FT - How global warming could suddenly tip over and ignite calamity

[tex-wyo-dem]

The heat is on: how global warming could suddenly tip over and ignite calamity

by Fiona Harvey
Financial Times
September 20, 2006

Scientists at Nasa, instead of staring into the skies, have been using satellites to look down at the world and track how it is changing. Within a year, the US space agency disclosed this week, an area of sea ice "the size of Texas" had been lost from the Arctic.

Data pieced together by Nasa showed that Arctic perennial sea ice, which normally survives the summer melting season, abruptly shrank by 14 per cent between
2004 and 2005. The report found: "Perennial ice can be 10 or more feet thick. It was replaced by new, seasonal ice only one to seven feet thick that is more vulnerable to summer melt."

<snip>

But will that be soon enough? A growing body of scientific opinion suggests the world may be about to experience not a gradual rise in temperatures over several decades but a wild careering into climate chaos.

That is because some of the changes triggered by warming temperatures create a "feedback" effect of their own. These feedbacks can cause the warming trend to accelerate further or bring serious disruption to regions of the world (see box).

<more>

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=56&ItemID=11008

[leftchick]

1. this scares me more than anything

and here I live in a country that rather than find a solution is exacerbating the problem. :cry:

[Lorien]

2. It should scare EVERYONE more than anything

but most of America is more afraid of "terra" and high gas prices than the total collapse of the planet's ecosystems.

Madness.

[Bandit]

16. I really don't think that is the case

I think they just want to be on the winning side and Republicqns have proved they can "win" elections. Though the GOP has admitted outright they are not out to win the hearts and minds of the people. The say quite proudly "They would rather be feared than loved". They are indeed feared and even their own base does not love them. Somehow (Diebold) they keep winning elections though. Most americans treat politics like a sports game. They truly do not understand the consequences of their actions.. IMO

[Lorien]

59. There have been many polls on DU about "top issues"

and Global warming generally doesn't make the top five.

If WE aren't seriously concerned, if our Dem reps aren't making it a top priority-then who will?

[Uncle Joe]

4. I agree leftchick,

I believe whatever kind of society, if any, survives the effects of global warming will judge us very harshly.

[tex-wyo-dem]

6. Yep, in the annals of human history...

we will be looked upon with contempt and as an expample of how not to conduct a society.

[The2ndWheel]

12. I doubt it

If a society survives, it'll do exactly the same thing we're doing today, because it would have to if it wants to survive.

If no society survives, they'll have a few different problems to deal with before our artificial civilization(both population and consumption aspects of it) gets back into a balance with existence.

[tex-wyo-dem]

14. I agree, but the ones that are most likely to survive are the ones

with the most money. They will initially be able to survive until/unless society totally collapses, at which time money doesn't have a whole lot of value anyway.

[FedUpWithIt All]

41. I tend to think just the opposite..

I think people who are accustomed to surviving will do better. Remember all systems will break down. And nobody really knows what will happen so planning is difficult. Money is only good if you know what to prepare for or if the societal systems still depend on money or commerce.

Certain populations on this planet have learned to survive and adapt. Those who rely on money to provide needed food, shelter, health care will not do well when these things are not readily available.

Planning will only serve to tie one down to a "safe spot". I fear that a nomad existence will be necessary as shifting weather patterns and geological catastrophes occur on a more frequent basis.

[Occulus]

42. Have you been reading Stephen Baxter also?

(If not, they're really good hard science fiction. Highly recommended.)

[FedUpWithIt All]

43. No, it is just my instinct.

My gut has been pulling me to figure out a way to live with less and form less attachment.

Long before i knew anything about the climate, i felt like things were not right. For years i have been reading up on new ways to find, grow and preserve food, build shelter, travel efficiently, animal husbandry, unconventional ways to treat medical ailments...


I have taught my children how to make a flint fire and purify water.

It makes me laugh to see it all written out. It sounds insane.. But i cannot ignore the part of me that needs to learn as much as possible...right now.

I am from the camp that feels we have less time than scientifically predicted. For years i have watched the scientists show consistent amazement at the speed of the process. We are in uncharted territory now.

Edited to add...My young teen daughter came up to me to show me the college she would like to attend in 4 years as i was reading this thread.

