Cool this summer? arctic sea ice melt 3rd highest

[bigfish1965]

The science is settled then is it? what about the ice age that was coming in the 70's? you were around for that one.

 

Of course I was. And by using geology and geography to predict the cycles, we are headed that way as a natural occurrence. The natural cycles occur over thousands of years, not over decades like the manmade ones do.

[hotrod]

They weren't saying thousands of years in the 70's, it was going to happen and us kids in school were afraid of freezing to death, same as all the kids are being scared into believing they are going to drown or burn up if they don't stop global warming, which I believe we can't even if we needed to and you believe we can. Strong opinions on both sides, I guess we'll have to see if the planet is still here in 10 years and then decide.

[alctel]

They weren't saying thousands of years in the 70's, it was going to happen and us kids in school were afraid of freezing to death, same as all the kids are being scared into believing they are going to drown or burn up if they don't stop global warming, which I believe we can't even if we needed to and you believe we can. Strong opinions on both sides, I guess we'll have to see if the planet is still here in 10 years and then decide.

 

Oh it'll be here in 10 years still, just most of the salmon will have died off and there is a good chance that the eco-system in large areas of the ocean will have collapsed.

 

It is actually possible to do something about it - luckily the planet is pretty awesome at sorting itself out and given half a chance will regenerate itself pretty handily as long as its not too badly damaged (i.e the existing carbon sinks are damaged beyond repair or outpaced by positive feedback loops)

 

Oh and regarding past ecological problems, remember the Ozone Layer disappearing? Due to the ban on CFCs and other emission regulations the depletion rate slowed down significantly, and is in fact expected to start regenerating itself sometime in the next 20 years. So we can make a difference!

 

We call it Oil Sands ( Crazy Lefty's and Environmentalists call it Tar Sands, Sounds Dirtier) , also I was talking to Scug. For your info I did read some of the Links, However, I also read some of the links that are opposed. Myself, I dislike anyone that is two faced that are broadcasting these issues. In other words if THEY have a problem with how Canada or our Neighbor, or the World is working, do something ( just dont Force me). Lead by Example. Sign a contract that you will have absolutely nothing to do with, fossil fuels, Carbon emitting machinery, anything to do with nuclear reactors including medicine, X Rays, and TV. Anything man made causing your ice to melt. Also I Apologize if I hurt your feelings. I'm a straight up guy that says it like it is. No hiding around the corners. WOW, the word Smug hurt your feelings eh. If I called you sitting so vain, you would call that a name calling right. But since you brought up the name calling, Your personal attack on me

( Im proud to say I never Pmd a Mod to complain) only proved to me how weak you are and proved exactly what I said when you, corner, disagree, or even disapprove a Lefty, Pacifist, or Doom and Gloomer, Ill even throw an Environmentalist in case hes a Righty. Tar Sands are Awful, how about all that Pollution in Ontario. Have you forgotten Acid rain, or is that not the in thing anymore. One must look at themselves before criticizing or telling others what to do.

 

I don't quite get what you mean here - I try to do what I can (I don't own a car, cycle everywhere, grow as much of my own food as I can etc) but I know for various reasons a lot of people don't have those options at all. For the record, I think Nuclear Power is awesome and I have no idea why the left in Canada is so against it (I blame the Simpsons, lol). I dunno what you mean by cornering me either?

 

Since you mentioned Acid rain, it was a MAJOR problem back in the day and the situation vastly improved - however recently due to the Oil Sands it has started again, and blowing West into SK, Manitoba and even Northern Ontario, where it is killing all the fish. http://www.ec.gc.ca/acidrain/acidfact.html

 

It is a major problem because it is also poisoning the water supplies of remote communities in those areas as well as killing the fish

Edited September 10, 2009 by alctel

[danbouck]

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sP-4KemxrPk

[StoneFly]

When and IF Al Gore does something about global baloney then maybe I will too.

 

http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/gorehome.asp

 

My guess is that you already emit about 3 times as much greenhouse gas as the average bear!!! J/K

[StoneFly]

Actually, you have been doing all the name-calling so far, calling me smug and all kinds of other things! And have you actually read anything we have posted, or do you keep conjuring up strawmen?

