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.

 

An introduction to global warming impacts

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 07:10 PM
link   
Since it seems like we are still having a debate over whether
global warming even exists or not, heres some good info!
All one has to do is admit to the dwindling water reserves of the SW,
to see the bigger picture. There are numerous places this is happening NOW!
And still we are in denial. No problem, but we better face the music soon.
Doesn't even matter if its our fault or not, if your stuck on that still.
It will impact us all sooner or later, if it hasn't already in some form.
climateprogress.org...


This is for readers who wanted one-stop, updatable introductory posts on various key topics. Please do add any key impacts you think I’ve missed — but focus on those with a scientific source.

In this post, I will examine the key impacts we face by 2100 if we stay anywhere near our current emissions path. I will focus primarily on:

Staggeringly high temperature rise, especially over land — some 15°F over much of the United States
Sea level rise of 5 feet, rising some 6 to 12 inches (or more) each decade thereafter
Dust Bowls over the U.S. SW and many other heavily populated regions around the globe
Massive species loss on land and sea — 50% or more of all life
Unexpected impacts — the fearsome “unknown unknowns”
More severe hurricanes — especially in the Gulf
Equally tragic, as a 2009 NOAA-led study found, these impacts be “largely irreversible for 1000 years.”


Before flaming me, you better look at all the links! While maybe not the be all to end all of climate change controversy, just another ice berg of information to either trip over or ignore I guess. Have at 'er.

www.ipcc.ch...
www.nature.com...
www.guardian.co.uk...
Good articles about it affecting Australia here:
www.latimes.com...
www.newscientist.com...

www.climatescience.gov...
en.wikipedia.org...:Global_Warming_Map.jpg
news.yahoo.com...
www.physorg.com...
climateprogress.org...-5203

[edit on 14-4-2009 by dodadoom]




posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 07:18 PM
link   
I have one question for everyone since you probably don't know about this but WHICH TIME have they been right?

KNOW YOUR HISTORY - READ: Did you know this is the 4th incarnation of climate doom? Probably not since that is not what the media wants you to know... yes, 1895, 1920's / 30's, 1970's, Today... REMEMBER - THESE SAME NUTJOBS wanted to cover the polar icecaps in black soot to avoid an ice age 30 years ago...to prevent an ICE AGE! Remember that?

SAME STORIES, SAME DOOM PREDICTIONS - 100+ YEARS See below.

www.businessandmedia.org...


It was five years before the turn of the century and major media were warning of disastrous climate change. Page six of The New York Times was headlined with the serious concerns of “geologists.” Only the president at the time wasn’t Bill Clinton; it was Grover Cleveland. And the Times wasn’t warning about global warming – it was telling readers the looming dangers of a new ice age.

The year was 1895, and it was just one of four different time periods in the last 100 years when major print media predicted an impending climate crisis. Each prediction carried its own elements of doom, saying Canada could be “wiped out” or lower crop yields would mean “billions will die.”

Just as the weather has changed over time, so has the reporting – blowing hot or cold with short-term changes in temperature.

Following the ice age threats from the late 1800s, fears of an imminent and icy catastrophe were compounded in the 1920s by Arctic explorer Donald MacMillan and an obsession with the news of his polar expedition. As the Times put it on Feb. 24, 1895, “Geologists Think the World May Be Frozen Up Again.”

Those concerns lasted well into the late 1920s. But when the earth’s surface warmed less than half a degree, newspapers and magazines responded with stories about the new threat. Once again the Times was out in front, cautioning “the earth is steadily growing warmer.”

After a while, that second phase of climate cautions began to fade. By 1954, Fortune magazine was warming to another cooling trend and ran an article titled “Climate – the Heat May Be Off.” As the United States and the old Soviet Union faced off, the media joined them with reports of a more dangerous Cold War of Man vs. Nature.

The New York Times ran warming stories into the late 1950s, but it too came around to the new fears. Just three decades ago, in 1975, the paper reported: “A Major Cooling Widely Considered to Be Inevitable.”

That trend, too, cooled off and was replaced by the current era of reporting on the dangers of global warming. Just six years later, on Aug. 22, 1981, the Times quoted seven government atmospheric scientists who predicted global warming of an “almost unprecedented magnitude.”

