• Please be sure to read the rules and adhere to them. Some banned members have complained that they are not spammers. But they spammed us. Some even tried to redirect our members to other forums. Duh. Be smart. Read the rules and adhere to them and we will all get along just fine. Cheers. :beer: Link to the rules: https://www.forumsforums.com/threads/forum-rules-info.2974/

Polar Bear Swims For 9 Days In Search Of Sea Ice

pirate_girl

legendary ⚓
FF Patron
Polar bear's epic nine day swim in search of sea ice.
bearswim.jpg


A polar bear swam continuously for over nine days, covering 687km (426 miles), a new study has revealed.

Scientists studying bears around the Beaufort sea, north of Alaska, claim this endurance feat could be a result of climate change.
Polar bears are known to swim between land and sea ice floes to hunt seals.

But the researchers say that increased sea ice melts push polar bears to swim greater distances, risking their own health and future generations.

In their findings, published in Polar Biology, researchers from the US Geological Survey reveal the first evidence of long distance swimming by polar bears (Ursus maritimus).
"This bear swam continuously for 232 hours and 687 km and through waters that were 2-6 degrees C," says research zoologist George M. Durner.

"We are in awe that an animal that spends most of its time on the surface of sea ice could swim constantly for so long in water so cold. It is truly an amazing feat."
 
Saw a show yesterday where they showed how much more the polar ice was expanding this winter. Something over a million sq. miles more. There were a bunch of Russian ships trapped in the ice a week or two ago.
 
Polar Ice is Melting Fast

by Fraser Cain on September 13, 2006

New data gathered by NASA’s QuikScat satellite has found that ice at the Arctic polar ice cap is disappearing rapidly. Just between 2004 and 2005, the spacecraft measured a loss of 14% of the perennial sea ice; ice that normally lasts all year round. This is an amount of ice measuring 720,000 square kilometers (280,000 square miles), an area the size of Texas. Scientists expect that the coverage of perennial sea ice will continue to decrease this year as well.

NASA data show that Arctic perennial sea ice, which normally survives the summer melt season and remains year-round, shrunk abruptly by 14 percent between 2004 and 2005. According to researchers, the loss of perennial ice in the East Arctic Ocean was even higher, nearing 50 percent during that time as some of the ice moved from the East Arctic to the West.
The overall decrease in winter Arctic perennial sea ice totals 720,000 square kilometers (280,000 square miles) — an area the size of Texas. Perennial ice can be 3 or more meters (10 or more feet) thick. It was replaced by new, seasonal ice only about 0.3 to 2 meters (one to seven feet) thick that is more vulnerable to summer melt.
The decrease in the perennial ice raises the possibility that Arctic sea ice will retreat to another record low extent this year. This follows a series of very low ice-cover years observed over the past four summers from active and passive microwave satellite data.
A team led by Son Nghiem of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif., used NASA’s QuikScat satellite to measure the extent and distribution of perennial and seasonal sea ice in the Arctic. While the total area of all the Arctic sea ice was stable in winter, the distribution of seasonal and perennial sea ice changed significantly.
“Recent changes in Arctic sea ice are rapid and dramatic,” said Nghiem. “If the seasonal ice in the East Arctic Ocean were to be removed by summer melt, a vast ice-free area would open up. Such an ice-free area would have profound impacts on the environment, as well as on marine transportation and commerce.”
The researchers are examining what caused the rapid decrease in the perennial sea ice. Data from the National Centers for Environmental Prediction, Boulder, Colo., suggest that winds pushed perennial ice from the East to the West Arctic Ocean (primarily located above North America) and significantly moved ice out of the Fram Strait, an area located between Greenland and Spitsbergen, Norway. This movement of ice out of the Arctic is a different mechanism for ice shrinkage than the melting of Arctic sea ice, but it produces the same results – a reduction in the amount of perennial Arctic sea ice.
Researchers indicate that if the sea ice cover continues to decline, the surrounding ocean will get warmer, further accelerating summer ice melts and impeding fall freeze-ups. This longer melt season will, in turn, further diminish the Arctic ice cover.
Nghiem cautioned the recent Arctic changes are not well understood and many questions remain. “It’s vital that we continue to closely monitor this region, using both satellite and surface-based data,” he said.
This is one of three sea ice study results being released today by NASA. These findings are the result of a new study by NASA; the U.S. Army Cold Region Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, N.H.; and the National Ice Center, Washington, D.C. Study results are published in a recent issue of Geophysical Research Letters.
Original Source: NASA/JPL News Release




Care to comment about this ?
Is JPL incorrect?
 
