GSA, AGU meetings.

[Old Rocks]

Well, the Geological Society of America, and the American Geophyisical Union will be having their annual meetings soon. End of October in Denver for the GSA, middle of December in San Francisco for the AGU.

There will be updates on what we are seeing being caused by the present warming. More lectures on the basic science concerning AGW as there was at the 2009 AGU convention.

And our resident liars will immediatly attack the 'logic' of anyone presenting the sites where one can listen to or read the lecture content. And challenge anyone that has the terminity to say that the scientists presenting the lectures actually are saying what they are saying.

But those of us interested in real science and not being 'politically correct' will keep you updated as to where you can find the real science concerning global warming and the climate change that it is driving.

 

[Chris]

Republicans have problems with "science" and "facts."

They prefer mythology and lies.

 

[fyrenza]

Will they be covering both sides of the issue?

I'd be interested in reading/hearing some debates.

 

[Chris]

Will they be covering both sides of the issue?

I'd be interested in reading/hearing some debates.

Will they be covering both sides of the Flat Earth Theory?

 

[Si modo]

Will they be covering both sides of the issue?

I'd be interested in reading/hearing some debates.

Will they be covering both sides of the Flat Earth Theory?

The fact that you think that is any kind of analogy speaks volumes. Or, do you parrot Gore and think the 'science is decided' on AGW?

 

[westwall]

Will they be covering both sides of the issue?

I'd be interested in reading/hearing some debates.

I'll be at the AGU meeting so I will let you know. Personally I doubt it. Many of my colleagues and I are very cynical with the organisation to be quite frank. Science has been all but abandoned in the search for the allmighty grant money. Pathetic.

 

[westwall]

Will they be covering both sides of the issue?

I'd be interested in reading/hearing some debates.

Will they be covering both sides of the Flat Earth Theory?

I will be quite interested to hear your spirited defence of the flat earth theory there Chris...very interested indeed!

 

[westwall]

Republicans have problems with "science" and "facts."

They prefer mythology and lies.

Wait a minute here, you guys are the ones promulgating the religion not us!

 

[Chris]

Will they be covering both sides of the issue?

I'd be interested in reading/hearing some debates.

Will they be covering both sides of the Flat Earth Theory?

The fact that you think that is any kind of analogy speaks volumes. Or, do you parrot Gore and think the 'science is decided' on AGW?

I never mentioned Al Gore once.

What speaks volumes is the ignorance of Republicans and their oil company buddies.

 

[Si modo]

Will they be covering both sides of the Flat Earth Theory?

The fact that you think that is any kind of analogy speaks volumes. Or, do you parrot Gore and think the 'science is decided' on AGW?

I never mentioned Al Gore once.

What speaks volumes is the ignorance of Republicans and their oil company buddies.

*sigh* Is the science decided or not, Chris, with respect to AGW?

 

[Old Rocks]

Will they be covering both sides of the issue?

I'd be interested in reading/hearing some debates.

There is no debate concerning the fact that GHGs warm the atmosphere. There is no debate that the atmosphere and oceans are warming. There is no debate concerning the fact that the CO2 level has risen about 40% in the last 150 years, from 280 ppm to about 390 ppm. That is higher than it has been in something like 15 million years. The CH4 level has risen from about 700 ppb to about 1800 ppb.

For more information concerning the realities, here are some sites from scientific sources.

A23A

C24A

H22A

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

 

[Old Rocks]

Arctic researchers and developers are to gather in Murmansk: Voice of Russia

This year’s anomalous heat has told also on the Arctic regions. The Murmansk forum will outline some guidelines for the study of its impact on the region’s wildlife. Speaking on the subject Aleksandr Frolov, the head of hydrometeorology and environment monitoring said: “The anomalous heat on the European territories was felt in Siberia and the European parts of the Arctic, be it even with a lower amplitude. The western parts of the Arctic had no ice – and that’s another anomaly. We monitor the climatic changes in the Arctis using our 49 research stations including 3 observatories that are quite well-equipped, and satellites. Another important goal is the study of permafrost in Siberia and Yakutia that was also affected last summer.”

“The rise of the upper temperature level of the permafrost amounted to 3 degrees, and that that’s a serious thing given that houses there are built on pillars, and if permafrost starts to melt, the pillars may sink with cracks in the walls of the houses. Then there are oil and gas pipelines and other infrastructure laid down in the permafrost. We are speaking about big cities – Norilsk, Dudinka and Vorkuta. Besides The world’s northern areas and their southern extremities can also be affected by temperature rises, spelling trouble to up to 800 million people. If the temperatures rise above 2 degrees or the trend of their steady growth can in the coming two decades result in the 57 centimeter level rise of the world ocean,” said Sergei Shoigu, the Minister for Emergency Situations and President of the Russian Geographic Society.

Director of the Geography Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences Vladimir Kotlyakov emphasized international cooperation in the Arctic Studies: “As one of the participants of the International Polar Year of 2007 and 2008, thanks to government’s funding Russia was one of the four countries that did work on more than half of more than 200 programmes it outlined, with good results, too. Companies that do business in the Arctic are invited to participate in the Murmansk forum, including oil and gas companies, shipping companies, and other market operators.”

 

[Old Rocks]

Will they be covering both sides of the issue?

I'd be interested in reading/hearing some debates.

So would I for that matter. You see, I do not like at all what I am seeing coming down the road. So I really would like someone to give me evidence that there are negative feedbacks that will dampen and prevent an adrupt climatic change that will disrupt the agriculture.

Thus far however, the kind of arguements presented on this board seem more concerned with the fact that we cannot say day to day what the temperature will be, than the fact that the glacial melt, the permafrost melt, and the ice melt in the Arctic Ocean has occured far faster than anyone thought possible. And then there are the clathrates outgassing in the Arctic Ocean. Last year, the Arctic Ocean, by itself, put more CH4 in the atmosphere than did all the other oceans of the world combined.

