ABC News: Climate Change No Longer a Theory, It's Happening
How do you stop a landslide?
15,000 years ago sea level was 150 meters lower, and something happened. The rise was slow for a few thousand years, then from 13,000 to 10,000, it rose to near current levels. There were a few flat spots on the way up, and an 18 meter rise one summer.
Over the last few hundred years, where we have something to measure, such as docks, sea level has risen a foot every hundred years.
From 22,000 to 27,000 years ago sea level was seven meters higher. That is what you get when all the ice melts. People lived along the coast of the Arctic Ocean, above the Arctic Circle, in six months of day.
Over the last 10,000 years sea level has risen a fair steady foot a Century, for a total of 100 foot, 30 meters. There is only enough ice left to keep this up for 2,200 more years. Then we are back at peak sea level, in a warmer world, likely for five thousand years or longer.
This is old news in Geology.
I am sure humans are speeding it up, But just like slowing it down, nothing changes the direction.
So Al Gore discovered that sea level was rising. It may be true that the foot in a hundred years rate speeds up at the end, warmer world, less ice, maybe a meter, and only seven hundred years till all the ice is gone.
So everyone should panic. Think of the beach houses! Also, 90% of Florida will sink beneath the waves. Just inland, across the Gulf Coast, is the old beach line from 25,000 years ago, it has long been used as a road.
13,000 years ago the beach line was several hundred miles offshore. It ended in a cliff, the Gulf far below, great view, good breeze, but those beach houses were doomed.
Methane is a bigger greenhouse gas, and the Mammoth Fart view fell out of favor, as them dying off did not change things. The permafrost melting does release huge amounts of Methane. It is a much greater cause of warming than the CO2 produced to generate electric power.
The slaughter of 90,000,000 buffalo for farting did not change the climate.
Taxing utilities will not affect climate change. It could pay for a new series of beach houses.
Sea level will continue to rise till all the ice melts, It may be 700 years, it may be 2,200, it will happen.
The air will become more dynamic, heat and moisture does that.
Where I live will become open Gulf, Florida is a goner.
I am not willing to give up anything to slow down a planet. I think it early to buy up the old high beach line.
As someone who doubts our system will last a decade, that most of the human species will last past mid century, I look to the short term.
I expect emissions to reach zero, that will not change the climate. It will not come from good intentions, it will come because we are broke.
to add that, in terms of the recent flooding, all the trees we have cut down in the last couple 100 years could have come in really handy for absorbing all that rain water.
Not to mention converting CO2 back into oxygen.
And they look purty too.
to add that, in terms of the recent flooding, all the trees we have cut down in the last couple 100 years could have come in really handy for absorbing all that rain water.
Not to mention converting CO2 back into oxygen.
And they look purty too.
This is part of the reason Christmas upsets me. For one cyclical consumption is at an all time high polluting more than any other time of the year. This directly impacts the biosphere.
Then, to symbolise our cheery Christmas spirits in the name of Jesus (even though the tree symbolises the Pagan God Horrus I believe) millions chop down trees that have been grown over the year just to throw them out. EM HELLO. lol.
Could be not use brains and realise for a start that we could be replanting more and more trees, then with a bit of luck realise we don't need to consume endless to make ourselves happy?
_________________
<Insert meaningful signature here>
That is how you stop the landslide.
What we could control, compared to the heat energy in the system, should be conserved for air conditioning, and houses should be twenty foot underground.
The Arctic Ocean is coming up ice free, all around the permafrost is melting, and releasing Methane.
Our CO2 is a weak green house gas, Methane is much stronger. China and India have two and a half billion people to feed, Shutting down is not an option. For them it would come out of food production.
The last time, the people who survived lived along the Arctic, and way up in the mountains. We complain about 100, Some recent records have been 140, Over all time, Earth, 125 degrees. Day, night, winter summer, some change, but this is a warm planet.
While the long term trend is warming, it happens coming out of an ice age, it is not a constant. Some only look at how hot, some at how cold, but both have been peaking. It is the normal weather pattern coming back.
The strangest period in geologic history, the last 500 years. After the little ice age, 1100 to 1300, it warmed up by 1500, and was mild, regular, crop after crop, for 500 years. The direct result, babies, an endless stream of babies everywhere. More food, more babies, without a single good mass killing famine to be found.