I am so sorry for the children.

[hatrack]

46. Did he write "Forty Signs Of Rain"?

I heard it was a good read, but haven't gotten around to it yet.

[YankeyMCC]

70. No that would be Kim Stanley Robinson

also very good

KSR is best known perhaps for the Red, Green, Blue Mars series which has an interesting allegory for the environmental movement in the Red/Green struggle debate between those that would keep Mars as it was found by humans and those that would 'terraform' (make it into another Earth or as close as technically possible)

[Ignis]

56. I second that recommendation.

Good stuff! :)

[reprobate]

73. Yes, but only for a short time, I fear. Once the ability to read and

write is lost, we'll only be remembered in folk tales told around the fireside.

And I fear that this will not be an exaggeration.

Has anyone considered the speed at which a civilization can devolve? Knock out the props of cheap energy and a temperate climate and what do you have left? Little arable land for food production, which will be produced by horse drawn plow. This means a MUCH smaller sustainable population and this will result in most of the systems we rely on in society breaking down.

And the root cause for all this is what? Corporate Greed. The refusal to face reality when profits are threatened. They are the ones who order the politicians to fight changing the laws to allow change in standards.

I'll say it again: The American Corporate Model will bring on the end of civilization as we know it. But we can't do anything to stop them because they own the politicians and as long as the politicians depend on corporate money to finance their elections, they won't allow any change.

But there is a simple answer: Public financing of all elections. Take the profit motive out of politics.

[Bigmack]

3. The Free Market...

... will solve the problem.

Jeeezus will come soon, so who cares. I'm outa here.

It's Clinton's fault.

It's just variation in climate. People have nothing to do with it.

Liberal hysteria!

Did I miss any bullshit rationalizations?

[Tesha]

7. Nuther: "It's just pointy-headed scientists." (NT)

[calimary]

20. Oh yeah - the "Junk Science! Junk Science" defense.

Don't forget that one.

Denial runs DEEP.

[Viking12]

8. You missed...

"China and India are growing so fast there's nothing we can do anyway."

But otherwise you about covered the bases.

[cobalt1999]

30. actually, that is the only one that is valid.

Without a way of reducing emissions GLOBALLY, it's a doomed strategy.

Unless there is a global agreement to say set emissions at a level of "x" per person that in total is far less than today, global warming will continue unabated.

I doubt there ever will be such an agreement with EVERYONE (esp. China & India), so I suspect the planet will be doomed...actually it probably already has passed the tipping point due to the latency of climate change, thus it's already doomed.

[Viking12]

35. Change has to start in the USA

As a nation we make up <5% of the world's population yet emit ~25% of all GHGs. Our "x" person is off the scales compared to India and China. Furthermore, in order for those countries to adopt more carbon efficient economies, we need to lead the way. We have the resources to develop the energy infrastructures that those developing countries can adopt as the emerge. It would be a win-win, global cooperation and economic development for the USA. Ignoring our responsibilities because China and India won't make a commitment is morally irresponsible.

[tex-wyo-dem]

44. BINGO! (n/t)

[reprobate]

74. I wouldn't be surprised to see big change start in China.

Their cities and rivers are facing huge polution problems and they have admitted the problem. Since they are not a "Free Market" economy- what a bullshit term, there's no such thing- change will come quicker there than here, where corporate profits determine rate of change.

[tex-wyo-dem]

10. You left out...

"It's just a plot by liberal scientists to get more research grant money"

And I think the correct Heritage Foundation approved talking point is "liberal alarmist."

[Tyler Durden]

11. We must protect Jobs/the Economy/the American Way of Life...

You forgot those.

[fshrink]

34. That was a Neanderthalian slogan.

Just one strain survived and is now back in power in the USA.

[leftofthedial]

5. big deal

more places to water ski

and get suntans



or so you'd think if you listened to mush limpballs.

[Rex]

9. This will mean weather that no one has ever seen before in places

that are not prepared for 'bizarre' weather conditions. Halliburton is probably getting ready to make a lot more money.

[DemoTex]

13. Big Oil (and their GOP) will continue to squash science ..

Too much money to be made.

