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.

 

Haunting face crying a river of tears as glacier melts into the sea

page: 4
46
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jalis
The problem is not about how hotter the planet is getting, but how fast it is getting hotter. Natural climate changes take hundreds, if not thousands years. Here, everything is changing in decades. And it seems to be getting exponnentially faster.
Ok, we're not about to kill everything that lives (not yet ?
). Life will adapt. But the adaptation will be so fast that there will be many losses.



Even natural climate change is open to speculation. How do we know it takes hundreds or thousands of years? Scientists to this day still debate if the ice ages were sintgular events or repetitive and cyclic in nature. At one point in time, antarctica and even north pole (Baffin Island anyone?) were green rainforests, filled with vegetation. Our only REAL scientific evidence is since the Renaissance, beside a few facts or blips wehere recorded history disappears for awhile. The last hundred years the world could have already been warming itself, even without the introduction of manmade pollution from factories, cars and trains. Thing is, we'll never know, as we cannot simply "redo" it all and find out.

OP: that photo is breathtaking. Nature never ceases to amaze.

Also when all these nutcase scientists take in as global warming, is an averaged temperature of the world.

If its normally 80 in SoCal and 50 in Peru, your average is 65 degrees. Suddenly hypothecize its now 95 in socal and 35 in peru.. still same average temp, and the climate drastically changed. This is an EXTREMELY simplified example but I do think it conveys my point. the average global temperature is still an average of local temperatures and "global warming/cooling" can infact mean the opposite of the word chosen in other areas. Global climate change is a MUCH better term to use.




posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 09:18 AM
link   
The Human ability to see patterns is amazing and without a doubt it is a cool pic. You have to wonder though what would be our emotions if the "mouth" were a smile or an "O" of suprise, would we then say the Earth was Happy or suprised?



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 09:18 AM
link   
reply to post by calmbutwary
 


How arrogant and full blown denial to think that we can't. It is so easy to ignore a problem isn't it?


I can site about 100 incidences going on right now of how we are altering the earth. But I will give you a taste of what humans CAN really do:

The Three Gorges Dam built in China has displaced so much water it actually added a second to the Earth's rotation every year.


The project will also cause devastating environmental damage, increasing the risk of earthquakes and landslides. It will also threaten the riverþs wildlife. In addition to massive fish species, it will also affect endangered species, including the Yangtze dolphin, the Chinese Sturgeon, the Chinese Tiger, the Chinese Alligator, the Siberian Crane, and the Giant Panda. Moreover, silt trapped behind the dam will not only deprive downstream regions, but also will impede power generation from the back-up. Construction of the dam would require extensive logging in the area. Finally, the dam and the reservoir will destroy some of Chinaþs finest scenery and an important source of tourism revenue.


Yea, a human project that adds a second to the Earth's rotation. And we couldn't possibly effect the Earth.



Ocean City inlet, MD, is one of the most striking examples of the unintended consequences of engineered inlets causing increased erosion of adjacent barrier islands downdrift from the jettied inlet. The Ocean City inlet opened during a 1933 hurricane, and soon after, the twin stone jetties were built by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to maintain the inlet for navigation. However, the jetties also severely disrupted littoral-inlet processes, trapped sand on the north side of Fenwick Island (site of the Ocean City amusement park and parking lot), and severely starved Assateague Island National Seashore to the south of sand. The result of almost 70 years of disrupted sand transport along the coast has been an offset in the two barrier islands—Fenwick and Assateague—by approximately 1 km, along with accelerated erosion, reduction and alteration in beach-berm heights, and loss of critical beach and dune habitats. The effects attributable to the jetties have extended about 15 km southward from the inlet.


If you ever visit beautiful Assateauge Island or National Seashore, at night you stand on the beach you see the blaring lights of OC which sit a km out into the ocean now because of erosion. It looks odd, considering they are supposed to be one 47 mile long island/peninsula till they get to Delaware.

link


Basically now the Mississippi, which worked fine on its own for who knows how long, is an artificially regulated river.
Levees were put in to control flooding, then they realized they needed the flooding, and more structures had to be created to control the flooding.

The mighty Mississippi is now controlled by humans.


