Who believes in Global Warming?

“I don't know about long term trends and huge shifts, but a at least a short term trend is seen in the melting of glaciers in teh North Cascades and Glacier national park.

http://www.alpenglow.org/climbing/ptarmigan-1953/s-cascade-1953-2003.html

This site shows the same glacier in the North Cascades, 40 years ago and now.

I know in the early part of this centure people predicted we were entering a new ice age, because the glaciers were getting bigger. These may be 20 year cycles, or 50 year cycles, and an ice age is more of a 10,000 year cycle.”

“sure trailhound. Theories of man's influence on global climate may be way off the mark. You willing to take a chance with that though?”

“You missed my point. Never did I mention that this issue should be ignored. Never did I mention what side of the issue I was cheering for. However, there are other scientific phenomenons that are much more imperative to mankind than this issue. Yes, I do have a problem with a politician who claims the worlds foremost environmental issue is the combustion engine. Global Warming has become a news headline buzz word, and a rallying cry for agendas to parade behind. Thus, science is prostituted for financial and political gain. That’s junk science, for the entire scientific process has been removed. No longer is evidence looked at unbiased. It’s determining the conclusion (not hypothesizing) and desperately searching for evidence in support of agendas, which help no one.”

“Global Warming leads to ice ages. Read the whole thread.... if you have a day to kill.”

“But if the debate doesn't become politicised then how is anything going to be done about it either way? Surely it's an issue of concern?”

“The exact way other scientific problems are solved. The better question is when have any theoretical scientific problems been solved when there are politicized? None that I can think of, no one wants to kill their pet goose that lays the golden eggs. It’s the same reasoning behind most (not all) drug companies researching the cure of symptoms.

Yes, it is a concern and action needs to be taken, but there is a difference between a concern and tomorrows cataclysm.”

“...when politicized?

...most (not all) drug companies ONLY researching the cure of symptoms.”

“so basically trailhound, we do it that way and nothing gets done until the scientists come up with some sort of consenus as to a problem and a solution. There is a reason why scientists don't rule the world you know ;op”

“Maybe we should do like they did in Futurama and mine comets so we can drop a huge ice cube into the world’s oceans to keep temperatures cool.”

“No! We do the best we can and quit using theoretical science as scientific law in the way of pushing agendas and control. What really is being done now? Not a whole lot and the reasons are because no one really knows anything about it or if it really exists. Of course, we claim as if we know it inside and out, especially politicians. The larger picture of things we know almost nothing! Yeah, we got some fairly good educated guesses underneath the umbrella, but why waste time on the effect and not the cause because although linked issues they are much different. The answer is that many individuals want to ride this horse for all its gain. If combustion exhaust is killing us quit b-itching about global warming focus on an alternative, potentially killing many birds with one stone. So back to my original point, global warming is a cash cow and a political tool.”

“... about global warming focus on an alternative FUEL, potentially killing ...”

“NOAA REPORTS COOL SUMMER, SEVENTH COLDEST AUGUST ON RECORD ACROSS THE LOWER 48 STATES; RECORD NUMBER OF NAMED ATLANTIC TROPICAL CYCLONES FOR AUGUST
The contiguous United States experienced its 16th coolest summer (June-August) on record and seventh coolest August, according to scientists at NOAA Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C. While much of the West, including Alaska, remained warmer than average, the majority of the nation had a cool summer, with Minnesota having its coldest August on record. Meanwhile, eight named tropical cyclones in the Atlantic basin broke a record for named storms during the month of August. Six of those storms affected the United States.

Full Story”

“OSLO, Norway (Reuters) -- Mussels have been found growing on the seabed just 1,300 km (800 miles) from the North Pole in a likely sign of global warming, scientists said on Friday.

The blue mussels, which normally favor warmer waters like off France or the eastern United States, were discovered last month off Norway's Svalbard archipelago in waters that are covered with ice most of the year.

"The climate is changing fast," said Geir Johnsen, a professor at the Norwegian University for Science and Technology who was among experts who found the bivalves. Mollusks were a "very good indicator that the climate is warming," he said.

"It seems like the mussels we found are two to three years old," he told Reuters. Such shellfish have not been recorded off the islands since Viking times 1,000 years ago during another warm period.