I did not buy this the first time around. How do we know they havent always swam that far. Heck, that might be a leisurely float about for a polar bear.
 
Polar Ice is Melting Fast

by Fraser Cain on September 13, 2006

. . .

. . . blah blah blah . . .

. . .

Original Source: NASA/JPL News Release




Care to comment about this ?
Is JPL incorrect?

I don't know if JPL was correct in 2006 but it appears they are incorrect today and there seems to be many reports of ice caps growing.

Linky => (January 2010 report) http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2010/jan/10/inconvenient-truth-ice-cap-growing/

Dinky => (April 2009 report) http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,517035,00.html

Do => (March 2010 report) http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/03/oh_that_inconvenient_growing_p.html

But most interesting of all, is this report from 2011, which seems to indicate we are in the early stages of the next ICE AGE, while indicating that 2006 was the lowest level of ice coverage, it also indicates that the current ice crop is fairly low, with growing coverage in some areas and shrinking coverage in other areas. LINK => http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
 
I have no idea of the normal range of polar Bears, but I do know they routinely swim between Greenland and the Arctic cap. Actually saw them doing so, but have no idea what the distance was.
 
OK AV8R3400, here ya go, 2011 New York Times as googled just a few minutes ago.
Will this be enough for ya to read or will ya need more?
Some people simply will not accept the truth when it's not what they want to hear.


Search All NYTimes.com
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Science


