Earth To Reach Highest Temperature In 1,000,000 Years

Good link Grady. Thanks.

But.


There's no doubt we're in for some serious changes - even if we spin it as an exciting opportunity to discover earth's archeological and paleontological past.

There's also no doubt that climate change is being discussed in policy and board rooms, and in the oval office.

Obviously, there are action plans, emergency plans, contingency plans.


I still want to know:

Why aren't our governments telling us what they plan to do about it?

Why don't we, the public, have access to this information?


Are we sitting blinded and gagged while our tax dollars are being spent on the well-connected elite, for their survival, but not our own?

I find it amazing that they can tell that the temps will rise to their highest point in a million years.

Originally posted by jsobecky
I find it amazing that they can tell that the temps will rise to their highest point in a million years.

Uh huh.

It's also amazing that NASA can shoot for Mars, from Earth - and not miss.




Those NASA guys are seriously kewl. The ones who did this climate change report too, not just the space guys. I'm thinkin they probably use the same computers, programs, mathematicians, physicists and everything.

Talk about an efficient use of resources.

Ok first... I do believe in global warming I know we have done alot of damage to mother nature... BUT I dont think global warming is totally plausible as to the total effect it is having. And how can they know its the hottest in a million years? We didnt have that stuff back int he day.. There is no way to ACCURATELY consider its one million years. It could of been 10000 yrs ago but they dont know. I also think it is a natural cycle that has the most effect. HAARP I dont think is plausible either. We are in a time of change get used to it and there are some stuff to be proven that it is.

Originally posted by soficrow
Why aren't our governments telling us what they plan to do about it?

Why don't we, the public, have access to this information?

They are, and we do.

Originally posted by soficrow

There's ...no doubt that climate change is being discussed in policy and board rooms, and in the oval office.

Obviously, there are action plans, emergency plans, contingency plans.


...Why aren't our governments telling us what they plan to do about it?

Why don't we, the public, have access to this information?

Originally posted by apc

They are, and we do.

Okay, I'll bite.

Do you have links?

Blanks already filled in?


But i'm thinkin we're sitting blinded and gagged while our tax dollars are being spent on the well-connected elite, for their survival, but not our own.

Ding Ding Ding.

It's every man/woman/hermi for him/her/itself.

Originally posted by apc
Ding Ding Ding.

It's every man/woman/hermi for him/her/itself.

I knew that.




Well to heck with the power-mongering incompetents. We need to do something ourselves then. Together I mean.

Ya know that cache of seeds buried somewhere up north?

...I figure human culture and languages deserve at least the same respect.


Am I wrong?

Well... I've got a laptop that is dedicated to book storage (about 12gigs of books) that I keep inside a faraday caged suitcase.

But you're right... if there's anything Katrina taught us, it's that the only ones we can fully depend on in the event of disaster is ourselves... and sometimes eachother.

When the world starts burning, bring your own marshmellows, because it's not the fed's job to bring enough for everyone.

Highest in a million years... so this has happened before then?

So... why can't we just focus on evolving and evolve our way through this?
I can definitely see how a huge percentage of fish will die in the ocean. Okay.
Huge amounts of fish dead means that the sea will become a cesspool of bacteria. Got it.

But there will be survivors.

A huge amount of life may die... but so what? The earth isn't going to glow orange and go sterile. Life will find a way and continue - maybe not with us in the picture.

From the original article

The last time it was that warm was in the middle Pliocene, about three million years ago, when sea level was estimated to have been about 25 meters (80 feet) higher than today."

What caused the extreme warm period back then?

What produced the greenhouse gas?

Flatulent woolly mammoths?

If anything, the above quote (if true) shows that global warming, and "climate change" are more likely part of a natural cycle, than to be a man-made condition.

How hot was it three million years ago?

Its my understanding that there was a Medieval Warm Period from about 900 AD to 1300 AD. Some scientists report that during this period the Vikings were planting crops in Greenland. Acording to some reports the climate during this period was warmer than todays. And then again there was the so called Little Ice Age that occurred from 1500 to 1850. Both of these periods occurred long before the invention of the gas guzzling SUV. Long before human industrial activity could have possibly impacted the Earth’s climate.

So from 1850 until now the earth has been continually warming. During this time mankind has thrived. This warming period (+ 1 degree) has witnessed the greatest
advancements in standards of living.

Some would like everyone to believe that all scientists are in lock-step agreement with one one another when it comes to the cause of Global Warming but this is far from true.
Some prominent scientists are now reporting that Antartica is getting colder and that ice is in fact growing there.

It seems many have a knee jerk reaction to media statements and self righteous celebrities and completely disregard any opposing research or studies.


my 2 cents Thanks

Some of my info was obtained and blatenly copied from this link:
epw.senate.gov...

Is it all true. I dont know. But I know there is much more evidence that should be considered before my mind is made up.
So its not as simple as it may appear.


[edit on 26-9-2006 by Sparky63]

Another report by 60 prominent scientists stated in part;
"Observational evidence does not support today's computer climate models, so there is little reason to trust model predictions of the future. Yet this is precisely what the United Nations did in creating and promoting Kyoto and still does in the alarmist forecasts on which Canada's climate policies are based. Even if the climate models were realistic, the environmental impact of Canada delaying implementation of Kyoto or other greenhouse-gas reduction schemes, pending completion of consultations, would be insignificant. .........."Climate change is real" is a meaningless phrase used repeatedly by activists to convince the public that a climate catastrophe is looming and humanity is the cause. Neither of these fears is justified. Global climate changes all the time due to natural causes and the human impact still remains impossible to distinguish from this natural "noise."

www.canada.com...

