These will change your mind....

Look at the before and after photos here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/picture_gallery/05/sci_nat_how_the_world_is_changing/html/1.stm

Then look at the photographers page who took those pictures and who has done a pretty good synopsis of what's going on..

http://www.worldviewofglobalwarming.org/

SCARY CHIT.

Oh come on Salty, it just needs more study :hs:

I liked Buhs's absurd statement the other day that He won't sign onto any environmental plan that costs America jobs. What a freakin con artist.

Given that global warming induced extremes in weather will likely do much damage, it wouldn't suprise me if W ties it to a job creation initiative :rolleyes:

-spence

I think the one that says it all is the pic of the glacier...then the Hatteras house... wow.

Originally posted by spence
Oh come on Salty, it just needs more study :hs:

I liked Buhs's absurd statement the other day that He won't sign onto any environmental plan that costs America jobs. What a freakin con artist.

Given that global warming induced extremes in weather will likely do much damage, it wouldn't suprise me if W ties it to a job creation initiative :rolleyes:

-spence

SPence, you drive an electric car , right? Don't use any aersol to paint your plugs, right?

Convervations startus with YOU. Don't blame the president, he is trying to preserve the way of life Americans have defined. Its everyone's personal responsibility.

BULLSHYTE :af:

The President is ignoring 99.9% of the World's scientists, the Pentagon and every other Nation at the behest of the oil and energy industries. He's not even willing to recognize there is a problem.

This isn't a partisan attack. It's about foolishness and greed.

I personally don't drive a gas guzzler, I keep the heat turned down as low as I can, I recycle everything allowable, I purchase organic and natural foods whenever possible.

This individual is doing what he can. On a matter of such importance I expect the leader of the largest polluter in the World to lead, not hang out with the ostriches.

-spence

I don't think anyone is questioning the fcat that the global temperature is rising. What is open to debate os the reason why it is happening. About half of the sceintists point to "greenhouse" gases, the other half point to normal cyclical variations. Who should we believe and why?

I don't believe it's 1/2 and 1/2. There is a tremendous amount of evidence to support man-made influence in this century.

The problem is, we need to be prepared for it regardless. Buhs's stance is to ignore and delay any action that may have a cost.

At the very least they could officially recognise the threat and come up with a long term plan. We have the ability to lead the world to ensure it doesn't do our economy harm.

-spence

Off to the Scuppers with this one! :)

:faga: :behead:

:laugha:

-spence

Originally posted by spence


This individual is doing what he can. On a matter of such importance I expect the leader of the largest polluter in the World to lead, not hang out with the ostriches.

-spence [/B]


HUH??? Please explain why SUVS are the best selling cars? Most individuals are doing squat.

I said this individual :smash:

I don't curse everyone for driving a large truck. Some people need them for work etc...

I do think it's absurd for so many to drive 8mpg SUV's as a car to ferry kids and get groceries.

We've certianly enjoyed a lifestyle that's somewhat unrealistic. Our economic and military strength have been used to keep gas prices low compared to the rest of the world. There's is not a limitless supply of oil, and the shyte will hit the fan sooner rather than later.

The government can raise MGP standards, provide incentives for green vehicles, develop alternate transportation etc...

I'd prefer we're prepared...

-spence

Of course, I personally exempt all surfcasting buggy's from this example :D

:ss: :gu:

-spence

Not concerned. The earth has been around for billions of years, right? During that period, science has shown that the earth has gone thru periods of deep freeze as well as hot arid conditions. Few argue these points. The period of these changes is longer then these snippets of photos.

Moreover, no people were around way back then. Who was to blame? (must have been the republican dino's :D)

Lets keep in mind that when a big volcano erupts, it puts out more toxic gas then all the exhaust fumes produced from autos for decades. Sure we should do what can to stem polution as technology permits but you need see the big picture. Everthing is NOT mankinds fault and it is esp not G%$%$%$%$'s fault.