Advertise on NYTimes.com


Report an Error
Science > Topics > Global Warming
Recommend
E-MAIL

Global Warming


Updated: Jan. 13, 2011

Global warming has become perhaps the most complicated issue facing world leaders. On the one hand, warnings from the scientific community are becoming louder, as an increasing body of science points to rising dangers from the ongoing buildup of human-related greenhouse gases — produced mainly by the burning of fossil fuels and forests. On the other, the technological, economic and political issues that have to be resolved before a concerted worldwide effort to reduce emissions can begin have gotten no simpler, particularly in the face of a global economic slowdown.
Global talks on climate change opened in Cancún, Mexico, in late 2010 with the toughest issues unresolved, and the conference produced modest agreements. But while the measures adopted in Cancún are likely to have scant near-term impact on the warming of the planet, the international process for dealing with the issue got a significant vote of confidence.
The agreement fell well short of the broad changes scientists say are needed to avoid dangerous climate change in coming decades. But it laid the groundwork for stronger measures in the future, if nations are able to overcome the emotional arguments that have crippled climate change negotiations in recent years. The package, known as the Cancún Agreements, gives the more than 190 countries participating in the conference another year to decide whether to extend the frayed Kyoto Protocol, the 1997 agreement that requires most wealthy nations to trim their emissions while providing assistance to developing countries to pursue a cleaner energy future.
At the heart of the international debate is a momentous tussle between rich and poor countries over who steps up first and who pays most for changed energy menus.
In the United States, on Jan. 2, 2011, the Environmental Protection Agency imposed its first regulations related to greenhouse gas emissions. The immediate effect on utilities, refiners and major manufacturers will be small, with the new rules applying only to those planning to build large new facilities or make major modifications to existing plants. Over the next decade, however, the agency plans to regulate virtually all sources of greenhouse gases, imposing efficiency and emissions requirements on nearly every industry and every region.
President Obama vowed as a candidate that he would put the United States on a path to addressing climate change by reducing emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas pollutants. He offered Congress wide latitude to pass climate change legislation, but held in reserve the threat of E.P.A. regulation if it failed to act. The deeply polarized Senate’s refusal to enact climate change legislation essentially called his bluff.
But working through the E.P.A. has guaranteed a clash between the administration and Republicans that carries substantial risks for both sides. The administration is on notice that if it moves too far and too fast in trying to curtail the ubiquitous gases that are heating the planet it risks a Congressional backlash that could set back the effort for years. But the newly muscular Republicans in Congress could also stumble by moving too aggressively to handcuff the Environmental Protection Agency, provoking a popular outcry that they are endangering public health in the service of their well-heeled patrons in industry.
Read More...
Global Talks
The United States entered the Cancún conference in 2010 in a weak position because of continuing disputes with China and other major developing nations over verification of emissions reductions, and its lack of action on domestic climate and energy legislation. Democratic leaders in the Senate in July 2010 gave up on reaching even a scaled-down climate bill, in the face of opposition from Republicans and some energy-state Democrats. The House had passed a broad cap-and-trade bill in 2009.
The Cancún conference ended in December 2010, with only modest achievements. The conference approved a package of agreements that sets up a new fund to help poor countries adapt to climate changes, creates new mechanisms for transfer of clean energy technology, provides compensation for the preservation of tropical forests and strengthens the emissions reductions pledges that came out of the last United Nations climate change meeting in Copenhagen in 2009.
The conference approved the agreement over the objections of Bolivia, which condemned the pact as too weak. But those protests did not block its acceptance. Delegates from island states and the least-developed countries warmly welcomed the pact because it would start the flow of billions of dollars to assist them to adopt cleaner energy systems and adapt to inevitable changes in the climate, like sea rise and drought.
But the conference left unresolved where the $100 billion in annual climate-related aid that the wealthy nations have promised to provide would come from.
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, under whose auspices these annual talks are held, operates on the principle of consensus, meaning that any of the more than 190 participating nations can hold up an agreement.
Background
Scientists learned long ago that the earth's climate has powerfully shaped the history of the human species — biologically, culturally and geographically. But only in the last few decades has research revealed that humans can be a powerful influence on the climate as well.
A growing body of scientific evidence indicates that since 1950, the world's climate has been warming, primarily as a result of emissions from unfettered burning of fossil fuels and the razing of tropical forests. Such activity adds to the atmosphere's invisible blanket of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping "greenhouse" gases. Recent research has shown that methane, which flows from landfills, livestock and oil and gas facilities, is a close second to carbon dioxide in impact on the atmosphere.
That conclusion has emerged through a broad body of analysis in fields as disparate as glaciology, the study of glacial formations, and palynology, the study of the distribution of pollen grains in lake mud. It is based on a host of assessments by the world's leading organizations of climate and earth scientists.
In the last several years, the scientific case that the rising human influence on climate could become disruptive has become particularly robust.
Some fluctuations in the Earth's temperature are inevitable regardless of human activity — because of decades-long ocean cycles, for example. But centuries of rising temperatures and seas lie ahead if the release of emissions from the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation continues unabated, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The panel shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with former Vice President Al Gore for alerting the world to warming's risks.
Despite the scientific consensus on these basic conclusions, enormously important details remain murky. That reality has been seized upon by some groups and scientists disputing the overall consensus and opposing changes in energy policies.
For example, estimates of the amount of warming that would result from a doubling of greenhouse gas concentrations (compared to the level just before the Industrial Revolution got under way in the early 19th century) range from 3.6 degrees to 8 degrees Fahrenheit. The intergovernmental climate panel said it could not rule out even higher temperatures. While the low end could probably be tolerated, the high end would almost certainly result in calamitous, long-lasting disruptions of ecosystems and economies, a host of studies have concluded. A wide range of economists and earth scientists say that level of risk justifies an aggressive response.
Other questions have persisted despite a century-long accumulation of studies pointing to human-driven warming. The rate and extent at which sea levels will rise in this century as ice sheets erode remains highly uncertain, even as the long-term forecast of centuries of retreating shorelines remains intact. Scientists are struggling more than ever to disentangle how the heat building in the seas and atmosphere will affect the strength and number of tropical cyclones. The latest science suggests there will be more hurricanes and typhoons that reach the most dangerous categories of intensity, but fewer storms over all.
Government figures for the global climate show that 2010 was the wettest year in the historical record, and it tied 2005 as the hottest year since record-keeping began in 1880.

Steps Toward a Response
The debate over climate questions pales next to the fight over what to do, or not do, in a world where fossil fuels still underpin both rich and emerging economies. With the completion of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change at the Earth Summit in 1992, the world's nations pledged to avoid dangerously disrupting the climate through the buildup of greenhouse gases, but they never defined how much warming was too much.
Nonetheless, recognizing that the original climate treaty was proving ineffective, all of the world's industrialized countries except for the United States accepted binding restrictions on their greenhouse gas emissions under the Kyoto Protocol, which was negotiated in Japan in 1997. That accord took effect in 2005 and its gas restrictions expire in 2012. The United States signed the treaty, but it was never submitted for ratification, in the face of overwhelming opposition in the Senate because the pact required no steps by China or other fast-growing developing countries.
It took until 2009 for the leaders of the world's largest economic powers to agree on a dangerous climate threshold: an increase of 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) from the average global temperature recorded just before the Industrial Revolution kicked into gear. (This translates into an increase of 1.3 degrees Fahrenheit above the Earth's current average temperature, about 59 degrees).
The Group of 8 industrial powers also agreed that year to a goal of reducing global emissions 50 percent by 2050, with the richest countries leading the way by cutting their emissions 80 percent. But they did not set a baseline from which to measure that reduction, and so far firm interim targets — which many climate scientists say would be more meaningful — have not been defined.
At the same time, fast-growing emerging economic powerhouses, led by China and India, still oppose taking on mandatory obligations to curb their emissions. They say they will do what they can to rein in growth in emissions — as long as their economies do not suffer. The world's poorest countries, in the meantime, are seeking payments to help make them less vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, given that the buildup in climate-warming gases so far has come mainly from richer nations. Such aid has been promised since the 1992 treaty and a fund was set up under the Kyoto Protocol. But while tens of billions of dollars are said to be needed, only millions have flowed so far.
In many ways, the debate over global climate policy is a result of a global "climate divide.'' Emissions of carbon dioxide per person range from less than 2 tons per year in India, where 400 million people lack access to electricity, to more than 20 in the United States. The richest countries are also best able to use wealth and technology to insulate themselves from climate hazards, while the poorest, which have done the least to cause the problem, are the most exposed.
In the meantime, a recent dip in emissions caused by the global economic slowdown is almost certain to be followed by a rise, scientists warn, and with population and appetites for energy projected to rise through mid-century, they say the entwined challenges of climate and energy will only intensify.
Hide

