'Fountains' of methane 1,000m across erupt from Arctic ice

[SAT2]

How can we be so far behind the eight ball on this?

 

[Old Rocks]

Jeez, it didn't happen in the 1930's (when it was warmer) it didn't happen in the MWP (when it was way warmer, and it didn't happen during the RWP (when it was likewise way warmer). I say get a team down there and cap the plumes at their source and start generating some power with it!

10,000 sq. miles. A square one hundred miles on the side. And in this small area, they found over 100 of these plumes. Some exceeding 1/2 mile wide.

If you have a reasonable way of capping this, patent it. It will be a real money maker, and a boon to us all.

However, returning to reality, last year, they were looking at some plumes 100 meters across. And ten years ago, they were measuring methane in solution in the ocean, and the increase in percentage of methane in the air above the oceans. This is releases on an order of magnitude in the space of a year. That is correct, they did not have these plumes in the MWP when it was not warmer than at present. And it was not warmer the world over in the '30's, only in the continental US.

Methane, once it is in the atmosphere, for the first 20 years is over 60 times as effective of a greenhouse gas as CO2. The higher the percentage of methane in the atmosphere, the longer this more effective period lasts. In other words, an addition of 1 ppm would be the equivelant of an increase of over 60 ppm of CO2. Even discounting present methane and other GHG increases, that 1 ppm would push us over the equivelant of 450 ppm of CO2.

Going to be interesting to see what happens in 2012 in this region. A major burp, such as that of the Storega Slide of 8000 years ago could provide us with some real entertainment.

And?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

'Fountains' of methane 1,000m across erupt from Arctic ice
Daily mail ^ | 12.13.2011 | n/a

The Russian research vessel Academician Lavrentiev conducted a survey of 10,000 square miles of sea off the coast of eastern Siberia. They made a terrifying discovery - huge plumes of methane bubbles rising to the surface from the seabed. 'We found more than 100 fountains, some more than a kilometre across,' said Dr Igor Semiletov, 'These are methane fields on a scale not seen before. The emissions went directly into the atmosphere.'


(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
'Fountains' of methane 1,000m across erupt from Arctic ice - a greenhouse gas 30 times more potent than carbon dioxide | Mail Online

huge plumes of methane bubbles rising to the surface from the seabed

I thought humans were responsible for the increase of methane in the atmosphere.

Now we're supposed to believe that there is methane that we're not responsible for?

Impossible!!!

Next they'll tell us that termites generate methane that we can't be blamed for as well.

 

[Old Rocks]

How can we be so far behind the eight ball on this?

The scientists have been warning us for over 50 years that there could be some bad cess coming from the rapid warming. For the last 30 years, they have been stating that there will be some bad cess.

Now, we are seeing that bad cess. But the same people that were denying that there was any warming right up to 2000, when it bacame too obvious too all that it was warming rather rapidly and radically, are now denying that the changes we are seeing in weather, the increase in the number and ferocity of the extreme weather event, are happening.

But our society, and most others, for that matter, would rather try to live in an alternate reality, than face up to the evidence that the scientists are presenting. And, when reality arrives in their back yard, they will be the first to blame the scientists for not warning them.

 

[Old Rocks]

'Fountains' of methane 1,000m across erupt from Arctic ice
Daily mail ^ | 12.13.2011 | n/a

The Russian research vessel Academician Lavrentiev conducted a survey of 10,000 square miles of sea off the coast of eastern Siberia. They made a terrifying discovery - huge plumes of methane bubbles rising to the surface from the seabed. 'We found more than 100 fountains, some more than a kilometre across,' said Dr Igor Semiletov, 'These are methane fields on a scale not seen before. The emissions went directly into the atmosphere.'


(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
'Fountains' of methane 1,000m across erupt from Arctic ice - a greenhouse gas 30 times more potent than carbon dioxide | Mail Online

huge plumes of methane bubbles rising to the surface from the seabed

I thought humans were responsible for the increase of methane in the atmosphere.

Now we're supposed to believe that there is methane that we're not responsible for?

Impossible!!!

Next they'll tell us that termites generate methane that we can't be blamed for as well.