In all, the print news media have warned of four separate climate changes in slightly more than 100 years – global cooling, warming, cooling again, and, perhaps not so finally, warming. Some current warming stories combine the concepts and claim the next ice age will be triggered by rising temperatures – the theme of the 2004 movie “The Day After Tomorrow.”


Despite all the historical shifting from one position to another, many in the media no longer welcome opposing views on the climate. CBS reporter Scott Pelley went so far as to compare climate change skeptics with Holocaust deniers.

“If I do an interview with [Holocaust survivor] Elie Wiesel,” Pelley asked, “am I required as a journalist to find a Holocaust denier?” he said in an interview on March 23 with CBS News’s PublicEye blog.

He added that the whole idea of impartial journalism just didn’t work for climate stories. “There becomes a point in journalism where striving for balance becomes irresponsible,” he said.

Pelley’s comments ignored an essential point: that 30 years ago, the media were certain about the prospect of a new ice age. And that is only the most recent example of how much journalists have changed their minds on this essential debate.

Some in the media would probably argue that they merely report what scientists tell them, but that would be only half true.

Journalists decide not only what they cover; they also decide whether to include opposing viewpoints. That’s a balance lacking in the current “debate.”

This isn’t a question of science. It’s a question of whether Americans can trust what the media tell them about science.


www.mustangdaily.net/media/storage/paper860/news/2006/10/16/Opinion/Global.Warming.May.Be.Just


World renowned climatologists as recently as the 1970s were convinced that the world was entering a prolonged period of global cooling. Newsweek reported in April of 1975 that meteorologists "are almost unanimous" that catastrophic famines were sure to result from the global cooling.

Prominent scientists at the time were even making wild propositions about the drastic steps world governments should take to counter the cooling trend. In some of the more extreme cases, there were plans to divert Arctic rivers and to cover the poles with black soot to melt the polar ice caps to stave off the next ice age.

An article titled "Fire and Ice," published by the Business and Media Institute, outlines four major swings in media hysteria concerning global climate change. In the early parts of the 20th century, The New York Times ran several stories about the signs of a new ice age. Then, in the 1930s, there was a series of articles about record-breaking heat waves with no end in site. This panic was followed in the mid 1970s by even bolder assertions of another impending ice age.


So, what is different this time ? Bogus computer models?


Look,

I think a better question to ask would be "Do You Believe The Carbon Credit Scam Will Do A Damned Thing About CO2"

You know, I have seen data after data after data... known BS computer models, BS scare tactics, Sweltering heat that never happened, Nasa's Hansen caught lying twice. Scientist falsifying data to support GW. Changing the name to "climate change" when it was discovered that GW stopped in 1998 in order to "cover all the bases" in case the earth cooled. New articles saying C02 may "CAUSE AN ICEAGE" now.... just in case temperatures drop.

OK, I don't know if CO2 does a damned thing or not. What I do know is that there is a "Carbon Credit Scam" that Government, Financial Traders & Speculators, and the UN WANT BADLY!

Money, Power, Money, Power.... and WE pay for it and it DOES NOTHING to lower CO2 and that is fact!

To much to type, I will link all my previous data on the subject.

CARBON CREDITS is a SCAM!

But you have to get people to "buy" the problem an "Believe" were all going to die before they can tax us into oblivion while we have dumb azz smiles on our faces because "we are saving the earth"

Reminds me of Idiocracy.... it's got what plants crave. It's got electrolytes! duh duh duh

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...


It is very hard to "buy into" this with all the falsified data, The BLATANT SCAM from "carbon credits / cap & trade".





[edit on 14-4-2009 by infolurker]



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 07:29 PM
link   
I like the dustbowl bit the best.

the colder the planet gets, the more water that is locked up, the more water locked up, the less rain you recieve.

Tropical regions have abundant rain due to evaporation because of temperature.
If the planet was warming and the polar regions where melting there would be more evaporation which would give more rain to more areas.

Why is it that global science just cannot agree on what is happening?

water vapour is the biggest green house gas making up at least 95% of all green house gas, why is that never mentioned?



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by infolurker
 

The earth was flat once but we made the leap of faith and basically
admitted we we're wrong about it in the first place didn't we.
No not much has changed then I see. We cant admit weakness and
learn new things I see. Way too critical.
I know, its the NWO order thing.
Ever think they might not care HOW we get killed off?