Europe went from exporting surplus people to kill Arabs, Jews, Christians, to holding Hundred year wars, to exploding all over earth finding new people to kill, and lands to claim for for the god of people who did not live there.
Others had expanded, Greeks, Romans, but they all had some plague come and kill those fools. Sometimes they annoyed the wrong neighbor, and Rome lost three Legions in the north one day. 18,000 men, 6,000 cooks and hookers, gone in a day. Some of the plagues in the city of Rome killed hundreds of thousands. On important days thousands died in the arena.
Europe started from a low, three waves of the Black Death killed about three quarters. 1666 was a good year.
We have had a modern shortage of plagues. The 1918 flu killed 50,000,000, so did WWII, but the numbers never even flattened,
All of that Peace and Public Health have made it worse.
The main source of CO2 is people exhaling! Cars park, people breath day and night without end. That is not all, they cut down trees just to burn them, Og Control Fire, Og Powerful! Then Og goes on to making babies before the fire, just to show off.
Paul Bunnun is the Saint of clear cutting whole States with a single swing of his ax. Die you evil green things, die so we can have some Progress, free of you always looking down at us. Trees make houses, fires, beds, and more babies.
The destruction of the planet was for one reason, babies.
OK, that can be fun, nothing good on TV and all. But without war, famine, plague, it does not work out long term. Asteriods and ice ages do not happen often enough.
Rome, a city of perhaps a million. 90% slaves, was it. There were a few piles of bricks in other places, but a few million lived there. Everyone of the time thought the earth was over populated, for they kept killing them every chance they got. Even those who lived died at 42.
They still managed to kill every tree in the Medditeraen Basin, farm the soil to sand, and refining silver, cover the land with lead. Writing stopped, thinking had before, and they still remembered how to make babies.
Now over seven billion, and I old enough to have been shocked at five.
We do not need to tax CO2, we need to tax babies!
Each baby should have to plant ten trees, that live longer than they do. Ten trees should equal the per person carbon output. Babies do not have a large carbon foot print, but by the time they are twenty, those trees would consume as much carbon as they produce. Produce as much Oxygen as they consume, and when they die, they should be planted with their trees.
All producers of CO2 should have to plant a number of trees equal to production.
Then those who plant trees can rent out the Carbon Sink, Oxygen Production, in a cap and trade that produces income.
I favor a tax on production that makes growing five hundred year forests profitable. Plant Black Walnut and a tree can be worth $30,000. It may be fifty years till the first thinning, but then it keeps getting better.
Deal with Carbon and climate on the front lines together.
What the future needs is shade. Trees cool the earth, block the wind, and conserve moisture.
auntblabby
Veteran
Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115,251
Location: the island of defective toy santas
Growing crops is what feeds people, not industry. The truth is, there is plenty of food. No one on this planet should ever go hungry. When crops get destroyed to keep the price of grains and other crops high, people go hungry. It's bad management that's the problem. We don't need industrialization of the planet to "feed people." People were eating before the industrial age...
Globally, we have a choice whether to release carbon dioxide or not. If Asia decides to release more, and, if acute climate change is occurring because of excess CO2 due to industrialization, they won't be able to grow as many crops to feed their people as they can now. Those of us in North America won't be able to, either.
If the global scientists are right, we can expect some dramatic shifts in climate in the next twenty years. It seems so abstract, but the effects will be devastating. Once it gets to the point the ice age is beginning, we won't be able to do much to reverse it, as a cycle of weather will occur due to the expansion of glaciers. We will just be stuck with it until someone figures out a way to reverse it.
Only time will tell who is making the correct prediction. By then, it could be too late, though.
It's not that simple. I hear that a lot of the fertilizer we use is petroleum-based.
And that's not even half of it. On the whole I'd say our entire approach to farming is unsustainable.
Completely agree with the last 3 people.
the chemicals are coating onto the soil and plants is messing everything up. soil quality, rain water quality, yields, killing bees and who knows what else.
there has always been enough to go around but it is more profitable to create scarcity in this day and age.