You are one fucking dumb asshole. We warmed the atmosphere and ocean with our GHG emissions. That is why the clathrates are rapidly degrading.

 

[SAT2]

A call for immediate action. Useless, of course, except in the context of the scientists being able to state "We told you so".

NGU brochure

Nothing will be done, and we will see all of this happen. The 'tipping point' is passed. As individuals, and as a nation, we need to plan for consequences. That is not going to happen, either. Except for a very few people, none will consider this serious until it is directly affecting them. Even then, many will insist it is 'cyclic' and has nothing to do with the GHGs that we put into the atmosphere.

How can we be so far behind the eight ball on this?

The scientists have been warning us for over 50 years that there could be some bad cess coming from the rapid warming. For the last 30 years, they have been stating that there will be some bad cess.

Now, we are seeing that bad cess. But the same people that were denying that there was any warming right up to 2000, when it bacame too obvious too all that it was warming rather rapidly and radically, are now denying that the changes we are seeing in weather, the increase in the number and ferocity of the extreme weather event, are happening.

But our society, and most others, for that matter, would rather try to live in an alternate reality, than face up to the evidence that the scientists are presenting. And, when reality arrives in their back yard, they will be the first to blame the scientists for not warning them.

I think that the rich figure that they can buy their way out of anything, and the average denier is their dupe in this, like they are in everything.

 

[Old Rocks]

From Australia, Russia, and the Missouri and Mississippi of the US, we can see that weather events of the magnitude of the past two years spare no one in their path, irregardless of position or wealth.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

How can we be so far behind the eight ball on this?

The scientists have been warning us for over 50 years that there could be some bad cess coming from the rapid warming. For the last 30 years, they have been stating that there will be some bad cess.

Now, we are seeing that bad cess. But the same people that were denying that there was any warming right up to 2000, when it bacame too obvious too all that it was warming rather rapidly and radically, are now denying that the changes we are seeing in weather, the increase in the number and ferocity of the extreme weather event, are happening.

But our society, and most others, for that matter, would rather try to live in an alternate reality, than face up to the evidence that the scientists are presenting. And, when reality arrives in their back yard, they will be the first to blame the scientists for not warning them.

The scientists have been warning us for over 50 years that there could be some bad cess coming from the rapid warming.

They've been warning us since the 60s?
Weren't they warning us we were entering a new ice age in the mid-70s?
Damn, you don't even realize the BS you're spreading, do you?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

'Fountains' of methane 1,000m across erupt from Arctic ice
Daily mail ^ | 12.13.2011 | n/a

The Russian research vessel Academician Lavrentiev conducted a survey of 10,000 square miles of sea off the coast of eastern Siberia. They made a terrifying discovery - huge plumes of methane bubbles rising to the surface from the seabed. 'We found more than 100 fountains, some more than a kilometre across,' said Dr Igor Semiletov, 'These are methane fields on a scale not seen before. The emissions went directly into the atmosphere.'


(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
'Fountains' of methane 1,000m across erupt from Arctic ice - a greenhouse gas 30 times more potent than carbon dioxide | Mail Online

huge plumes of methane bubbles rising to the surface from the seabed

I thought humans were responsible for the increase of methane in the atmosphere.

Now we're supposed to believe that there is methane that we're not responsible for?

Impossible!!!

Next they'll tell us that termites generate methane that we can't be blamed for as well.

You are one fucking dumb asshole. We warmed the atmosphere and ocean with our GHG emissions. That is why the clathrates are rapidly degrading.

Or, the Earth was warming before we added GHG and we couldn't slow down the warming, even if we tried.

 

[SAT2]

They've been warning us since the 60s?
Weren't they warning us we were entering a new ice age in the mid-70s?
Damn, you don't even realize the BS you're spreading, do you?

No "they" weren't. There was a Time magazine article about a possible new ice age. You're taking a popular press article from three decades ago and using it to attack reality. Fail.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

They've been warning us since the 60s?
Weren't they warning us we were entering a new ice age in the mid-70s?
Damn, you don't even realize the BS you're spreading, do you?

No "they" weren't. There was a Time magazine article about a possible new ice age. You're taking a popular press article from three decades ago and using it to attack reality. Fail.