P.S. Theres no way you could of read all that info before you posted
the same post you throw up on every one of these threads.
Thats all I asked of you in the first place before you comment, was it not?



[edit on 14-4-2009 by dodadoom]



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by munkey66
 

Because people cant understand why when the atmosphere warms up why it would create more vapor due to evaporation! DUH!
Thereby creating worse storms, colder temps where its cold,
and warmer temps were its already warm.
If its cold we just say, nah the earth aint warming! Its a NWO lie.



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by dodadoom
 


The earth being flat was more a religious thing rather than a science thing, how was there a leap of faith to say we where wrong?

What about saying in a leap of faith that science has been wrong in the past and no doubt will be wrong again in the future, We hear all about climate change because they know it is hard to keep calling something global warming when you are freezing your nuts off, but lets have a little leap of faith and say to ourselves,
"what if science is wrong about this"
I am not saying that we shouldn't look for alternative energies or recycle, I am all for that, but what is it that is pushing climate change as a fact rather than a theory?

Why is it that everywhere you look you ar egetting subliminal messages that the earth is warming?
even Fox admitted to putting Climate change messages in their programs.

so lets have not so much a leap of faith, but ask ourselves "why?"

why are they pushing CO2 so hard.
China is building a new Coal fired plant every week to generate enough power to give electricity to 1 million people with each plant, yet we are not warming.
we have more cars and factories than ever before and no warming in the last 10 years.
So please explain to me how we are putting more pollution into the atmosphere in the last 10 years alone and we are not getting warmer?
you see thats what I can't understand, why temperatures are not reaching record highs or lows.



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 07:44 PM
link   
The Vostok ice cores showed a lag of 800 years between temperature rise and CO2 levels rising, Now if we accept that CO2 is presently rising and look back 800 years.........Isn't that roughly the time of the Medieval Warm Period ?



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by dodadoom
reply to post by infolurker
 

The earth was flat once but we made the leap of faith and basically
admitted we we're wrong about it in the first place didn't we.
No not much has changed then I see. We cant admit weakness and
learn new things I see. Way too critical.
I know, its the NWO order thing.
Ever think they might not care HOW we get killed off?

P.S. Theres no way you could of read all that info before you posted
the same post you throw up on every one of these threads.
Thats all I asked of you in the first place before you comment, was it not?

[edit on 14-4-2009 by dodadoom]


What great "enlightenment" have we gotten in the last 30 years on climate history?

I know you "want" to believe but we don't have enough climate data to make an informed decision... and these nutjobs want to do drastic things like detonate nukes and flood the atmosphere with pollution particles to reflect sunlight.... This is drastic crap for not really having allot of freeking data and doing a 180 degree turn from 30 years ago.

BTW - Not much to read

#1 An Assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

#2 Hurricanes are getting fiercer

#3 Guardian poll reveals almost nine out of 10 climate experts do not believe current political efforts will keep warming below 2C (well no crap, the cap & trade scheme is about money & power not CO2 reduction)

#4 What will global warming look like? Scientists point to Australia (proof? no - just controversy)

#5 Rainforests may pump winds worldwide - claims in a controversial new theory - enough said

#6 Page 3 - There is no clear evidence to date of human-induced global climate change on North American precipitation amounts. However, since the IPCC AR4 report, further analysis of climate model scenarios of future hydroclimatic change over North America and the global subtropics indicate that subtropical aridity is likely to intensify and persist due to future greenhouse warming (OK, NO CLEAR EVIDENCE & LIKELY) kind of give it away.

#7 wiki

#8 Don't cut down rain forests... I agree

#9 Bluetongue is spread by the biting midge, Culicoides imicola, which has recently colonised the northern Mediterranean coast, leading to outbreaks in affected regions. However, BT outbreaks have also been spread by other novel vector species of midge (C.pulicaris and C obsoletus groups), which are abundant across the whole of central and northern Europe. In experiments, a single bite from a fully infected midge can transmit the virus and as midges are blown across Europe "like aerial plankton" it is almost impossible to prevent them getting to the United Kingdom.