Related: More About Global Warming From The Learning Network


Retreating Ice


Erin Aigner, Jonathan Corum, Vu Nguyen/The New York Times

Arctic Melt Unnerves the Experts

By ANDREW C. REVKIN

Scientists are unnerved by this summer?s massive polar ice melt, its implications and their ability to predict it.

ARTICLES ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING

Newest First | Oldest First Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | Next >>


Multitude of Species Face Climate Threat

By CARL ZIMMER
The conclusion that global warming can speed up extinctions is equally as strong as the difficulty in linking the fate of any single species to climate.
April 4, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, ENDANGERED AND EXTINCT SPECIES, ENVIRONMENT
The Truth About Climate Change, Still Inconvenient

By PAUL KRUGMAN
The climate deniers can’t handle it when one of their own goes off script.
April 3, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: UNITED STATES POLITICS AND GOVERNMENT, RESEARCH, REPUBLICAN PARTY In the Mountains of Patagonia, a Harbinger of a Rising Ocean

By JUSTIN GILLIS
A study suggests that glacial melting in Patagonia has sped up by at least a factor of 10 in recent decades, dovetailing with temperature records suggesting that the Earth has been warming briskly since around 1980.
April 03, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: Glaciers, Global Warming, Ice, Patagonia (Argentina), Nature Republicans Get Inconvenient Replies at Climate Hearing

By ANDREW C. REVKIN
Republicans hold a climate hearing and get some answers they might not appreciate.
March 31, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: Global Warming, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Temperature, Berkeley (Calif), House of Representatives, Republican Party Assessing America's Energy Choices

By ANDREW C. REVKIN
An assessment of energy options, from nuclear plants to fuel from corn.
March 31, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: Air Pollution, Carbon Dioxide, Energy and Power, Ethanol, Global Warming, Nuclear Energy, Midwestern States (US), United States

March 25, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: Air Pollution, Alternative and Renewable Energy, Environment, Global Warming, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hedge Funds, Labor and Jobs, Referendums, United States Politics and Government, California, San Francisco (Calif), Silicon Valley (Calif), Farallon Capital Management, Brown, Edmund G Jr, Shultz, George P California Judge Calls Time Out for Climate Change Law

By FELICITY BARRINGER
Conservatives spent millions trying to derail California's global-warming law. Now it is on hold thanks to liberal activists.
March 22, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: Air Pollution, Carbon Dioxide, Decisions and Verdicts, Economic Conditions and Trends, Environment, Global Warming, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Prices (Fares, Fees and Rates), Regulation and Deregulation of Industry, California, Los Angeles (Calif), Oakland (Calif), Richmond (Calif), Sacramento (Calif), San Francisco (Calif), California Air Resources Board, Columbia University, Tufts University, Reich, Robert B Divergent Lessons from Japan's Calamity for McKibben, Monbiot

By ANDREW C. REVKIN
Leading environmentalists extract starkly different lessons from the earthquake and nuclear crisis in Japan.
March 22, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: Energy and Power, Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant (Japan), Global Warming, Japan Earthquake and Tsunami (2011), Nuclear Energy, Japan, McKibben, Bill U.S. Nuclear Push May Be in Peril