The time scale of those photos are so small (100 years maybe) that no long term trend can be established. The earth clearly has changed in cycles for billions of years there is NO evidence that anything has changed. So, over the last 100 years the earth is warming....so what? that does not mean it will continue! Perhaps, If you extrapolate from a tiny slice in time to the future, things could look ugly. This is like saying, my child grew 3" this yearand gained 20#...this doesn't mean that he will be 17.5' and 1400# when he is 70 years old.
THis is ***exactly*** the kind of "science" you are refering too. It is aimed at specific people to scare for various reasons as well as for political reasons.

BTW, per our productivity or output, we produce FAR less pollents then most of the world. Sure if you don't MAKE anything you can have less waste.

Spence, sorry mis-read your response, I thought you said "the" individual.
:smash:

Spence, with all due respect.................please give it a rest.
Before I even opened this thread, I knew you'd be one of the first to turn it into a GWB bashing agenda. It's really getting old.

BigBo, I happen to think this is a pretty serious and important issue along with a host of other environmental problems, that are being intentionally ignored. Not all of this is Buhs's fault, but He's got the ball and is doing everything possible to undermine a clean game.

Sandman, the Earth may have gone through dramatic change before...but not with developed coastlines and a Global population that requires massive amounts of clean water and agriculture to exist.

-spence

Yep its all W's fault:rolleyes:

Spence, I doubt we can do anything to stop mother nature from doing what she wants to. These scientists are making a incorrect *assumption* about what they think is causing these changes. we can't save the world....if the water starts to rise you need to move. Perhaps we should educate the world to this ?

I would worry more about illegals getting vaild drivers lic and mooching your healthcare systerm into the ground then the 0.1 deg rise in the earths temp.

I like to blame sunspots for everthing. :laughs: damn sunspots.

It is not the earth that is in trouble, it is the human population that is in trouble, when it has had enough of us we will be recycled. The earth will be here long after our kind have left!

My 0.02

I think partisan politics aside oil/energy is keeping the US from signing, %$%$%$%$ officially declared it dead but WJC could have done more (higher MPG's etc) during his reign as well

As far as the science is concerned Sandman is on the right track in that the earth has gone through extreme cycles during the last 4600 Million years of the Earth's existence... During the Cretacous, which ended with the impact event that killed the Dino's 65Ma, there was a sea up the midwest known as the interior seaway, that means that we'd be surfcasting in Iowa or somewhere if we were there.. (Spence!)

More recently during the last glacial maximum (~25,000 years BP) sea level was 120m lower than today, so the shoreline was out on the shelf edge at the 360ft contour...

Previous work in the Holocene (the last 10,000yrs) showed a relativly quiet time climatically, however in recent years, studies have shown that many of the same phenominon that existed then and today are driven by things such as solar radiation cycles etc with cycles of 100's of years...

There is little evidence opposing the fact that global temperatures are increasing.. how much of that is human induced is still up for debate, however it may not be the intensity of the extremems that we are seeing today, but rather the increased rate these changes are occuring in, maybe this isnt that different to the past, but most evidence is suggesting that at the present change is happening faster than it should....

As they say, the present is the key to the past, but science is shifting towards looking at the processes that were present in previous warmer/colder periods, and how they would impact todays society, rather than just using previous times as a direct analog.....

Spence mentioned having a developed shoreline, and thats true, sea level rise and coastal erosion (which on the shorter term are unrelated which we can debate another time if you dont believe me) would not be a problem if we werent living there... As my advisor likes to say, the beach will always be there, probably just not where you want it to be...

To get back to Sandman's point that the earth will be fine, in the long term you are correct, we're the proverbial flea on the dogs back. whatever we F up on the planet will be negligable in the a few million years (unless we're still here)
You are right about volcanos releasing more gas (water vapor, CO2, Sulfur etc) than humans, but the impact this has on the overall climate system is generally short term (a few years) and generally cools the planet because of particles in the atmosphere.... our impact is sustained, specifically increasing inputs to the carbon cycle by burning carbon that was buried millions of years ago and re-releasing it to the atmosphere...

My take, having read a fair amount of literature on the likelyhood of global warming as well as studies on the geologic past, I think that we need to be prepared, not only to face extreme climate events but also to face some changes in the structure of our economy and industry as a country and as a planet... I'd point you towards Rifkin's Book "The Hydrogen Economy" for a good read.... Do I believe personally that the Earths climate is changing? Yes, 100% I belieive some change is going on... do I believe 100% that we have some impact? Yes... Do I beleive we are the only factor 100% Not yet, there is so much contradictory evidence, the more you read, the less your sure of... which is why this is such a sticky wicket...