_________________
<Insert meaningful signature here>
well you know the world was a lot warmer when the dinosaurs roamed the earth. Maybe it's an elaborate plot first they bring back the mammoths then the dinosaurs and when the world hits the boiling point then the dinosaurs eat everyone...........
although actually I do think global climate change is a reality. The incidence of hurricanes increasing can be explained by the 20 yr active/inactive hurricane cycles. As for the siberian shelf that's something to consider but there are a lot of doomsday theories out there. Somewhere between hysteria and keeping one's head firmly in the ground therein lies the truth.
Planting trees is just my hobby. I like trees, so they are the answer to all problems.
Back to Geology, Climate Change, that thing between Ice Ages and Global Warming, is a known problem with a known cause.
In a word, Panama! Panama is a recent result of volcanic action, geologic recent. Before there was a Panama, the Earth had a long term stable climate for millions of years. A major warm current flowed through the gap, joined the Gulf Stream, and you could be killed by a hippopotus in London.
Only since this gap was filled has the earth had to suffer through ice ages, global warming, more ice, more heat, which is hard on trees, when they migrate, they march at about one foot a year.
The Pacific Ocean is eight foot higher than the Gulf, remove Panama, and the Gulf Stream becomes a jet, Europe in days. It was the dynamic that kept all the ocean currents moving.
The main two effects are it spreads the heat, and it stirs up the deep cold and rich water on the bottom of the oceans.
The area of livable climate grows, the oceans can support a lot more life, and they are most of the planet.
The Dinosaurs lived over a much larger area than we do. They lived in Canada, Alaska, Siberia. Being cold blooded and huge, they could only survive in very rich vegatation. Little Mammoths ate 600 pounds a day, and only weighed 15,000 pounds. A small herd of dinosaurs could knock back 100 tons a day, every day.
If you want a stable climate that produces, Panama must die!
If nothing is done it will get warmer, all the ice will melt, and the last three times sea level has been this high, it started snowing a Meter a day, for several thousand years, fifty kilometers of snow, that compacted to five kilometers of ice, and flowed outward.
Global Warming always ends in an Ice Age. Ice Ages end in major floods.
Removing Panama will double the habitable land area, and bring a new dynamic to the oceans. Replace it with a very large valve, The Thermostat, and the entire planet becomes climate controlled.
The last time it was open the Earth had a stable climate for millions of years.While some say warming, others cooling, both are true, and will give us less land fit to raise crops.
Remove Panama, and the heat of the topics will expand the temperate zone. Cooler tropics, a longer temperate growing season, warmer so that crops can be grown farther north, imagine golden wheat from the Urals to Hudson Bay.
The Arctic will survive, 22,000 to 27,000 years ago sea level was seven meters higher, people lived above the Arctic Circle, and the Polar Bears, Seals, Whales, all survived.
Do nothing, what is most likely, and most people die. Within a few thousand years the snow falling a meter a day, a wall of ice reaching from London to the Urals, and from Washington State to Saint Louis, to New York, Survivors driven to the tropics.
Right now we have long term unemployment in construction, the people and tools to install the valve.
Teddy took Panama from Columbia, Jimmy Carter gave it to Noriega, who is doing life somewhere, France now? It was drug profits and we have a right to take it back. The Darian Gap is useless for anything but drug running. The canal was finished in 1914, time for something new. La Palma near Columbia is less than fifty miles across.
Two miles wide, 100 foot deep, about two cubic miles of earth to move.
Besides climate control, it will connect the whales, who now use the Antarctic route.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2 ... on-climate
Plenty of links within the article as well if you want to use the link instead.
The dense forests of the Amazon soak up more than one-quarter of the world's atmospheric carbon, making it a critically important buffer against global warming. But if the Amazon switches from a carbon sink to a carbon source that prompts further droughts and mass tree deaths, such a feedback loop could cause runaway climate change, with disastrous consequences.
"Put starkly, current emissions pathways risk playing Russian roulette with the world's largest forest," said tropical forest expert Simon Lewis, at the University of Leeds, and who led the research published today in the journal Science. Lewis was careful to note that significant scientific uncertainties remain and that the 2010 and 2005 drought – thought then to be of once-a-century severity – might yet be explained by natural climate variation.
"We can't just wait and see because there is no going back," he said. "We won't know we have passed the point where the Amazon turns from a sink to a source until afterwards, when it will be too late."
