Originally posted by zsandmann
Check out my sig, The Day After Tomorrow will be the biggest crock of bull ever to hit the screen. And I thought the core was bad, but anyways, people
will go see it cause its memorial day weekend, and stuff gets blown up, yadda yadda. But please dont use it to portray what could happen to the earth.
The ice caps melting would raise sea level, yes, but a new ice age would lower sea level. You cant have both. More ice, less water, more water- less
ice. And what the heck is with the ice following them down the hallway. COME ON! Climate changes take thousands of years to create shifts like that.
Its in the rock record. Its in the fossil record. ARGGGG! Im pulling my hair out.
Well, on this I disagree with you, first you have to be an oceanographer or Research Marine Physicist, and not a geologist, to know what the Arctic
melting will cause to the Atlantic current. Yes, the movie portrays it too fast, but you are also wrong that it takes thousands of years for rapid
climate change. This has been covered many times already, let me see if i can find some links.
" Despite government pressure on NASA not to support the scenario in The Day After Tomorrow, scientists are backing the science behind the film. The
part of the film most of them object to has to do with the compression of events that they think will happen gradually. Marine physicist Tim Barnett
says, "What happens will frankly be worse than what they show, in the long run. Our lives and all our systems will get stretched and stretched and
pushed and pushed. The conflicts that will come up will be remarkable." Andrew Bridges quotes oceanographer William Patzert as saying, "…Perhaps
it's an opportunity to crank up the dialogue on our role in climate change."
Excerpt taken from.
" TIM BARNETT
Research Marine Physicist
B.A., Pomona College
M.S., Ph.D., University of California, San Diego-Scripps Institution of Oceanography"
HIs credentials were taken and can be found in this site.
There is also this newest press release.
"OSLO, Norway (Reuters) -- Global warming is hitting the Arctic more than twice as fast as the rest of the planet in what may be a portent of wider,
catastrophic changes, the chairman of an eight-nation study said Monday.
"There is dramatic climate change happening in the Arctic right now ... about 2 to 3 times the pace of the whole globe," said Robert Corell,
chairman of the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, an 1,800-page report to be handed to ministers in Iceland in November."
I posted the above in another thread in ATSNN, there you will find the original link. Here is a link to the ATS post.
I couldn't find some of the other threads where other members and I show more information. But here is a good link.
" In the 1950s, a few scientists found evidence that some of the great climate shifts in the past had taken only a few thousand years. During the
1960s and 1970s, other lines of research made it plausible that the global climate could shift radically within a few hundred years. In the 1980s and
1990s, further studies reduced the scale to the span of a single century. Today, there is evidence that severe change can take less than a decade.
A committee of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) has called this reorientation in the thinking of scientists a veritable "paradigm shift." The
new paradigm of abrupt global climate change, the committee reported in 2002, "has been well established by research over the last decade, but this
new thinking is little known and scarcely appreciated in the wider community of natural and social scientists and policymakers."
Excerpt taken from.
[Edited on 26-5-2004 by Muaddib]