PDA

View Full Version : Global Freezing?




Mr. Anderson
May 11, 2005, 12:27 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/05/10/gulfstream/index.html

So all of the members up north and across the pond - you might want to think about heading south permanently in the next decade or so. You might even want to sell your house soon before the market drops out of sight....

Strange how the global warming ends up totally messing the whole system and causing more change than anything else.


D



MongoTheGeek
May 11, 2005, 12:30 AM
I'm about 50 miles south of the furthest extent of glacier advance. Just need to plan ahead.

Mr. Anderson
May 11, 2005, 12:36 AM
I'm about 50 miles south of the furthest extent of glacier advance. Just need to plan ahead.

During what glacial epoch? And where exactly?

I just think we're all going to get a rude awakening and theres not anything we can do to stop it at this point. The paleoclimate's historical record shows that the Earth has had warm eras where there were no polar ice caps. If all the ice melts in the Arctic, that will be pretty bad, but if it lets the Greenland Icesheet melt, then we'll see sea level rise. Florida, Venice, Bangladesh and many atolls and islands around the world are going to have very difficult times ahead....

I'm going to have to go visit Venice soon, I think.

D

PlaceofDis
May 11, 2005, 12:41 AM
wow, first thought was the movie: The Day After Tomorrow

scary to think about it, but it could happen, obviously not that fast though...

Mr. Anderson
May 11, 2005, 12:44 AM
wow, first thought was the movie: The Day After Tomorrow

scary to think about it, but it could happen, obviously not that fast though...


No, they're talking in terms of decades - which, scary enough, is a blink of the eye in geologic time scales. Its events like these that could cause mass extinctions on a global scale. Imagine there not being any polar bears in the wild in 2040.....

D

PlaceofDis
May 11, 2005, 12:48 AM
No, they're talking in terms of decades - which, scary enough, is a blink of the eye in geologic time scales. Its events like these that could cause mass extinctions on a global scale. Imagine there not being any polar bears in the wild in 2040.....

D

i know, its going to happen in my lifetime and i'm terrified of it too. Rising sea levels are an obvious danger, but the climate slowly getting colder is hazardous as well. Not to mention the other extinctions that would occur. The change to the wildlife would be dramatic, and the plantlife would never be the same. I suppose that this is one way that the earth works to 'reset' itself in some ways.

Chappers
May 11, 2005, 03:34 AM
I hope the world wakes up a little here but we all still seem to have a blinkered view on this.

America is almost totally blind to the problem and everyone else is shuffling around it like a bunch of old folk trying to learn to dance the twist.

crap freakboy
May 11, 2005, 04:40 AM
better buy some thermal socks then.

wrldwzrd89
May 11, 2005, 06:33 AM
This is interesting to me, not because I live in an area directly affected (I used to, though), but because my part of Ohio seems to be noticeably colder than usual - at least it was until a few days ago, when we shifted to a warm pattern. However, we'll soon be turning cold again, thanks to another powerful Canadian cold front. This one will bring 2+ foot (61+ cm), heavy, wet snows to the northern Rocky Mountain area and the Black Hills in the Dakotas, as well as a significant outbreak of severe thunderstorms at its southern extent. I'll just be getting rain and some rumbles of thunder, though.

vouder17
May 11, 2005, 07:24 AM
I HATE the cold...hate it!!! I truly hope that this is not true. If it is i will seriously back up and move back south, i couldn't care less what i am studying as long as i am warm. And who can study when it is cold anyway???

whocares
May 11, 2005, 07:32 AM
No, they're talking in terms of decades - which, scary enough, is a blink of the eye in geologic time scales. Its events like these that could cause mass extinctions on a global scale. Imagine there not being any polar bears in the wild in 2040.....

D

I'm quite sure were already going through a mass extinction period, and it should only get faster with warming and other human activity induced changes...

As for sea level rise, the biggest problem isn't the input of molten ice (a relatively small volume) but ocean expansion due to its warming: as water gets warmer, its density decreases and it takes up more space :eek:

Applespider
May 11, 2005, 07:41 AM
I think one of the biggest mistakes was calling the problems of climate change 'global warming' in the first place. Many people in the industrialised north thought 'great, we'll have warmer summers' and ignored it.

And because everyone was still talking centuries rather than decades, we've all buried our heads in the sand. Even meeting the Kyoto agreement would just be the tip of the iceberg (if they're not melted by then!). Councils offer recycling because they're legally obliged to do it; and get a few people who actually do it because then they feel like they're doing their bit. Chances are they are the same people with a TV on standby in each room burning power all day.

