^^^^ Global Warming has already Started ^^^^
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Sanny - 28 Jun 2008 18:14 GMT A year back I used to read Global warming will melt ice in 10-20 years.
Last month I read All ice of Artic will melt in 1-2 years.
Today I read North Pole will be free of ice by September this year.
Complete Discussion: http://www.getclub.com/Show/view.php?best=Discussion&itemid=25
I will answer a few Questions.
Q 1 Why Global warming is happening. -------------------------------------------------------
1. We are using Oil which gives out Co2 in atmosphere. And many other Chemicals which create Green House Effect.
Green house effect you can see in Cars surrounded by glasses. You will find Car gets really Hot when all the glases are covered.
2. Ozone Layer depletion.
We are using a few Chemicals in Fridge and Jet Engines which are depleting the Ozone Layer.
3. As ice melts it converts into water. Ice reflect Light waves back to space. While Water absorbs the heat energy from light So it leads to further heating of planet.
Complete Discussion: http://www.getclub.com/Show/view.php?best=Discussion&itemid=25
Q 2. What will happen if nothing is done. -----------------------------------------------------------
1. By Ozone depletion many 1 Billion people will get skin Cancer and die.
2. If all ice melts 90% of the Big cities in Japan/ US/ Europe/ India will submerge in water.
3. All living beings on ice will die.
4. Big Storms and Cyclones will come destroying all big buildings.
Complete Discussion: http://www.getclub.com/Show/view.php?best=Discussion&itemid=25
So We must act now else die just like the Titanic Sink.
Have you seen the Titanic Movie. Slowly people start drowning same thing will happen with Global Warming.
Bye Sanny
Complete Discussion: http://www.getclub.com/Show/view.php?best=Discussion&itemid=25
Antares 531 - 28 Jun 2008 18:28 GMT >A year back I used to read Global warming will melt ice in 10-20 >years. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >Q 1 Why Global warming is happening. >------------------------------------------------------- (snip)
The last ice age bottomed out about 20,000 years ago and remained quiescent for about 8,000 years. About 12,000 years ago this current interglacial warming started and has been going on steady by jerks, like a toad a walkin', since.
Of course the warming rate has picked up as the polar ice area has diminished, and these last few years will probably go very rapidly....unless the earth starts its plunge into the next ice age. It may very well be that our industrial age atmospheric pollution has saved us, for the time being, from a plunge back into the next ice age. Gordon
Sanny - 28 Jun 2008 18:37 GMT > The last ice age bottomed out about 20,000 years ago and remained > quiescent for about 8,000 years. About 12,000 years ago this current > interglacial warming started and has been going on steady by jerks, > like a toad a walkin', since. Why earth had ice age 20,000 years back? was the distance between Sun & earth more than that it is now?
Unless we really know why these things happen we can predict any good.
> Of course the warming rate has picked up as the polar ice area has > diminished, and these last few years will probably go very > rapidly....unless the earth starts its plunge into the next ice age. > It may very well be that our industrial age atmospheric pollution has > saved us, for the time being, from a plunge back into the next ice > age. Gordon- Do you mean after few years Ice age will start again? Why will the temperature drop now?
But if ice age comes Humans will survive that using Electric Heaters. 20,000 years back no animal was clever enough to create Heaters.
So Ice age can be habitatable.
Bye Sanny
Antares 531 - 28 Jun 2008 20:24 GMT >> The last ice age bottomed out about 20,000 years ago and remained >> quiescent for about 8,000 years. About 12,000 years ago this current [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Why earth had ice age 20,000 years back? was the distance between Sun >& earth more than that it is now? There are several possible causes, but the one that finds the most support is that solar output increases/decreases in cycles that last about 110,000 years. The previous ice ages/interglacial periods have followed this cycle, and there is no reason to think the present one won't continue to follow the cycle.
>Unless we really know why these things happen we can predict any good. Even with little knowledge as to WHY ice age/interglacial warming cycles happen, we can study the history as recorded in polar ice records, for instance, and anticipate the way this present cycle will most likely progress.
