Artic Melting...Not Just a Puddle Under Your Fridge

[Isaac Brock]

Try living in the North and see how "trivial" some of those changes are. The Inuk of Canada and Thule of Greenland have suprisingly long records of hunting patterns and ice extent. The change is real and certainly has not occurred since humans have occupied the Arctic.

After living there for a year, you can see the changes first hand. The ice roads are not open as long, permafrost is melting and buildings are being unsettled.

But like most things to do with the environment, the prevailing mentality is: "Out of sight, out of mind."

 

[freeandfun1]

But like most things to do with the environment, the prevailing mentality is: "Out of sight, out of mind."

It has nothing to do with "out of sight, out of mind". I grew up in Texas, and I know the winters there now are not as bad as they were 30 years ago.

Here is my take, I do think that man has had some effect on the environment but frankly, I think nature has had the most effect. Ice cores taken from Greenland prove that there have been many periods throughout time where the temperature of the earth has risen and fallen. Who or what is to blame is the debate. As I said, I believe it is a combination of the two.

JMHO.

 

[KarlMarx]

Try living in the North and see how "trivial" some of those changes are. The Inuk of Canada and Thule of Greenland have suprisingly long records of hunting patterns and ice extent. The change is real and certainly has not occurred since humans have occupied the Arctic.

After living there for a year, you can see the changes first hand. The ice roads are not open as long, permafrost is melting and buildings are being unsettled.

But like most things to do with the environment, the prevailing mentality is: "Out of sight, out of mind."

But, does that mean that these changes were caused by humans? Not necessarily. It is possible that the climate of the Earth is changing, but then it wouldn't be the first time.

The climate of the last 10,000 years or so has been remarkably stable. In fact, that is part of the reason civilization is such a recent event in human history. Previous to 10,000 years ago, the Earth was hit with many ice ages. All of that happened without the Industrial Revolution or fossil fuels.

During these ice ages, humans could do little more than survive. With the warming of the Earth came the opportunity for humans to settle down instead of following herds of animals for food, it gave them the opportunity to farm instead of hunt and because of this, civilization became possible.

The story of the flooding of the Earth during Noah's time may actually be a recount of the thaw after the last Ice Age, when mean sea level was 500 to 1000 feet lower than it is today. With the thaw came a sudden increase in sea level, flooding human settlements which were near water.

 

[Isaac Brock]

It has nothing to do with "out of sight, out of mind". I grew up in Texas, and I know the winters there now are not as bad as they were 30 years ago.

Here is my take, I do think that man has had some effect on the environment but frankly, I think nature has had the most effect. Ice cores taken from Greenland prove that there have been many periods throughout time where the temperature of the earth has risen and fallen. Who or what is to blame is the debate. As I said, I believe it is a combination of the two.

JMHO.

Perhaps, but when the world's foremost leading scientists meet and jointly say that there is sufficient evidence to suggest that global warming is real and correlates not only to the rise of human industry, but also does not correlate in the proper timescale to to micro-climate changes, I say there is merit to their point (To this I refer to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)). Even these scientists seem agree, and I certainly concede, that the link is not absolute, but rather likely.

However, even if you are convinced that global warming is likely not caused by human influence, as I'm sure you would agree that you cannot say for a fact that it is absolutely not, then is it not reasonable to suggest we err on the side of caution given the severity of the possible impacts. Given that there are also numerous other secondary benefits to reducing CO2 emissions, such as lowering of associated Ozone, NOX, SO4, H2S emissions, lower dependency on foreign controlled crude oil and decentralized and sustainable energy economy wouldn't it also be reasonable to suggest mitigating our activities may indeed be worthwhile, warming not withstanding.

 

[gaffer]

You all left out cow farts which some of these psuedo scientists are also claiming add to global warming. They say there are too many cattle and they produce too much methane. Its all because we eat to much steak, roast, hamburger cheese and milk. All these things need to be done away with to keep from melting the polar ice caps.

Oh yeah there are a number of active volcanos spewing ash, and multiple gases into the air. They need to be plugged immediately. Of course volcanos must be Bush's fault.