Time said we were entering a new Ice Age while all the scientists said we were warmer than ever?

Any links to prove your claim?

 

[asterism]

'Fountains' of methane 1,000m across erupt from Arctic ice
Daily mail ^ | 12.13.2011 | n/a

The Russian research vessel Academician Lavrentiev conducted a survey of 10,000 square miles of sea off the coast of eastern Siberia. They made a terrifying discovery - huge plumes of methane bubbles rising to the surface from the seabed. 'We found more than 100 fountains, some more than a kilometre across,' said Dr Igor Semiletov, 'These are methane fields on a scale not seen before. The emissions went directly into the atmosphere.'


(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
'Fountains' of methane 1,000m across erupt from Arctic ice - a greenhouse gas 30 times more potent than carbon dioxide | Mail Online

huge plumes of methane bubbles rising to the surface from the seabed

I thought humans were responsible for the increase of methane in the atmosphere.

Now we're supposed to believe that there is methane that we're not responsible for?

Impossible!!!

Next they'll tell us that termites generate methane that we can't be blamed for as well.

You are one fucking dumb asshole. We warmed the atmosphere and ocean with our GHG emissions. That is why the clathrates are rapidly degrading.

These plumes are caused by a 1 deg rise in temperature?

 

[asterism]

From Australia, Russia, and the Missouri and Mississippi of the US, we can see that weather events of the magnitude of the past two years spare no one in their path, irregardless of position or wealth.

And Florida saw the same in 2004, 1960, 1845, etc...

Much of the nation saw this in the 1930s with the dustbowl.

Soooo..... ???

 

[SAT2]

They've been warning us since the 60s?
Weren't they warning us we were entering a new ice age in the mid-70s?
Damn, you don't even realize the BS you're spreading, do you?

No "they" weren't. There was a Time magazine article about a possible new ice age. You're taking a popular press article from three decades ago and using it to attack reality. Fail.

Time said we were entering a new Ice Age while all the scientists said we were warmer than ever?

Any links to prove your claim?

That's not quite what I said.

You are referring to a popular press article about global cooling.

When we talk about global warming, we're talking about a century of data supporting global warming.

You're combating [or trying to] that century of data by fighting with an article in a popular magazine.

 

[Old Rocks]

How can we be so far behind the eight ball on this?

The scientists have been warning us for over 50 years that there could be some bad cess coming from the rapid warming. For the last 30 years, they have been stating that there will be some bad cess.

Now, we are seeing that bad cess. But the same people that were denying that there was any warming right up to 2000, when it bacame too obvious too all that it was warming rather rapidly and radically, are now denying that the changes we are seeing in weather, the increase in the number and ferocity of the extreme weather event, are happening.

But our society, and most others, for that matter, would rather try to live in an alternate reality, than face up to the evidence that the scientists are presenting. And, when reality arrives in their back yard, they will be the first to blame the scientists for not warning them.

The scientists have been warning us for over 50 years that there could be some bad cess coming from the rapid warming.

They've been warning us since the 60s?
Weren't they warning us we were entering a new ice age in the mid-70s?
Damn, you don't even realize the BS you're spreading, do you?

Damn, you are even more of an ill informed and stupid fuck than I thought.


What were climate scientists predicting in the 1970s?


What were climate scientists predicting in the 1970s?
Link to this pageThe skeptic argument...
Ice age predicted in the 70s
"The media had been spreading warnings of a cooling period since the 1950s, but those alarms grew louder in the 1970s. In 1975, cooling went from 'one of the most important problems' to a first-place tie for 'death and misery'. The claims of global catastrophe were remarkably similar to what the media deliver now about global warming." (Fire and Ice).

What the science says...
Select a level... Basic Intermediate
The vast majority of climate papers in the 1970s predicted warming.


In the thirty years leading up to the 1970s, available temperature recordings suggested that there was a cooling trend. As a result some scientists suggested that the current inter-glacial period could rapidly draw to a close, which might result in the Earth plunging into a new ice age over the next few centuries. This idea could have been reinforced by the knowledge that the smog that climatologists call ‘aerosols’ – emitted by human activities into the atmosphere – also caused cooling. In fact, as temperature recording has improved in coverage, it’s become apparent that the cooling trend was most pronounced in northern land areas and that global temperature trends were in fact relatively steady during the period prior to 1970.