>> Of course the warming rate has picked up as the polar ice area has >> diminished, and these last few years will probably go very [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Do you mean after few years Ice age will start again? Why will the >temperature drop now? That depends upon your definition of "a few years" but we do have reason to believe that we are near the turning point, after which we can expect a drop back into the next ice age. It won't happen instantly, or even in a few years. The ice records of previous ice age cycles indicate that the earth will experience about 85,000 years of cooling to the bottom of the next ice age, followed by about 25,000 years of warming during the next interglacial warm period.
>But if ice age comes Humans will survive that using Electric Heaters. >20,000 years back no animal was clever enough to create Heaters. Humans may survive, but our present complex industrial age may not. And if it doesn't, there will be no electric power grids or electric heaters. Humans, those who survive, will revert to a very primitive way of living, and the population will drop to that which can be sustained by a small fraction of the present agricultural area of the world. There will likely be an equatorial band that is quite hospitable to humans and most animals.
>So Ice age can be habitatable. No previous ice age ever killed all forms of animal life. There will likely be some extinctions, but most basic fauna and flora will probably survive. Gordon
jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 28 Jun 2008 20:25 GMT In sci.physics Sanny <softtanks@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > The last ice age bottomed out about 20,000 years ago and remained > > quiescent for about 8,000 years. About 12,000 years ago this current > > interglacial warming started and has been going on steady by jerks, > > like a toad a walkin', since.
> Why earth had ice age 20,000 years back? was the distance between Sun > & earth more than that it is now? What an idiot.
> Unless we really know why these things happen we can predict any good. Gibbering nonsense.
> > Of course the warming rate has picked up as the polar ice area has > > diminished, and these last few years will probably go very > > rapidly....unless the earth starts its plunge into the next ice age. > > It may very well be that our industrial age atmospheric pollution has > > saved us, for the time being, from a plunge back into the next ice > > age. ? Gordon-
> Do you mean after few years Ice age will start again? Why will the > temperature drop now? Because eventually it always does.
> But if ice age comes Humans will survive that using Electric Heaters. > 20,000 years back no animal was clever enough to create Heaters. And humans have air conditioners for when it is hot.
> So Ice age can be habitatable. A new tropical climate would be far more survivable than an new ice age.
A good part of the world goes under a mile or so of ice.
The places left where food can be produced goes to few and far between.
 Signature Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply.
BradGuth - 28 Jun 2008 20:35 GMT > > The last ice age bottomed out about 20,000 years ago and remained > > quiescent for about 8,000 years. About 12,000 years ago this current [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > Bye > Sanny The best of viable notions have to do with the Sirius star/solar system.
- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
Saul Levy - 01 Jul 2008 19:38 GMT Sirius has nothing to do with it, BradBoi! lmfjao!
Saul Levy
>> > The last ice age bottomed out about 20,000 years ago and remained >> > quiescent for about 8,000 years. About 12,000 years ago this current [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> Why earth had ice age 20,000 years back? was the distance between Sun >> & earth more than that it is now?
>> Bye >> Sanny [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BradGuth - 28 Jun 2008 20:33 GMT > On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 10:14:07 -0700 (PDT), Sanny > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > saved us, for the time being, from a plunge back into the next ice > age. Gordon As of 12,500 BP is roughly when we picked up Selene as an orbiting sister or binary planet we call our moon. Before then, Selene was merely a very big and icy NEO of perhaps 4000 km.
- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc) - 28 Jun 2008 18:52 GMT Dear Sanny:
...
> We are using a few Chemicals in Fridge and Jet > Engines which are depleting the Ozone Layer. ...
> 1. By Ozone depletion many 1 Billion people will > get skin Cancer and die. ... then greenhouse gas contributions decrease, and the cycle normalizes. Standard negative feedback.
Global Warming has started, and has started every few hundred or thousand years.
Of course, there have been natural cycles of the North Pole ice cap melting completely away, which is partly why that is ice there is not particularly old.
If we did cause this "peak" with: * the gasses we have been emitting, and * the destruction of forests, and * the change in the albedo of the planet (both from paving it over, and from contaminating the oceans), then what will we do different than if we didn't cause it?
Will we stop pushing the "boundaries" of rivers and oceans to make more "dry land" with levees and dikes?
Will we stop damming rivers, allowing in nutrients and land-absorbed heat to drive the natural cycles of life and thermal currents in the ocean, or will we force an unbalance in the mass distribution in the planet with ever more earthquakes and finally massive adjustment / upheaval? The Earth is a spinning "wheel", pliable, and its shape is determined by the mass distribution. Add more mass one place, and another place may rise... like the bottom of an ocean.