By JOHN M. BRODER; KAREEM FAHIM CONTRIBUTED REPORTING FROM BENGHAZI, LIBYA, and DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK FROM TRIPOLI, LIBYA.
Fragile bipartisan consensus that nuclear power offers part of answer to America's energy and global warming challenges is in question because of Japanese earthquake and tsunami that caused damage and radiation leaks in country's nuclear reactors; Pres Obama has been seeking tens of billions of dollars in government insurance for new nuclear construction, which has all but been paralyzed since Three Mile Island accident in 1979; photos
March 14, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: TIDAL WAVES AND TSUNAMIS, JAPAN EARTHQUAKE AND TSUNAMI (2011), ENERGY AND POWER, EARTHQUAKES, RADIATION, BUDGETS AND BUDGETING, NUCLEAR ENERGY, JAPAN, UNITED STATES, THREE MILE ISLAND (PA), OBAMA, BARACK On Earthquakes, Warming and Risk (Mis)Perception

By ANDREW C. REVKIN
A discussion of problems communicating risks attending earthquakes and global warming.
March 12, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: Disasters and Emergencies, Environment, Global Warming, News and News Media, Japan, Oregon, Pacific Northwestern States (US), Roberts, David House Panel Votes to Strip E.P.A. of Power to Regulate Greenhouse Gases

By JOHN M. BRODER
The sharply partisan vote, by a subcommittee, chips away at a central pillar of the Obama administration’s evolving climate and energy strategy.
March 11, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: UNITED STATES POLITICS AND GOVERNMENT, GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, LAW AND LEGISLATION, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, REPUBLICAN PARTY, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, OBAMA, BARACK Russian Heat Extraordinary But Not Unnatural

By ANDREW C. REVKIN
Russia's deadly heat wave was a rare event, indeed, but new analysis shows no hints of a link to building greenhouse gases.
March 10, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: Global Warming, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Research, Weather, Russia, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Academy Endorses Navy Concerns on Warming, Arctic and Law of the Sea

By ANDREW C. REVKIN
A scientific review endorses Navy concerns about security risks attending warming.
March 10, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: Defense and Military Forces, Global Warming, Humanitarian Aid, Ice, Icebreakers, Law of the Sea (UN Convention), Security and Warning Systems, Ships and Shipping, Arctic Regions, United States, United States National Research Council, United States Navy, Inhofe, James M Study Says Navy Must Adapt to Climate Change

By JOHN M. BRODER
A report from the National Research Council builds on previous work by the Pentagon, State Department, the intelligence community and independent groups that have concluded that climate change is a "threat multiplier" that adds new and unpredictable dangers to global stability.
March 10, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: Disasters and Emergencies, Drought, Global Warming, Ice, Intelligence Services, Oceans and Seas, Research, Ships and Shipping, United States Defense and Military Forces, Weather, Arctic Regions, Defense Department, National Academy of Sciences, State Department, United States Coast Guard, United States National Research Council, United States Navy On Our Radar: E.P.A. Calls Foul Over Republican Gas Price Claims

By JOHN COLLINS RUDOLF
Previous congressional efforts to regulate and put a price on greenhouse gas emissions would have increased the price of a gallon of gasoline by 19 cents in 2015 and 95 cents in 2050, Republicans assert in a news release. Not true, the federal government and prominent Democrats say.
March 10, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: Air Pollution, Clean Air Act, Global Warming, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Invasive Species, Oil (Petroleum) and Gasoline, Prices (Fares, Fees and Rates), Regulation and Deregulation of Industry, Democratic Party, Environmental Protection Agency, House of Representatives, Republican Party, Senate Coffee Source In Colombia Suffers Setbacks

By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL
Rising temperatures and other changes in weather patterns suspected to be linked to global warming are contributing to shortage of coffee beans used in specialty blends from Colombia and other Latin American countries; shortage is leading to higher prices and fears that Arabica coffee supply may never fully recover; photos; graphs
March 10, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: WEATHER, SHORTAGES, PRICES (FARES, FEES AND RATES), COFFEE, COLOMBIA Pedal to the Metal

By ANDREW C. REVKIN
You've awoken at the wheel of an accelerating car and haven't taken driver's ed. Welcome to the human predicament of the 21st century.
March 10, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: Consumer Behavior, Earthquakes, Global Warming, Psychology and Psychologists, Sustainable Living, Shearer, Allan Climate Scientists Face Off With House Panel

By THE NEW YORK TIMES
A vote on a relevant bill to restrict the Environmental Protection Agency's powers to regulate greenhouse gas emissions could come by late this week.
March 08, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: Air Pollution, Environment, Global Warming, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Law and Legislation, Regulation and Deregulation of Industry, United States Politics and Government, Environmental Protection Agency, House of Representatives On Our Radar: $2 Billion Carbon Bill for European Airlines

By JOHN COLLINS RUDOLF
The top ten airlines, including British Airways, Air France, Lufthansa and Ryanair, would have to buy about 21 million permits, an official says.
March 08, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: Agriculture, Airlines and Airplanes, Carbon Dioxide, Cocoa, Global Warming, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Water, California, Europe, Vietnam, Air France, Deutsche Lufthansa AG, European Union, Ryanair Holdings PLC Behind China's Shift on Energy and Growth

By ANDREW C. REVKIN
Many factors conspire in shaping China's economic and energy plans
March 05, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: Air Pollution, Carbon Dioxide, Coal, Economic Conditions and Trends, Global Warming, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, International Trade and World Market, Mines and Mining, China On Climate, Who Needs the Facts?