Disease recent to the area - trying to relate it to global warming. No proof

What part of "recently colonized" in the northern Mediterranean coast goes along with Global Warming... The Med coast is already warm.. this looks like normal disease spread. The whole story is about a disease with a one-liner trying to link it to GW... again, nothing but conjecture.

[edit on 14-4-2009 by infolurker]



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 07:51 PM
link   
reply to post by munkey66
 

Excellent questions and thanks for moving our thoughts forward!
You both bring up valid points. One thing I learned from the YS thread
was this is all connected somehow. It would take lifetimes of knowledge in
hundreds of fields to ever get a true handle on our world. Even then we argue for another hundred! Indeed we are still discovering new creatures everyday! We are only scratching the surface for sure. Something is going on with the climate and it is in our
best interests(long term) to try and learn how to live with it if nothing else.
We obviously are not going to live in caves again, so we need to develop
long term sustainable ideas.
The leap of faith is in our ability to admit fault.
You got me with the Co2 thing. I know exactly what you are saying though.
All I can think is it would force big coal to fess up and that would never fly. We get, what 40something% of our power from coal?
If the co2 dont get ya, the mercury will eh?



[edit on 14-4-2009 by dodadoom]



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by infolurker
 

Cool!
Good assesment! I agree there is
alot of kookyness out there. Same as organized religion,etc.
One has to be critical enough to see through the bs.
It is hard if not impossible for most. We are the minority here though.
I trust for the most part we all want the same outcome!
It really is like being up a creek with bs all around
and all the time you have to fight through it~!
Even if 10% of it is right, thats the part to be concerned with.
Especially if you live in one of those hundred year flood zones, that
keeps getting one every 5 years!


P.S. Thanks for looking at the info! It is all fairly new....
Australia is a very good example of it.
So is the pacific northwest. The forests are dying and thus easier to ignite.
The warmer tempatures allow the pine beatles to thrive.
They have done incredible damage to the trees in this area.
Before the cold would kill them every winter.
I agree, we had a chance to do something 30 years ago, but we have
continued to deny any involvement one way or another.
We have been and still are flooded with big corp(oil,coal,etc)propaganda to the point of utter confusion what to even believe. And it remains that way.

[edit on 14-4-2009 by dodadoom]



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 08:06 PM
link   
First, let me say to the OP...... goodonya for the collection of links. I've spent the past hour going through them, and they validate my beliefs. I believe that the Earth (as well as other planets) are indeed in a warming phase. There WILL be exceptions, when one looks at particular points on the globe and compares them with history for that location.

I think where some of us go amiss, is we tend to look at the global weather as a static thing. We may know intellectually that there are cycles, but our view is so very short, and there is a tendancy to think of our lifetime views as "the way it is" and therefore any divergence from that smushy unmeasured view is a "change". Here's where I'm at:

The world, this and others, are constantly changing. I can compare our perceive "average" rainfall for the last 15 years (the time I've lived here) and can easily surmise that things have changed, that we're drier than ever before. BUT......

I would really have to look further back, perhaps a couple of hundred years to see a more complete pattern. BUT.....

That's really just a snip in the whole picture. It has ALWAYS been changing. Weather and climate are not static. I'm with you OP -- it matters less who is to blame, whether it's AGW or just GW... what really matters is, what are the impacts upon our survival as a species, and what can we do about it.

One school of thought I've subscribed to is that humanity is but a blink in the whole picture of the history of the Earth. There's no doubt in my mind that we basically screw up everything we touch. Is that natural, given that we are spawn of nature? I have no doubt that the Earth will adapt and survive. She may be a minor blue marble in the solar system, but she's hardy. Should all the Earth's species have to suffer because of our carelessness? No, but, again, that's the way of things. We as a species, lack the emotional maturity to agree upon things as a whole, and make changes for the good of all systems. We lack a hivemind, and while that probably makes us fairly unique amongst semi-intelligent species, it also makes us less probable to survive our own works.

You know what scares me most of all within context of this discussion? Humanity deciding to "correct" the climate or create unnatural systems to adjust the patterns. The Earth will go through various cycles -- perhaps some so lengthy that our history just hints at or doesn't adress them at all -- however, I believe that what is best for the planet isn't necessarily best for our species.