U.N. scientists say the Arctic is now warming faster than any other region because of human emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases released from burning fossil fuels in cars, factories and power plants.

As the white ice and snow melts, it exposes darker ground or water that soaks up heat and so accelerates warming compared to regions further south. By comparison, ice in Antarctica is thicker and acts as a deep freeze resisting global warming.

Inuit peoples in Canada, for instance, are seeing robins for the first time and hunters are falling through previously solid sea ice. In Scandinavia, birch trees are moving northwards into previously icy areas used for reindeer herding.

The scientists monitoring Svalbard also said they had found seas free of ice further north than for 250 years at one point this summer.

"The climate has been warming," said Bjorn Gulliksen, a professor at the University of Svalbard. "The ice limit...has not been as far north since 1751."”

“"The ice limit...has not been as far north since 1751."


Lots more cars driving around back then apparently.”

“Try and scare a Canuck with global warming.

Wait a minute...


I LIKE winter camping.

Now I AM confused.”

“http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/26/science/26climate.html

THE ENVIRONMENT
NASA Expert Criticizes Bush on Global Warming Policy
By ANDREW C. REVKIN

Published: October 26, 2004
A top NASA climate expert who twice briefed Vice President Dick Cheney on global warming plans to criticize the administration's approach to the issue in a lecture at the University of Iowa tonight and say that a senior administration official told him last year not to discuss dangerous consequences of rising temperatures.

The expert, Dr. James E. Hansen, director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in Manhattan, expects to say that the Bush administration has ignored growing evidence that sea levels could rise significantly unless prompt action is taken to reduce heat-trapping emissions from smokestacks and tailpipes.

Many academic scientists, including dozens of Nobel laureates, have been criticizing the administration over its handling of climate change and other complex scientific issues. But Dr. Hansen, first in an interview with The New York Times a week ago and again in his planned lecture today, is the only leading scientist to speak out so publicly while still in the employ of the government.

In the talk, Dr. Hansen, who describes himself as "moderately conservative, middle-of-the-road" and registered in Pennsylvania as an independent, plans to say that he will vote for Senator John Kerry, while also criticizing some of Mr. Kerry's positions, particularly his pledge to keep nuclear waste out of Nevada.

He will acknowledge that one of the accolades he has received for his work on climate change is a $250,000 Heinz Award, given in 2001 by a foundation run by Teresa Heinz Kerry, Mr. Kerry's wife. The awards are given to people who advance causes promoted by Senator John Heinz, the Pennsylvania Republican who was Mrs. Heinz Kerry's first husband.

But in an interview yesterday, Dr. Hansen said he was confident that the award had had "no impact on my evaluation of the climate problem or on my political leanings."

In a draft of the talk, a copy of which Dr. Hansen provided to The Times yesterday, he wrote that President Bush's climate policy, which puts off consideration of binding cuts in such emissions until 2012, was likely to be too little too late.

Actions to curtail greenhouse-gas emissions "are not only feasible but make sense for other reasons, including our economic well-being and national security," Dr. Hansen wrote. "Delay of another decade, I argue, is a colossal risk."

In the speech, Dr. Hansen also says that last year, after he gave a presentation on the dangers of human-caused, or anthropogenic, climate shifts to Sean O'Keefe, the NASA administrator, "the administrator interrupted me; he told me that I should not talk about dangerous anthropogenic interference, because we do not know enough or have enough evidence for what would constitute dangerous anthropogenic interference."

After conferring with Mr. O'Keefe, Glenn Mahone, the administrator's spokesman, said Mr. O'Keefe had a completely different recollection of the meeting. "To say the least, Sean is certain that he did not admonish or even suggest that there be a throttling back of research efforts" by Dr. Hansen or his team, Mr. Mahone said.

Dr. Franco Einaudi, director of the NASA Earth Sciences Directorate at the Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md., and Dr. Hansen's supervisor, said he was at the meeting between Dr. Hansen and Mr. O'Keefe. Dr. Einaudi confirmed that Mr. O'Keefe had interrupted the presentation to say that these were "delicate issues" and there was a lot of uncertainty about them. But, he added: "Whether it is obvious to take that as an order or not is a question of judgment. Personally, I did not take it as an order."