[Solon]

15. So I guess my prediction is still on track?

Amazon Rain Forest turns to desert, starting next year(2007), leading to decreased oxygen levels in atmosphere, probably cut the total by about 5% or more. This also increases CO2 levels, by the way, creating a feedback loop that magnifies the greenhouse gas effect. Humans will feel, at sea level, what it is like to live a few thousand feet up in the air, think asthma attacks for healthy people.

Permafrost starts melting(note, this started a few years ago), and starts to release large amounts of Methane, a much more efficient greenhouse gas. The feedback loop mentioned above accelerates this melting, releasing large amounts of Methane into atmosphere.

Due to global climate change, the grass and farmlands of the Midwest turn to desert, from expansion of the Southwestern deserts. In addition, peak oil, probably hitting as soon as next year, makes the problem worse, food prices skyrocket, famine occurs worldwide, total amount of deaths would probably be in the billions.

By 2010, the North ice cap disappears entirely in summer, the Arctic sea warms up from absorption of the Sun's heat, ice reflects, water absorbs. In the same year, the glaciers of Greenland and the ice shelves of Antarctica collapse completely, causing ocean levels to rise anywhere from 30 to 60 feet or more.

Most coastal waters are now uninhabitable, over 2 billion people worldwide will be refugees, at the minimum, their homes and businesses now several feet underwater.

By 2014 or so, frozen methane under the sea floor vaporizes, due to rising sea temperatures, releases tons of Methane gas, this gas then further raises the temperature of the Earth by probably 3 degrees within a few years.

By 2018 or so, humans start abandoning the equatorial regions entirely, civilization, what is left of it, collapses for the most part, Grasslands and forests, mostly sub-tropical, start growing in regions of Canada and Russia, the former tundra regions. Humans, the few who are left, migrate with the forests. Humans start inhabiting the coasts around the arctic sea and possibly Antarctica as well. Total population by this time is MAYBE a billion people or so, and that is being generous.

However, Global Warming won't stop, in fact, most of the methane in the sea still hasn't been released, and it is slowly creating a runaway effect.

By 2030, the last humans on Earth, indeed, some of the last of the large mammals, start breathing their last, by 2040 or so, most go extinct, humans among them.

Can you tell I'm an optimist? ;)

Of course, this is only a WORST CASE SCENARIO, best case would be to delay EVERYTHING by about a decade, at best. Things seem to be speeding up, and I don't know if we can stop it.

[IA_Seth]

18. Uh..what is the basis of this hypothesis?

Not saying there isn't facts out there to support global warming, but your timeline in particular seems a bit outside the norm.

[Dhalgren]

22. I don't have the link, but a couple of weeks ago I read an article

that interviewed the scientist, James Lovelock (who needs no introduction). And he said that by mid-century at the latest all surviving human beings would be living on the coasts of the Arctic Ocean. He was not optimistic...

[kurth]

25. "Only nuclear power can now halt global warming"

- James Lovelock, 2004

[Solon]

47. OK, let's see if I can break it down...

The Amazon Rainforest has been suffering from a drought for almost 2 years now, a LOT of reduced rainfall. Now, the good thing is that the roots of most trees in that jungle are DEEP, so that they can withstand normal droughts for about 3 years, however, the bad thing is that there is NO sign that the drought is going to let up. If it continues into next year, expect large tracts of the Amazon to die off, dry up, and probably burn as well, huge forest fires, like we have never seen, could sweep a too-dry rain forest really easily. The worst part about this is that the Amazon is ONE of the reasons why our Oxygen levels on Earth are where they are at NOW, and also absorbs a huge amount of CO2.

Climate is notoriously hard to predict, but think about this, due to the huge amounts of freshwater, from Arctic and Greenland ices melting, the Gulf Stream, the thermal conveyor belt of the Earth is breaking down. This will have two effects, the first, and most obvious, are severe winters in Europe, but these are only temporary. The second effect is the warming, dramatic warming, of the Equator. This leads to two things, in areas of plenty of water, like the Caribean, Hurricanes of immense proportions are now fueled by this too warm water. The second effect is that the moisture in the air that normally has a chance to dump onto the Amazon Rain Forest is now sucked into the Caribean, causing a drought there.

As far as Permafrost melting, that has been happening at an ever increasing rate for years, and permafrost contains a HUGE amount of Methane that is released when it melts. Same for oceans that become too warm, they have frozen methane under the sea floor, and some of it is vaporizing and reaching the atmosphere right now.