 

[sagegirl]

How about serious efforts to reduce population growth...... and reduce your useage, reuse, and recycle.

 

[KarlMarx]

Its all because we eat to much steak, roast, hamburger cheese and milk. All these things need to be done away with to keep from melting the polar ice caps.

Oh well....There goes the Atkins diet!

In New Zealand last year, the government was considering a "gas tax" to be levied on livestock farmers because their herds were.... well.... you know!!!. They were to be charged by the number of head of livestock (sheep, cows etc). Needless to say, this wasn't too popular with New Zealand sheep farmers!

Comic Relief: Here in New York State, this year's State income tax form included a box that asked how much you spent on online purchases during the previous year. From that figure, you were levied a tax (because of course New York was being "cheated" out of tax revenue, since most online purchases don't charge tax). Needless to say, it wasn't very popular. Many people refused to fill it in. Can you imagine a similar question on your 1040 form?

"How many times did you pass gas during Tax Year 2004? If you are married and filing jointly, include the number of times your spouse passed gas, if you are claiming dependents, include dependents as well. Use Form 1999-FRT and follow the directions to determine the percentage of gas passing episodes were "light" (e.g silent but deadly ones that you blamed on a pet), "moderate" (somewhat audible, the type that family members reprimanded your for), and "heavy" (so called "barn burners", especially ones that sounded like the fog horn on a New England Light House). Include gas passing episodes brought about by illness, iritable bowel syndrome, bean burritos, brocolli, beer and prunes".

 

[Mariner]

about my attack on George Bush's policies relative to auto fuel efficiency and oil. Check out the comprehensive thread where Robert Kennedy, Jr. lays out the Bush environmental record. I don't see too many of you on that thread defending Bush's actions--because they are very hard to defend.

I bought a diesel car in expectation of tighter sulfur emissions that Clinton had put into place. The next week, Bush changed the rules so that the oil companies would have two additional years to reduce the sulfur. There's nothing gratuitous about attacking him for this. I'm just telling the truth. (I responded, by the way, by running my car on biodiesel, and I'm considering converting it to a "grease car" which will run on pure, free, non-petroleum-based used vegetable oil from McDonald's.)

As for people buying SUVs--I agree. Especially since they are less safe than cars. (My VW Jetta is almost twice as safe as a Ford Explorer--see Malcolm Gladwell's superb piece on why people think SUVs are safer in the New Yorker a couple of months ago.) But I don't want the air I breathe to depend on other people's choices about which car to drive. Heck, I can't get my own brother to stop driving an SUV. Hence I would like gov't action. And the loophole is so glaring that it's easy to hold Bush himself responsible for not closing it. As an oil man, he knows better than anyone.

When it comes to hybrids, I get a heavy heart each time I see a Toyata Prius. Why should that profit be going to Japan? In this century, to stave off environmental disaster, the world's cars are going to have to be made more efficient. If we were the leaders in this technology instead of the followers, we'd make a killing. Minimal gov't investment in energy technology (which Bush has cut and cut except for his questionably sensible hydrogen initiative) could put us at the forefront, just as gov't investment in NIH and other research institutions keeps us at the forefront of my field, medicine.

Regarding global warming, the models are now very sophisticated, and they take into account things like increased solar intensity. They all show a gradual warming of the earth beginning with the industrial revolution, and accelerating seriously. Why should this be any surprise? We have burned enough fossil fuel to increase the CO2 in the atmosphere by 30%. CO2 is known to trap heat (the "greenhouse" effect). I don't understand the people who dismiss this argument, and wonder whether they have looked at the actual research. Did you see the National Geographic piece a couple of months ago? It showed 16% of the world's coral reefs, the "rainforests of the ocean" where most diversity is found, have been heat-damaged, and the ocean temperatures are only a tad away from hot enough to kill off all the coral reefs. Besides, being wrong about global warming and investing money in getting off oil is far less costly than pretending it's not happening, and having to deal with massive economic change.

