Interesting news article adding to the global warming debate
http://www.windsorstar.com/technology/Global+warming/5747606/story.html
http://www.windsorstar.com/technology/Global+warming/5747606/story.html
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Will you be watching the FIFA World Cup Final?
- Status
I totally agree with you.
That article has several inaccuracies in it too, funnily enough.
I agree with the gist of it - that SOMETHING strange is going on - but I'm not convinced its a conspiracy. I do think the Earth is warming, just not for the same reasons the popular says it is. Even so, I support green efforts, I just dont think get why people make a religion of it and want to burn "deniers" like me on stakes.
I agree with the gist of it - that SOMETHING strange is going on - but I'm not convinced its a conspiracy. I do think the Earth is warming, just not for the same reasons the popular says it is. Even so, I support green efforts, I just dont think get why people make a religion of it and want to burn "deniers" like me on stakes.
STS
Mafia Detective
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2009
- Messages
- 32,797
- Reaction score
- 2,943
there is a difference between caring about the environment and having to endure another fairytale since god is non-existent. just because there is no god doesn't mean i have to stop being a nice person, just as not believing in global warming doesn't mean i have to stop caring about the environment
+1
Arthur
Honorary Master
I don't think global warming is a lie. It might well be getting a little warmer. Maybe. Some say it's even cooling again, at least over the past 5 years or so... the changes are all quite natural and have been going on since there was an earth to have a climate.
But to aver that people are causing it is utter balderdash.
And of course we should reduce or even better eliminate pollution, waste, environmental blighting, etc.
But to aver that people are causing it is utter balderdash.
And of course we should reduce or even better eliminate pollution, waste, environmental blighting, etc.
copacetic
King of the Hippies
What's with all the preaching in a science article?
There is a massive difference between caring for the environment (not littering, not polluting rivers, etc.) and wasting countless billions on combating a threat that nothing can be done about. I have no doubts that the climate is changing (though whether it is really warming or cooling is debatable), but there is nothing we can do about this other than adapt...
All the AGW hype is there just to make certain people richer. The powers that be created a currency (carbon credits) that makes billions for a few, at the expense of the majority of the world...
All the AGW hype is there just to make certain people richer. The powers that be created a currency (carbon credits) that makes billions for a few, at the expense of the majority of the world...
The_Assimilator
Executive Member
That isn't even a news article, that's bits and pieces of Google search results joined together. It's been a while since I've read something as disjointed, factually inaccurate, and completely biased as that.
With that out of the way, the bullsh_t about the IPCC is exactly that. The IPCC's results have been peer reviewed multiple times and found to be valid. Nothing to see here folks, just another poorly-researched climate change denialist article, move along.
With that out of the way, the bullsh_t about the IPCC is exactly that. The IPCC's results have been peer reviewed multiple times and found to be valid. Nothing to see here folks, just another poorly-researched climate change denialist article, move along.
carstensdj
Expert Member
+1! It's become a bandwagon that is now overloaded!
lucifir
Expert Member
+1 .... just because we can waste resources ... does not mean we should ... we now have extinct animal species .... how long before we run out of certain resources?? Whether the climate changes or not should be the reason to change our behavior .... this the typical "god fearing" approach .. do something only because u will benefit at some point, rather than for the benefit of everyone
porchrat
Honorary Master
I would hardly call this a science article. It is in the Windsor Star and not a reputable journal. It is as a result allowed to employ the sort of language that a real science article would not traditionally be allowed to utilise.
This is why we separate journals from other publications.
copacetic
King of the Hippies
Science article, as in an article about a scientific subject, as opposed to a, say, a celebrity article (Paris Hilton's vagina or whatever).
That's all I meant!
+1
It is actually quite funny that so many of the posters take this seriously. When people lose respect for the academy and their trust in science and research, this is the sort of nonsense you end with.