Alex Bowen, from the London School of Economics and Political Science's Grantham research institute on climate change, said huge emissions of carbon from the Amazon would make it even harder to keep global greenhouse gases at a low enough level to avoid dangerous climate change. "It therefore makes it even more important for there to be strong and urgent reductions in man-made emissions."
The revelation of mass tree deaths in the Amazon is a major blow to efforts to reduce the destruction of the world's forests by loggers, one of the biggest sources of global carbon emissions. The use of satellite imagery by Brazilian law enforcement teams has drastically cut deforestation rates and replanting in Asia had slowed the net loss. Financial deals to protect forests were one of the few areas on which some progress was made at the 2010 UN climate talks in Cancún.
The 2010 Amazonian drought led to the declaration of states-of-emergencies and the lowest ever level of the major tributary, the Rio Negro. Lewis, with colleagues in Brazil, examined satellite-derived rainfall measurements and found that the 2010 drought was even worse than the very severe 2005 drought, affecting a 60% wider area and with an even harsher dry season.
On the ground, the researchers have 126 one-hectare plots spread across the Amazon, in which every single tree is tagged and monitored. After 2005, they counted how many trees had died and worked out how much carbon would be pumped into the atmosphere as the wood rotted. In addition, the reduced growth of the water-stressed trees means the forest failed to absorb the 1.5bn tonnes of carbon that it would in a normal year.
Applying the same principles to the 2010 drought, they estimated that 8.5 billion tonnes of CO2 will be released - more than the entire 7.7bn tonnes emitted in 2009 by China, the biggest polluting nation in the world. This estimate does not include forest fires, which release carbon and increase in dry years.
"The Amazon is such a big area that even a small shift [in conditions] there can have a global impact," said Lewis.
Lewis said that two such severe droughts in the Amazon within five years was highly unusual, but that a natural variation in climate over decade-long periods cannot yet be ruled out. The driving factor of the annual weather patterns is the warmth of the sea in the Atlantic. He said increasing droughts in the Amazon are found in some climate models, including the sophisticated model used by the Hadley centre. This means the 2005 and 2010 droughts are consistent with the idea that global warming will cause more droughts in future, emit more carbon, and potentially lead to runaway climate change. "The greenhouse gases we have already emitted may mean there are several more droughts in the pipeline," he said.
Lewis said that the 2010 drought killed "in the low billions of trees", in addition to the roughly 4 billion trees that die on average in a normal year across the Amazon. The researchers are now trying to raise £500,000 in emergency funding to revisit the plots in the Amazon and gather further data.
Brazilian scientist Paulo Brando, from the Instituto de Pesquisa Ambiental da Amazônia (Amazon Environmental Research Institute), and co-leader of the research said: "We will not know exactly how many trees were killed until we can complete forest measurements on the ground. It could be that many of the drought-susceptible trees were killed off in 2005. Or the first drought may have weakened a large number of trees so increasing the number dying in 2010."
Brando added: "Our results should be seen as an initial estimate. The emissions estimates do not include those from forest fires, which spread over extensive areas of the Amazon during hot and dry years and release large amounts of carbon."
Climate tipping points
Scientists know from the geological record that the Earth's climate can change rapidly. They have identified a number of potential tipping points where relatively small amounts of global warming caused by human activities could cause large changes in climate. Some tipping points, like the losses to the Amazon forests, involve positive feedback loops and could lead to runaway climate change.
Arctic ice cap: The white ice cap is good at reflecting the Sun's warming light back into space. But when it melts, the dark ocean uncovered absorbs this heat. This leads to more melting, and so on.
Tundra: The high north is warming particularly fast, melting the permafrost that has locked up vast amounts of carbon in soils for thousands of years. Bacteria digesting the unfrozen soils generate methane, a potent greenhouse gas, leading to more warming.
Gas hydrates: Also involving methane, this tipping point involves huge reservoirs of methane frozen on or just below the ocean floor. The methane-water crystals are close to their melting point and highly unstable. A huge release could be triggered by a little warming.
West Antarctic ice sheet: Some scientists think this enormous ice sheet, much of which is below sea level, is vulnerable to small amounts of warming. If it all eventually melted, sea level would rise by six metres.
_________________
<Insert meaningful signature here>
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-s ... al-warming
Aparently global warming now caused the riots in Egypt. ![]()