At the same time as some scientists were suggesting we might be facing another ice age, a greater number published contradicting studies. Their papers showed that the growing amount of greenhouse gasses that humans were putting into the atmosphere would cause much greater warming – warming that would a much greater influence on global temperature than any possible natural or human-caused cooling effects.

By 1980 the predictions about ice ages had ceased, due to the overwhelming evidence contained in an increasing number of reports that warned of global warming. Unfortunately, the small number of predictions of an ice age appeared to be much more interesting than those of global warming, so it was those sensational 'Ice Age' stories in the press that so many people tend to remember.



The fact is that around 1970 there were 6 times as many scientists predicting a warming rather than a cooling planet. Today, with 30+years more data to analyse, we've reached a clear scientific consensus: 97% of working climate scientists agree with the view that human beings are causing global warming.

 

[Old Rocks]

huge plumes of methane bubbles rising to the surface from the seabed

I thought humans were responsible for the increase of methane in the atmosphere.

Now we're supposed to believe that there is methane that we're not responsible for?

Impossible!!!

Next they'll tell us that termites generate methane that we can't be blamed for as well.

You are one fucking dumb asshole. We warmed the atmosphere and ocean with our GHG emissions. That is why the clathrates are rapidly degrading.

These plumes are caused by a 1 deg rise in temperature?

Global Warming and the Arctic FAQs | Center for Climate and Energy Solutions
Why study the effects of global warming on the Arctic?

For years, climate scientists have believed that the Artic would likely be one of the first regions to be affected by global warming and would likely experience greater warming than the rest of the world. Recent evidence has validated these concerns. While the world as a whole warmed about 1oF over the entire 20th century, parts of the Arctic have warmed by 4-5oF just since the 1950s.
The Arctic continues to warm at a rate about twice as fast as rest of the world. Scientists, as well as the indigenous people of the Arctic, have noticed dramatic changes in the Arctic environment that has affected ecosystems and wildlife, human settlements and infrastructure, and the way of life of indigenous peoples.

For these reasons, the ACIA was undertaken to evaluate whether these changes are caused by human activities; how Arctic climate change may affect climate change in the rest of the world; and the risks of continued global warming for the Arctic, its people, and its ecosystems and wildlife.

How will warming in the Arctic affect the rest of the world?

Climate change in the Arctic is expected to affect other parts of the world. The melting of ice masses in the Arctic could contribute significantly to global sea-level rise, and the addition of that fresh water to the salty oceans could change global ocean circulation patterns. Arctic tundra also stores huge amounts of carbon, which could be released to the atmosphere during a thaw, further enhancing the greenhouse effect and global warming.

How will warming in the Arctic affect the United States?

Some of these impacts are detailed in our report, “Observed Impacts of Climate Change on Natural Systems in the United States” by Camille Parmesan of and Hector Galbraith, released on November 10, 2004. Observed impacts in Alaska include the northward migration of treelines, increased melting of permafrost and the release of carbon dioxide from the thawing tundra, and changes in competition between species such as the arctic and red fox.

Additionial research on environmental impacts from global warming:

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No "they" weren't. There was a Time magazine article about a possible new ice age. You're taking a popular press article from three decades ago and using it to attack reality. Fail.

Time said we were entering a new Ice Age while all the scientists said we were warmer than ever?

Any links to prove your claim?

That's not quite what I said.

You are referring to a popular press article about global cooling.

When we talk about global warming, we're talking about a century of data supporting global warming.

You're combating [or trying to] that century of data by fighting with an article in a popular magazine.

When we talk about global warming, we're talking about a century of data supporting global warming.

Maybe when we talk about that, you have some papers published in the mid 70s that show the data back then supported warming. I'm sure there were thousands, 100% blaming manmade CO2.

Let me know when you find links to a bunch of that proof. Thanks!!

 

[Zander]

Global warming alarmists need to step up. It's time for you folks to walk the walk.....