Will we stop killing all plant life, or arbitrarily picking one or two species that produce fuel for the giant wheeled "jewelry" we adorn ourselves with? We set ourselves up for another "potato blight", only involving corn this time.
How many will die, and how will it be accomplished? We showed little restraint in arriving here / now. When will Mankind achieve maturity?
What about Global Ignorance? Will we chalk it up to Divine Intervention, or "it was predicted in Revelations", or will we accept personal, individual responsibility for the place we are right now?
We know enough. Not enough to stop a natural cycle. Not enough to offset the damage that may or may not have already been done. But enough to mature.
We are where we are, because the rest of the world is the rest of the world's problem. Not that we need to meddle, but we need to participate.
Sanny, what will you do?
David A. Smith
Benj - 28 Jun 2008 19:44 GMT > I will answer a few Questions. Oh goodie. But first please list your credentials so we can judge if your answers mean squat. (for the record, mine are "principal research scientist")
> Q 1 Why Global warming is happening. > > 1. We are using Oil which gives out Co2 in atmosphere. And many other > Chemicals which create Green House Effect. Total political lie. It's all about political economics and NOT about truth as CO2 simply CANNOT have enough of an effect to induce global warming. The whole subject of "carbon footprints" is rife with political lies, media propaganda and catchy slogans as well as "fake" honors to drive the lies home such as Algore's "Oscar", "Emmy" and Nobel Prize. And this includes the lies that YOU are trying to spread here as well. What were your credentials again?
> Green house effect you can see in Cars surrounded by glasses. You will > find Car gets really Hot when all the glases are covered. Gas does not equal "Glass"!
Moron.
> 2. Ozone Layer depletion. > > We are using a few Chemicals in Fridge and Jet Engines which are > depleting the Ozone Layer. Not to mention the space shuttle! Note that an amazingly fast ban on certain freons was instituted almost world wide that has improved but not totally fixed the situation. Ultra fast political action very strongly implies a secret knowledge of real danger with regard to the problem. That means it might make sense to look at Ozone layer depletion as one cause of global warming (somehow).
> 3. As ice melts it converts into water. Ice reflect Light waves back > to space. While Water absorbs the heat energy from light So it leads > to further heating of planet. Melting ice makes the oceans DEEPER and adds very little additional surface area.
Moron.
> Complete Discussion:http://www.getclub.com/Show/view.php?best=Discussion&itemid=25 > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > 1. By Ozone depletion many 1 Billion people will get skin Cancer and > die. Not such a bad thing given current population levels. However 1 billion BLIND people to take care of is a VERY bad thing.
> 2. If all ice melts 90% of the Big cities in Japan/ US/ Europe/ India > will submerge in water. Nonsense. And even though lowlands clearly would be flooded, it happens slow enough that low areas will be abandoned and cities moved to higher ground. A huge pain, but hardly end of the world. And even though a lot of big cities are built on coasts, The entire cities are not at the coastline so a couple of feet of water is not the same as skyscrapers poking out of the sea! This is just scare propaganda.
> 3. All living beings on ice will die. "Beings"? Am I talking to a feeling caring liberal here? You mean like polar bears? Yeah, could be. Human beings on the other hand have proved themselves able to adapt to all manner of conditions.
> 4. Big Storms and Cyclones will come destroying all big buildings. "ALL BIG BUILDINGS"? And the way you know this is? A quick look at the "big storms" to date shows that it is "big buildings" that tend to survive. Oddly enough the "big storm" didn't hit New Orleans directly but it was trashed simply by filling up with water! What kind of dummies build a house below sea level thinking that sooner or later it's never gonna have a front yard full of water? Oh yeah. Human dummies! Why are we supposed to bail out people who did stupid things and got themselves in trouble? Same goes for people building along the banks of rivers that flood regularly! Oh poor me! I never thought mother nature would ever "dis" me like this! That's why I put the mobile home on the riverbank!
> Complete Discussion:http://www.getclub.com/Show/view.php?best=Discussion&itemid=25 > > So We must act now else die just like the Titanic Sink.
