the climate

i was doing a bit of research today into affects of global warming and other things that we haven't really went into depth here.

the first is global dimming. global dimming was a problem between the 1950's and 1990's. contrails, aerosols and release of pullotants block out the sun and cause clouds to be more dense (more reflective). global dimming theoretically reduces heat during the day due to reflecting the heat back. and increases heat doing the night by reducing heat escaping.

this is why clear days in winter are warmer but the nights colder.

but this only existed til the 1990's. then people though air pollution was quite crap and reduced it. and in the 1990's it was reversed. well not totally due to the increase in air travel and so contrails. but air pollution was reduced.

the effect of contrails in global temperature were observed after 9-11 (no planes those days). the difference in temperature was 1 degree higher than normal universally. so the days were hotter and the nights cooler those days.

so why is this at all important now if the problem was been sorted? because the problem is that we have sorted it. we have now got rid of a cooling factor in a situation where the earth is warming.

the scale of global dimming was been proven as well. it was originally believed to account for 0.5% to 1% loss in sumlight. but research saw that it was in fact 10%. and it s now believed that this problem resulted in the failure of the monsoon is sub-saharahan which resulted in massive famine and death.

it is also thought to be responsible for the the descrepencies in global warming. global dimming is regional. global warming is not. most regions on earth have heated up but some like the east united states have in fact seen a heat reduction compared to the west. the east is downwind from the major pollution areas (sulphur dioxide mainly) and has seen more cloud coverage.

so what's the problem? well it has masked the effects of global warming and so ruins all predictions made before it was integrated into these predictions.

and a raise in temperature will bring more forest fires. particularly in the amazon. more fires = more co2. and the amazon is a place packed full of the stuff it would be devasting if even a small fraction was released.

the other thing i will bring in right now is the effect of methane hydrates.

these are (fairly stable) deposits at the bottom of the ocean and have been there for years and years. but they ain't as stable as one would like. they don't like temperature change too much. so why this is a problem? well as i said methane hydrate is stable until the temperature changes. and it isn't a big temperature change either. it become unstable at 18 degrees. this is unfortunate. it falls within the predicted changes in global temperature if global dimming is correct.

so why be afraid of this gas? well it's a greenhouse gas like co2 but....... it's 8-10 times more effect as a greenhouse gas. 1 litre of methane hydrate solid is enough to release 168 litres of methane. and this isn't a small rare deposit. it's 10x less rare than natural gas. it's total co2 output would dwarf all of the fossil fuels. and it wouldn't be released slowly.

and then of course there are the ice caps. which undeniably are melting. and this is a wee bit of a problem. it's irreversable. and is also a growing problem beyond the actual melting. warm water is bigger. and so the cities at risk are even more at risk as the increased water levels become more heated.

just a few thoughts.

So.... the planet's undergoing chances that'll actually COOL the environment? In addition to the warming behaviors. Neat.

Quite frankly, I'm not too worried. This planet is wonderfully self-corrective. Those methane deposits on the ocean, as they release, will actually encourage oceanic plant growth (methane-based chemical structures do that to aquatic plantlife). The plankton and algae populations produce more than half the oxygen on this world, and are ultimately responsible for over 90% of our ozone production rates. Global warming shoots up, also improving oceanic plant growth, the poles melt, creating a larger ocean with which to produce, and the planet cools. Colder planet mean ice-caps return, the planet's oceans shrink, and things return back to normal. 2000 year ice age, granted, but it'll work.

Our little rock has been doing these cycles since before the first fish crawled out of the shallow freshwater seas of the ancient past. Ecosystems collaps and return, species vanish to be replaced, and humans have lived through harsher conditions without too much difficulties. We'll be fine.

no the cooling process is over. it stopped in the 1990's after we started acting on air pollution. plankton may infact be killed by an increase of temperature of 10 degrees in the next 100 years (predicted in the gloabal dimming studies)

the idea that we can continue down the line we have been following blindly is arrogant.

It's all about getting the firgging government to listen, they won't stop it because it rakes in a hell load of money.


We can either go down the wrong line or just stop and let the planet do the rest. It's practically suicide. We'll ends up in another Ice age before the human race goes extinct.

But, our species achieved it's greatest successes (from a survival standpoint) during an ice age. We built fire and spears, we invented clothing, we from a tiny zone in africa (so small a sizable earthquake, volcano or flood could have destroyed our entire species) to living on almost every continent in the world.

We not only survive in such environs, we thrive.