Dr. John H. Marburger III, the science adviser to the president, said he was not privy to any exchanges between Dr. Hansen and the administrator of NASA. But he denied that the White House was playing down the risks posed by climate change.

"President Bush has long recognized the serious implications of climate change, the role of human activity, and our responsibility to reduce emissions,'' Dr. Marburger said in an e-mailed statement. "He has put forward a series of policy initiatives including a commitment to reduce the greenhouse gas intensity of our economy.''

In the interview yesterday, Dr. Hansen stood by his assertions and said the administration risked disaster by discouraging scientists from discussing unwelcome findings.

Dr. Hansen, 63, acknowledged that he imperiled his credibility and perhaps his job by criticizing Mr. Bush's policies in the final days of a tight presidential campaign. He said he decided to speak out after months of deliberation because he was convinced the country needed to change course on climate policy.

Dr. Hansen rose to prominence when, after testifying at a Senate hearing in the record-warm summer of 1988, he said, "It is time to stop waffling so much and say the evidence is pretty strong that the greenhouse effect is here."”

““No! We do the best we can and quit using theoretical science as scientific law in the way of pushing agendas and control. What really is being done now? Not a whole lot and the reasons are because no one really knows anything about it or if it really exists. Of course, we claim as if we know it inside and out, especially politicians. The larger picture of things we know almost nothing! Yeah, we got some fairly good educated guesses underneath the umbrella, but why waste time on the effect and not the cause because although linked issues they are much different. The answer is that many individuals want to ride this horse for all its gain. If combustion exhaust is killing us quit b-itching about global warming focus on an alternative, potentially killing many birds with one stone. So back to my original point, global warming is a cash cow and a political tool.””

“The seas are taking away my homeland. Global warming may be part of the problem but the Corps of Engineers and big oil companys are really to blame.

http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0410/feature5/index.html”

“That\'s bullcrap! The area is a natural floodplain and should be returned to just that. It is ludicrous for someone to settle there and then point the finger at others.”

“What really is being done now?

Bush and his administration have done their best, in the interest of big corporation, to repeal emission laws for most of the biggest producers of greenhouse gas.

Bush passed This Bill...
The administration’s air pollution bill (H.R.5266 and S.2815) would repeal and weaken vital clean air protections in the current Clean Air Act, while proposing only weak, delayed, and incomplete limits for power plant air pollution. The bill would roll back existing public health safeguards for meeting standards, along with key measures protecting local air quality, curbing pollution from upwind to downwind states, protecting our national parks, and restoring visibility. The bill would do nothing at all to curb power plant carbon dioxide pollution, the main cause of global warming.

What CAN we do???
Vote Bush out of office!!!”

“why so angry, nowslimmer?”

“

"why so angry, nowslimmer?"
Crash Bang

Me angry? You don't want to be near me, when I'm angry! LOL

It sometimes disturbs me when people reuse the older threads instead of starting new threads and using "fuego." With regard to that clown's post, the article actually has multiple subjects and is mixing "apples and oranges." And the clown says, "The seas are taking away my homeland." So what, I feel that it has been the other way! When one lives in risky areas, one takes his chances.

Just sign me,
Pissed on a beautiful Sunday morning.
(I was waken early for some unnecessary help by someone who simply forgot to set the clock back!)”

“"The larger picture of things we know almost nothing! Yeah, we got some fairly good educated guesses underneath the umbrella, but why waste time on the effect and not the cause because although linked issues they are much different......"


I kindly suggest that you pick up the Sept edition of National Geographic and read the massive Global Waring articles in it. It will shed some light on this subject for you.”

“NS - If this guy is a cajen (sp?), he would be correct about there homeland being taken away. I think it's the Moldives that is suing the UK and the US, citing that because of our bad habits, it has cause the ocean to rise and swallow up their island.”