The ice shelves of Greenland and Antarctica are sitting on LAND, by the way, so when they actually DO collapse and dump all that water into the oceans of the world, they will increase the total volume of the ocean where sea levels rise up to 60 feet, perhaps more.

By the way, I'm just extrapolating from current data, its a speculative prediction, that is true, but based on real data, and real effects. I fear that this could be the worst extinction event since the Permian extinction(95% of all life dead), and that one was triggered by a global tempurature rise of about 5 degrees, we are already one FIFTH of the way there, in a single century. By the way, CO2 levels are right now at their highest for the past 100 thousand years.

So far I mentioned at least 3 feedback loops that will occur due to Global Warming, and there is also another, the Ocean is reaching is peak as far as CO2 absorption, which has slowed down Global Warming for the past 100 years, expect that to fail soon, and its possible that CO2 will be released back into the atmosphere at any time. That's 100 years of pollution that can be released in less than year.

I'm just looking at the Earth's climate as a single system, a system that has been stable for long enough for civilization to arise on Earth. I have no doubt that after this instability passes that the Earth's climate will enter another stable period, what I do doubt are humans, and in fact, any large animals, surviving the period of instability. Some species will survive(Cockroaches!:)), but I don't think humans, with all our adaptability, will be able to survive it.

[tex-wyo-dem]

19. Unfortunately, you may not be off base with your prediction...

Check out Jared Diamond's "Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed"...a very insightful look at how societies throughout history have collapsed due to eco-meltdown.

http://www.amazon.com/Collapse-Societies-Choose-Fail-Succeed/dp/0670033375

[Delphinus]

29. Excellent book!

I've told countless people about how good it is, suggesting they read it. No one, yet, has gotten back with me to discuss it ... unfortunately.

[truedelphi]

21. I think you re being an optimist

Even if we do not blow ourselves to smithereens in a nuke war in the next eighteen months over Iran,
I think that this climate change will be worse and faster.

2030. Gosh I don't believe it. I think that 2015 is the outer edge.

There has been one scientific model created by a pair of scientists that stated that once the ocean currents stagnate TOTALLY, then the whole game is over in about two or three years.

We are already seeing moderate stagnation - the Caribeean to Scandanavian ocean currents are changing such that farmers in Finland are altering the crops they grow.

Ocean currents are responsible for the shift in weather, for the jet stream flow. When there is no longer any movement of weather conditions from one part of the planet to another, then illnesses begin to mushroom beyond control (continual dispersion by weather of the local atmospherres make viral and bacterial growth more difficult. You can picture this on a very local scale - if you have a bathroom with a lot of light, a lot of windows and ventilation through a fan, etc, you don't get mold or must. But if you close that bathroom off, no air movement, little light, and never clean it, yuck!)

[hogwyld]

28. So, are you saying over 5.5 BILLION people are going to die

in the next 11 years?

[ramapo]

39. That'll get peoples' attention

Should be quite a show. It'll certainly compete with American Idol and Desperate Housewives.

[pampango]

50. Are ocean levels rising already?

While I believe that global warming, partly natural cycle, mostly man made, is happening, it occurred to me that with all of this melting in the Arctic, ocean levels should already be rising, at least modestly. That should be a fairly easy measurement, shouldn't it? If it hasn't started to rise perceptively yet, is it because there is refreezing occurring elsewhere, like the Antarctic/

[Solon]

65. First off, yes it is measurable...

And we have only suffered a modest rise so far, as it should be, think of an ice cube in water, 95% of it is under the surface of the water, if an ice cube melts in a cup of water, the level of the water really doesn't change much. Same for the Arctic sea, think of the ice cap there as a big assed iceberg. Ocean levels won't rise dramatically till LAND based ice, in Greenland and Antarctica melt(its already started), and collapse completely into the oceans of the world. Then we will see rises of 30 feet or more.

Also, measuring ocean levels is actually quite difficult and ocean levels actually vary wildly depending on where on Earth you are measuring it. You have the Tides, caused by the Moon's and Sun's gravity interacting with the oceans, so you have to average that out. Not to mention the Earth's spin, interaction with continents and islands, currents, water tempurature, wind, etc. all effect what the water level is at any given time.