I'm also apalled at the fantastic amount of money that is being garnered on the false promise of "greening" up....... of making things better, as opposed to just doing the right thing now. We have had the technology for several decades to produce power without a significant environmental impact. It is expensive, and we shake our heads sadly, and some of us spend our precious duckets to feel good about producing our own power.

I think we need to be wary of governments getting involved in "greening" things or other programs with the "green" label. Follow the money, see who it benefits.

We need to stop wasting resources. Paper..... we use X amount and piss away X+1. Water...... we treat it like it's NOTHING, not the invaluable resource it is. People around the world could LIVE off what many of us discard. It's sorrowful and it's a yardstick of the human condition. Our legacy, at present (IMO) is a global junkyard. Oh wait, I forgot, we've left our scat in the middle and upper atmosphere as well.

Yes, I believe that the CO2 crisis is a scam. Yes, I realize that various levels have been measured and their counterpart compounds extropolated. It's a lack of plant life to process it, simple as that. They "exhale" what we inhale, and vice-versa. We've upset the balance, and until that is restored, then the game is going to be dodgy. I realize there are a whole range of chemical interactions that are predicated and dependent upon others.... I have a degree in Chemistry with a minor in Physics and Math, for all the good it has done me. I think it still comes back to our spanking the balance out of whack, and it's our bad, our blame, and it's not necessarily a good thing to create technological "systems" to "correct" it. You'll have to pardon me...... I seem to have contracted "quotationitis".

The preceeding rant is my own opinion only, and reflects in no way that of the OP, ATS, fuzzy chickens who live near my house, nor my Bride (who, incidentally, loves me even though she thinks I'm a whackamole.)

Cheers

Edit for spelin'

[edit on 14-4-2009 by argentus]



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 08:17 PM
link   
p.s. -- Dodadoom...... well done, on your compillation of sources and ideas.

Most of all, well done on your evenhandedness. I can sorta surmise your view -- I could be wrong -- and yet you present it without a slant or spin.

thank you. Almost anyone could benefit from your thread.



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 08:27 PM
link   
reply to post by argentus
 

Thats one thing I've always heard. Things will always change!
We live on a dynamic and ever changing planet!
You bring up many good points and I'll not try to take them on,
I'll let the reader enjoy. You see my point, thank you.
It is too bad other creatures have to endure our little oospy daisies!(spills,deforestation,poaching,encroachment,depletion,etc.)
While I try to remain positive, obviously from my name I dont hold
out much hope for humanity to save itself in the end.(without serious help)
Thanks again for your post!
You are correct, conservation is the key!
We have to learn to not waste what we have left or we really are in trouble.

P.S. Thank you for your kind words!
I really try to present it that way, I hope that is how it comes across.
Dont let the name fool ya, I'm on your side!


[edit on 14-4-2009 by dodadoom]



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 08:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by dodadoom
Since it seems like we are still having a debate over whether
global warming even exists or not, heres some good info!
All one has to do is admit to the dwindling water reserves of the SW,
to see the bigger picture. There are numerous places this is happening NOW!


The dwindling water levels are being brought about due to the overpopulation, and immense growth present in normally arid climates. How is this a mystery, or a supporting evidentiary factor of "Global Warming"?



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 08:50 PM
link   
reply to post by TheAgentNineteen
 

Um, in case no one has noticed the west and southwest have been in a
severe prolonged drought. While it is true everything you said, GW
exacerbates the problem. What you are refering to is mans greed for
more wanton development in unsustainable areas, I would have to say.
Heres a couple good links to start with:
rubicon.water.ca.gov...
www.earth-policy.org...
www.answers.com...
lakepowell.water-data.com...
This says snow pack levels are normal! Wheewho!
It seems like the precip is more normal the past couple years now here.
That would either coincide with more water vapor in the atmosphere or
more normal weather patterns. Either way I'm not going to argue because we need the moisture here!




Forests: High temperatures and drought lead to the death of millions of pinyon pines in the Southwest. Bark beetles, an invasive insect, thrive in these warmer temperatures and destroy the forests. It has also resulted in four times the number of major fires that were experienced two decades ago.

www.nwf.org...



There is also high confidence that many semi-arid areas (e.g. Mediterranean Basin, western United States, southern Africa and north-eastern Brazil) will suffer a decrease in water resources due to climate change.