There have been times when grapes were grown in Yorkshire. There have been times when it was possible to walk quite safely across large swathes of the North Sea. These times were well before we ever reached a state of industrialisation. If you look over a period of millions of years the fluctuations in the planet's temperature are massive indeed. Granted, the projection of 10 degrees in 100 years is rather faster, but I still haven't seen much conclusive evidence of it. Given that we can't even accurately model cloud patterns, I don't think we've got much grounds for claiming we know much conclusively.

And at any rate, we will survive. As we said in the other thread about disasters, Humanity = win. There's not much that's going to stop us. So I'm not worried. And that's presuming Udsana's post isn't accurate, though I believe it has some merit.

Edit: Wait, wouldn't then removing the laws on air pollution be a way to slow this down quiet significantly so that we have longer to figure a real solution out? Put the ability to cool the planet back into place.

No, the air polution may not be the global-devestation force when it comes to climate. But acid rain and toxic air are both VERY real, deadly to individuals and devestating to ecosystems. Air pollution is clearly linked to those phenomena.

So, keep the polution controls in place. It might (maybe) balance out the climate effects, but even if it does, the cure would be worse than the disease.

cut down on pollution but the frigging governments refuse to approve of it.

Global warming happens, if it gets too bad the government will be batted on with hot sticks. Even if it gets extremely bad the "controllers" will stop causes.

Air polution controls are admirably strict as it is (water and ground: they need LOTS of work, but air is quite good- and it's air pollution most directly accused of effecting climate changes). And I say ACCUSED- there is no conclusive proof that our activities have had any measureable effect on the heating or cooling of our world. The ozone, yes, we ****ed that one up.... but the temperature? Our planet's in a stage where it's slowly drifting closer to the sun. Has been since about the middle of the ice age. And will for a few million more years, probably to the point of turning our entire planet into desert and tropics. Then it'll start drifting out again. Until we see another ice age in another few million.

Humans won't be around to see that ice age. If our genetic descendants even exist anymore, they'll no longer be recognizable as human.

in a few billion years, the sun will grow and swallow up the first four planets.

Yeah, I'm hoping I'm not here for that. It'll be somewhat uncomfortable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shoden

cut down on pollution but the frigging governments refuse to approve of it.

Global warming happens, if it gets too bad the government will be batted on with hot sticks. Even if it gets extremely bad the "controllers" will stop causes.

---

Friggin' Government, running their machines day and night!

Seriously though, unless you're living in a stone hut using moss to wipe yourself after defacating, you're part of the problem. Considering that you use this forum, I'd assume you have access to electrical goods. Even if we were to completely stop everything tommorow, stop burning fossil fuels, using electrical appliances, the works, the planet is still in an irreversible cycle. Whether or not this is a natural occurance is up to opinion, though it's obvious that something is happening to the world as a whole. Tectonic activity, global warming, poles shifting...I remember someone mentioning that the planet may be thinking for itself. An interesting notion indeed, that we're being killed off. But Udsuna's got a point. Human beings are highly resiliant beings. We've come close to extinction on several occasions and we've pulled through regardless. We have something that no one species has : Sentience. It's a powerful tool, and allows us to think our way out of situations, think outside the box. Then again, that's what's gotten us into this situation in the first place.

Actually, tectonics have been surprisingly low for the last decade. We've had less activity this year than we had in '95. We're picking back up, and if we get 3 or 4 more nice 4.0 or better quakes, we'll be back on par with average. We've gotten used to not having quakes, and now the planet's picking back up (as it was bound to do). It's got a lot of spare pressure to burn, we'll be seeing a few biggies. Not to mention some impressive volcanoes. Most quakes, however, happen in the ocean, which is the cause of tsunami strikes.

Our planet's just doing what it's always done: going through cycles. We just had a lucky streak of mild phenomena. Now our streak is gone, and we're not used to it. Kind of like 50 degrees is cold enough for a jacket in summer, but warm enough for shorts in winter. It's simply aclimation.

What I'm waiting for is another "incredibly stupid human error inviting total destruction". Like the tsunami, and hurricane katrina. You know.... the ones that wouldn't be a big deal, except that people are idiotic and chose to live the wrong ways, in the wrong places. I'm thinking it'll be an earthquake in Chicago. Yes, Chicago, it's sitting pretty close to a powerful fault line. Said line, more or less follows the Mississipi river. Last time it went off was about 150 or so years ago. The Mississipi river flowed BACKWARDS for six months in order to fill the hole it created. There isn't a skyscraper in Chicago that could take a tremor of any power.