“I don't want a fight and I'm no Nature Nazi. I work for a chemical company for peaks sake. The oil companies dug canals which have criss crossed and eroded our homeland. The Corp of Engineers 100+ years ago built levees that contain the Mississippi River and deny the wetlands the fresh sediment needed to stay ahead of erosion and settling. Global warming is occuring whether by manmade or natural forces. How long will it last? How much damage will result? We don't know. Low lying areas like Louisiana will be gone before those things are answered. It disappoints me that you would attack me without knowing me or the facts. My family has lived here for generations and even survived the great 1927 flood. I suggest that you read Rising Tide by John M. Barry. It is a great book about the taming of the Mississippi and the eventual aftermath.


http://www.powells.com/cgi-bin/biblio?show=Trade+Paper%3ASale+Books%3A0684840022%3A6.98”

“The driver is very correct!

I saw a ditty on Discovery Times about it.”

“http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/content/ResourceCenterPublicationsSLRMapsGulf.html

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0375420762/qid=1099366588/sr=2-1/ref=pd_ka_b_2_1/002-2878228-1353601
last edited: 11/01/04 9:39:35 PM”

“Thank you for your post, the additional information and the link. I have nothing against you and have no desire to fight, either. Had I checked your User Information, it is unlikely that I would have called you a clown.

In consideration of your effort to educate me in this area, I will try to explain what caused my reactions plus a little more. Be aware that I am against the emisssions that are changing the environment above us.

First, my main objection is that people are using these old threads to express things which now should be on Fuego Threads. You are now one of these people.

Secondly, the article at the link, Gone With The Water," is a scare article. My previous remarks for the article still stand.

Next, you stated, "The seas are taking away my homeland." How much homeland do you really have if you are living below sea level and/or on a flood plane? Sooner or later there must be a relocation.

Finally, you stated, "... but the Corps of Engineers and big oil companys are really to blame." This is missing a lot. How about overpopulation and overdevelopment? Every building, street, sidewalk, curb, light pole, the shopping centers with their large parking lots., every creek or stream that has had curves straightened, the removal of floodplanes, the reversal of water flows such as the Chicago River, etc. All of these things and more contribute to moving water faster into concentrated areas, which then are flooded. Yes, there are retention ponds, but they are insignificant except for small, select areas I have seen downstream areas flooded because of upstream development. An example is at Nine Mile Creek in Tulsa, OK. And it appears that you are living in one of the largest flood areas in the country. I only know of two choices, leave or take your chances.

Screw-ups, yes, they have happened. It appears that you have visited southern Florida. Farm land was gained there years ago by digging canals. Water was moved directly to the Atlantic and to the Gulf. This reduced the largest flood plane and rainy season river in the country. This has caused environmental changes in the Everglades and allowed sea water to push into the aquifer which supplies the Miami area with potable water. They are now in the expensive period of trying to correct this mistake. Along the Mississippi River, they are allowing areas, which get flooded, to be returned to the flood planes. The water flow has to be slowed to keep your head above water. And I believe there is an attempt to alter some or all of the river to another route to the Gulf.
------------------------------------------------
I would be delighted to meet you and to take the tour. Someday the opportunity may arrive.

I, too, have worked for the oil industry in the past. And at the Panama Canal I worked to help keep it open for the ships to transit. My place in Florida was damaged by the recent hurricanes, but I am not crying. I know the force of water. I have been in a number of typhoons in the Bering Sea near Siberia with seas of 60 to 70 feet. And I have written and installed computer software to monitor, request power and direct distribution at two dams on the Columbia River. I still have a lot to learn.

With regard to Global Warming, I read an interesting article today. It may be a satire, I can't be sure. It is "Global Warming: The Canadian Perspective," by Liz Seifert, 04, Grinnell College. Here are a few statements from it:

"The truth is, global warming will be the best thing that happened to Canada since the invention of the snowmobile."

"A warmer Canada is a better Canada. Living in Canada will be the most attractive it's been since Nixon ended the American draft."

"When global warming hits, an extended growing season and those long daylight hours will transform the boreal forest into amber waves of grain. And the corn belt? Goodbye Iowa, hello Saskatchewan."

"... the St. Lawrence Seaway will finally be navigable year-around. How ironic that your obsession with driving your cars will make it easier for us to use our ships. Thank you, America!"

"Besides, ocean levels in the Equatorial Atlantic are expected to rise five times as much as in the Canadian Artic. Americans would be waving goodbye to Florida, while up by the North Pole, Ellesmere Island would lose less than a foot of coastline."