From my link posted earlier and again here: www.ipcc.ch...
An Assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change!


Warming in western mountains is projected to cause decreased snowpack, more winter flooding and


More good stuff here: (I'm not going to cut and paste anymore)
ag.arizona.edu...
And here: www.andrewskurka.com...
And here: www.foxnews.com...
And here: www.sciencedaily.com...
And here: www.usatoday.com...

More here: www.sciencenewsblog.com...
WHOA! Look at this one! www.partsonsale.com...

[edit on 14-4-2009 by dodadoom]



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 09:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by dodadoom

Um, in case no one has noticed the west and southwest have been in a
severe prolonged drought. While it is true everything you said, GW
exacerbates the problem. What you are refering to is mans greed for
more wanton development in unsustainable areas, I would have to say.

....

This says snow pack levels are normal! Wheewho!
It seems like the precip is more normal the past couple years now here.
That would either coincide with more water vapor in the atmosphere or
more normal weather patterns. Either way I'm not going to argue because we need the moisture here!



Forests: High temperatures and drought lead to the death of millions of pinyon pines in the Southwest. Bark beetles, an invasive insect, thrive in these warmer temperatures and destroy the forests. It has also resulted in four times the number of major fires that were experienced two decades ago.


www.nwf.org...
[edit on 14-4-2009 by dodadoom]




I actually like the format in which you are presenting points, as you seem open minded towards the various forms of evidence both opposing and promoting AWG (Anthropogenic Global Warming).


As for the "Drought" in the American Southwest, well, it has always been in a drought throughout our Modern History, that is why it is a Desert Climate. In the past, it has been through even worse periods of drought, which in fact lead towards a mass migration of the various Native tribes inhabiting the region.

I will say, from my 12+ years of Experience in working with various Climatologists on this very subject matter, that those "Scientists" who act as if AWG is a given theory, or that it represents a Consensus of true science, are in fact the Politicized loudmouths by-in-large. Just about every serious Climatologist which I have ever had the great pleasure of knowing and working with, always hesitates when blaming any of their observed and analyzed factors upon Human actions.

Lol, "weewho!"


In regards to the Snow pack, take a look at the entire United States over this past Winter, and you will observe Average to Record Breaking levels of snowfall and precipitation. So far this April as well, where I live in the Mid-Atlantic, we have had extremely cool temperatures, so much so as a matter of fact that our grass is still hardly growing, despite the immense amount of "April Showers" we have received.

Now, I am not certain if you are completely referring to Normal Climatic Patterns, or allegedly Human Induced Ones, but in regards to the Natural Cycles and Climate Causes/Effects, we still hardly understand the Connections and Creations of the various and numerous factors present behind such.

Even with the recent Expedition to Antarctica, wherein the Oceanographers, Glaciologists, and Climatologists are using a ROV to scan and test the underwater side of major calving glacier, the Scientists onboard are stating that they believe the Oceanic currents are behind any warmth witnessed on the peninsula in question.

The Planet has a system of balance, whether it be a simple Thunderstorm, or a Hurricane, they are all forms of Energy release and balance. Therefore, any Warmth which might present itself upon our Earth will more likely than not balance itself out through a Cooling of an opposing region. Also, in the same note, wherein an Arid Region may witness Drying or Moistening conditions, an as of now Heavy Precipitation Climate may witness either of the two in response.



[edit on 4-14-2009 by TheAgentNineteen]



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 10:14 PM
link   
reply to post by TheAgentNineteen
 

Kewl! Thanks for your insightfull reply!
Most appreciated. I am just trying to help the ongoing discussion.
We are barely starting to kinda understand some of it now.
I am glad we realize this too! I understand your points exactly.
I was looking for the link about GW making for colder winters but
the window crashed and I lost it. Prolly just as well, too many variables
to understand and then pull all together to explain everything thats
going on with the crazy a** weather!

OOPS I think I found it or its close here:
scienceblogs.com...
Sorry, its getting late! I dont have another decent response in me tonight I dont think! My eyes are getting tired from looking through all those links!
Whew! Peace and love and all that to everyone!