Trying to combat global warming may not be possible either because we have done too much already or because it is a natural cycle, but I feel that it is an issue that should go beyond partisan bickering, and past the national level... there is a reason most major climate studies are done with multiple contries, (do a google search on IPCC) because this is a global problem, not a US, Japan, Russia etc.. problem....

(edit added after->) I think combat is the wrong word above, I think deal with, accept and live with global warming/climate change and the resultant impacts is what I really meant..

whew, that was a long rant, if you managed to read this far I appologize for ranting and raving... this was the first time in a while I;ve had to organize this stuff in my head, so it may have been a bit disjointed...

Bryan
Ranting and Raving Geologist....

One of the more interesting climate changes occured in Europe during the 15-17 centuries (I think, that's apx) when the average tempature dropped a degree or two. I have read history concerning the Bubonic Plague that cite the tempature drop as a correlating factor to the unhealthy conditions of the time.

I did not even know they had Right Guard spray back then.:huh: ;)

Your refering to the "Little Ice Age" which was preceeded by the medieval warm period... its all a Cluster F... who really knows anyways :D:smash:

Pretty sedate for a rant there OAK :rolleyes:

:D :laughs:

-spence

Ok, fine, how about a brain dump, not rant... besides you know I;m not a volotile person :angel:

I need to lay off the caffine :D:smash:

RI-ROCK-HOUND...

I defer to your expertise on this matter.:D

I plan to continue to press on with my life and not get too heated up about this issue.:p

I thought you were a different kind of rock hound...a guy you like to fish from rocks :)

Sandman,

I am more of the fishing king of rockhound, I'm a "no rock" geologist" by trade, specifically I work in the recent (last 25,000) years on glacial and coastal geology

You made excellent points, I wasnt trying to crush anyone or imply I am an expert, I certainly am not I've just read a bunch of this stuff and have strong opinions as does everyone else here... my inention wasnt to be condecending etc.. I just wanted to clarify a few points and offer some insight where I thought appropriate....

All good points Oak...being an expert is relative ;)

My real beef is that corporate interests have had a larger influence over the interpretation of science in the past 4 years than possibly ever before. This has led to roll-backs of legislative progress and shunning Global discussions all in the name of GDP and margin. We;ve done this plenty of times in the past, but the stakes keep getting higher and higher.

Global warming isn't our fault, there are too many trees, asbestos and MTBE are good for you, mercury isn't all that toxic, fossil fuels are limitless etc...

If you think I'm being silly, look at what's really going on :smash:

-spence

Spence, there is always a danger to that, when a major study comes out it is always important to look at who is underwritting it... most scienctists are honest, however if you go in with preconcived ideas it is easy to come out with preconcived answers....

If it warms up around here, I may reconsider moving down into rebel country.

WOW I started this POST? :smash:

Just wanted to show OAK what ranting really looks like :cool:

-spence

thanks bryan-- I have a geology exam tomorrow. you basically just summarized what i've been learning for the past coupla weeks. :D

this global warming issue has been around for more than four years and it certainly didnt happen overnite!!!!!!

take a look at the history of the earth and what has been different in the last 100-150 years or so.....

Originally posted by Jenn
take a look at the history of the earth and what has been different in the last 100-150 years or so.....
If I remember correctly, the rate of climate change has increased dramatically in the last 35 years.

-spence

is here to stay..... but lets say the average mean temperature increases by just one degree. that will increase the oceans height by ten feet.... which means fishing "in" downtown Boston, Providence , Newyork and any other coastal city will happen.

But the main thing to realize is that when the polar ice caps and or glaciers melt and add all that water to our ecosystem,
it will increase precipitation otherwise known as rain and or snow making for huge blizzards ...with ten foot snowfalls becoming normal and not the unusual.... so that will make for real long NARLEY winters that makes this winter of 2005 seem like a PICNIC in comparison.

I just want to know how this house is still there?