Then again, this might be the only way for Equatorial Africa to get any decent level of investment from the developed world; if the fat cats here decide they want to live there...

Mr. Anderson
May 11, 2005, 08:24 AM
As for sea level rise, the biggest problem isn't the input of molten ice (a relatively small volume) but ocean expansion due to its warming: as water gets warmer, its density decreases and it takes up more space :eek:

I think you have your facts a little off here. Ice has more volume than water - but the surface ice displaces the same amount, just as if it was water. The large impact is the land locked ice in Greenland and the Antarctic - if all the ice melts on both poles it could raise the sea level 100s of feet - 100s means that there will be a lot of places that will be underwater - think of all the coastal towns around the world.....

D

broken_keyboard
May 11, 2005, 09:49 AM
Primitive man migrated out of those same areas when they got too cold.

Hot - Cold - Hot - Cold. The Earth just does that. Where did people get this assumption that it is supposed to be constant? Bad assumption.

emw
May 11, 2005, 10:34 AM
Very interesting article. I always wonder how much of this is "doom and gloom" and how much is real stuff to be worried about.

One comment that really caught my eye:

Such a dramatic climate change would not take place in five days, but rather several years, said Joyce.
Just the fact that this could conceivably happen over the course of only a few years is frightening, if true.

Edit: Then again, maybe we just need more blankets. (http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/05/10/swiss.glacier.reut/index.html)

takao
May 11, 2005, 11:14 AM
I'm going to have to go visit Venice soon, I think.

the absolute height between the waterline in venice/adria/mediterran sea is different from those in the atlantic though .. AFAIK the difference is 5-7 meter or more between Holland and Triest

that aside: Venice ( in a lagoon(sp?) after all is very aware of the problem and considering building dams who will provide water exchange but prevent the town going under

edit: on the news: it's not really news anymore... rather old story: my geography teacher told us about that what ? 8-9 years ago ? something like that

aloofman
May 11, 2005, 12:19 PM
I think you have your facts a little off here. Ice has more volume than water - but the surface ice displaces the same amount, just as if it was water. The large impact is the land locked ice in Greenland and the Antarctic - if all the ice melts on both poles it could raise the sea level 100s of feet - 100s means that there will be a lot of places that will be underwater - think of all the coastal towns around the world.....

D

He's right that much of the sea level rise is liquid expansion, not just the melting of ice packs on land. The oceans are so enormous that even a tiny heat expansion will produce noticeable changes in sea levels. AFAIK, no one is predicting a sea level change of hundreds of feet any time soon. Even the darkest predictions I've heard are talking about 20 feet within our lifetimes.

Really thick ice like in Antarctica takes millenia to react to atmospheric temperature changes. There's some reason to believe that the current melting is really a reaction to the end of the last ice age, not warming that's going on now. It's like thawing a turkey. The outside can be thawed while the inside is still frozen. If indeed humans are causing major climate change, then the distant future might be even worse than the next 50 years.

virividox
May 11, 2005, 12:43 PM
yeah must go to venice then :D

wdlove
May 11, 2005, 05:10 PM
I agree with the comment that this is a complex issue. The good news is that research is being done

pinto32
May 13, 2005, 01:23 PM
This is why its been great to see gas prices going up, even if its still only $2.00-$2.50 a gallon, its still better than $1.50. For the first time in years, SUV and trucks sales are supposedly going down. Still, its only a drop in the bucket, and I doubt that our species is smart enough (as a whole) to do anything in time.

As a little note of daily irony....here in Pennsylvania, we have several specialty licence plates (DARE, preserve our heritage, preserve our wildlife, etc.) The reason I mention them is the sheer irony of seeing the "preserve our wildlife" plate on a Chevy Suburban. (notto worry, the wildlife plates are still infinantly outnumbered by "god bless America" ribbons on SUVs)

aloofman
May 13, 2005, 02:23 PM
Whoops, duplicate post....

aloofman
May 13, 2005, 02:24 PM
In my opinion, it's not the prospect of global warming or our contribution to it that is the most disturbing part. The worrisome thing is that we don't know how the system works, what (or if) we're changing anything, or whether we could reverse any bad trends even if we were willing and able to do so.

Many scientists agree that climate change has had "tipping points" in the past, when a trend starts and leads in some inevitable direction for a long period of time. We have only a vague idea of what the next tipping point might be and we don't know if we could detect it while it's happening. It's possible that such a point has already happened and we won't realize it until long afterward.