Like I said in my previous post, I dont know if global warming is man made or not.
Smarter folks that me will have to figure that out. But it seems to me that very little consideration is given to those who have opposing views on this matter.

The 60 Scientists who prepared this letter or report are not crack-pot "fringe" scientists. I encourage any who are inclined to think so to go to the link above and review their credentials.

.


The opening article talks about a report from the boys at NASA - the same guys who send ships to Mars.

I seriously doubt their credentials are in question.


Here is the link for the Original Paper.

Here is the interview with Hansen.

What Hansen actually said to the interviewer is this:

"That means that further global warming of 1 degree Celsius defines a critical level. If warming is kept less than that, effects of global warming may be relatively manageable," said Hansen.

..."During the warmest interglacial periods the Earth was reasonably similar to today. But if further global warming reaches 2 or 3 degrees Celsius, we will likely see changes that make Earth a different planet than the one we know. The last time it was that warm was in the middle Pliocene, about three million years ago, when sea level was estimated to have been about 25 meters (80 feet) higher than today."

news.mongabay.com...

We're not asking if mankind caused the problem, we're asking what we can do about it.

NASA says we have a problem. Should we listen?

Should we let the elite run the show, and save themselves first?

Or should we take steps to protect human society, in all its forms?


.

Originally posted by soficrow
Should we let the elite run the show, and save themselves first?

Or should we take steps to protect human society, in all its forms?

There are only so many steps one can take before the likelihood of having a fall becomes unavoidable.

The "elites" have obvious methods of "running the show." All we have to do is not let ourselves become part of the cast.

If you think they are gobbling up power by dominating the oil market, stop using oil. If you think they are gobbling up money by dominating the credit industry, don't use credit.

Personal responsibility. Independence.

The dependent are being, have always been, and will always be taken advantage of. Don't be dependent on anyone, or anything, and no "elite" can touch you.

When the End Game is on the horizon, the Powers will do what they must to ensure their survival. We must do the same. We must be prepared.

Why are there still doubts about whether global warming is real or not?!
Absolutely preposterous..
For once please look beyond your pockets (Kyoto Critics) and look at the future..

Highest In 1 million years aye?
But the last ice age was only what 10-20000 years ago?
Aren't ice ages temperature regulators?
So how does that figure?

Picture our climatic cycles as a sine wave. That wave defines the long term heating and cooling of the planet. The line of the wave is actually another, smaller cycle, where the planet gets a little cooler a little hotter.

We appear to be on a little heating wave still on the larger cool wave of the entire cycle. So technically, we are still in an Ice Age. In another million years or so, if the current data is correct, we will make our way into the hot side of the wave.

The effects of these smaller cycles can be easily be devestating to our way of life. Mini-Ice Ages and things like our current "Global Warming" being the most obvious.

Originally posted by soficrow
.
We're not asking if mankind caused the problem, we're asking what we can do about it.

NASA says we have a problem. Should we listen?

Should we let the elite run the show, and save themselves first?

Or should we take steps to protect human society, in all its forms?


.

Sofi,

Please dont take this as argumentative or as an insult, because it's not intended that way.

But to answer you, I think that YES, for the most part, (as unbelievably illogical as this sounds) that the general populations of the world find it less counter-productive to debate over WHO or WHAT is to blame for the warming trend than it is as to debate over plans for the inevitable..so where you say say that you dont believe anyone is asking if mankind caused the anamoly, i totally disagree.

If NASA ( or ANYONE AT ALL) says that we have a problem we should ALWAYS listen, but attempt to educate ourselves enough to discern what is real from what isnt, dont you think?

I believe that elite, or otherwise, will always follow basic human nature and instinct, and that would be self-preservation. So when the inevitable DOES come to pass, believe me when i tell you that there will be NO ONE running ANY show but mother nature herself.

Again, you should ALWAYS take steps to protect yourself, whatever is within your means. Clearly dont count on anyone else to ensure this protection for you, because i guarantee you that no one will. I'm sure you're scared or worried, but dont be.

Originally posted by jdem02
Ok first... I do believe in global warming I know we have done alot of damage to mother nature... BUT I dont think global warming is totally plausible as to the total effect it is having. And how can they know its the hottest in a million years? We didnt have that stuff back int he day.. There is no way to ACCURATELY consider its one million years. It could of been 10000 yrs ago but they dont know. I also think it is a natural cycle that has the most effect. HAARP I dont think is plausible either. We are in a time of change get used to it and there are some stuff to be proven that it is.

Well, at least you have asked this question, and apparently noone read the whole article.

Here is what it says about the "hottest that it has been in a million year" remark comes from... From that same article if you continue reading you will find....

"It's certainly the warmest it's been in the last couple of thousand years," Robock said. "I don't have access to the data about the last million years but it's probably right. I just haven't looked at it in detail.

www.msnbc.msn.com...

What do you think a statement like that one, supposedly coming from a scientist says about his statement?.....

This man admits he hasn't looked at the data but claims "it must be right"?..... This man obviously has an agenda, or he was misquoted by the reporter.

This man should have looked at the data, before making such a claim, if he wasn't misquoted.

[edit on 27-9-2006 by Muaddib]

Originally posted by alphabetaone

I'm sure you're scared or worried, but dont be.

No, I'm not. I'm PO'd.

There's a BIG difference.

IMO - Critical information is being suppressed to prevent people from asking the right questions, defining the real problem, and working towards a solution. It's misinformation as distraction.

And the effect of this distraction is to leave the elite free to steal all our resources and use them to protect themselves, without regard for the whole of humanity.




btw - Mauddib - the back tracking you describe is a common response to gag orders.