"So again, thank you America. Please don't stop driving your SUV's, because we'll be happy to take the heat. In 100 years when America is a parched, barren wasteland, Canadians will be living the high life, eh?"

The Russians would appreciate a warmer climate, also.

Well, best wishes, and keep your feet dry.”

“Floodplanes should be floodplains, in several places.

Sorry.”

“"The Russians would appreciate a warmer climate, also......."


Would you be willing to trade New York or Hawaii for that?”

“Gee, can I do that? Can I throw-in Michigan, too?”

“LOL, NS. Honestly, beofre I read that Sept issue of National Geographic (for my Physical Geo class), I thought that some of this GM thing was bunk. The article is put together in a very neutral way, with wonderful graphics, charts and mini "sides" in the whole piece. Basically, yes, this is a "natural" cycle, we are just makng it worse wax and wane to the extremes.”

“I believe in global warming. I also belive in global cooling. I think both are natural processes that are getting a slight boost from our irresponsible treatment of Earth.

Now, the random thought....

When the polar ice caps melt it's estimated that ocean levels will increase by ~60m. This will cause extensive flooding all along coastal regions. Now, wouldn't the ocean floor begin to sink in an attempt to acheive isotatic equilibrium with the added weight of the water? For example, the lake bottom near the Hoover damn has subsided/downloaded (correct term?) a great extent since the building of the damn. Another example, areas covered by the last glaciation period are still rebounding after the weight of the glaciers was removed by melting.

Where am I going with this? I don't know.... Ummm...so coastal areas will be flooded but after time. Damn. I forgot that if temperatures increase oceans will expand regardless of ice cap melting. Nevermind.

I declare there will be an increase in severe earthquakes.

I must sound like a lunatic! Ah well, I just had a study breakthrough so bear with me.”

“This all sounds like a bad movie.”

“It was a very bad movie.

The problem is that we have several studies that are showing one thing and several that show another.

Years ago, I did some research paper on acid rain. Environments were screaming about acid rain back in the late 60's. Everything started very subtle. The true signs did not rear their ugly heads until much later.

Too late to stop it? NO

We experienced a simular event some 4 years ago in Chicago. I think it was in 2001, but the lake levels dropped some 30 feet. To most people, this sounded devistating.

Oh my god! Where did it all go? A little research showed that it was a cycle. Every 50 or so years, the lake levels dropped.

Today, all is well, except for the levels of bacteria in the water.

With regards to global warming, most people dissmis it. Is it happening, probably. Will we be able to stop it before every iceberg melts, causing massive flooding,

I hope so...”

“Arctic Melt Accelerates, Governments Split

2 hours, 38 minutes ago Science - Reuters


By Alister Doyle, Environment Correspondent

OSLO (Reuters) - A thaw of the Arctic icecap is accelerating because of global warming but nations in the region including the United States are deadlocked about how to stop it.


Due for publication on Nov. 8, an eight-nation report compiled by 250 scientists says the Arctic is warming almost twice as fast as the rest of the planet due to a buildup of heat-trapping gases and the trend is set to continue.


"We are taking a risk with the global climate," said Paal Prestrud, vice-chair of the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (ACIA) report, which says emissions of gases from cars, factories and power plants are mostly to blame.


The Arctic icecap has shrunk by 15-20 percent in the past 30 years and the contraction is likely to accelerate, Prestrud said. The Arctic Ocean could be almost ice-free in summer by the end of the century.


Inuit hunters are falling through ice, permafrost is thawing and destabilizing foundations of buildings and vital winter roads while the habitat of creatures from polar bears to seals is literally melting away.


The report says that the thaw will have some positive side-effects. Oil and gas deposits will be easier to reach, more farming may be possible and short-cut trans-Arctic shipping lanes may open.


NATIONS SPLIT


Diplomats said governments in nations around the Arctic rim -- the United States, Russia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland and Iceland -- disagree about what to do, with the United States most opposed to any drastic action.


Arctic nations are meant to agree policy recommendations based on the report at a meeting of foreign ministers in Iceland on Nov. 24.


"U.S. negotiators say 'we already have a policy on global warming -- we can't have a new one just for the Arctic'," one European diplomat said. Government negotiators will try to break deadlock with a new round of talks in mid-November.


