|
|
Post by bluemingidiot on Jan 9, 2018 9:04:48 GMT
"The reason a direct connection between cold weather and global warming is still up for debate, scientists say, is that there are many other factors involved. Ocean temperatures in the tropics, soil moisture, snow cover, even the long-term natural variability of large ocean systems all can influence the jet stream." linkThe title implies that it is colder than normal (whatever normal is). If it is not what it was, then it has changed. So the title could also read, "Why is it different? Because it has changed may be part of the answer." Just how many years of college and research does one need to come up with that hypothesis? The portion of the article implies that as of now, we don't know what is influencing what. If we do not understand cause and effect, how do we decide what we should and should not do? It staggers the imagination to think we are experimenting with atmosphere and climate. And before we change the change, shouldn't we honestly evaluate the good created by change along with any bad? If, although the sky falls, and occasionally hits someone on the head, but as an incidental result of the sky falling there are also more nuts on the ground than are running around, do we really want to get the king involved? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2018 16:28:07 GMT
When glaciers reach down to Kansas, as it did during the last ice age, I will worry!
With out man walking the earth volcanoes & wildfires have polluted the atmosphere.
Earth core sample prove that wild fires burned till nature provided and end to the fires.
Those fires were larger without man to aid in putting them out.
A volcano shoots out metric tons of a combination of toxic and not toxic gases and debri.
Autos pale in comparison to volcano's pollution.
Earth era's are defined by the climate and the impact that the climate on life forms on land and seas.
So, while its colder this winter in many areas it is well with in ranges that man has survived thru.
One day that may change and as you noted is change bad... No, I don't believe so.....imagine is we freaked out over Kansas losing its glaciers!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Melissa on Jan 9, 2018 17:51:56 GMT
I think we need to be sensible and aware. If there is evidence that the earth is warming overall, I think our primary consideration should be all those very populated coastal areas that could easily be flooded. I don't think it is always productive to debate why it is changing, just better figure out what is going to happen due to the change...
|
|
|
|
Post by Skandi on Jan 9, 2018 20:57:21 GMT
I think we need to be sensible and aware. If there is evidence that the earth is warming overall, I think our primary consideration should be all those very populated coastal areas that could easily be flooded. I don't think it is always productive to debate why it is changing, just better figure out what is going to happen due to the change... That's my thought, why stand around throwing accusations at people/countries when what we should be doing is figuring out how to move people north. There's tons of land up in canada and russia that if the earth did warm the 10C they are suggesting would become inhabitable, There's also the fact that in the past when the earth has been warm it has also been very wet, so given enough time the present deserts on the equator may (or may not) become inhabitable. Basicaly countries need to get along and do what is best for everyone. 10m they say sea level will rise, yay the bottom of my field is 14m above.. so seafront property for me! (Or my great great great kids or whatever) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2018 23:14:30 GMT
In reality adaptating via mass migration IS what animals and humans independently have done in history ,with out any benefit of scientific multi dollars studies.
With the benefit of science we know that the ice mass that coveted north America as far as the west coast to Maine and as far south as Kansas primarily was a larger land mass of ice than what we have today...yet after that melt which changed the topographical areas craving out the great lakes, aiding in enlarging a crevice that ius now the grand canyon, aided in turning rivers to flow away from the equator, This ice has a great deal more mass over water and like ice in a glass of water the risk of that ice water melting and spilling over the glass is unfounded.
The land mass covered in the last ice age melted and it for the most part did create higher water level increase than what could result from a smaller volume of land mass as we have today.
The melt out will not be a sudden event and since earth has in the past had other ice ages and melt off periods its called a natural event.
To me the mental reaction to nature being nature in like a human pregnant person trying to contain the fetus in her body because that's all the fetus know so.....the change in being birth would be an experience no fetus should have to go thru. Over looking that change is nature and nature is change ....over reaction to nature being natural is quite off to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluemingidiot on Jan 10, 2018 3:13:48 GMT
Using an accelerating NASA formula the estimate is a 2 ft increase by 2100. sealevel.nasa.gov/understanding-sea-level/projections/empirical-projectionsI can't see this 2 ft rise easily flooding "all those very populated coastal areas." Few structures existing now will be serviceable 82 years from now. We should not have been building or rebuilding low lying coastal areas even if there is no increase. We should not have rebuilt New Orleans or any area below sea level. We should not be building any area 10 ft or less above sea level. But the sky is not falling. |
|
|
|
Post by Melissa on Jan 10, 2018 23:40:52 GMT
A 2 foot rise could cause a lot of chaos though...
|
|
|
|
Post by paquebot on Jan 11, 2018 1:15:45 GMT
The flaw in the ice cube analogy is that much of the polar ice caps are precipitation on top of sea ice. That's from thousands of years of snow. That's where the sea level rise would come from.
Martin
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2018 3:21:24 GMT
Martin I believe I have accounted for my rational of the ice in a glass of water.
Note from Maine to Montana and down to Kansas is pretty much all on top of a land mass
I live with glaciers, iwalk on the, climbed them had one in my back yard! (Mendhall).
Glacier up here do sit on land but not all, they rest on frozen lakes and streams and much of them are on the waters.
The lower 48 pretty mush melted away. Man has a habit to populate coast lines. Ships and boats and other floatable form of transportation for trade made that a great choice.
Comparing land glacier and only counting those glaciers will lower the amount that could potentially raise the water surface and encroach on to the land.
We deal every so often with burping glaciers ....that's when an ice block is holding back melted water and the block breaks and flash flooding of water, and ice take out communities. People are warned and used to be migratory but now we build to be permanent and dismiss the warning.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2018 3:29:02 GMT
A 2 foot rise could cause a lot of chaos though... That two foot rise will take time just like the melting of the North American glacier mass over the lower forty eight did. So much time that chaos should be minimum. Sort like the cost of a funeral. We all know we will die We all know that burials can cost a mint. A death in a family can cause chaos to a budget but come on one knows its a coming so prep. There's time to prep one millimeter at a time for the great flooding... |
|
|
|
Post by bluemingidiot on Jan 11, 2018 13:18:44 GMT
A 2 foot rise could cause a lot of chaos though... A 2 foot rise could also cause a lot of benefit. Huge amounts of land would become available for agricultural purposes. People in Minnesota and Ohio could grow okra and watermelons and get a tan. Who knows, with a little bit of luck you might even get a southern accent. I can't believe that I have to be the one to tell you that change is not all bad. Life certainly isn't fair. |
|
|
|
Post by bowdonkey on Jan 11, 2018 15:54:09 GMT
Maybe MN should put up a wall.
|
|
|
|
Post by Melissa on Jan 11, 2018 16:21:13 GMT
A 2 foot rise could cause a lot of chaos though... A 2 foot rise could also cause a lot of benefit. Huge amounts of land would become available for agricultural purposes. People in Minnesota and Ohio could grow okra and watermelons and get a tan. Who knows, with a little bit of luck you might even get a southern accent. I can't believe that I have to be the one to tell you that change is not all bad. Life certainly isn't fair. I don't really mind change, of course I am not living on an island in the middle of the ocean or anything either. I just believe in being prepared. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2018 20:37:13 GMT
If a scientific study states that a land glacier is resting over land submerged 1.5miles under water.
Would another way to express it be its floating..
I ask because I I will did out that study.
|
|