I'm not worried about the planet. The Earth and much of the life on it will be around long after our species is gone. But no major climate shift (hotter or colder) has ever occurred during the span of human civilization. It's not clear at all whether we would adapt well if it happened.

topgunn
May 13, 2005, 04:36 PM
I was watching the news the other day and we almost broke a high temperature mark that was set in 1929. Hmmm, I guess it got hot back then, too. And I recall winter record lows that were set around the turn of the century. So it was hot and cold in those days?

We humans are a paltry, tiny party of this ecosystem. Consider the amount of "pollution" like CO2 and SO2 that volcanoes spew into the atmosphere every day. The Smithsonian's Global Volcanism Network estimates that there are 50 to 60 eruption each month. Levels of CO2 in the Cretaceous were many times what they are now? I guess Excursions were popular back then, too.

Dr.Gargoyle
May 13, 2005, 06:10 PM
if I understood it correctly aren't we suppose to see much more voliatile weather. Like El ninjio a couple of years ago. It raised the water temperature a couple of degrees. I went diving outside kenya the year after. More or less all the coral was dead. Just a grey mess under water. Apperently, all it took was small increase of water temperture. Same with southern Florida, how many hurricanes passed? 6? We have had snow fall in greece, which is a bit odd. In southern Sweden, where I live we see snow very selldom nowdays. :confused:
IMHO, I think we have f**ed around with mother nature a bit too much and now she is striking back at us. You guys from US should seriously reconsider signing the Kyoto protocol. Just my 2c.

Nickygoat
May 13, 2005, 06:14 PM
the absolute height between the waterline in venice/adria/mediterran sea is different from those in the atlantic though .. AFAIK the difference is 5-7 meter or more between Holland and Triest
Isn't sea level just that - level?

Dr.Gargoyle
May 13, 2005, 06:17 PM
Isn't sea level just that - level?
Compare tide...

topgunn
May 13, 2005, 07:06 PM
Isn't sea level just that - level?
Visit the Panama Canal and you will see how level the seas are. It's quite amazing, really.

Music_Producer
May 13, 2005, 08:53 PM
IMHO, I think we have f**ed around with mother nature a bit too much and now she is striking back at us. You guys from US should seriously reconsider signing the Kyoto protocol. Just my 2c.

Yeah, if we 'average guys' were in power, we would sign that Kyoto accord rightaway and stop all these insane wars going on around the world. I moved to the US from India a couple of years ago, and while the politicians in India are the biggest bribed officials..its the same here too. Except that, they do it in a more 'classified' manner..and in a twisted way.

Of course, no one gives a damn about the environment anyway..its not a 'profitable' sector..invading countries sure is.

Dr.Gargoyle
May 13, 2005, 09:47 PM
Yeah, if we 'average guys' were in power, we would sign that Kyoto accord rightaway and stop all these insane wars going on around the world. I moved to the US from India a couple of years ago, and while the politicians in India are the biggest bribed officials..its the same here too. Except that, they do it in a more 'classified' manner..and in a twisted way.

Of course, no one gives a damn about the environment anyway..its not a 'profitable' sector..invading countries sure is.
I honestly think politicians are a separate breed (perhaps caused by a biological experiment gone terribly wrong :P ). They seem to just the same all over the world. The only thing keeping their small and narrow minds busy, is how to get reelected. It still amazes me to see that when it really matters, we actually let the ass control the brain.

broken_keyboard
May 15, 2005, 01:33 AM
What you are not being told about climate change
(Canadian video)

http://www.friendsofscience.org/index.php?ide=3

Mord
May 15, 2005, 10:26 AM
makes me glad i live on high ground.

planes are one of the biggest causes of global warming, if you have the choice of taking the train or a plane take the train for the sake of the environment, the costs are huge and it's not in a hundred years it will come into effect it's in decades.

in my total ignorance i just hope that the gulf stream stopping should just about cancel out global warming in the uk so we stay about the same, but thats my nieve pipe dream

mproud
May 15, 2005, 03:18 PM
It's just speculation, people. Don't believe every single idea you hear about.

crap freakboy
May 15, 2005, 03:43 PM
It's just speculation, people. Don't believe every single idea you hear about.

Didnt the band play on while the Titanic sank?