I have some faith in businesses to see the reality on this. A business council in CA recently estimated future losses related to warming in the billions. NH's ski industry stands to disappear when the snow goes, and it's going fast--Mount Kilimanjaro won't be snow capped any more in just 15 years. Glacier National Park will be glacier-free in a few decades--all of its glaciers are retreating fast. To skeptics I say, look at the evidence before you pooh-pooh it.

Also, Bush himself has dropped his usual codicil to the gov't scientific report on the subject. In other words, he's quietly accepting warming as real.

Mariner.

 

[fuzzykitten99]

1. I suspect the ridiculous fluctuations in oil prices will help drive that effort. Hybrid autos are becoming ever more popular and I suspect technologies in that arena will mature more quickly now.

2. I wonder just how much the SUV standards differ from the rest of the autos.

3. Investment in alternate energy technologies, while sounding like a relatively simple solution, is, in and of itself, not the only answer. There needs to be a concerted effort on the part of the international community to share technologies in that area. The Japanese seem to have the leading edge at the moment.

As for the rest of your post, blaming everything on Bush wont help anything. There have been Democratic Presidents in the recent past who have done less. There is no question that auto manufacturer and oil companies have a vested interest in keeping the petroleum based products around.

i agree...i'll buy a hybrid when it can tow a 20ft Bayliner inboard, and not get stuck in the launch. I'll buy a hybrid when it can tow a 2-horse trailer as if there is nothing there. I'll buy a hybrid when I can fit a family of 3, plus stroller, and other luggage, without sacrificing comfort. I'll buy a hybrid when they avg 200hp MINIMUM, so I can actually get up to highway speed in a reasonable amount of time. I'll buy a hybrid when they stop making them so damn ugly.

 

[Mariner]

using all those horsepower to haul something, I have no problem with it. It's the lines of shiny Range Rovers, Hummers, and Lexus SUV's that clog Boston's streets and smell like, umm, you know, that make me angry (as I pass them on my pollution-free skateboard, trying not to breathe the fumes).

Mariner.

 

[freeandfun1]

using all those horsepower to haul something, I have no problem with it. It's the lines of shiny Range Rovers, Hummers, and Lexus SUV's that clog Boston's streets and smell like, umm, you know, that make me angry (as I pass them on my pollution-free skateboard, trying not to breathe the fumes).

Mariner.

make sure you rant to all your liberal buddies driving around in their S500 mercedes', their super-big SUVs, etc. Here in Vegas I would be willing to bet that about 65% of the Kerry/Edwards bumper stickers were on the kinds of cars just mentioned. Plus, look at hollywood and all their superbig gas guzzlers, look at all your elite buddies in NYC (trump, etc.) that fly around in private jets, etc. Trump was a big Kerry supporter but every week you can see him on TV flying around in his private jet, having his private helicopter pick him up and take him places, etc. on the Apprentice. Funny how libs think it is okay for the likes of Trump, Kennedy, etc. to fly around in their private planes, but a hard working upper middle class American from the heartland better not think he/she is good enough to drive around in their SUV.

 

[Eightball]

Earth ice ages, and warm periods are cyclical. Just look at the geological record written in the earths strata.

Most of these scientists are as full of Bull as Al Gore.

Most environmental nazis are very selective in what articles they quote. Their authoritative references must validate their basic hatred of big corportations, and countries such as the U.S. that are large consumers of natural resources. The Kyoto Treaty is such an example. All of creation has presidence over human beings. The infamous Spotted Owl ruined the economy of coastal Northern California, and coastal Southern Oregon. Then, "heavens to bettsy" it was discovered that the poor little owl species doesn't just nest in Redwood trees, but likes barns and other human created structures. By the time of that rational revelation. Thousands of families dependent on the lumber industry were displaced, put on welfare, and basically negatively changed. Northern California(coastal) is only second to Berkeley in their high density of environmental activists that migrated their back in the late 1960's. The old time residents are hostages to the left wing environmentalists now. The quaint little town of Arcata, California looks like a mini-Berkeley. Logging, and lumber is now a cuss word, where once Arcata was a thriving lumber town. Arcata is the home of Humboldt State University.