A very solid foundation :eek:

-spence

Raven,
I'm curious where you got your numbers from... 10ft is a big sea level rise, the IPCC high estimate is ~1m/100yrs so thats 3 ft by 2100, concievable 10ft by 23oo, I'm not doubting, I'm just curious what time scale your talking..

Also the way I understand it is that when the ice caps melt, sea level will rise, as thats where the water tends to go, but I'm not really sure that I've ever seen evidence that this increases the frequency/intensity of weather events (a la Day after Tommorow) Some arguments are made that increased temperature will increase the intensity of storms, but not the extra water.. again thats what I know, I'm curious on a source, I'd like to read it for my own personal edification

Jenn, whats different the last 150 years or so is burning fossel fuels for energy and releasing CO2 in the atmosphere... so that argument points more towards our impact... maybe thats what your where hinting at...

As far as the problem being around for a while, I stated in my first post that GWB didnt ratify this, but it's not all his fault, this has been going on for a long time... Conspirancy theory people argue that Detroit has had the technology to make practical Hydrogen cars since the 70's... it sort of makes sense... we could make bombs out of it in the 40's....

This is turning into a good thread... not really political, but fun..


Oh and Bart, Anytime I can help man :D if you get stuck shoot me an email....

Bryan

cover an extremely wide range of reading ....from emerging technologies via the net to tv specials on climate and reading books on history.... so that i cannot just pull a reference out of the air... but i already surmised that someone would challenge that 1 degree is equal to a ten foot rise in ocean height as i wrote it and will endeavor to locate the people who first made that estimation..... i was watching a program yesterday about these ice drillers that are taking core samples that are 150,000 years old and can be read (very similar to tree rings) on climate changes.

as far as fresh water...i read that it tends to stay on top of the ocean as a layer because of the reduced salinity and is therefore subject to increased evaporation and adds to the earths rain....system.

people think of deforestation of the planet as being the biggest threat to our ecology(gases) when in reality its the plankton in the earths oceans covering 3/4's of the planet that provide the majority of the oxygen.

satelite imagery is changing the way we look and measure
whats actually happening in the earths Oceans and how productive they are.... for example here's an interesting article on ( optical backscattering http://wwwnl.technologyreview.com/t?ctl=BA2E68:2ED7E87

The oceans are the roach motel of global warming. In the case of the oceans, it is heat which checks in but doesn't check out. Water has an extraordinary heat capacity. In other words, it holds heat better than almost anything else. That means that when the oceans warm, they lose that heat only slowly and reluctantly. Ocean heat stays around for a long time. And most of the heat from global warming -- about 90% -- goes into the oceans.

source: http://members.dcn.org/dorritie/now.html

Thats interesting, I was aware of the effect of freshwater supposedly slowing or shutting down the heat pump of the ocean by basically stopping the gulf stream...

As far as the ice cores, pick up a book called 2mile time machine by Richard Alley... great read on the Greenland Ice core project, and yes it is an annual record like tree rings...

There are some interesting ideas you brought up, I wasnt aware of a bunch of them and will require further review :D
I like this thread

I've read similar predictions that the temp rise will dramatically increase precip in northern lattitudes. Now where was that...

-spence

Anybody see the movie Day After Tommorow?
Rented it a few weeks back. Was alright, a little out there made you think WHAT IF....

I think that movie was good in that it made people think... and bad in that it made people think that it could happen like that...

I do like dennis quade though, he's a good everyguy actor like Bruce Willis etc... I can do without Ahnold, Stalone etc..

It is quite ironic that the Pentagon came out with some deadly serious predictions as to what global warming could really do to impact our quality of life...at about the same time ;)

-spence

The earth is and has been heated by the sun. Reflective heating exists and has existed for all time.

In the summer you climb into a dark car and its like an oven. A lighter color car a little less.

Now, drive around and check out all the huge shopping malls that have sprung up in the last 40 - 50 years.

Where there used to be huge tracs of open land with trees and grass with land that could absorb the rain that fell and put it into wells and underground streams there is now acres and acres of not only buildings over that land but huge parking lots keeping the earth from absorbing the rain and cooling things down.