That fault line in/around Chicago went off not too long ago. I think it checked in at a 4.5. Probably a 3 by the time it got to the city. I happened south of the city and was fast though. I wonder if this means a bigger quake is coming soon...ish?

(FRIG IS MY WORD XD)


What I mean is no matter how much it smacks them in the face they refuse to stop and turn to something that won't screw the planet to supply power and stuff, why should I care? I won't be around to see the world pummel into oblivion..



Sound familiar people?

i'm sorry the argument for letting global warming happen is "we survived it before so it's okay"? i'm sorry but that is a dumbass argument.

and the planet is not a stable ecosystem as some claim. that's why it flactuates and why we went from ice age to non-ice age. but and it's a big but. this has never happened this violently before. even at 5 degrees in the next hundred years (the amount accepted when global warming was first investigated) is huge. we are talking missing the monsoon season kinda huge. this isn't a normal change. normal changes don't happen at this rate.

and i am not in support for allowing air pollution. we need to cut down on co2's. that is the only way.

and shoden you may actually be.

and the san andreas fault line is building in pressure. the asian tsunami shifted a lot of weight that way.

The sooner we cut down the less global temperatures will rise it's simple as that, why know it but it's making other people know that's the problem.

Don't worry, Cloud, very intelligent scientists have prooved global warming has absolutely no relation to our gases or contamination, and it is actually a natural change in the planet.


>_>


<_<


The fact such research was paid by polluting multinationals has NOTHING to do with the conclusions.


No, really!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cloud No.9

this isn't a normal change. normal changes don't happen at this rate.

---

Even the best meteorologists will admit that they don't know what is normal for this planet. One of the problems is that there's a lot of guesswork based around how the planet is operating now. You've got to take into account other factors, such as tectonic plate placement, sun activity, position of orbit etc. etc. Heck, we even underestimated the actual age of the Earth by a few billion years, so who knows what's "normal". Besides which, you go back far enough and we were a rapidly cooling ball of magma supposedly. If that doesn't fly straight up the "violent changes" flagpole I don't know what does.

And the militant liberals who think every tree we cut down is the end of the world? Their funded studies are any more reliable?

Global warming is something to pay attention to, not to fret over. I try not to buy into scare tactics, and I definately do not support things that means that we save creatures at our sake (i.e. banning automobiles because it pollutes the air). But if global warming is studied more objectively, I'd be interested.

I'm not gonna be very worried until WEAPONs start popping out of the north pole.

The fact of the matter is that we don't really know what's the biggest cause of global warming. The only thing scientists have figured out is that the average temperature is rising, and though we're not entirely sure that it isn't a natural spike that will level off, it's still advisable to keep an eye on it, and that it might be worth it to try and make some changes to see if that helps. It's not "omg we gotta change our whole industrialist system or we're ALL GONNA DIE!!111"

Researching this topic a while ago, I found a petition apparently signed by 5,000+ scientists who swore that there was no evidence that global warming was anything but a natural occurence. Researching THAT, I found semi-reliable evidence that it was a hoax, which I found rather amusing. Anyway, enough rambling.

but the point is if it is a natural spike then it will be okay. if not it will go beyond a certain temperature burning the rainforests and leaving them as a desert and releasing methane hydrates. at that point we are thoroughly screwed.

this thread is reminding me of ff7 where the planet produced the weapons to counter harmful things that were acting on it...

You're kidding, right? With the devestations inflicted by other natural forces and fluctiation you can believe that a natural phenomena will actually stop in a zone safe for humans? I assure you, nature left to it's own devices, is just as deadly as anything we're capable of.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cloud No.9

but the point is if it is a natural spike then it will be okay. if not it will go beyond a certain temperature burning the rainforests and leaving them as a desert and releasing methane hydrates. at that point we are thoroughly screwed.

---

What about cacti?

My guess is the climate change is natural and man made.

If the man made part is subtracted it'd not be as bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by udsuna

And the militant liberals who think every tree we cut down is the end of the world? Their funded studies are any more reliable?

---

Liberals? Why liberals? What does liberalism have to do with global temperatures rising? Cause last time I checked, being a liberal or a conservative wasn't related to caring about nature. Cuase you know, right-winged people can also have a critic view on wars, dumping, capitalism and all that.

I was taking an ironic tone in responce to another post. It was meant for sarcastic value, almost. Or something like that. A vast, sweeping, generalization in response to another vast, sweeping, generalization. Actually, your post. Que sera, sera.