In addition to the flooding problem, engineers now face problems caused by the lack of flooding. The channelization produced by the levees and control structures deprives natural wetlands of the sediments normally deposited during flooding. Wetlands rely on sediments from distributaries and flooding to counteract subsidence, the compaction of sediments under their own weight. Water flows faster in subsidized areas, and distributaries can rapidly expand into wide channels, causing wetlands to disappear under the influx of water. The coastal marshes of Louisiana provide a natural barrier against the erosion causes by the fierce storms which often come from the Gulf. Because of the loss of these wetlands, the Louisiana coast has receded several thousands of feet over the past few decades, and commercial fishermen have also been deprived of a ready source of income. Most of the problems resulting from the levee system, including wetland degradation, stem from channelization. While the levee system could not be scrapped without a large financial loss, the USACE realized that diversion structures could help alleviate some of the problems caused by channelization. Diversion structures diminish some of the force of flood waters and the likelihood of crevasses (breaks in the levee) by providing flood waters with established escape routes. The first diversion structure, the Bonnet Carre Spillway, was built in response to the great flood of 1927. It was designed to discharge excess flood waters into Lake Pontchartrain and thence into the Gulf of Mexico.


link

In the 1870s hunters managed to to kill 6 million buffalo, almost eradicating a species.

In ten years! With just guns.


buffaloes were so thick in western Kansas that an immense herd held up u Kansas Pacific train for nine hours while it crossed the track



By the way, all that prairie we hard about on Little House on the Prairie? And that all that buffalo ran across?

Only 1% of it remains.


That massive prairie ran from Texas through Canada.

There is a 17 mile ring around Chernobyl of land that can't even be touched by humans for 200 years. Animals died and stopped reproducing.

There are ten miles of the red forest of trees that dies shortly after the accident.

The radioactive fallout was found as far as Sweden.

I will leave you with the Great Sparrow campaign:


The campaign was initiated by Mao Zedong, the first President of the People's Republic of China. Sparrows were included on the list because they ate grain seeds, causing disruption to agriculture. It was decided that all the peasants in China should bang pots and pans and run around to make the sparrows fly away in fear. Sparrow nests were torn down, eggs were broken, and nestlings were killed.[1] Initially, the campaign did improve the harvest. By April 1960 the National Academy of Science found that sparrows ate insects more than seeds. Mao declared "forget it" (Chinese: 算了; pinyin: suàn le), and ordered the end of the campaign against sparrows.[1] By this time, however, it was too late. With no sparrows to eat them, locust populations ballooned, swarming the country and compounding the problems already caused by the Great Leap Forward and adverse weather conditions, leading to the Great Chinese Famine in which around 30 million people died of starvation


link


Oh but we don't have an affect on our planet do we??



And that is the very short very abridged list.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheRedneck
Oh, well, if there's a chunk of ice that looks like a crying face, that settles everything! There's no need to even look at any scientific evidence anymore. The planet is telling us to stop hurting it! We have to change our ways NOW!



Did I mention that yesterday I saw a cloud that looked exactly like a Prius being pulled by a wrecker? So much for buying one of those now.


Please, can we get any sillier than using ice formations as proof of anything?

TheRedneck


I don't think the OP was claiming this as proof of anything per se, so much as a metaphor for climate change... or just an interesting image at the very least.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 09:31 AM
link   
This is clearly the work of aliens. It's simply not possible for nature to imitate faces, that's just silly. They should peruse for UFOs and sightings in the area.

But aside from that... very cool looking.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 09:32 AM
link   
Nice photo.... really touches the heart strings,
Al Gore would be proud of that...
global warming is a false flag for "cap and trade"
one winner = goldman sachs and the NWO
PEACE
RK



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 09:46 AM
link   
reply to post by LiveForever8
 


I have to admit that that photo is a striking image of what is happening to the Ice Caps in this global warming trend! That is a huge lump falling away....

S+F for the photo



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 09:56 AM
link   
It is an awesome picture, and wild to look at.

But I think it goes along the lines of a potatoe that looks like elvis.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 10:03 AM
link   
reply to post by nixie_nox
 



...of a potatoe...



"potatoe"? Former Vice President Dan Quayle, is that you??


Teasing. Now you're saying there are potatoes in the glaciers
I'm growing confused....

OK...more teasing. JUST to show example of how some threads get sent off into the deep end, here lately.

Actually, I find the photo fascinating, I used it to emphasize WHY people continue to see things in images fromthe Moon and Mars that don't exist, either. A function of our vision centers, in the brain.

Forms, shadows...of course, with ice, it won't last. All we have is the one image, captured in the moment, just the right angle, and all.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


ACK! I didnn't even realized I did that! haaahaa

I think it is the same thing as seeing a face on mars and Jesus in the clouds.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 10:20 AM
link   
Pareidolia is a psychological phenomenon involving a vague and random stimulus (often an image or sound) being perceived as significant. Common examples include seeing images of animals or faces in clouds, the man in the moon, and hearing hidden messages on records played in reverse.

