fact, I think I already have...

From out the window behind me as I type, without the benefit of any zoom lens or other photographic manipulation:

That's one view of 90 acres of the same. That 90 acres is connected to a few hundred acres of similar growth. Those few hundred acres are amidst thousands of acres just like it. I no longer need to dig a hole, just sit back and watch hundreds of trees that nature plants for me every year.


Yep, plant a tree. That is such a great idea that I'll cover a couple hundred alarmists who are too lazy to do so.


TheRedneck



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 07:25 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 

Nice job Redneck.
How about everyone else on this thread pledging to plant some trees? It's a way we can all help the environment, regardless of where you stand on this issue.



posted on Sep, 8 2008 @ 08:37 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
Well, well. It appears, Prof, that no one cares enough to actually do something themselves, other than post their anger at those of us who disagree with their viewpoints.

Sad. Very sad.


TheRedneck



posted on Sep, 9 2008 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 





Well, well. It appears, Prof, that no one cares enough to actually do something themselves, other than post their anger at those of us who disagree with their viewpoints.

Somehow, I suspected this would happen, and I'm sure you did also.
I guess they didn't want to put their trees where their mouth is.
Makes you kind of think that it's all about politics, and not really saving the earth. Next spring, I'll order 20 extra trees from our county to cover the no-shows on this thread.



posted on Sep, 9 2008 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
Yes, I'm afraid I did as well.

I can't let you do it alone. I know a spot that could use some trees. I think I'll transplant a few saplings this spring.

Come on people! One little tree! You can do it!

TheRedneck



posted on Sep, 9 2008 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 

Redneck,
I finally figured out why they don't want to plant any trees.
They just read this new article in the Strata-Sphere:
strata-sphere.com...


Scientists: Prepare for three decades of global cooling

Today, Ice Cap featured a report that is predicting 3 decades of global cooling, driven by the well established and documented Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO):

Addressing the Washington Policymakers in Seattle, WA, Dr. Don Easterbrook said that shifting of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) from its warm mode to its cool mode virtually assures global cooling for the next 25-30 years and means that the global warming of the past 30 years is over. The announcement by NASA that the (PDO) had shifted from its warm mode to its cool mode (Fig. 1) is right on schedule as predicted by past climate and PDO changes (Easterbrook, 2001, 2006, 2007) and is not an oddity superimposed upon and masking the predicted severe warming by the IPCC. This has significant implications for the future and indicates that the IPCC climate models were wrong in their prediction of global temperatures soaring 1°F per decade for the rest of the century.

Unlike the failed predictions from the IPCC, this scientific model is correct because it’s predictions work like clockwork. And its record goes back for some time.





posted on Sep, 9 2008 @ 06:22 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 


That settles it! I am cutting down all the trees on my property and driving my cars around on it all day. Since I can only drive one at a time, I will just leave the others on idling.....and just to be sure I will buy a few cows and feed them nothing but cabbage....


reply to post by RedNeck
 


I am not usually the jealous type, but 90 acres of that gets my eyes turning green....
I only have one acre with about 2 dozen gum trees and other assorted vegetation. What I find sad is many of our neighbours are subdividing, ripping up the trees to build houses on 400sqm lots. What a waste...!! The upside is that all the wildlife that is left are all coming on to our yard now 'coz there is nowhere left to go.

I dont get why people have to build on the best fertile land leaving unfertile, yet liveable land vacant. Its all arse about if you ask me.

[edit on 9/9/2008 by VIKINGANT]



posted on Sep, 9 2008 @ 08:07 PM
link   
I'm not sure how many have seen latest issue of National Geographic. It features an article about the Sahara, and how in the recent past, a section larger than the United States mainland, was transformed into a lush green environment.

news.nationalgeographic.com...


A wobble in Earth's orbit—along with other environmental factors that occurred about 12,000 years ago—brought intense monsoons to the Sahara, greening the desert and attracting a wave of human inhabitants, according to Sereno and colleagues.


It certainly lends another example of how mother nature seems to have a larger effect on the earth than man.
Then there is this:

www.buzzle.com...


Global warming could significantly increase rainfall in Saharan Africa within a few decades, potentially ending the severe droughts that have devastated the region, a new study suggests.

The discovery was made by climate experts at the Royal Meteorological Institute in De Bilt, the Netherlands, who used a computer model to predict changes in the Sahel region - a wide belt stretching from the Atlantic to the horn of Africa that includes Ethiopia, Somalia and Djibouti.

Global warming will heat the land more than the sea, leading to changes in air pressure and weather. When the Netherlands team simulated this effect and combined it with warming caused by the expected rises in greenhouse gas emissions between 1980 and 2080, they found Sahel rainfall in the July to September period jumped 1-2mm a day.

Some scientists suspected that global warming might increase rainfall in the region, causing the so-called greening of the Sahara, but these are the biggest predicted increases so far.

Writing in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, the scientists say the increased rainfall could "strongly reduce the probability of prolonged droughts".