MASSIVE enviromental change is on its way soon. Granted it wouldve changed in time but at a pace where we would have adapted naturally. The speed will be shocking. Saying that, the way we live does have to change just as dramatically so some good may come out of it. Mankind likes to think its so smart.

munchmime
May 15, 2005, 04:07 PM
Visit the Panama Canal and you will see how level the seas are. It's quite amazing, really.


either you are forgetting, or you just don't really know, but the panama canal was built above ground due to the immense effort it took for them to dig into the ground at the time.
They tried to dig it out like the erie canal, and failed. Another architect took it over and built it above ground.

http://www.pancanal.com/eng/general/howitworks/index.html

so you can not compare the oceans as being level by the way a canal is built.
same as the erie canal, Lockport, NY has more locks because some of the ground was too hard to dig through, so they had to vary the sizes of the locks to maintain the level of water for commerce (traffic) to flow through without scraping the bottom.

Mord
May 15, 2005, 05:25 PM
It's just speculation, people. Don't believe every single idea you hear about.

we are screwed unless we make major changes it's a fact dont ignore it, it's people like you who run things into the ground.

hob
May 15, 2005, 06:48 PM
"The environment is changing, we're all gonna have to make some changes, whilst not slight will still not be life-altering, such as using alternative fuels..."
"Really?"
"Yeah, seriously - here's the evidence"
"Oh... right... so it's just happening in Europe, right?"
"yeah... that's what the evidence looks like"
"Oh, ok then" [imaginary man gets into SUV and drives off]

I hate the way even by reading this thread I've felt slightly better about climate change - "oh, it's ok - it happens anyway..." c'mon people...! It's been *so* cold here in the last 2 weeks, I dunno bout you but I don't think it's usual...

Hob

crap freakboy
May 15, 2005, 07:40 PM
Btw Hob...don't watch Godfather 3...sooo bad

barneygumble
May 16, 2005, 02:36 AM
This is why its been great to see gas prices going up, even if its still only $2.00-$2.50 a gallon, its still better than $1.50. For the first time in years, SUV and trucks sales are supposedly going down. Still, its only a drop in the bucket, and I doubt that our species is smart enough (as a whole) to do anything in time.

As a little note of daily irony....here in Pennsylvania, we have several specialty licence plates (DARE, preserve our heritage, preserve our wildlife, etc.) The reason I mention them is the sheer irony of seeing the "preserve our wildlife" plate on a Chevy Suburban. (notto worry, the wildlife plates are still infinantly outnumbered by "god bless America" ribbons on SUVs)

This coming from a guy who leaves his computer on to let it fold, using how many KW of juice, not only that but recommends to thousands of others that they do the same. Just thought i would point that out, but gas usage and wasted electricity is a big issue that we need to think long and hard about and then do something

x86isslow
May 16, 2005, 03:34 AM
check out what this russian scientist is doing: Ice Age Park (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4533485.stm)

garybUK
May 16, 2005, 07:55 AM
Will living on t'pennines help??? anyway look which news company is reporting this story.... nuff said!

Abstract
May 16, 2005, 09:17 AM
Swedish girls may become extinct!! :eek:

MongoTheGeek
May 16, 2005, 09:24 AM
Swedish girls may become extinct!! :eek:
But what about the Swedish Bikini Team?

resm
May 16, 2005, 10:30 AM
What you are not being told about climate change
(Canadian video)
http://www.friendsofscience.org/index.php?ide=3



and some more about climate change and change of the poles position ......

http://www.worldproutassembly.org/archives/climate_change/index.html

resm
May 16, 2005, 10:40 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/05/10/gulfstream/index.html
So all of the members up north and across the pond - you might want to think about heading south permanently in the next decade or so. You might even want to sell your house soon before the market drops out of sight....

Strange how the global warming ends up totally messing the whole system and causing more change than anything else.
D

and the ones living south should be moving north.....

http://www.worldproutassembly.org/archives/2005/04/the_coming_ice.html

emw
May 16, 2005, 10:46 AM
I think the hardest part of all of this is our now ingrained skepticism regarding any reporting like this. Really, can anyone here read these reports, many of which present views that are, excuse the pun, polar opposites, without thinking "someone's got an agenda here"?

There is so much disinformation and confusing information - where do you go for reliable, unbiased research data? And how do you know?

hob
May 16, 2005, 10:51 AM
Btw Hob...don't watch Godfather 3...sooo bad
Don't worry, I didn't! (http://hobmcd.blogspot.com/2005/05/as-if-you-didnt-already-know.html)

Did anyone else watch the canadian film that was linked? It was in 5 parts. Quite interesting, though I'm a little skeptical about the sources - though they all seemed to be using eMacs and iMacs so they can't all be bad :p

The conclusions they draw is basically that climate change happens regardless of human interaction or not. I don't know how they could tell (perhaps someone could enlighten me) but apparently over the last few thousand years there have been several major temperature changes...

resm
May 16, 2005, 10:55 AM
I think the hardest part of all of this is our now ingrained skepticism regarding any reporting like this. Really, can anyone here read these reports, many of which present views that are, excuse the pun, polar opposites, without thinking "someone's got an agenda here"?

