Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Prof., Jun 27, 2008.
Our ignorance and incompetence is going to be the thing that destroys us.
That's always the case, this is no different.
What is the air and water temperature change from previous years around the North Pole?
How much of the warming around the North Pole is attributable to human activity, in percent or approximation?
Oh great, now we're going to have oil wars up there with Russia.
No wonder Russia likes global warming, bit warmer in the north and some oil too.
Global warming is not real.
This is pure sarcasm
The northward march of the treeline in Alaska is well documented and the temperature rise has been greater at the poles than near the equator. I believe Alaska has warmed some 5 degrees or so in the last few decades.
Many native villagers are losing their homes, their livelihoods and the ability to travel outside of their communities. If there's no ice planes can't land.
Much less the fact that oil industry in Alaska is totally dependent upon their ice runways. No ice, no oil, simple as that.
As far as percentages are concerned, I'll let you look that up yourself.
What exactly is the point of this argument? At best, isn't it essentially "not my fault and therefore not my problem"?
Head in the sand...
Don't really feel like scouring the internet for something you probably know and could just post without holding back information deliberately.
What in the name of Cookie Monster are you talking about?! I simply asked how much of the warming up there is attributable to humans...that's it.
And neither were the moon landings or September 11
I wonder which will come first- the scramble for resources in the North or South poles...?
Oh lord. Yeah- a bunch of liberals went up to the North Pole with blow dryers and melted the whole thing so that they could get the evil corporations to stop polluting the planet.
Brilliant - More water to run these cars!
Lee - I was kidding. I on your side
As we all know, the Earth goes through natural warming and cooling periods. What is disputed is usually whether some of the observed warming is manmade or just a natural cycle...
I don't think any/many credible sources would dispute that some (most) of the observed warming is manmade.
What I meant by what I said (and "what in the name of cookie monster" is awesome! by the way) is that I don't really get the argument. If climate change is happening and it's destructive, it seems like we still need to address the problem, regardless of whether humans are contributing 95% or 5% towards the change.
one way this will hurt world wide climate is the ice is fresh water or much of the ice cap is.
The problem with this is it will delute some of the warmer sea currents salt there for making it less dense. Normally this warm currents would sink to the bottom and be below a cold layer of water. Now they will mix with that cold layer instead of being blow them. THis will screw with weather patterns world wide.
If it man made or nature it still not a good thing. Now is man helping yes. Question is how much is man caused and how much is nature.
That's what I suspected you were saying, but I wasn't sure. IMNSHO, it would be incredibly arrogant of humanity to attempt to "fix" something that is just natural variation, even if it is destructive. It's no different than not fixing global warming to me.
As for my personal opinions: I'm what you call a global warming skeptic, and I love that label so very much. But before you all pounce on me, I also love technology, including green technology. In other words, I'll be driving an electric car because it's awesome, not because it's that much better for the environment (if it even is). What I will not stand by idly and acquiesce to, however, is watching the government dedicate trillions of dollars we don't have to fixing a problem that I believe can be remedied by private/public investment and capitalism.
Thats a lot of ice not to be there. Does the article say anything if there will ice at the earth's axis? No Ice up there at all would be truly catastrophic. Also to keep in mind is that the North Pole drifts from decade to decade. Its been tracked since 1900. link
Why are you such a skeptic?
maybe the Doomsday prediction of 2012 isn't so crazy after all....
I'd like to refrain from delving into this in this thread. It should suffice to say that I have no problem with conservation and stuff like that.