However, even given that, there is a measurable increase in ocean levels worldwide, look up the Island Nations of Nauru and Tuvalu, and see what is happening to them. I'll give a hint, Atlantis comes to mind.

[Lorien]

61. 2040-2050 has been my estimate also

for the end of most mammals (actually, most of life on earth) including us.

My oldest friend's father just retired from studying climate change in the Antarctic after about 47 years. What he told me about climate change 20 years ago made me decide never to have children. :-(

[Boomer]

71. Sounds about right to me, too

Just from reading the articles that Hatrack has posted on the Environment forum, your speculation tracks closely with milepost observations such as the Amazon rainforest's ongoing drought, the accelerated melting of the permafrost, the limited C02-absorbing capacity of the oceans, and last -- but by no means least -- the increasing risk of melting methane clathrates.

We're screwed. And unfortunately, we're taking most of the world's species along with us on the Great Extinction Ride of the Century.

At most I might quibble with the time scale, but not by much. If we're lucky we'll buy an extra decade or two, but in geological terms that's a nanosecond and we haven't got many left.

Each day that goes by, I'm more and more grateful that I don't have children. It would make me crazy to love a child and know what fate was in store for them.

[katty]

77. we are past the 'tipping point'

[AX10]

17. K & R!

[kurth]

23. EIGHT years are being wasted

thanks to the assholes we have in the White House.

[lutefisk]

26. It's Bush's reverse-Midas-touch on a global scale

And the horrible irony is that the rightful POTUS is Al Gore- a World leader in fighting global warming and related issues. If he had the power of the Presidency, could he slow this thing down...or is 2009 just too late???

[ramapo]

40. You are too kind

It is more like 35 years have been wasted because of the assholes we have in this country

[truthisfreedom]

24. this is why the thugs will lose this fall: they don't believe in "tipping

points." and they've reached one.

Myron Ebell of the US Competitive Enterprise Institute, a prominent sceptic on global warming, adds: "I don't think a scientific concept. It's a popular cliche that is being used by the alarmists to increase alarm. Mr Gore's slide show, movie and book use it."

cheneybush is the first name of every single thug in office. they've reached their "tipping point" and we're going to go 'thug tipping this fall. 8^)

[Shipwack]

45. "I don't think a scientific concept..."? Aaargh!

:wtf::wow:
This is the end result of poor science education in the schools. I did experiments in HS about how sometimes a chemical reaction will go slowly, if at all, then all of a sudden... boom! (so to speak...) Anyone that had a halfway decent science class would have seen some experiment like that and been able to grasp that we might not have have much warning when things go to pot in a big way...

Aaaargh! :argh:"I don't think a scientific concept"? Tipping points are a major consideration in electronics, such as in switching diodes. :banghead:

Someone give me a fork to shove up my ear to distract me from the pain... :mad:

[truthisfreedom]

48. consider zeners, negistors (look them up on google), 4-layer diodes...

there's tons of examples of "tipping points" existing in very simple electronic devices, and plenty more in nature. the threshold between solid and liquid is a huge consideration here... the arctic ice has hovered near freezing forever, and the slightest temperature change can drive all of it over the edge into melting... these people are IDIOTS.

[hunter]

27. Crosslink...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=115&topic_id=67956&mesg_id=67956

I'm pretty sure we've tipped. Life is going to get, um, interesting.

[rodeodance]

31. and bushco says it will hurt our economy IF we follow Kyoto!!

[rodeodance]

32. says this is a conceptual shift---

Though some warn against overstating the feedback effect and the near approach of tipping points, most climate scientists accept the possibility that the climate will change abruptly rather than warm gradually. But this is not adequately taken into account at the highest levels of politics. Mr Lenton, describing this as a serious omission, says the climate is subject to "highly non-linear change".

He elaborates: "The curve is not smooth, in other words. But the typical economic approach has smooth curves. This is a conceptual shift, from a smooth curve to stepped rises, that if policy-makers could get hold of could transform the way we think about this."

[DrunkenMaster]

33. Nobody Gives a Shit, even here at DU

oh, there may be some handwringing, but it never translates into action. Think I'm wrong? Check out this thread (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2172703&mesg_id=2172703) in GD and look at some of the posters here who will defend their "right" to drive their SUVS no matter what effect it has on the planet. Awesome.