Reindert Haarsma, who led the research, said: "We were surprised that it was such a big rainfall signal. There is a lot of uncertainty in this kind of prediction but it is possible the Sahara region could benefit from climate change."

Sediments from the region suggest the semi-arid Sahel region, which borders the southern edge of the Sahara desert, was filled with lakes and lush vegetation as recently as 5,500 years ago. Countries in the Sahel have suffered unpredictable swings in rainfall, leading to severe drought between the 1970s and 1990s.



posted on Sep, 9 2008 @ 08:30 PM
link   
I have some news... there is no sunspot activity. There were six sunspots this year from cycle 23, and none since July 28th. Cycle 24 never came. The Earth is cooling not warming. Warming is caused by sunspot activity. Cooling is caused by cosmic rays and a quiet sun. 2007 was the coldest globally in five years and the Earth's global temp has not risen from 1998 but has been on a steady decline since 2000. In 10 years the ice will return and global warming will be erased. Plants will recede and C02 will decrease as we enter a mini ice age.



posted on Sep, 9 2008 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Fromabove
 

Great point. The last thing we need is to try to delay "global warming", only to find that we have helped speed a much worse fate for the planet.

www.theaustralian.news.com.au...

The Australian: Sorry to ruin the fun, but an ice age cometh
Disconcerting as it may be to true believers in global warming, the average temperature on Earth has remained steady or slowly declined during the past decade, despite the continued increase in the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide, and now the global temperature is falling precipitously.

All four agencies that track Earth's temperature (the Hadley Climate Research Unit in Britain, the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, the Christy group at the University of Alabama, and Remote Sensing Systems Inc in California) report that it cooled by about 0.7C in 2007. This is the fastest temperature change in the instrumental record and it puts us back where we were in 1930. If the temperature does not soon recover, we will have to conclude that global warming is over.

The sunspot number follows a cycle of somewhat variable length, averaging 11 years. The most recent minimum was in March last year. The new cycle, No.24, was supposed to start soon after that, with a gradual build-up in sunspot numbers.

It didn't happen. The first sunspot appeared in January this year and lasted only two days. A tiny spot appeared last Monday but vanished within 24 hours. Another little spot appeared this Monday. Pray that there will be many more, and soon.

The reason this matters is that there is a close correlation between variations in the sunspot cycle and Earth's climate. The previous time a cycle was delayed like this was in the Dalton Minimum, an especially cold period that lasted several decades from 1790.

Northern winters became ferocious: in particular, the rout of Napoleon's Grand Army during the retreat from Moscow in 1812 was at least partly due to the lack of sunspots.

That the rapid temperature decline in 2007 coincided with the failure of cycle No.24 to begin on schedule is not proof of a causal connection but it is cause for concern.

It is time to put aside the global warming dogma, at least to begin contingency planning about what to do if we are moving into another little ice age, similar to the one that lasted from 1100 to 1850.

There is no doubt that the next little ice age would be much worse than the previous one and much more harmful than anything warming may do. There are many more people now and we have become dependent on a few temperate agricultural areas, especially in the US and Canada. Global warming would increase agricultural output, but global cooling will decrease it.

Millions will starve if we do nothing to prepare for it (such as planning changes in agriculture to compensate), and millions more will die from cold-related diseases.

There is also another possibility, remote but much more serious. The Greenland and Antarctic ice cores and other evidence show that for the past several million years, severe glaciation has almost always afflicted our planet.

The bleak truth is that, under normal conditions, most of North America and Europe are buried under about 1.5km of ice. This bitterly frigid climate is interrupted occasionally by brief warm interglacials, typically lasting less than 10,000 years.

The interglacial we have enjoyed throughout recorded human history, called the Holocene, began 11,000 years ago, so the ice is overdue. We also know that glaciation can occur quickly: the required decline in global temperature is about 12C and it can happen in 20 years.

The next descent into an ice age is inevitable but may not happen for another 1000 years. On the other hand, it must be noted that the cooling in 2007 was even faster than in typical glacial transitions. If it continued for 20 years, the temperature would be 14C cooler in 2027.

By then, most of the advanced nations would have ceased to exist, vanishing under the ice, and the rest of the world would be faced with a catastrophe beyond imagining.

Australia may escape total annihilation but would surely be overrun by millions of refugees. Once the glaciation starts, it will last 1000 centuries, an incomprehensible stretch of time.





posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 09:44 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
Now you are addressing my biggest fear; that by interfering with the natural regulation of temperatures, we throw things off balance for real, leading to a true disastrous climate change.

I have been researching the methods used to detect CO2, and it appears the only way is to measure how much carbonic acid is produced when a known volume of air is filtered through water. This brings up the question of how closely factors besides CO2 levels (ionization of the water, impurities, pressure, temperature, etc.) are monitored during these tests...

Strange that it is so difficult to find the specifics on the methods used for measurement. Anyone have any links to help me out on this?

TheRedneck



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 10:03 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 

Redneck,
There is an infra-red detection device that measures carbon dioxide, in addition to the standard wet method.
Here is a link to a manufacturer:
www.gmiuk.com...



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join