These same stupid environmentalist, were responsible for massive, man-inspired salmon killings in Oregon, where they killed all farmed, Silver Salmons, to protect the native Silver Salmon populations. To this day, the environmentalist haven't given a rational explanation of how to discern between the physical characteristics of hatchery Silver Salmon and stream hatched Silver Salmon. The insanity goes on and on.

U.S. = Bad Polluting Country.

Regards, Eightballsidepocket

Regards, Eightballsidepocket

 

[Mariner]

I do indeed rant to anyone I know about gas mileage. My car gets 43mpg running on biodiesel.

Talking about Kennedys flying private planes is a bit cruel, don't you think?

Eightball--I don't understand the type of extreme anti-environmentalist position that you take. Do you forget that it was a Republican president, Teddy Roosevelt, who established the major national parks? Would you really be happy if Yosemite and Yellowstone were paved over?

Just to take a tiny example, 96% of California's original redwoods are gone. The very tallest one was cut down just for fun, not even for commercial use. I say Thank God for the environmentalists who saved the last 4%. You really want a California without redwoods?

When you take aim at the spotted owl protection, it seems you don't appreciate how ecosystems work as wholes, not as individual animals. We're part of the ecology whether we like it or not.

Do you enjoy breathing car fumes? Do you like it that you can't eat the fish from your local lake because some coal company resists regulation to force it to clean its soot? Are you thrilled that GE filled the Hudson River with PCBs? Does a strip mine look like a postcard from heaven to you? Without regulation, much of which results from environmental activism, we'd be living in a capitalism-created cesspool.

Take a look at how the few remaining wild places are experiencing soaring visitors--people need wildness. Have you never visited a place saved by an environmentalist and felt even a moment of gratitude?

Mariner.

 

[KarlMarx]

I do indeed rant to anyone I know about gas mileage. My car gets 43mpg running on biodiesel.

Talking about Kennedys flying private planes is a bit cruel, don't you think?

Eightball--I don't understand the type of extreme anti-environmentalist position that you take. Do you forget that it was a Republican president, Teddy Roosevelt, who established the major national parks? Would you really be happy if Yosemite and Yellowstone were paved over?

Just to take a tiny example, 96% of California's original redwoods are gone. The very tallest one was cut down just for fun, not even for commercial use. I say Thank God for the environmentalists who saved the last 4%. You really want a California without redwoods?

When you take aim at the spotted owl protection, it seems you don't appreciate how ecosystems work as wholes, not as individual animals. We're part of the ecology whether we like it or not.

Do you enjoy breathing car fumes? Do you like it that you can't eat the fish from your local lake because some coal company resists regulation to force it to clean its soot? Are you thrilled that GE filled the Hudson River with PCBs? Does a strip mine look like a postcard from heaven to you? Without regulation, much of which results from environmental activism, we'd be living in a capitalism-created cesspool.

Take a look at how the few remaining wild places are experiencing soaring visitors--people need wildness. Have you never visited a place saved by an environmentalist and felt even a moment of gratitude?

Mariner.

I can't say that anyone wants Yosemite paved over or wants to breathe polluted air or drink polluted water.

There is a difference between conservation (i.e. being a good steward of the Earth) and radical environmentalism.

Because of radical environmentalism, California forests were not cleared of dead trees and underbrush and the result was out of control wildfires.

The leading cause of death in under developed countries is not AIDS but malaria, which claims 2 million lives each year. Yet, DDT, which is an effective deterrent against mosquitoes that carry malaria is banned. And the reasons for the ban are questionable.

What people really don't like about environmentalism is that all too ften translates into people dying.

 

[Eightball]

I do indeed rant to anyone I know about gas mileage. My car gets 43mpg running on biodiesel.

Talking about Kennedys flying private planes is a bit cruel, don't you think?

Eightball--I don't understand the type of extreme anti-environmentalist position that you take. Do you forget that it was a Republican president, Teddy Roosevelt, who established the major national parks? Would you really be happy if Yosemite and Yellowstone were paved over?

Just to take a tiny example, 96% of California's original redwoods are gone. The very tallest one was cut down just for fun, not even for commercial use. I say Thank God for the environmentalists who saved the last 4%. You really want a California without redwoods?