Those humungous parking lots, all nice black tar to absorb the heat and pass it back up into the air aren't helping either. Walk across a field in your bare feet and then walk across a parking lot barefooted. I doubt it.

Where does all that heat produced by the black parking lots go? Heat rises! No, it's not going to happen in a week but over a period of 20, 30, 40 years, all that extra heat produced has to have an effect on the atmosphere.

Just a thought

Sarge

RIROCKHOUND

Doesn't that Cape Hattaras photo just show the normal motion of barrier islands and offshore currents ? Isn't that normal coastal geology and has nothing to do with global warming ?

NC..
I mentioned breifly what I felt about the previously...

Yes, on the shorter term less than a 100yrs, sea level does not drive coastal erosion... there are many geologists who think it does, but I am in the camp that believes erosion is storm driven... on the scale of 500-1000's of years sea level does determine where the shoreline will be, but as it effects on structures is minimal... heres why I think that

Take the SE New England coast for example; sea level at the Newport Tide gauge has risen about 2.7mm/yr since it was installed, with some wiggle here and there. This ammounts to about about 27cm of sea level rise/100 years... that means that if you built a house on the Charlestown Barrier after the Hurricane of 1938, your house is ~65 years old. Sea level has risen ~7" since then... Your averave storm surge on the Sshore in '38 was ~15ft give or take... 6" is chump change on that...

Short term erosion on the coast is driven by storms, tropical and extra tropical (NE'ers), and are generally based on these factors
(Hayes and Boothroyd, 1969)
1. Storm intensity
2. Storm track (east or west of location)
3. Stage of the tide (spring/neap)
4. Storm Duration (Often why SE'ers are more erosive than thier cousin the hurricane... they often last for many tide cycles, a hurricane is generally 1 tide cycle)
5. Time between storms


Where sea level rise has come into play is that houses built, even to code, that were high enough when constructed to allow the 100yr storm surge to pass under them are now not high enough to accomidate this surge... This is true for many structures...

Sea level also dictates where on the shelf the shoreline (barriers) will be, which is also dictated by the topography of the land behind the shoreline...

Bottom line, the beach will always be there, just not where you want it to be..


And Newboater.. that argument has been made and probably has some validity, but I think the amt of energy of the oceans far eclipses that of the effect of black top, but I still think it doesn't help matters much....

bryan-- i sent you an email. thanks man.

back at ya

for spence, from CNN -
%$%$%$%$ said he knows that some allies think that his only concern is national security, and he said that national security is at the top of his agenda. Yet, he said, "We also care about hunger and disease. We care about the climate."

Many allies are upset with the United States for refusing to approve the Kyoto climate treaty.

"They thought the treaty made sense," %$%$%$%$ said. "I didn't." He noted that the Senate had voted 95-0 against the treaty. Yet, %$%$%$%$ said there were other ways to deal with the problem of global warming and that he would talk with allies about new technologies to deal with the issue.

Originally posted by RIJIMMY
[B]for spence, from CNN -
%$%$%$%$ said he knows that some allies think that his only concern is national security, and he said that national security is at the top of his agenda. Yet, he said, "We also care about hunger and disease. We care about the climate."
If Buhs had a track record of caring for hunger and disease I would think differently...but the simple facts are what He says and what He does are completely different.

Remember K3rry during the campaign? "this is the most say one thing and do another administration..."

They do a brilliant job of talking a moderate line, then walking in the other direction. Most people really don't pay attention, if the media reports it they are ridiculed as a liberal conspiracy.

Many allies are upset with the United States for refusing to approve the Kyoto climate treaty.

"They thought the treaty made sense," %$%$%$%$ said. "I didn't." He noted that the Senate had voted 95-0 against the treaty. Yet, %$%$%$%$ said there were other ways to deal with the problem of global warming and that he would talk with allies about new technologies to deal with the issue.
This is the same line He gave to the World 4 years ago. The Administration said they didn't agree with Kyoto and that they would provide a counter proposal we would agree to. It never happened, in fact they kept claiming we just needed to study the issue more...delay...delay...delay...now we're getting the same story all over :rolleyes:

I'm not saying Kyoto is a great proposal, but we need to engage with the World and provide some leadership. Doing so would require admitting there may be a problem, and this is the problem.