President Bush (news - web sites) pulled out of the U.N.'s Kyoto protocol on global warming in 2001, arguing it was too expensive and wrongly excluded developing nations.


The other Arctic nations, most recently Russia, have agreed to Kyoto's target of cutting developed nations' emissions of carbon dioxide by five percent below 1990 levels by 2008-12.


The WWF environmental group Tuesday accused the eight nations, which account for 30 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, of hypocrisy in sponsoring the Arctic report while failing to crack down.


"The big melt has begun," Jennifer Morgan, director of the WWF's global climate change campaign, said in a statement. She said industrialized nations were using the Arctic as a guinea pig in an uncontrolled experiment on climate change.


Scientists have agreed to discuss parts of the report ahead of full publication -- Reuters published main conclusions in September. Some European governments originally wanted the report issued before Tuesday's U.S. presidential election.


The report projects that temperatures in the Arctic will rise by 4 to 7 degrees Celsius (8 to 14 degrees Fahrenheit) in the next 100 years. If temperatures then stayed stable, the Greenland icecap would melt altogether in 1,000 years and raise global sea levels by about seven meters (23 ft).


The thaw of the icecap floating on the Arctic Ocean does not affect sea levels, in the same way that a full glass of water with an ice cube jutting above the brim does not spill when the ice melts since ice takes up more space than water.”

“TT - really, you're not that far off, but hte whole weight thing, I don't know about that. I do know that if some of the sheets melt and some of the caps melt more, it might have an effect on the oceans process in recovering carbon and the Global ocean circulation system. Also, let us not forget that natural water basins, like lakes and such, are drying up, like Lake Chad in Africa. People depend on these systems for water and food. When this is all gone, problems will start!”

“It is absolutely ridiculous to think that we humans can stop a tremendously large natural cycle such as Global Warming. We can not stop it. Similarly, we will not be able to stop Global Cooling years down the road from now.

We should, however, concern ourselves with preservation of our natural environments. If for nothing else than to attempt to preserve our own species.

But, in the end, whenever that may be, we too will become extinct and another stage of Earth's history will take shape.”

“Pleased to me ya. After reading your last post I think if you and I sat down and talked we would agree a lot more than disagree. Lets hope we find a way to deal with the coming problems. Take care and enjoy DRYLAND.

Bateauxdriver signing off from waterworld.”

“Did anyone see the National Geographic article on "The Case of the Missing Carbon"?

Great article. It was amazing to see how the earh is swollowing up all that carbon and neutralizing it in the atmosphere. But the question still remains how long can that continue”

“All we need is a Krakatoa.”

“You might be on to something. Are there any volcanic type islands near red-neck territory?”

“Krakatoa! Are you crazy Pathman? I live just above sea level! Krakatoa would wash waves to Iowa! I'll settle for the natural carbon cycle myself. Phytoplankton floating in the seas lock up tons of carbon. They are eaten by damn near everthing and the poop from everything, mostly sinks to the ocean floor. The sedementary deep ocean poop doesn't realese the carbon very rapidly. The extra nitrates we have introduced and higher temperatures actually aids in their growth. With the rapid loss of the rainforest which is a huge carbon absorber, our hope rest not on mahogony giants but little guys floating with the tides.

Ski season is coming have fun out there in the Land of Enchantment! I'm heading for Winterpart Thanksgiving week.”

“Colorado snow is looking good for the early season! El Nino!”

“

It is not the strongest
of the species that survive,
nor the most intelligent,
but the most responsive
to change.
—Charles Darwin (1835)

Climate change affecting wildlife


This appears to be a summary of the above article:
Wildlife Society predictions include:”

“In honor of the Kyoto treaty and the failure of Bush to address warming in any meaningful way.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/picture_gallery/05/sci_nat_how_the_world_is_changing/html/1.stm”

“it's amazing how in 4 short years bush has made glaciers disappear and oceans crash over roads. He also killed Jon Benet i think.”

“errr no, try reading. "Failure of Bush to address," really isn't the same as "cause of."”

“global warming is just a natural process.

like the extinction of the dodo or the irradication of the buffalo.”

“Melting Glaciers will not cause the ocean to rise. Anyone who believes this nonsense is a complete and utter moron.”