[SammyWinstonJack]

53. Yes because it's ONLY SUVs that are responsible for Global Warming.

:eyes:

[ronnie624]

57. I don't believe the poster

to whom you replied meant to imply that SUVs are solely responsible for global climate change. I think he was using the unwillingness of so many to give up their SUVs as an example of the sense of entitlement that seems to be so much a part of the American collective consciousness (reinforced, no doubt, by the continuous bombardment of propaganda from corporate pop media). Even many liberals and progressives believe they have a "right" to operate a large, inefficient utility vehicle as a personal mode of transportation, when they could be driving a vehicle that gets at least twice the fuel mileage. This self-centered attitude is likely carried over into other areas of their lives as well, as indicated by the replies on the thread to which the other poster linked.

While SUVs are not THE cause of global climate change, they most certainly make a contribution, and their widespread use as a personal vehicle is a clear indicator of the prevailing attitudes of U.S. Americans.

[Lorien]

62. Amen. n/t

[faithnotgreed]

78. completely emphatically agree - well said ronnie

[Lorien]

64. Unfortunately, I have to agree that most don't

and most won't take action. The attacks on Prius owners alone make it seem as if DU is populated by a large percentage of Libertarians.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

36. Now tell me again why it's so important that you drive to work

even though public transit is available.

(People who don't have public transit available get a pass on this one, but they should start lobbying their local governments to make it possible to live without a car.)

[Jcrowley]

37. Most pressing issue of our time, survival is at stake

The federal government is the largest single user of energy inside the United States, and the Department of Defense (DOD) is the largest user within the federal government, accounting for 70% of the government’s total. Accordingly, DOD is a likely source of emissions reductions if the Administration is to achieve the level to which it agreed at Kyoto.

But according to an internal DOD memo subsequently made public, reducing DOD fuel usage by 10 percent, a not unlikely target, would have a significant impact on unit readiness of US ground forces, steaming time for US Navy ships, and flying hours for the aviation components of all the services. The memo states that in the event of such a reduction, it would be difficult for the American military to meet the requirements of the US national security strategy.

[tex-wyo-dem]

38. If the "US national security strategy" didn't include...

global imperialistic dominance, them I'm sure they would easily be able to meet this requirement.

on edit: make no mistake, global warming IS a national security issue (not to mention a "will the human species survive" sort of issue as well).

[NotGivingUp]

49. it's so sad to think we could've been on the right tract these

past years and perhaps prevented this from happening. now it may be too late.

[BlueJackal]

51. I don't buy it

My brother's a meteorology major at university. He tells me that almost all of his professors dismiss global warming as nonsense or at the very most a hyped-up theory.

I asked him what about the body of evidence such as the polar ice caps melting, etc.

He told me it was cyclical and that Venus has holes over both of its poles.

He told me that when scientists adaquately explain the holes over the poles on Venus then he'll believe that man is responsible for the holes over our own poles.

Just passing on what I was told.

[Lars39]

52. His professors are bucking the opinions of the world's scientists then.

If I was him I'd be looking to transfer out of that university.

[hatrack]

54. "Venus has holes over both of its poles" - Pardon me?

Please explain.

[BlueJackal]

58. There are holes in the atmosphere of Venus.....

I have no idea, that was cited to me as evidence as to whether or not man is responsible for global warming or not. That's all I was saying by that.

[Solon]

66. That is just bullshit...

No one is that stupid, first, Venus is a planet where one face of it faces the sun year round. Second, and this is important, I assume they are talking about the Ozone holes over the poles(Which is completely unrelated to Global Warming, BTW), well, Venus can't have those, because you need atmospheric oxygen to FORM ozone in the high atmosphere. Venus's atmosphere is over 95% Carbon Dioxide, at the surface its at over 80 Earth Atmospheres of pressure. The only thing that's at high altitudes of Venus's atmosphere are Sulfuric Acid clouds. By the way, there are NO holes that even so much as breaks through the cloud cover of Venus.

