The average temperature in the Arctic will increase twice the global rate

[Slotte]

www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/science/11/08/globalwarming.reut/index.html

What do you say to that?

[CatholicEagle]

What temperature change will it really be? From -40 C to -33 C... That's still cold

[Anastasios]

I have read several studies that suggest that humans don't really have much of an effect on the environment, that global warming is happening but we don't know why, and that all of this is part of a cycle of temperature that happens on a long term scale--over tens of thousands of years.

If there is something that we humans can do to stop it, fine, but in the end, it may just be the NATURAL process of our planet.

Anastasios

[penelope]

^I agree, but nevertheless I hope this motivates people to be more environmentalist.  I think the mere chance that global warming could be our fault should be enough to motivate us to change, and we should be treating the environment a lot better anyway.

[Slotte]

CatholicEagle From -40 C to -33 C... That's still cold

Right, so that's nothing to worry about then?

anastasios If there is something that we humans can do to stop it, fine, but in the end, it may just be the NATURAL process of our planet

What about the O₃ -layer, or the CO₂ that comes from the biosphere and the vulcanic activity, do you mean that human activity has no major part in the O₃ layer reduction and CO₂ increase, or that those gases don't have a significant or long-lasting effect on climate?

[JoeS]

If all this melting is going on why isnt Long Beach Island NJ under water???   Parts of the Island are only 10 feet above sea level and there has been no rise in sea levels in the 20 years I have been going there to fish.

JoeS

[Brendan03]

A related political joke (in somewhat bad taste):    The reason why the Democrats are more anxious about global warming than the republicans is that more Blue States border oceans than Red States, and so when the water rises, there goes the Democratic base.

Dunno if that really works that way, but I thought I would share it.  I seriously think we need to take climate change seriously, and find out whether it is happening and why.

B

[Slotte]

JoeS If all this melting is going on why isnt Long Beach Island NJ under water?

Later on, it will melt more rapidly than now, the graph is not linear

[Pravoslavbob]

Anastasios,

I would be interested in knowing about what studies you have read.   I do know that there is some dissention, but as far as I know, the great majority of scientists are of the opinion that the climate of the planet is warming rapidly, and that it is humans who are causing it.  

It is true that the planet cools and warms naturally over time.  The only problem is that it is warming so rapidly right now, that ecosystems (hence plants and animals as well) may be unable to adapt to the changes.  One example in the Arctic is the Polar Bear.  Already, it would seem that the average weight of these bears is declining rapidly because of the greatly reduced time that arctic waters are iced over.  This is because the bears hunt for seals by waiting for them to surface at air holes in the ice.  Take the ice away earlier, and it makes it that much more difficult for the bears to survive.  This is just one example of how global warming is causing chaos for ecosystems.  I could site many more examples.

Thanks!

Bob

[Αριστοκλής]

Anastasios,

I would be interested in knowing about what studies you have read.   I do know that there is some dissention, but as far as I know, the great majority of scientists are of the opinion that the climate of the planet is warming rapidly, and that it is humans who are causing it.  

Seems that is the message from CNN and the 'global government' crowd. There is equal evidence the other way as well. It just is the popular thing to promote, especially the human cause. With a meteorlogical record accurate to, at best, a couple of hundred years, it is silly to interpolate the data too drastically. The geologic record shows even more drastic swings in the past when 'humankind' could not have affected anything.
And then there is perspective vantage. The past two summers we have 'frozen our butts off' here on the Allegheny Plateau of Pennsylvania while our European friends have roasted. No wonder we don't see the same issues.
All this is not to say we should not attempt to care for Creation; but the global warming controversy is basically international politics.

Demetri

[Anastasios]

Bob,

Just like most people who are scared about global warming get their info from the TV and newspaper, I don't recall the exact studies that I have seen referenced in various places.  However, I did look up some stuff on global warming and actually found something on that bear you mentioned:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,138346,00.html

An interesting site--which I found only today and which I can't vouch for its accuracy--is http://www.junkscience.com

I'm not saying that global warming is not occuring, just that I am not so sure that the media and scientists with an interest in global warming being true are really giving us the whole picture.  At any rate, I think that if studies do come out that show humans having an adverse effect on the environment, that we should clean up our act as good stewards. What I am opposed to is the scare tactics of some environmentalists.

Anastasios

[Pravoslavbob]

Demetri :

I don't really know how to respond to your post, simply because I have yet to meet anyone who considers the idea of global warming to be a concocted conspiracy of some kind.  In all humility, I ask you to indulge me for a minute, if you would be so kind, and let me offer my view of things.

Fact:  The vast majority of scientists working on the question view global warming as something that is real, happening now, and caused by humans.  A small minority do not agree with this theory, and believe that something else is to blame for what is going on, or indeed that nothing is going on.  Could the majority view be wrong?  Certainly.  It has not been proven, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that global warming is happening or that people are causing it.  
The other thing that we  don't have much knowledge about is the speed at which the planet will continue to warm, if that is indeed happening.  But there seems to be indications that it is happening very quickly.  Do we know what the consequeces will be?  Mostly not, we can only make educated guesses.  But I ask you, should we simply be planning for the best case scenario?  Given the limited knowledge that we have, it only seems to make sense, I think, to try to work towards improving the state of things as much as is within our power.  

The fluctuating temperature extremes that you make reference to are a normal part of things when climate change is iminent.  And yes, geological changes will account for climatic changes, but it is thought that these kinds of changes do not occur so rapidly.  

With all due respect, I don't understand this idea that global warming is somehow a kind of political ploy.  What are countries that support the Kyoto accord to gain from supporting the accord?  It just seems to me like they have to put a lot of BST into changing over to different ways of garnering energy.  On the other hand, I could see how it might be very appealing to big multinationals like Exxon and Mobil to debunk the theory of global warming as much as possible, as they would be looking out for their own interests.  

Bob

[Anastasios]

"I don't understand this idea that global warming is somehow a kind of political ploy.  What are countries that support the Kyoto accord to gain from supporting the accord?"

Easy enough to answer. Third world countries get exemptions for their industries to comply with Kyoto in say 10 years time, while 1st world countries must immediately comply (which cuts down on production until alternatives are found), which basically allows for third world countries to get an advantage in industry over first world countries.

Anastasios

[Pravoslavbob]

Well, you may have a good  point there, Anastasios.  Still, after all the ink is dry, it's still possible, isn't it,  that it's not that great a deal for third world countires that sign on?  And really, what's in it for the first world countries?

[Pravoslavbob]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6530026/


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6575314/



If anyone is still interested......

[Pravoslavbob]

Oh yes.  One more "two cents worth."  I was just reminded by a piece on the radio that the Pentagon has warned about the consequences of global warming, going into quite a lot of detail.  The Pentagon is surely not partial to the "global government crowd".  Okay, I'll let the matter rest.  

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Free-For-All > Non-Religious Topics (Moderator: Pravoslavbob) > Topic: The average temperature in the Arctic will increase twice the global rate