 

[westwall]

Geez olfraud you keep trotting those silly old links out and you havn't a clue what they are actually saying. Stop allready They are not useful anymore.

 

[westwall]

Will they be covering both sides of the issue?

I'd be interested in reading/hearing some debates.

So would I for that matter. You see, I do not like at all what I am seeing coming down the road. So I really would like someone to give me evidence that there are negative feedbacks that will dampen and prevent an adrupt climatic change that will disrupt the agriculture.

Thus far however, the kind of arguements presented on this board seem more concerned with the fact that we cannot say day to day what the temperature will be, than the fact that the glacial melt, the permafrost melt, and the ice melt in the Arctic Ocean has occured far faster than anyone thought possible. And then there are the clathrates outgassing in the Arctic Ocean. Last year, the Arctic Ocean, by itself, put more CH4 in the atmosphere than did all the other oceans of the world combined.

How about some real unadulterated evidence to support what you're saying? I would love to see some good hard raw data. You know the kind that the CRU can't seem to come up with. I think Jones' dog must have eaten it.

 

[Old Rocks]

Will they be covering both sides of the issue?

I'd be interested in reading/hearing some debates.

I'll be at the AGU meeting so I will let you know. Personally I doubt it. Many of my colleagues and I are very cynical with the organisation to be quite frank. Science has been all but abandoned in the search for the allmighty grant money. Pathetic.

Well, let's see, a member of the Royal Society, a member of the AGU, goes for a three month stroll in the Amazonian jungle surviving off of the land. Going to drive down in your GT 40 Ford?

I expect to see you making the presentation that will blow all the other speakers out of the water concerning global warming. I can expect that, can I not? Should be a minor accomplishment considering your other accomplishments.

 

[Old Rocks]

Natalia Shakhova interview on subsea methane in the East Siberian Arctic Shelf

Dear Readers,

The area of the East Siberian Sea is 2,000,000 square kilometers. The mean depth is 50 meters. It's a great big ancient tropical swamp. She said they found the concentrations of methane in the air that were 8-10% more than the global average (remember they used to believe that the subsea methane was frozen down there in the sea floor and couldn't get out?).

Climate Change: The Next Generation: Natalia Shakhova interview on subsea methane in the East Siberian Arctic Shelf

 

[Old Rocks]

Arctic 'Melt Season' Is Growing Longer, New Research Demonstrates01.27.10 New NASA-led research shows that the melt season for Arctic sea ice has lengthened by an average of 20 days over the span of 28 years, or 6.4 days per decade. The finding stems from scientists' work to compile the first comprehensive record of melt onset and freeze-up dates -- the "melt season" -- for the entire Arctic.

> Larger image
Arctic sea ice has been facing longer melt seasons, according to a new study. Credit: NASA/Thorsten Markus The melt season begins each April when the sunless winter gives way to sunrise and spring, and water and air temperatures rise. By September, the sea ice shrinks to a minimum and begins refreezing, bringing the annual melt season to an end.

The longer melt season, described by Thorsten Markus of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md., in the Journal of Geophysical Research -- Oceans, has implications for the future of Arctic sea ice. Open water that appears earlier in the season absorbs more heat from the sun throughout summer, further warming the water and promoting more melting.

NASA - Arctic 'Melt Season' Is Growing Longer, New Research Demonstrates

 

[Old Rocks]

Report details next steps in arctic shipping policies

UAF News and Events Blog Archive Report details next steps in arctic shipping policies

Download AMSA workshop report
Marmian Grimes
907-474-7902
9/15/10

As the climate warms and global commerce grows, the prospect of an arctic shipping route becomes more tangible. A new report released by the University of Alaska Fairbanks offers international policymakers guidance for navigating the political and practical ramifications of shipping in the Arctic.

The report, “Considering a Roadmap Forward: The Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment,” is the result of a workshop hosted by UAF in October 2009 as part of the University of the Arctic’s Institute for Applied Circumpolar Policy. The workshop drew nearly 70 experts from Canada, China, Denmark, Japan, Norway, the United Kingdom and the United States to examine the 17 recommendations outlined in the Arctic Council’s 2009 Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment.

“The workshop report takes the key AMSA recommendations and provides to the arctic community a list of action items to consider as we collectively navigate a future of change,” said Mike Sfraga, head of the UA Geography Program and UAF vice chancellor for students.
Sfraga co-chairs the Institute for Applied Circumpolar Policy with Kenneth Yalowitz of Dartmouth College. Yalowitz is director of the Dickey Center for International Understanding at Dartmouth.

 

[fyrenza]

Once upon a time, scientists would get together to research an issue, then publish their findings for all of the world to see and, although not Carved In Stone, the rest of the world accepted the findings.

NOW, however, it's become a race for the grant monies, the issues have become contaminated with politics, and the scientists have no problem using questionable data.

To think that we, the human race, are NOT having some effect upon our surroundings is ridiculous,

but to fail to take ALL of the facts into consideration is JUST as ridiculous.

With the AGW issue, we've got our infringement into the natural cycle of things, as well as, for example, the fact that we're undergoing a period of major sun spot activity.

I honestly wEnder how this research would be conducted if there were no politics involved in the mix... I mean, are ALL of the sciences and their research going through these sorts of SKIRMISHES within their ranks, where any findings not in agreement with the Desired Outcome are just ignored or bad-mouthed?

Bottom line, isn't the whole point to find ALL of the contributing factors and develop a "Report" that takes them all into consideration? "Reports" and research which do not do this are, themselves, going to turn into a Major Contributing Factor, imho.

Science is supposed to be an AGREEMENT, not a WAR between factions...