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.

 

SCI/TECH: More Unusual Weather, Heavy Rain, Flooding, Power Out

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 11 2004 @ 01:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mynaeris
ap.tbo.com...

"JAKARTA, Indonesia (AP) - Two volcanoes in separate parts of Indonesia shot forth plumes of smoke....


Sorry to dampen the spirits of all you global warming fans. We all know how volcanic eruptions can cool things down. ....and amazingly, at the same time they spew tons of "greenhouse" gasses in the atmosphere.

Yahoo also has a good story on the two volcanos as well: Article




posted on Jun, 11 2004 @ 02:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Outland
Sorry to dampen the spirits of all you global warming fans.


You are too naive for your own good Outland.... I don't know about the others but if I am wrong that's fine and actually good for everyone if there was no probability of an abrupt climate change in the near future, perhaps a few years from now.

You also seem to not want to listen... Volcanoes do have a big impact on climate change, that's true, and more so if they are under sea and close to either poles to help in the melting of the glaciers.

Global warming may have been, and in some cases still is, a misused term, since these changes will be mostly regional. While one region will be colder for longer periods of time, other regions will be warm.

The world will not end but if such changes occur in regions where people live in big cities, it will mean that a lot of people will be caught unprepared if some sort of abrupt climate change happens.

It is also true that the Earth has gone through these kind of changes in the past, but are most people prepared for such a change? What if it happens within the next few years?

I could be wrong, but I see people like yourself just being hard headed because you don't want to think about the possibility of something like this happening because you think there is nothing we can do about it. Well, we can do something, we can be prepared in many ways.

I also think that some scientists are still trying to find ways to downplay the changes we are seeing around us and that have happened in the past. Probably because they would be scared of the possibility or they think themselves to be in a secure world that mankind can control, and don't want to deal in this possibility.

Even if people take small steps to be prepared for anything it will be better than just denying the possibility of something that has happened many times in the past and its certain to happen again in our lifetimes.

[edit on 11-6-2004 by Muaddib]



posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 07:13 PM
link   

Muaddib Said:
"You are too naive for your own good Outland.... I don't know about the others but if I am wrong that's fine and actually good for everyone if there was no probability of an abrupt climate change in the near future, perhaps a few years from now."


I went over every post I made and I don't see where I ever said that abrupt climate change wasn't possible. Are you confusing my posts with someone else's? My point has consistently been that regional climate changes are likely due to natural causes rather than the still unproven assumption of anthropogenic interference via energy use related CO2.


Muaddib Said:
"You also seem to not want to listen... Volcanoes do have a big impact on climate change, that's true, and more so if they are under sea and close to either poles to help in the melting of the glaciers."


I also can't find any post of mine that disputed volcanic disruption to ice.


Muaddib Said:
"Global warming may have been, and in some cases still is, a misused term, since these changes will be mostly regional. While one region will be colder for longer periods of time, other regions will be warm."


The term "global warming" is being misused in all cases since what climate change events that do exist at this time are regional. And since not all of these events are warming events, the term is doubly errant. Add to that the fact that many scientists dispute the accuracy of global surface and oceanic temperature records for valid reasons based on inaccurate and incomplete data and methodology as well as a lack of corroborating satellite data. The term of "global warming" is merely a tool of the green-alarmist full of intent to blame it all on evil civilization. The naive ones are those who swallow this socialist, anti-west nonsense.


Muaddib Said:
"The world will not end but if such changes occur in regions where people live in big cities, it will mean that a lot of people will be caught unprepared if some sort of abrupt climate change happens."


Throughout history, people have gathered together in cities that have been destroyed by climate and other natural events. Nothing surprising there. From past ice ages to droughts to severe floods, cities have vanished and people have died with no influence from anthropogenic CO2 emissions.


Muaddib Said:
"It is also true that the Earth has gone through these kind of changes in the past, but are most people prepared for such a change? What if it happens within the next few years?"