When it comes to preventing and mitigating the effects of global warming, among House Republicans, politics trumps science.
March 5, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: ENVIRONMENT, FEDERAL BUDGET (US), INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGE, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, REPUBLICAN PARTY No Glory (Satellite) in Space

By ANDREW C. REVKIN
Another NASA satellite launch fails, hampering efforts to clarify persistent climate questions.
March 04, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: Global Warming, Satellites, Space, National Aeronautics and Space Administration China Issues Warning on Climate and Growth

By ANDREW JACOBS
China’s environment minister issued an unusually stark warning about the dangers of unbridled development.
March 1, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: ENVIRONMENT, AIR POLLUTION, CHINA On Our Radar: 'Small' Nuclear War Would Cool Globe, Scientists Say

By JOHN COLLINS RUDOLF
Explosions from bombs would throw approximately five million tons of black carbon into the upper atmosphere, blocking sunlight and causing a plunge in temperature, researchers say.
February 28, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: Bombs and Explosives, Endangered and Extinct Species, Global Warming, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Weather, California, China The Anthropocene

There is serious talk among scientists that a new geologic era has begun, called the Anthropocene.
February 28, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: WATER POLLUTION, PALEONTOLOGY, WEATHER, OCEANS AND SEAS, ENVIRONMENT, EDITORIALS, GEOLOGY Climate Change Takes Toll on the Lodgepole Pine

By JOHN COLLINS RUDOLF
The tall, slender pines, once used widely by American Indian tribes as poles for teepee lodges, could largely disappear from the region by the end of the century if current climate trends persist, researchers say.
February 28, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: Forests and Forestry, Global Warming U.N. Unveils Tool for Tracking Progress of Climate Talks

By JOHN M. BRODER
The United States, for example, offers a submission spelling out its views on how a committee on adaptation should be structured, financed and operated.
February 28, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: Air Pollution, Computers and the Internet, Global Warming, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, International Relations, Treaties, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Cancun (Mexico), United Nations
Fact-Free Science

By JUDITH WARNER
How the right is using tactics learned from the left to discredit climate change.
February 27, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: UNITED STATES POLITICS AND GOVERNMENT, GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Does the Southwest Face a Mega-Drought?

By JOHN COLLINS RUDOLF
The added warmth from emissions of greenhouse gases could tip the Southwest into an era of severe drought potentially lasting a millennium or more, a researcher says.
February 25, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: Drought, Global Warming, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Southwestern States (US) Scientists Are Cleared of Misuse of Data

By LESLIE KAUFMAN
Inquiry finds no evidence that scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration manipulated climate data to buttress the evidence in support of global warming.
February 25, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, INHOFE, JAMES M What if: Standing in Line for Climate Aid

By ANDREW C. REVKIN
Tough fights could be coming between poor nations seeking climate aid for different reasons.
February 25, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: Disasters and Emergencies, Drought, Famine, Floods, Global Warming, Third World and Developing Countries, Treaties, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Slim Pickings For Climate Science Critics in Inspector General Report

By ANDREW C. REVKIN
A probe of government climate scientists ordered by a senator comes up empty-handed.
February 25, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: Frauds and Swindling, Freedom of Information Act, Global Warming, Inspectors General, United States Politics and Government, Commerce Department, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, University of East Anglia, Inhofe, James M, Lubchenco, Jane, Solomon, Susan Reading Deep in Climate Science

By JUSTIN GILLIS
"The Warming Papers" is a rich feast for anyone who wants to trace the history of climate science from its earliest origins to the present.
February 24, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: Air Pollution, Books and Literature, Carbon Dioxide, Computers and the Internet, Global Warming, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Keeling, Charles David Scientist's View: In Climate Action, No Shortcuts Around CO2

By ANDREW C. REVKIN
A scientist warns against shifting the climate focus too far from the central challenge, curbing carbon dioxide.
February 24, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: Carbon Dioxide, Environment, Global Warming, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Ozone, United Nations Environment Program, United States National Research Council, Hansen, James E, Solomon, Susan
Kenneth Cuccinelli of Virginia Wages War on Climate Science