> Have you seen the Titanic Movie. Slowly people start drowning same > thing will happen with Global Warming. Think about the Titanic for a minute. Just what was the problem there? The same old thing: Hubris and ignorance!
Are you telling me that everyone on the titanic HAD to die? No Freakin' way! In fact they DIDN'T all die! The problem was hubris. Everybody believed the boat was "unsinkable" and that tempered their response. So they did nothing when they had plenty of time to save themselves. There were too few lifeboats. There were no preparations for disaster. In short these people killed themselves, auto-sodomized by their own stupidity!
Now I want you to make a change in your life and THINK for a moment! EVERYONE on the Titanic (except perhaps those in the area where the iceberg hit) could have been saved. This was a luxury liner FILLED with all manner of stuff suitable for floatation! Doors, wood, drums, sealed containers of all kinds. Life rafts which would have provided survival until the other ships arrived could have been easily built. But they weren't. Why? Everybody was believing a lie and in the end the LIE killed them!
The SAME thing is now going on with so-called AGW. Even the NAME is a lie! The lie that it's better to do SOMETHING even if it's the WRONG thing is the death sentence. Only the worst MORON believes that you can somehow make progress doing things when you have no idea what you are doing! Let's cure cancer! Let's bounce a basketball to cure cancer! Yeah that will work!
Here's the deal. Climate change is real and underway. It eventually will probably prove to be extremely dangerous to mankind. It's always better to solve a problem when it is still small rather than wait until it is out of control. And the WAY to solve a problem is to FIRST determine the factors CAUSING the problem and THEN eliminate them one by one!
Hey Sanny, you stupid son of a bitch, haven't you figured out that YOU live on this same planet WE do? You got some kind of death wish? Don't you think it's about time you woke up and quit blindly supporting all the political propaganda designed to enrich a few at the expense of the many and started supported finding out what REALLY causes climate change? We are ALL depending on you and those like you waking up and joining the side of SAVING the planet rather than waiting for a lifeboat that doesn't exist for you because the planet is supposed to be "unsinkable". The elite have THEIR lifeboats ready but there isn't one for their mouthpieces like you. They consider YOU "expendable"! And that puts you in the same boat with us. Think about it!
Timberwoof - 28 Jun 2008 21:12 GMT In article <838609e7-3134-44fa-98ea-18b2473cc05d@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
> CO2 simply CANNOT have enough of an effect to induce global > warming. What's your scientific basis for writing this?
 Signature Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com> http://www.timberwoof.com "When you post sewage, don't blame others for emptying chamber pots in your direction." ‹Chris L.
Immortalist - 29 Jun 2008 07:12 GMT On Jun 28, 1:12 pm, Timberwoof <timberwoof.s...@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com> wrote:
> In article > <838609e7-3134-44fa-98ea-18b2473cc...@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > What's your scientific basis for writing this? Me likes this explanation man;
The greenhouse effect is the process in which the emission of infrared radiation by the atmosphere warms a planet's surface. The name comes from the incorrect analogy with the warming of air inside a greenhouse compared to the air outside the greenhouse (see "Real Greenhouses" below). The greenhouse effect was discovered by Joseph Fourier in 1824 and first investigated quantitatively by Svante Arrhenius in 1896.[1]
In the absence of the greenhouse effect, the Earth's average surface temperature of 14 °C (57 °F) would be about -19 °C (–2.2 °F) .[2] Global warming, a recent warming of the Earth's lower atmosphere, is believed to be the result of an enhanced greenhouse effect due to increased concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. In addition to the Earth, Mars and Venus have greenhouse effects....
