Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I suggest we stop debating the fact that the world is getting warmer and concentrate our efforts on how to assure that modern Western Civilization will survive the change.
I suggest we stop debating the fact that the world is getting warmer and concentrate our efforts on how to assure that modern Western Civilization will survive the change.
Honestly, that is the debate. The whole discussion over AGW is whether it is occurring and whether we should do anything about it. Deniers say we do nothing and roll the dice. Thus the controversy.
So, if the Arctic sea ice is melting and connecting the north Pacific and the north Atlantic oceans for the first time in two million years, either we are living in a time of extraordinary natural climate change or anthropogenic climate change is at fault. The evidence of any extraordinary natural phenomena that would cause this Arctic sea melt is exactly zero.
I can either agree with NASA, Climate Change: Evidence, or the Deniers on this Forum. That answer is a no brainer.
I hope you are aware that the ice floats on the ocean, and does not actually separate them. You should also be aware than the Pacific and Atlantic oceans never actually meet in the north. To get to the Atlantic from the Pacific going north you have to go through the Bering Sea, the Chukchi Sea, then either turn east through the Beaufort Sea or west through the East Siberian Sea, before encountering the Arctic Ocean.
However, the Pacific and Atlantic oceans do meet at the southern tip of South America. So if there were going to be any "invasive" species traveling from one ocean to another, they have already had the means for millions of years. Nor would floating ice stop a species of fish from traveling from one ocean to another.
Lastly, it is not the first time the northern passage has been free of ice in two million years. During every interglacial period the northern passage has been free of ice, and there has been more than 50 interglacial periods in the last 2.58 million years. The current interglacial period happens to be the coldest of the last eight interglacial periods, which may explain why the northern passage has not been free of ice much sooner.
I suggest we stop debating the fact that the world is getting warmer and concentrate our efforts on how to assure that modern Western Civilization will survive the change.
That is a debate the left does not want to have. They would rather hide their heads in the sand and pretend that we do not exist by "reducing our carbon footprint." Carbon dioxide is not really the problem. It only accounts for less than 5% of all the climate change, but since every human endeavor involves producing CO2, it is some thing the liberal freaks think they can control. The real culprits behind climate change is water vapor and methane. But since liberal freaks cannot control either water vapor or methane, they make their number one enemy carbon dioxide and humans.
You have to also remember that most liberal freaks are self-loathing and utterly hate humanity as a whole. They would love nothing more than to see the human species become extinct.
That depends on what you mean by "optimum." Currently, the mean surface temperature of the planet is 14.8°C. However, that is because we have been in an ice-age for the last 2.58 million years. For the last 500 million years, the planet's surface temperature has been between 21°C and 23°C, excluding the ice-ages and the Permian/Triassic boundary when surface temperatures exceeded 35°C. When the current ice-age ends millions of years from now, surface temperatures will increase by 6°C to 8°C.
Whether something is "good" or "bad" is a matter of perspective. Modern humans have never experienced anything other than the current ice-age. Generally speaking, periods of glaciation are "bad" for humans, while interglacial periods are "good" for humans. When the ice-age eventually ends and surface temperatures increase by 6°C to 8°C it remains to be determined whether that will be a "good" thing or a "bad" thing, since it is nothing like we have ever experienced before.
Humans almost did not survive the last period of glaciation. According to our DNA, about 75,000 years ago (about 10,000 years before the peak of the last glaciation period) there were fewer than 15,000 breeding females on the planet. When the current Holocene Interglacial period ends and we begin another 100,000 years of glaciation, hundreds of millions will die. While we cannot say the same thing about a warming climate, we know for a fact that a colder climate is a "bad" thing for humans.
You left out the cause of this human bottleneck...74,000 years ago the human population was reduced to perhaps 10,000 individuals when the Toba supervolcano in Indonesia erupted and triggered a major environmental change. The theory is based on geological evidence of sudden climate change.
Seven in 10 Americans see global warming as a serious problem facing the country, enough to fuel broad support for federal efforts to limit greenhouse gas emissions – even if it raises their own energy costs, a new ABC News/Washington Post poll finds....One sure wouldn't know that from this forum.....This is not good news for the GOP, the main nest for deniers. Broad Concern about Global Warming Boosts Support for New EPA Regulations - ABC News
Seven in 10 Americans see global warming as a serious problem facing the country, enough to fuel broad support for federal efforts to limit greenhouse gas emissions – even if it raises their own energy costs, a new ABC News/Washington Post poll finds....One sure wouldn't know that from this forum.....This is not good news for the GOP, the main nest for deniers. Broad Concern about Global Warming Boosts Support for New EPA Regulations - ABC News
What do propose the federal government do to curtail greenhouse emissions?
LOL! Thats all you have? Half the warming has vanished and you want to talk about a very poor report (not peer reviewed by the way) that includes some very shoddy math?
Here is a nice review of the NOAA scientists approach.
Before you CAGW freakoutlovers skoff. Dr. Mass is a climate scientist who believes in CAGW.
Exactly.
Also, the ignorance shown by the OP is stunning. "Oh, gee, it's only about 0.42 C - so who cares?"
Look, it takes very little changes in the temperature to mess up the climate. So, we still have global warming, we still have a man-made component, and we still have a situation that can cause us harm down the road.
Just for a comparison, look up the Little Ice Age:
"In the North Atlantic, sediments accumulated since the end of the last ice age, nearly 12,000 years ago, show regular increases in the amount of coarse sediment grains deposited from icebergs melting in the now open ocean, indicating a series of 1–2 °C (2–4 °F) cooling events recurring every 1,500 years or so.[63] The most recent of these cooling events was the Little Ice Age. These same cooling events are detected in sediments accumulating off Africa, but the cooling events appear to be larger, ranging between 3–8 °C (6–14 °F).[64]"
It only took 1 to 2 degrees temperature change in the North Atlantic to trigger this event, so anyone who thinks an 0.42 C (and rising) increase in temperature is "nothing to worry about" has ZERO understanding of how sensitive the climate is to small, long-term temperature changes.
That is a debate the left does not want to have. They would rather hide their heads in the sand and pretend that we do not exist by "reducing our carbon footprint." Carbon dioxide is not really the problem. It only accounts for less than 5% of all the climate change, but since every human endeavor involves producing CO2, it is some thing the liberal freaks think they can control. The real culprits behind climate change is water vapor and methane. But since liberal freaks cannot control either water vapor or methane, they make their number one enemy carbon dioxide and humans.
You have to also remember that most liberal freaks are self-loathing and utterly hate humanity as a whole. They would love nothing more than to see the human species become extinct.
We have had the debate, we have done the science, and the facts have been presented.
Right-wing extremists - the types who spew hatred about "liberals" and who make gross assumptions about the motivations of anyone who understands climate change, such as "Uh, you just want to kill off humanity!" - have chosen a path of ignorance and selfish greed. They are not interested in the facts, and they don't care who they harm in the process.
The above vitriolic post is a prime example of this. The poster has the audacity to accuse others of "wanting the human species to become extinct" when he's one of the ones who wants to stick our heads in the sand, roll the dice, and hope everything works out. Gambling with all of humanity just so your Hummer is cheap to fill up... disgusting...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