When you take aim at the spotted owl protection, it seems you don't appreciate how ecosystems work as wholes, not as individual animals. We're part of the ecology whether we like it or not.

Do you enjoy breathing car fumes? Do you like it that you can't eat the fish from your local lake because some coal company resists regulation to force it to clean its soot? Are you thrilled that GE filled the Hudson River with PCBs? Does a strip mine look like a postcard from heaven to you? Without regulation, much of which results from environmental activism, we'd be living in a capitalism-created cesspool.

Take a look at how the few remaining wild places are experiencing soaring visitors--people need wildness. Have you never visited a place saved by an environmentalist and felt even a moment of gratitude?

Mariner.

You folks are so arrogant........" We are the only ones that love the planet. The rest of you are just user/wasters of the precious resources"

You folks also get a little too emotional, and need to tone it down. It really hurts the impact of your argument/debate when you start asking things like, "do you like breathing exhaust fumes......etc". Assinine statements do not promote healthy discourse, but just embitter those of us that have a different opinion on environmentalism. Bringing up Teddy Rooseveldt is an interesting point.........unfortunately, he would be very embarrassed to associate with the wackos that have hijacked the environmental cause presently.

There's a sensible approach to managing our resources, and there's a totally non-scientific, and archaic approach. The previous poster mentioned an extremely important flaw in the fanatical approach.......namely.......the lack of underbrush clearing in our National Forests.......with the sad outcome of millions of unnecessarily burned acres, including peoples homes destroyed too. Most of the present day wackos will write-off the homes as the fault of these folks for invading Mother Nature's domain.......and paying the price. Good forest management = Renewable resources! Environmental policy of the extreme allowed Yellowstone to burn for months! We do not live in a 14 century North America, where we can let forests burn for months until Winter rains/snows dowse them! We live in an era where man and his economy must integrate with and work with his renewable resources.........The Spotted Owl controversy was just a symptom of a sick philosophy that values all living things over humanity.

Humanity is willing to live with and manage it's resources, and definitely needs guidance from solid scientific know-how, not arrogant, non-scientific, folks who want to return the U.S. back to an 1800's economy and culture.

It's time the we stopped this crazy game of jousting windmills, and started facing the reality, that there are millions of people in the U.S. and we need to Agri-Farm our forests, and animal life to the fullest.........with a mind to protecting all species.....big or small.........and that includes the human species.

Regards, Eightballsidepocket

 

[musicman]

Mariner:

"Talking about Kennedys flying private planes is a bit cruel, don't you think?"

Well, what do you want, man? They've already fixed it so we can't talk about boats (John), cars (Ted), and amphibian concept vehicles (Ted, again - that one was a MISERABLE flop!).

 

[freeandfun1]

Mariner:

"Talking about Kennedys flying private planes is a bit cruel, don't you think?"

Well, what do you want, man? They've already fixed it so we can't talk about boats (John), cars (Ted), and amphibian concept vehicles (Ted, again - that one was a MISERABLE flop!).

I was talking about the radical environmentalist Kennedy that was on Hannity a while back talking about how Americans need to conserve by not driving SUV's, etc. Sean asked him, where are you going after the show. Kennedy replied, Miami. Sean asked, how are you getting there? Finally, Kennedy sheepishly admitted he was taking a private plane.

Oh yeah, we can't drive SUV's, but he can fly a private plane from NY to Miami and we are supposed to think nothing of it.

 

[musicman]

freeandfun1:

I gotcha. But, Mariner threw me a slow, fat one right down the middle of the plate, and I just had to take a poke at it!

 

[no1tovote4]

Um, ...

There is not any arctic melting....

At least according to this Canadian Scientist.

http://www.canoe.ca/CNEWSScience0104/24_artic-cp.html

 

[Trigg]

Um, ...

There is not any arctic melting....

At least according to this Canadian Scientist.

http://www.canoe.ca/CNEWSScience0104/24_artic-cp.html

Thanks for posting this sight. I think people need to realize that we have only had reliable data about environmental changes for about 50 years. We really don't know what is normal and what isn't. 100 years ago no one knew what was going on that far north, since it was so dangerous to get there.