...The molecules/atoms that constitute the bulk of the atmosphere: oxygen (O2), nitrogen (N2) and argon (Ar); do not interact with infrared radiation significantly. While the oxygen and nitrogen molecules can vibrate, because of their symmetry these vibrations do not create any transient charge separation. Without such a transient dipole moment, they can neither absorb nor emit infrared radiation. In the Earth’s atmosphere, the dominant infrared absorbing gases are water vapor, carbon dioxide, and ozone (O3). The same molecules are also the dominant infrared emitting molecules. CO2 and O3 have "floppy" vibration motions whose quantum states can be excited by collisions at energies encountered in the atmosphere. For example, carbon dioxide is a linear molecule, but it has an important vibrational mode in which the molecule bends with the carbon in the middle moving one way and the oxygens on the ends moving the other way, creating some charge separation, a dipole moment, thus carbon dioxide molecules can absorb IR radiation. Collisions will immediately transfer this energy to heating the surrounding gas. On the other hand, other CO2 molecules will be vibrationally excited by collisions. Roughly 5% of CO2 molecules are vibrationally excited at room temperature and it is this 5% that radiates. A substantial part of the greenhouse effect due to carbon dioxide exists because this vibration is easily excited by infrared radiation. CO2 has two other vibrational modes. The symmetric stretch does not radiate, and the asymmetric stretch is at too high a frequency to be effectively excited by atmospheric temperature collisions, although it does contribute to absorption of IR radiation. The vibrational modes of water are at too high energies to effectively radiate, but do absorb higher frequency IR radiation. Water vapor has a bent shape. It has a permanent dipole moment (the O atom end is electron rich, and the H atoms electron poor) which means that IR light can be emitted and absorbed during rotational transitions, and these transitions can also be produced by collisional energy transfer. Clouds are also very important infrared absorbers. Therefore, water has multiple effects on infrared radiation, through its vapor phase and through its condensed phases. Other absorbers of significance include methane, nitrous oxide and the chlorofluorocarbons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect
> -- > Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>http://www.timberwoof.com > "When you post sewage, don't blame others for > emptying chamber pots in your direction." ‹Chris L. BradGuth - 28 Jun 2008 20:29 GMT > A year back I used to read Global warming will melt ice in 10-20 > years. [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] > > Complete Discussion:http://www.getclub.com/Show/view.php?best=Discussion&itemid=25 Selene/moon is contributing 2e20 N worth of tidal force/sec.
Earth is 98.5% fluid, if not 99% fluid. Go figure.
- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
Art Deco - 28 Jun 2008 21:49 GMT >> A year back I used to read Global warming will melt ice in 10-20 >> years. [quoted text clipped - 61 lines] > >- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth Got salt, Brad?
 Signature "Substantiation that you regard yourself as a God to be worhsipped [sic] should be your concern, Deco." -- David Tholen
Immortalist - 29 Jun 2008 07:04 GMT > A year back I used to read Global warming will melt ice in 10-20 > years. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Complete Discussion:http://www.getclub.com/Show/view.php?best=Discussion&itemid=25 Looks like we are ready for a phase transition then, which usually surprises one. If water was warmed and there was a beep with degree the temperature changed, the beep that sound when it began to boil would be the same as the other beeps. How does one straw break a camels back? By setting it lightely on top of the other straws already on top of the back, but it only weighs as much as the others individual straws being piled on one at a time.
Phase Transition: An abrupt change in a system's behavior. A common example is the gas- liquid phase transition undergone by water. In such a transition, a plot of density versus temperature shows a distinct discontinuity at the critical temperature marking the transition point. Similar behavior can be seen in systems described by ordinary differential flows and discrete mappings. In nonlinear dynamical systems, the transition from self-organizing to chaotic behavior is sometimes referred to as a phase transition (or, more specifically, as an order- disorder transition).
Bifurcation: The splitting into two modes of behavior of a system that previously displayed only one mode. This splitting occurs as a control parameter is continuously varied. In the Logistic Equation, for example, a period-doubling bifurcation occurs whenever all the points of period-2n cycle simultaneously become unstable and the system becomes attracted to a new period-2n+1 cycle.
http://www.cna.org/isaac/Glossb.htm
Sanny - 29 Jun 2008 14:18 GMT > Phase Transition: > An abrupt change in a system's behavior. A common example is the gas- [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > referred to as a phase transition (or, more specifically, as an order- > disorder transition). Same was Tensile Strength of a metal. Till the point the tension is lower than tensile strength it follows Hookes Law. But then suddenly breaks in two.
Bye Sanny
Complete Discussion:http://www.getclub.com/Show/view.php? best=Discussion&itemid=25
Saul Levy - 01 Jul 2008 07:07 GMT Too bad it's GLOBAL COOLING, Sanny! lmao!
There is NO GLOBAL WARMING.
Nothing you claim will happen. NOTHING!
Saul Levy
>A year back I used to read Global warming will melt ice in 10-20 >years. [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] >Bye >Sanny
|
|
|