Lightscribe
Banned
NOAA: Multi Year Ice Disappearing
Something I've mentioned before...Temperatures are rising four times faster than elsewhere in China, and the Tibetan glaciers are retreating at a higher speed than in any other part of the world ... In the short term, this will cause lakes to expand and bring floods and mudflows ... In the long run, the glaciers are vital lifelines for Asian rivers, including the Indus and the Ganges. Once they vanish, water supplies in those regions will be in peril.[33]
A summary:
Conclusion
Evidence for melting Arctic sea ice is available from many different sources. Warming Arctic landmasses; declining sea ice area, extent and thickness; decreasing salinity; and major changes in Arctic and North Atlantic air and ocean circulation all form part of the picture. Impacts have already been observed on many scales: to Arctic ice algae and other micro-organisms, to walrus and polar bear populations and to Arctic human inhabitants, such as the Inuit. Long term climate records suggest that most of this warming, especially after 1920, is driven by increasing levels of human-created greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
Computer modeling suggests that, if warming and levels of greenhouse gases continue to increase, most of the permanent ice pack is likely to melt and be replaced by seasonal winter ice. This Arctic meltdown would threaten the productivity of the Arctic Ocean and the continued existence of many Arctic animals, including walrus, many seal species, and polar bears. It would also threaten the traditional lifestyle of the Inuit, the indigenous inhabitants of the Arctic coast.
The accelerated Arctic warming that would result from the removal of the permanent ice pack would significantly increase precipitation over the Arctic Ocean and far North Atlantic. This precipitation, combined with meltwater from sea ice and the Greenland ice sheet, would reduce the salinity of the North Atlantic. Computer models suggest that these changes in salinity, especially if they happen quickly, may severely reduce or completely switch off the North Atlantic Conveyor, which is the major driving force for the Gulf Stream and global ocean circulation. This may significantly cool the climate of northern Europe, and is likely to severely disrupt global marine life and fisheries, as well as reducing the ocean's ability to remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere.
Something I've mentioned before...Temperatures are rising four times faster than elsewhere in China, and the Tibetan glaciers are retreating at a higher speed than in any other part of the world ... In the short term, this will cause lakes to expand and bring floods and mudflows ... In the long run, the glaciers are vital lifelines for Asian rivers, including the Indus and the Ganges. Once they vanish, water supplies in those regions will be in peril.[33]
A summary:
Conclusion
Evidence for melting Arctic sea ice is available from many different sources. Warming Arctic landmasses; declining sea ice area, extent and thickness; decreasing salinity; and major changes in Arctic and North Atlantic air and ocean circulation all form part of the picture. Impacts have already been observed on many scales: to Arctic ice algae and other micro-organisms, to walrus and polar bear populations and to Arctic human inhabitants, such as the Inuit. Long term climate records suggest that most of this warming, especially after 1920, is driven by increasing levels of human-created greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
Computer modeling suggests that, if warming and levels of greenhouse gases continue to increase, most of the permanent ice pack is likely to melt and be replaced by seasonal winter ice. This Arctic meltdown would threaten the productivity of the Arctic Ocean and the continued existence of many Arctic animals, including walrus, many seal species, and polar bears. It would also threaten the traditional lifestyle of the Inuit, the indigenous inhabitants of the Arctic coast.
The accelerated Arctic warming that would result from the removal of the permanent ice pack would significantly increase precipitation over the Arctic Ocean and far North Atlantic. This precipitation, combined with meltwater from sea ice and the Greenland ice sheet, would reduce the salinity of the North Atlantic. Computer models suggest that these changes in salinity, especially if they happen quickly, may severely reduce or completely switch off the North Atlantic Conveyor, which is the major driving force for the Gulf Stream and global ocean circulation. This may significantly cool the climate of northern Europe, and is likely to severely disrupt global marine life and fisheries, as well as reducing the ocean's ability to remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere.
Nice post actually... was not expecting that from you
Glad to see that the general consensus of this thread is that its complete fail
porchrat
Honorary Master
I see what you are saying but it is still a journalist writing it and not a scientist. They run on entirely different standards. Journalists can use whatever flowery irrelevant language or phrases they want in their articles, scientists can't. You can't hold this article up to the standards of an article written by a scientist.Science article, as in an article about a scientific subject, as opposed to a, say, a celebrity article (Paris Hilton's vagina or whatever).
That's all I meant!
copacetic
King of the Hippies
Of course.
- Status