By JOHN COLLINS RUDOLF
Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II, Virginia’s crusading Republican attorney general, has waged a one-man war on the theory of man-made global warming.
February 23, 2011 MORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND: CARBON DIOXIDE, UNITED STATES POLITICS AND GOVERNMENT, GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, POLITICS AND GOVERNMENT, ATTORNEYS GENERAL, RESEARCH, AIR POLLUTION, CUCCINELLI, KENNETH T II

SEARCH 3029 ARTICLES ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING:
Match Any WordMatch All WordsMatch Exact Phrase
 
IT is the polar bear thing I had a problem with, they had a pic of one looking all lonely on an iceberg. A lie, I dont beleive bears drown swiming from one iceberg to another because all the ice has melted. I have still not decided if man contributes to GW or not, but do think we are better off to pollute as little as possible regardless. We need to be good stewards.
 
Yo Melen'sDad

I tried your hyperlinks and they didn't work...a little help here ?...





I don't know if JPL was correct in 2006 but it appears they are incorrect today and there seems to be many reports of ice caps growing.

Linky => (January 2010 report) http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2010/jan/10/inconvenient-truth-ice-cap-growing/

Dinky => (April 2009 report) http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,517035,00.html

Do => (March 2010 report) http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/03/oh_that_inconvenient_growing_p.html

But most interesting of all, is this report from 2011, which seems to indicate we are in the early stages of the next ICE AGE, while indicating that 2006 was the lowest level of ice coverage, it also indicates that the current ice crop is fairly low, with growing coverage in some areas and shrinking coverage in other areas. LINK => http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
 
fr73ed. All that is interesting, but does nothing to show that mankind actually has an impact on global climate change. The archeological and historical records show that rapid climate change has occurred across billions of years that mankind could not have caused. We are currently at the high point of recovery from a global cooling event that covered several hundred years. Some of this was contributed to by massive volcanic eruptions.
So, until scientist can offer valid evidence that mankind is able to overcome the affects of volcanic eruptions, solar cycling, solar wind effects, and can accurately predict events under the chaos effect then it must be assumed that any role mankind plays in global climate change is at most limited.
 
fr73ed. All that is interesting, but does nothing to show that mankind actually has an impact on global climate change.
=======================================================
=======================================================
You musta missed those parts then.
Are you saying that the industrial age has NO effect and all the data is misinterpreted ?
=======================================================






The archeological and historical records show that rapid climate change has occurred across billions of years that mankind could not have caused.
========================================================
========================================================
I think you must be refering to Geological records rather than archeo and historical when you include the phrase billions of years.
And geological records get real dim when we talk of times before precambrian, otherwise known as the archean era, which is 570 millions of years before the present time.

But I don't argue with your statement that rapid climate change occurred, but what sources are you referrin to ?
========================================================






We are currently at the high point of recovery from a global cooling event that covered several hundred years. Some of this was contributed to by massive volcanic eruptions.
So, until scientist can offer valid evidence that mankind is able to overcome the affects of volcanic eruptions, solar cycling, solar wind effects, and can accurately predict events under the chaos effect
========================================================
========================================================
Well, after readin a few bits about Chaos effect, my understandin is that nothing can effectively predict what will happen in a nonlinear system.
Do you mean that all scientists are totally wrong to suppose that man has some effect ? IE proceed as before and damn the torpedos or whatever the phrase was...
=======================================================




then it must be assumed that any role mankind plays in global climate change is at most limited.
=======================================================
========================================================
That may well be so, are you CERTAIN that it will be ok and what guarantee is there that your greatgrand kids won't regret your beliefs?

I just don't feel that way.
A lot of science argues that mankind has created a trend , that didn't occur before the industrial age began.
What does it take to get you thinking in a manner that allows this possibility ?
 
fr73ed, I should have included geological in my statement as well. Are you aware that geological data concerning climate change is more precise than the models climatologists use to predict their 'climate change'?
My point, which you obviously missed, is that long term climate prediction is the best example of 'chaos theory' currently available.
I well remember the first Earth Day and that it was promoted to stop the oncoming ice age. funny how this short a time later all the same groups are crying abut global warming.
Has mankind had an affect on the environment, and thus climate? Of course we have. But then again so has the elephant, the gazelle and the piss ant.
In comparison to the major drivers of climate change, I don't believe that humanity has had that great an effect. Climate change is cyclic, and almost always catastrophic. the best that we can do is to advance our technology to the point where a large percentage of humanity can survive a massive climate shift without the massive destruction unleashed by prior shifts. The current political drumbeats of climate change is preventable is a crock of sh*t and is solely an attempt by some of those elites to cement control of society for their benefit, and not for ours or the environments.
 