[edit on 14-4-2009 by dodadoom]



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 10:24 PM
link   
One thing we have going for us is we don't know everything that is going to happen. While the predictions for the future regarding the global warming side of climate change are dire maybe we will finally invent a new power source or devise a way to take CO2 out of the air more quickly than the forests and sea do naturally. Maybe some one or more super volcanoes will erupt and make our contribution moot.

The lag time between CO2 and temperature is explained through many links when you do a simple search. Perhaps I will write something tomorrow on it. Not gonna happen tonight.

I happen to be in the camp that is very concerned with recent temperature rise and rapid loss of Arctic Sea ice and glaciers at the poles and high elevations. When the high elevation glaciers are gone and as they dwindle the effects will be felt far down stream. It is going to be very bad for Bangladesh in particular. I think history will judge us very harshly and use our example to show what not to do.

I have yet to see the peer reviewed paper on warming throughout the solar system. I have read that it is happening on some planets but not others. I challenge those that use this arguement to explain explain the current situation to produce the evidence in the form of a paper from a respected scientific journal. There HAS to be a paper. Otherwise lets try to write that paper and see where it leads.



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 10:25 PM
link   
Wow, the amount of information and knowledge you compiled is very impressive! Awesome job.

I will say right now, I was a complete Al Gore Fan and totally on the Global Warming bandwagon until just a couple of months ago.

In saying that, let me clarify also, I studied all kinds of things on this, I also am very big into recycling everything and doing everything I can on my end to leave as little "carbon footprint" as possible.

I even worked on trying to put a whole Green community together. I won't go into all that.

But, in saying man is the reason for global warming, is now I find not exactly the complete story. yes, man is responsible for a huge amount of carbon put into the atomsphere. BUT - our whole solar system is heating up now, our carbon footprint on Earth could not be responsible for the rest of the solar system.

Let me say something else, which also always bothered me, when people would say it is getting cold..... well, if they saw "An inconvient Truth" then they would have learned how the flow of the oceans due to the polar ice melts has been changed, through that change the cold water is more dense than the warm water - the cold water is going to actually cause an ice age, because it will not have made it's southerly flow to the tropics to warm up. In the tropics right now, all the coral reefs are dying, because the water is very warm now, it did not go north, so the north water could come south. For some reason, I can not remember what the name of that flow is in the Atlantic.

Okay, so, we know the Earth is getting warmer, which by it getting warmer, it is actually then causing an ice age up North. BUT it is not from man only as it has been implied.

People need to look at volcanos and the amount of emissions released from them, there is actually much stronger influences heating our planet than man.

I think personally the govt. is now using this as an excuse to "screw" us, by adding hefty taxes now on things.... is it a conspiracy?
who knows.

But, since they aren't exactly being upfront about the scientific natural things heating up our planet and universe and only saying it is our "carbon footprint", then, yeah, I think they are going to use it to squeeze us big time.

Also, look at the magnetosphere, which is decreasing, besides doing some odd things......

Question..... what is causing our solar system to heat up - yet the sun is at is dimmest during anytime recorded in history?

Lots to think about and for us to question the complete gobal warming situation............ but especially since it does not seem the full truth of everything is being told to us.

Just my 2 very long winded cents.

EDIT - to add S and F for you my Friend!

[edit on 14-4-2009 by questioningall]



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 10:37 PM
link   
Than you Mandroid and Questioningall! I am far from done here,
but we got a good start didnt we? Very good points! Stars for you!
It is such a huge topic encompassing so many areas of study we
cant possibly know it all but it is interesting to speculate anyway!
I am glad I am getting this chance to learn more!
I have a soft spot for the polar baers and penguins myself!

Hx3 1963 had a link of the ocean currents you mentioned.
They are indeed maybe more of an influence than we give
them credit for! If they shut down it would not be good!
Thanks again!


www.seattlepi.com...
More wackiness here: www.foxnews.com...
www.boston.com...
www.treehugger.com...
saltfishing.about.com...
www.longlifecatalogs.com...
scienceandpublicpolicy.org... (look around this site!)
www.usatoday.com...
www.livescience.com...
earth.geology.yale.edu...

Links to saving money on energy:www.bestglobalwarmingarticles.com...&-Energy-Conservation/100
I keep adding stuff! www.mc.maricopa.edu...

[edit on 14-4-2009 by dodadoom]



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join