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The scientists have been warning us for over 50 years that there could be some bad cess coming from the rapid warming. For the last 30 years, they have been stating that there will be some bad cess.

Now, we are seeing that bad cess. But the same people that were denying that there was any warming right up to 2000, when it bacame too obvious too all that it was warming rather rapidly and radically, are now denying that the changes we are seeing in weather, the increase in the number and ferocity of the extreme weather event, are happening.

But our society, and most others, for that matter, would rather try to live in an alternate reality, than face up to the evidence that the scientists are presenting. And, when reality arrives in their back yard, they will be the first to blame the scientists for not warning them.

The scientists have been warning us for over 50 years that there could be some bad cess coming from the rapid warming.

They've been warning us since the 60s?
Weren't they warning us we were entering a new ice age in the mid-70s?
Damn, you don't even realize the BS you're spreading, do you?

Damn, you are even more of an ill informed and stupid fuck than I thought.


What were climate scientists predicting in the 1970s?


What were climate scientists predicting in the 1970s?
Link to this pageThe skeptic argument...
Ice age predicted in the 70s
"The media had been spreading warnings of a cooling period since the 1950s, but those alarms grew louder in the 1970s. In 1975, cooling went from 'one of the most important problems' to a first-place tie for 'death and misery'. The claims of global catastrophe were remarkably similar to what the media deliver now about global warming." (Fire and Ice).

What the science says...
Select a level... Basic Intermediate
The vast majority of climate papers in the 1970s predicted warming.


In the thirty years leading up to the 1970s, available temperature recordings suggested that there was a cooling trend. As a result some scientists suggested that the current inter-glacial period could rapidly draw to a close, which might result in the Earth plunging into a new ice age over the next few centuries. This idea could have been reinforced by the knowledge that the smog that climatologists call ‘aerosols’ – emitted by human activities into the atmosphere – also caused cooling. In fact, as temperature recording has improved in coverage, it’s become apparent that the cooling trend was most pronounced in northern land areas and that global temperature trends were in fact relatively steady during the period prior to 1970.

At the same time as some scientists were suggesting we might be facing another ice age, a greater number published contradicting studies. Their papers showed that the growing amount of greenhouse gasses that humans were putting into the atmosphere would cause much greater warming – warming that would a much greater influence on global temperature than any possible natural or human-caused cooling effects.

By 1980 the predictions about ice ages had ceased, due to the overwhelming evidence contained in an increasing number of reports that warned of global warming. Unfortunately, the small number of predictions of an ice age appeared to be much more interesting than those of global warming, so it was those sensational 'Ice Age' stories in the press that so many people tend to remember.



The fact is that around 1970 there were 6 times as many scientists predicting a warming rather than a cooling planet. Today, with 30+years more data to analyse, we've reached a clear scientific consensus: 97% of working climate scientists agree with the view that human beings are causing global warming.

At the same time as some scientists were suggesting we might be facing another ice age, a greater number published contradicting studies. Their papers showed that the growing amount of greenhouse gasses that humans were putting into the atmosphere would cause much greater warming

So cooling temperatures didn't count, because CO2 was increasing? OMG!
You're fucking hilarious.
Please stop emitting CO2, for the planet.

 

[Old Rocks]

From Australia, Russia, and the Missouri and Mississippi of the US, we can see that weather events of the magnitude of the past two years spare no one in their path, irregardless of position or wealth.

And Florida saw the same in 2004, 1960, 1845, etc...

Much of the nation saw this in the 1930s with the dustbowl.

Soooo..... ???

So, in the last two years we have seen weather disasters around the world in very rapid succession.

Flooding in Australia: The reality of a secondary peril | Swiss Re - Leading Global Reinsurer

According to Mehlhorn secondary perils have contributed to about 30% of the total insured natural catastrophe losses over the last 30 years on a global level. Insured losses for recent years totaled around USD 10bn annually, which is well above the long term average.

The December 2010 – January 2011 events in Australia underline once again the importance

And this year in just the US, we had 12 Billion+ dollar weather events. Ignore it if you want, it is going to be at your front door eventually.