Americans need to come to Jesus on the environment. We have an extremely good lifestyle, but it comes at a cost. The rise of other industrialized nations like China and India will only put more pressure on the system.

Some (like Rush Limbaugh) would like you to believe that anyone who's environmentaly friendly is anti-capitolisim. By Buhs's behavior I'd have to say the Administration shares this opinion.

Again, this isn't partisan Buhs bashing...it's a pragmatic look at our economy and what's really happened the past 4 years.

-spence

i just wanted you to see that ALL of Congress voted against the treaty

Context is very important here. Buhs is referring to a Senate vote that took place nearly 9 years ago :rolleyes:

Today there is stronger support, and even John McCain (R) is a proponent of Congressional action.

The message isn't even really that the US should just sign up to Kyoto, but that we should enter the International dialog surrounding climate change.

The most powerful nation on the planet shouldn't be ignoring what's clearly a Global problem. It's called "pluralisim", something that most right-wingers are deathly afraid of.

-spence

I agree with you and think paving over the ground with Tar everywhere has to eventually contribute excess heat...
and its not just parking lots but every highway and street in america and in every country on earth including all the "MASS" incorporated within buildings as well. It always amazes me when doing remodeling how little insulation was used in the walls of many older houses and allot of the times there simply isnt any which creates massive heating fuel consumption and subsequent heat loss from those homes.

right now scientists have created insulation thats super thin yet insulates as well as three feet of fiberglass insulation.

but like the automotive industry...it isnt going to be for sale any time soon...same as the car that gets 200 miles per gallon of fuel.

i heard today that one of the biggest super malls is going to expanded to twice its size in minnesota...at a cost of 1.8 billion dollars or something like that..... its insane......:af:

I wonder what it would have been like, the debates and stuff, if the technology we have and the scientists we have now were around at the start of the ice age? "It's getting colder each year, the Mammoth's are dying and the saber tooth tigers are too" It is not getting colder it's your imagination" Oh yeah it's getting colder and it's all President Krag's fault that no good neanderthal!":laughs: :laughs: :laughs:

Why is it the US's responsibility to clean the environment? The US is at the forefront in working towards a cleaner environment on all fronts. We have the technology and resources and have made more steps to controlling pollution than any other country. Countries like China and India (asmentioned) and especially third world countries are the ones not doing their part to take the proper steps towards a cleaner environment. Many have no regulations at all regarding automotive emissions, water pollution, factory emissions, refuse management, etc, etc, etc.
I've traveled all around the world and seen much of it first hand in both third world and industrialized countries.

It's everyone's responsibility. A little leadership goes a long way...

I suppose I should stop mowing my lawn because my neighbor didn't.

-spence

everything turns into a bash fest with some :smash:

It's everyone's responsibility. A little leadership goes a long way...
:doh: If the US is at the forefront in this issue, isn't that leadership?:smash:

Originally posted by #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&
WOW I started this POST? :smash:

You started a good thread that almost deteriorated into a predictable and common anti-Buhs thread.

Originally posted by BigBo
:doh: If the US is at the forefront in this issue, isn't that leadership?:smash:
The US isn't at the forefront of this issue...

And 28, are you saying I didn't go a good job ;) :laugha:

-spence

Yo Spence; the big yellow one's the sun.:D

The US isn't at the forefront of this issue...

Okay, I'll bite. who would that be then?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by spence
[B]It's everyone's responsibility. A little leadership goes a long way...

I suppose I should stop mowing my lawn because my neighbor didn't.



Use a push mower. :D You can think while you mow and get your mind right. :laughs:

Originally posted by BigBo
Okay, I'll bite. who would that be then?
The EU, Japan etc...

We're typically a step or two behind. The reason for this is quite obvious, we have more to loose. That doesn't still mean there aren't problems that need to be addressed though.

The US has done many positive things at home over the years, often to correct bad or missing legislation previously. Recently there has been a tremendous amount of manipulation of science at the behest of industry, which won't show for many years...

-spence

about georges administration ignoring the scientific community's findings on global warming....





http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/02/21/%$%$%$%$.science.ap/index.html

because of global warming