That's sort of like asking, "Will someone rebuild their beach house after a hurricane destroys it?" Some people will choose to be in harm's way despite knowing that the next catastrophe is just around the corner. That's more a matter of ignorance rather than preparedness. For most of the average populous, their view of history started when they were born. Then a 100, 500, 1000 or 10,000 year cyclic event occurs and they wonder if doomsday has arrived. Changing climate is a constant spanning billions of years. Mankind's perception is the variable that spans a blink of an eye.


Muaddib Said:
"I also think that some scientists are still trying to find ways to downplay the changes we are seeing around us and that have happened in the past. Probably because they would be scared of the possibility or they think themselves to be in a secure world that mankind can control, and don't want to deal in this possibility."


To the contrary, I don't think that any professional who studies the physical dynamics of the Earth and/or universe would feel totally secure at all. For the very near future, perhaps they do, but never for the long term. I'd say that most fear a meteor impact more than climate change. Of course, the former could affect the latter.

I think that the contrarian scientists who are downplaying the whole issue are just being more realistic. Pursuing possibly economy-crippling efforts to combat a "maybe" or an "if" just doesn't make sense. Then again, most scientists get their incomes and toys from taxes and handouts and are notorious for placing little thought on the economy of matters... they readily spend what they get.

We can shut down all the factories and power plants and we can put all our cars in the garage, but the end result is sitting around in the cold and dark while starving to death. While I agree that spewing CO2 and other waste products into the air isn't the right thing to do, I also disagree that it should be cited in an unproven way to be responsible for any recent climate change. Unfortunately, fossil fuels give the biggest bang for the buck making them hard to replace. Other technologies just aren't ready for primetime yet and many will never be.

Don't even get me started on hydrogen power. Talk about naive....

[edit on 15-6-2004 by Outland]



posted on Jun, 16 2004 @ 12:29 PM
link   
Since I compose my little contributions on my lunch hour, I will not be able to substantiate my opinions and recollections very well, but here goes. I believe there was a study of ice cores that showed a huge increase in atmospheric carbon since the advent of the industrial age. While there is no way to prove or disprove a connection to global climate change, the levels we have reached (if I remember right) correspond to levels in the Carboniferous Age, when global temperatures were substantially higher. There are conflicting theories about the immediate effect of increased atmospheric carbon, the Global Warming scenarios getting the most attention. Another less publicized theory postulates that the greater availability of atmospheric carbon may enhance plant growth rates, encouraging high rates of reforestation and consequent air cleansing through increased transpiration. I tend to think that if higher levels of carbon can trap more heat in the atmosphere, the increased energy levels will tend to cause more energetic weather patterns to be more common. It seems to me that a more energetic atmosphere would make alternative power sources like wind and tidal power more economically viable, which would in turn help to counteract the effect of all that extra energy. I agree with Outland's statement about hydrogen power - you just transfer the location of the pollution from the back end of your car (or whatever) to a power plant down the road.
Having said all that, I feel obligated to put my own opinion down as well. I do feel that anthropogenic CO2 and other gases are contributing to and will continue to contribute to changes in the weather patterns we have gotten used to. I think that it is probably too late to do much to prevent a major shift in climate, probably we will see a change to a new set of more-or-less "steady-state" conditions. I also think that a more threatening situation looms in the potential collapse of the oceanic food chain, but that is not what this string is about.
Gotta get back to work.....



posted on Jun, 23 2004 @ 06:52 PM
link   
Of interest to Muaddib.....



4. Volcanic eruptions' effect on global climate change

Including the atmospheric effects from volcanic eruptions in general circulation models may be the most important factor in improving the accuracy of long-term climate simulations. Vyushin et al. analyzed general circulation model estimates for the 20th century climate and found that volcanic eruptions, rather than the manmade effects from increasing greenhouse gas and aerosol levels, are the most significant factor in determining long-range correlations of surface air temperature. The authors tested more than 30 land and oceanic sites indicative of global climate change, using a full range of manmade and natural climate change factors, including the effects from enhanced greenhouse gases, aerosols, ozone, solar radiation, and volcanic eruptions, and found that the simulations containing volcanic effects most closely matched the observed long-term behavior of surface temperatures, which is a vital scaling factor used in climate model predictions.


See www.eurekalert.org... and scroll down to #4.




top topics
 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join