There is so much disinformation and confusing information - where do you go for reliable, unbiased research data? And how do you know?


The same way you gained your experience on other issues:
If somebody gives you a lot of BS over and over again, you stop beliving.

But if somebody has proven to you again and again that he/she is right then you can safely start to trust.

nbs2
May 16, 2005, 11:51 AM
apparently, we can't win - http://tinyurl.com/a8lzf

aloofman
May 16, 2005, 02:14 PM
Didnt the band play on while the Titanic sank?

MASSIVE enviromental change is on its way soon. Granted it wouldve changed in time but at a pace where we would have adapted naturally. The speed will be shocking. Saying that, the way we live does have to change just as dramatically so some good may come out of it. Mankind likes to think its so smart.

How is this claim any more supported than the people who say nothing is going to change? Using words like "massive", "shocking", and "dramatically" may make your point seem stronger, but it's no more based on facts than the scientist who says he's worried that temperatures will rise a few degrees in the next century. This is the kind of language that politicians like to use when they want to spin an issue, not when informed people are sharing information.

aloofman
May 16, 2005, 02:20 PM
Isn't sea level just that - level?

It's not just the tides that make sea level not level. It's not level all over the world.

First, the Earth is not a perfect ellipsoid. It's actually got lumps all over it that are not that perceptible. In fact, it wasn't even measurable until GPS came along.

Second, gravity is not uniform over the whole planet. Because some parts of the crust are made of denser material than others, gravity is slightly stronger on the surface in some areas. See an explanation of it here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3093927.stm

This causes water to "pile up" on areas that have stronger gravity and "hollow out" where it's weaker than average. For example, there's exceptionally strong gravity around the islands of Indonesia. So much so that if the Earth had uniform gravity, the area would be a big block of land and not islands at all.

aloofman
May 16, 2005, 02:25 PM
if I understood it correctly aren't we suppose to see much more voliatile weather. Like El ninjio a couple of years ago. It raised the water temperature a couple of degrees. I went diving outside kenya the year after. More or less all the coral was dead. Just a grey mess under water. Apperently, all it took was small increase of water temperture. Same with southern Florida, how many hurricanes passed? 6? We have had snow fall in greece, which is a bit odd. In southern Sweden, where I live we see snow very selldom nowdays. :confused:
IMHO, I think we have f**ed around with mother nature a bit too much and now she is striking back at us. You guys from US should seriously reconsider signing the Kyoto protocol. Just my 2c.

If the climate change situation is as serious as many fear (and we don't know if it is), then Kyoto doesn't go far enough. So the difference between the U.S. joining and not joining a watered-down treaty is not nearly as drastic as many people like to think. The carbon dioxide production of the United States is proportional to its share of the world economy, so it's not like we're egregious violators.

In my opinion the big push should be toward energy efficiency, not necessarily how much carbon dioxide a given power source creates. As long as the population keeps growing, we have to tighten the screws just to stay at the same emissions level. At some point, environmental protection becomes a population issue.

The greens also have to get their head together about nuclear power. It's the only large-scale, constant power source that produces no greenhouse gases. Wind and solar power might help in Europe, where the population is either stable or declining. But it won't make much of a dent in countries that are growing.

MOFS
May 17, 2005, 02:48 PM
makes me glad i live on high ground.

planes are one of the biggest causes of global warming, if you have the choice of taking the train or a plane take the train for the sake of the environment, the costs are huge and it's not in a hundred years it will come into effect it's in decades.

in my total ignorance i just hope that the gulf stream stopping should just about cancel out global warming in the uk so we stay about the same, but thats my nieve pipe dream

Actually from what I remember whilst watching Horizon, its the global warming that would stop the gulf stream. According to the episode I watched, the Gulf Stream is "powered" by salt water. As the planet warms, more rain occurs (due to the heat) and the icecaps melt, releasing more fresh water. Eventually, the scientists reckon that enough fresh water could end up in the Atlantic to stop the Gulf Stream, resulting in the countries of the Atlantic being sent into the next Ice Age. :eek: :( Which is why I either ride a bike or walk into uni...