[BlueJackal]

79. The guy who told him that was a college professor......

I highly doubt he would just mindly spout something out of the blue. I'm sure he had some evidence backing up his claim. Maybe he meant that when somebody explains the holes over the poles of Venus then he'll believe that man, *rather than nature* is responsible for global warming.

[Solon]

80. Problem is, the phrase "Holes over the poles" is meaningless...

without context. Also, I have no clue as to how Venus, other than being an example of runaway greenhouse effect, relates to Earth's global warming problem.

I mean, given EVERYTHING we know about Venus, there is NO context where there would be holes over its poles. I already covered Ozone, and Venus's cloud cover is so thick that if you stood on the surface, everything would be red because only the longest of wavelengths can even reach the surface. Hell, the ONLY way we were able to map the surface of Venus is with Radar, mostly from Magellan, and also, more recently Venus Express.

The only other context I can think of is the Magnetosphere, problem is, Venus doesn't have one, unlike Earth, Venus doesn't have an Aurora Borealis. In fact, Venus loses millions of tonnes of its atmosphere every Earth-year, due to the Solar Wind directly colliding with it.

This sounds like a professor who is full of shit, I strongly doubt this person is a professor of ANY of the hard sciences.

[hatrack]

67. Yeah, and my dog used to howl to certain classical pieces . . .

Which has just about as much to do with anthropogenic influences on climate change as the "evidence" cited to you.

Jesus, this is like attending science class in Bronze-Age Britain.

[Solon]

69. I know what you mean...

I actually feel dumber since reading that post!

[tex-wyo-dem]

55. I don't care who you talk to...

global warming or climate change is not "nonsense" or a "hyped-up theory," unless you think the ice age and age of the dinosaurs was nonsense.

There is no debate anymore that we are indeed experiencing climate change now, the only debate that has remained is whether it is induced by human activity and how rapid these changes will take place. In the last few years, almost all noted climate scientists have agreed that human activity is the main cause of global warming that is presently occurring; the rate at which it will occur is still being debated, but recent studies and observations have shown that the earth's climate appears to be changing much more rapidly than previously estimated. Most major climate change events throughout history have happened over thousands or tens-of-thousands of years...some scientists today are saying that it is possible that an abrupt climate change event could happen within this decade.

I agree...your brother needs to find a different school.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

60. Your brother reminds me of a former student of mine.

This student was convinced that the planet Mars was very, very hot. Because it's red.

And I suppose Mars doesn't have very many greenhouse gasses. So there goes the global warming theory.

:rofl:

[dave29]

63. you are aware of the temperature on Venus, right?

894 degrees Farenheit. I would hope nobody uses Venus as a model for atmospheric similarities to Earth.

[Solon]

68. Only insofar as a demonstration of how good a greenhouse gas...

CO2 is. If Venus did have an atmosphere more similar to Earth's, which it could support given its mass, then it would be a LOT cooler than it is today, cool enough to actually support liquid water on its surface.

Beyond that, similarities pretty much end.

ON EDIT: Another thing to consider, Earth, given its position in the solar system, can develop into a planet with climate conditions more similar to Venus than you would think. Granted it is rather difficult to do this, but consider this, the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere is minuscule compared to Venus's, but if we didn't have any at ALL in our atmosphere, the average temperature of Earth would be a full 60 degrees cooler than it is now. That's how good CO2 is as a greenhouse gas. Think of it like this, a little CO2 is good, but if we have too little or too much of it, then that's an extinction event.

[stepnw1f]

72. "A Major University"... Surrrrrrre

What university is that: Fundi-Bubble Institute?

[demo dutch]

75. You don't buy it..but yet, you don't understand your brother's explanation

so you're just passing on what you were told??
Think for yourself before you're passing on nonsense that you don't even understand!!!

[Boomer]

76. Forget the disinformation

Drop by the Environment forum and check out about three to four years worth of mainstream scientific research articles supporting every point about global climate change that has been covered in this thread.

At this point, the only speculation is "how long", not "if". We're skirting on the edge of an extinction event similar to the Permian Extinction. It's happened before, it will happen again. The best we can hope for this time around is that doesn't happen in our lifetimes, and even that optimism is beginning to sound uncomfortably uncertain.

[Jazzgirl]

81. Does anyone remember the report the Defense Dept.

released a couple of years ago on climate change. Scurry. Here is a link to the report.

JG