Author Topic: Global Warming (Read 14814 times)

lukster · « **Reply #30 on:** January 23, 2007, 03:53:30 PM »

Perhaps you are not aware that the ice in Antartica is growing overall and not shriking tedrbr? I think the coastlines are safe.

lukster · « **Reply #31 on:** January 23, 2007, 03:56:56 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by midnight Target

quote:
Originally posted by lukster
I Heart MT

Don't we all?

Skuzzy · « **Reply #32 on:** January 23, 2007, 03:57:33 PM »

Speak for yourself, I dunt schwing that way.

lukster · « **Reply #33 on:** January 23, 2007, 04:05:14 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Skuzzy
Speak for yourself, I dunt schwing that way.

Awe come on, just look at those cute little quips.

Skuzzy · « **Reply #34 on:** January 23, 2007, 04:06:09 PM »

My Mom told me if I looked at those, I would go blind,..or something like that.

Debonair · « **Reply #35 on:** January 23, 2007, 04:13:09 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lukster
Perhaps you are not aware that the ice in Antartica is growing overall and not shriking tedrbr? I think the coastlines are safe.

antardic ice is bright green with gay pink polska dots

it is, ya knoe:aok

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #36 on:** January 23, 2007, 04:14:15 PM »

We just don't know enough to make any real hypothesis. Anyone who thinks they do is fooling themselves.

And I'll definately be anti environmental reform when the same people who are freaking out about global warming are the same people who hate business and success. Because of that connection, any environment reform legislationi will be anti business. I will not even begin to believe global warming scaredy cats until they distance themselves from anti business / pro communist organizations.

2bighorn · « **Reply #37 on:** January 23, 2007, 04:31:34 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lukster
Perhaps you are not aware that the ice in Antartica is growing overall and not shriking tedrbr? I think the coastlines are safe.

Antarctica is a desert in terms of precipitation. However due to climate warming the Antarctic region experienced increased snowfall (1992 - 2003) which thickened the ice cover (East Antarctica interior in particular) of about 3/4 of an inch annually.

However, due to the same warming the edges of ice shelfs are braking off (two satellites launched in 2002 by NASA are monitoring the ice cover) at a faster rate then increased snow fall is replacing it.

The measurement shows a loss of about 35 cubic miles of ice per year since 2002.

Source: NASA

midnight Target · « **Reply #38 on:** January 23, 2007, 04:42:58 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lukster
Awe come on, just look at those cute little quips.

And my rock hard adjectives.

lukster · « **Reply #39 on:** January 23, 2007, 04:54:24 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by 2bighorn
Antarctica is a desert in terms of precipitation. However due to climate warming the Antarctic region experienced increased snowfall (1992 - 2003) which thickened the ice cover (East Antarctica interior in particular) of about 3/4 of an inch annually.

However, due to the same warming the edges of ice shelfs are braking off (two satellites launched in 2002 by NASA are monitoring the ice cover) at a faster rate then increased snow fall is replacing it.

The measurement shows a loss of about 35 cubic miles of ice per year since 2002.

Source: NASA

I have to conceded the point that Antartica may be shrinking overall but it's hardly in danger of melting in 10 years swamping all coastal cities.

Donzo · « **Reply #40 on:** January 23, 2007, 05:02:26 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Yeager
Im with Gore on this one. Pollution, greenhouse effect and the proven fact that the worlds reserves of ice covered terrain are dwindling all point to the same conclusion: Human industry and fossil fuel burning heating and transportation are acting to threaten our longterm survival in the very near term.

How do you know that "the worlds reserves of ice covered terrain" have not dwindled in the past as they are now?

2bighorn · « **Reply #41 on:** January 23, 2007, 05:02:37 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lukster
it's hardly in danger of melting in 10 years swamping all coastal cities.

Correct. The amount of melted Antarctic ice is good for a sea level rise of about 0.02 inches per year. It would take some 3 to 4 hundred years to melt completely if rate of melting remains at current level.

Yeager · « **Reply #42 on:** January 23, 2007, 05:16:51 PM »

Guys, just keep an eye on global climate trends over the next four or five years.

Fact is that there is an ever increasing number of human beings feeding an ever expanding global industrial infrastructure generating an ever increasing load of greenhouse pollution. Scarey thing is that if this thing (global warming) should prove to be actually happening, there is a good chance it could be acting exponentially.

I hope you guys are right (global warming is a hoax), but everything Im seeing and experiencing, and just good old fashioned common sense tells me your wrong.

tedrbr · « **Reply #43 on:** January 23, 2007, 05:30:27 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by 2bighorn
Correct. The amount of melted Antarctic ice is good for a sea level rise of about 0.02 inches per year. It would take some 3 to 4 hundred years to melt completely if rate of melting remains at current level.

And if is limited to melt water only, and no further break-ups of the ice shelfs in West Antarctica occur in the future .... not that anyone saw the last couple break-ups coming before they happened so spectacularly..... then I'd concede the point that the ocean rise will happen slowly.

Nothing to say that those ice shelves won't break off in the future.... and the glaciers behind them now also have access to the sea --- previously they have been essentially held back. Domino effects. Almost everything in the overall climate model has a positive feedback/reinforcement loop associated with it, once you get past a certain point..... a tipping point..... where the original effects are no longer absorbed or dampened.

Large break ups of the ice shelf, melting of the pack ice, and large scale melting in Greenland are of concern. Sudden climate shifts also are a possibility; they've happened in the past, and we could be headed for another in the near future.

The one I personally worry about having the biggest effect in the shortest time period is the methane sequestered in Siberian permafrost, and the deep sea beds..... if the permafrost melts (open water over the Arctic Sea for longer periods each year, absorbing more solar radiation, thus heating up the northern latitudes, and melting the permafrost), or the seas warm enough to free up seabed methane, then all bets are off. There is so much methane there that can be released in a short span of time that we could see serious increases of world-wide temperatures .... and it is the worse kind of positive feedback loop...... Earth's version of the runaway greenhouse effect.

FBBone · « **Reply #44 on:** January 23, 2007, 05:43:32 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Yeager
Guys, just keep an eye on global climate trends over the next four or five years.

Fact is that there is an ever increasing number of human beings feeding an ever expanding global industrial infrastructure generating an ever increasing load of greenhouse pollution. Scarey thing is that if this thing (global warming) should prove to be actually happening, there is a good chance it could be acting exponentially.

I hope you guys are right (global warming is a hoax), but everything Im seeing and experiencing, and just good old fashioned common sense tells me your wrong.

Four of five years hardly seems like a sufficient sample, especially when you're talking climate/weather. Heck, five years ago it was hotter here and I sold/installed more air conditioners than ever. Not much snow then either. The opposite seems to be true in the last year. Perhaps 20-50 years would suffice.