Carl Sagan hypothesized that as a survival technique, human beings are "hard-wired" from birth to identify the human face. This allows people to use only minimal details to recognize faces from a distance and in poor visibility but can also lead them to interpret random images or patterns of light and shade as being faces

Wikipedia is our friend



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by LiveForever8
Rising sea levels caused by melting ice caps are one of the most worrying effects of global warming and experts warn swathes of low-lying countries will be left under water.


Isn't it melting land based glaciers that raise the sea levels, and not the melting polar ice caps?


[edit on 4-9-2009 by craig732]



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by craig732
 


No.

Polar Ice Caps are apparently melting which is what will apparently rise sea levels.

[edit on 4/9/2009 by C0bzz]



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 11:56 AM
link   
We have created the civilization we see around us because the last 12,000 years the earth has been incredibly and unusually stable.

The earth usually has terrific volcanic activity, roughly 70,000 years ago there was enough geologic instability that only a few thousand humans survived...we are descendants of those few thousand that clung to life.

Volcanoes can erupt with a force we don't recognize or appreciate. Supervolcanoes are capable of ending life as we know it on earth...like a reset button.

Appreciate the earth, but any notion the earth is a stable environment cannot be backed by science or fact. We live on a violent and ever changing planet that can and has erupted enough to destroy anything larger than a rat.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 12:12 PM
link   
WOW, how sad.... but what a heart felt picture.

I was told long ago by a very wise Being that this would happen if we did not keep Balance and if we did not plant trees in mass for ......................



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


Wow you must have no imagination. This picture speaks a thousand words! Its ironic that it would appear to look like a crying face esp when we ARE killing our planet!



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Helmkat
 


Ok I admit that is pretty funny.

Is it an Oh crap what just happened look?

And : who are you people?



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by calmbutwary
What if the earth is just going back to the way it's supposed to be?

It's sad that some humans are so arrogant as to think that we could alter the earth's climate so dramatically by our presence, or that we could stop it.


Define and explain - supposed to be??

It's not arrogant to follow empirical data.....

...although it is ignorant to ignore it.

Precautionary measures should be carried out regardless of disagreements.

Whether you like it or not - human beings do have the power to destroy parts of nature. It is questionable if we can fix certain types of damage.

There are also parts of nature that we cannot control at all, and we are at the mercy of nature to some extent. Whether this be atmospheric, within the earth, the sun, or solar system objects nearby.

This face image is just another example of pareidolia, just like when we see images in clouds.

[edit on 4-9-2009 by john124]



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by light_sound
reply to post by LiveForever8
 


It is a lovely Pic.....

But it is so Sad we humans think we are more powerful than Nature itself.

The last time there was Global Warming, it resulting in an Ice Age [Gulf Stream being shut down].

HERE IS A FACT for everyone who beleives we humans are at fault:

THERE WERE NO CARS, PLANES, FACTORIES, OIL WELLS ETC 13,000 YEARS AGO!!!!
Get that firmly implanted in your heads and stop peddling TPTB agenda!

Our climate changed drastically some 13,000 years ago and the same thing is happening now....

You really need to look at the Sun, Magnetosphere and Nature....Respect it, it knows what it is doing.

The earth is getting ready to Regulate itself and start a fresh....Just another Cycle!!!!

Peace


Over a hundred years ago we discovered that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas - that is a fact!

Secondly it is a fact we are pumping out more carbon dioxide that at any other time in history.

Thirdly - precautionary measures are at least necessary whatever side of the coin you are on!

The evidence is also lacking that the sun is the main cause of net effect of global warming during the past few decades. Recent experiment failed to prove the theories on cosmic rays increasing cloud production, which is related to the few thousand years solar cycles that block or allow cosmic rays into our atmosphere.

The sun cycles are much longer that a few decades, so we would observe effects by the sun extremely gradually over several centuries.

[edit on 4-9-2009 by john124]



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Nola213
 



I do agree with those replying that we shouldn't be "so" concerned with saving the Earth. I mean the earth has been here for how long? And humans have been around for a blink of an eye in comparison.

The earth is slowly killing us off like the disease we are.


If we wish to survive we should learn to respect the planet we live on. It's not the earth we will damage long-term, as after we're gone it will recover most likely and life will flourish again after the losses humans have caused. But it's more for our own sake to look after the planet, not for the planet. Well it's both really... but more for ourselves and secondly other life.



new topics

top topics



 
46
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join