Well stated Jeff.

We humans on the planet are responsible for either saving or losing certain species.
It's all a mess when you think about where funding goes to contribute to the survival/ via campaign contributions, doesn't it?
It would be a sad day if the polar bear would someday become extinct.
The whole climate change thing is a lie (in my opinion)
 
PG, while the Polar Bear is a beautiul animal, given current restrictions on it's molestation the PB populayion is actually growing.
While species extinctions can be laid at the hands of humanity, many others have just run their course and are doomed by the cycle of life and the earth. This will eventually come to pass with humanity also unless we manage to quit being dependent solely on this planet.
 
=======================================================
========================================================
That may well be so, are you CERTAIN that it will be ok and what guarantee is there that your greatgrand kids won't regret your beliefs?

I just don't feel that way.
A lot of science argues that mankind has created a trend , that didn't occur before the industrial age began.
What does it take to get you thinking in a manner that allows this possibility ?
Regarding my grand kids, I am far more worried about the $100 + K debt each that the current crop of liberalism is leaving for them.

Ice comes, ice goes. Whether or not the current decrease or increase in ice is or is not the result of human behavior is a matter of opinion.

Having said that, I, too, being good stewards is an obligation.
 
fr73ed, I should have included geological in my statement as well. Are you aware that geological data concerning climate change is more precise than the models climatologists use to predict their 'climate change'?




Well, I dunno. Geological data is history and provable. Climatological models are attempting to predict the future.
Since I ain't no climatologist, an I cain't predict the future I agree.





My point, which you obviously missed, is that long term climate prediction is the best example of 'chaos theory' currently available.
I well remember the first Earth Day and that it was promoted to stop the oncoming ice age. funny how this short a time later all the same groups are crying abut global warming.
Has mankind had an affect on the environment, and thus climate? Of course we have. But then again so has the elephant, the gazelle and the piss ant.


Surely you aren't sayin that the elephant, the gazelle, an the good ol piss ant has had as much influence on our climate as H. Sapiens ???




In comparison to the major drivers of climate change, I don't believe that humanity has had that great an effect.



Your're just bettin your grandkids lives, livelyhoods, comfort etc. that this is true. You don't know, and you cannot show any proof that this is so.
If I got this wrong, please , help me understand, I must have missed something.







Climate change is cyclic, and almost always catastrophic. the best that we can do is to advance our technology to the point where a large percentage of humanity can survive a massive climate shift without the massive destruction unleashed by prior shifts. The current political drumbeats of climate change is preventable is a crock of sh*t and is solely an attempt by some of those elites to cement control of society for their benefit, and not for ours or the environments.




Maybe, if this is how you feel, why not do somethin to stop what you don't like ? Get involved to change...
 
Maybe, if this is how you feel, why not do somethin to stop what you don't like ? Get involved to change...
I am involved, I am doing my best to show people the error of depending on greedy politicians who foist wind farms and corn based alcohol on us when we could have long since provided all the power needed thru hydrogen and the electro sat project. I currently work with those who are trying to revive interest in moving humanity off this ball of dirt and out into the far reaches of this solar system to protect us from a global catastrophe. The fact it is an uphill battle because people are afraid to actually think for themselves just adds urgency to the need.
The problem with not waiting for determinative information on climate effects and how we influence it is that we could very well do the wrong thing and create a catastrophic cascade effect that could destroy us. When a man tells me a gun is unloaded I don't point it at my head and pull the trigger. That is analogous to the proposed changes for 'global climate change'.
I don't know that the elephant or gazelle have changed the climate more than humanity, however I know that ants can very well change the microclimates in their area.
You don't need to be a climatologist to understand that a vast majority of the 'science' that is being claimed is actually 'junk'.
A very little amount of reading and study will show you many of the fallacies of the so-called solutions being presented.
Two things to think about.
CO2 is indeed linked to climate change. But by the record, it is a result of, not a precipitant of those changes.
And can you identify the land mass that absorbs the highest amount of CO2 from the atmosphere? The answer is North America. Why is not exactly known, but because of this the US is a net user of CO2 rather than a net producer of it. Essentially, if the rest of the world wants to reduce CO2 emissions, then they need to look at copying the US in their vegetative and climate policies rather than having us attempt an unproven, expensive and most likely nonproductive attempt to correct a problem that doesn't actually exist.
 
Top