 

The Tar Sands are awful by the way - they are polluting the crap out of Alberta, Manitoba and SK, while the federal government has waived industrial standards and changed the environmental policy surrounding it. In a time when most countries are starting to move away from oil, it doesn't really make much sense to try to hang on to them, especially since the price of oil dropped so low (Alberta is about to start running a deficit again).

 

Canada has huuuuuuge amounts of sun, land, wind and coastline, if it wanted to it could lead the way in alternative energy and research instead of relying on digging stuff out of the ground and selling it.

 

Dont forget about Biogas (energy from waste)

[hotrod]

Dan Bouck............lol

 

 

So now all the salmon are going to die?and all the fish are dying in the north?I didn't see anything in the link you provided backing that up, wow you're a true believer. As I said earlier we can all agree we need to stop pollution. Carbon dioxide is not pollution and the world isn't going to end if we don't adopt cap and trade.

[StoneFly]

Ok...I'll Bite LOL!

 

Sorry guys but I have to laugh at the fear mongering a bit...

in the 70's it was "the next ice age is coming"

In the 80's it was "acid rain is going to kill us"

In the 90's global warming is "going to get us"

Now its not global warming but "climate change"....

Oh!

And lets not forget the doomsday Asteroids...

 

I can buy the climate change thing, as its such a broad spectrum, sure...it makes sense I suppose?

But food for thought here...

The Arctic has Tropical plants under the ice in some areas, Mammoth bones have been found as far south as central America, the great lakes basin was once ONE BIG ASS LAKE....

In my very NON EXPERT opinion would say Climate change has been going on for a lot longer then the last 1000 years In fact in my opinion its been going on for a very long time(thats my scientific answer) LOL!

 

Is it happening?...sure why not.

Am I going to worry about it?...nope

I'll wait until I'm a bit older and bored then I'll worry so I have something to do LOL!

 

Dont forget about Nostradomous, 2012, lol and I See massive trees, root balls and all displaced 10 km from where they were uprooted everyspring on some of our bigger tribs,...what is your point?

[kickingfrog]

We call it Oil Sands ( Crazy Lefty's and Environmentalists call it Tar Sands, Sounds Dirtier) , also I was talking to Scug. For your info I did read some of the Links, However, I also read some of the links that are opposed. Myself, I dislike anyone that is two faced that are broadcasting these issues. In other words if THEY have a problem with how Canada or our Neighbor, or the World is working, do something ( just dont Force me). Lead by Example. Sign a contract that you will have absolutely nothing to do with, fossil fuels, Carbon emitting machinery, anything to do with nuclear reactors including medicine, X Rays, and TV. Anything man made causing your ice to melt. Also I Apologize if I hurt your feelings. I'm a straight up guy that says it like it is. No hiding around the corners. WOW, the word Smug hurt your feelings eh. If I called you sitting so vain, you would call that a name calling right. But since you brought up the name calling, Your personal attack on me

( Im proud to say I never Pmd a Mod to complain) only proved to me how weak you are and proved exactly what I said when you, corner, disagree, or even disapprove a Lefty, Pacifist, or Doom and Gloomer, Ill even throw an Environmentalist in case hes a Righty. Tar Sands are Awful, how about all that Pollution in Ontario. Have you forgotten Acid rain, or is that not the in thing anymore. One must look at themselves before criticizing or telling others what to do.

 

 

Everybody called them the tar sands until oil hit 50-60 or so dollars a barrel.

 

Sorry for interrupting this discussion.

 

Please continue.

 

Now where did I put my popcorn?

[StoneFly]

I have a bachelor of environmental studies from the University of Waterloo which in itself does not actually make me me an authority but I have done a lot of work with regards to climate change including working with the Canadian Military.

 

Good to know Im not the Only one who has studied it. I have a Bachelor of Environmental Science (Hons) from the Univerisity of Guelph majoring in Earth and Atmosphere Science. I started 15 years ago (as a mature student), but was already heavy into the journals on the subject. In my first year, Global warming and Clmiate change was mostly a fringe science, I for one am happy to see the GLOBAL acceptance that has transpired over the years!!! Whats more is that yes, things happen in cycles geomorphologically and geologically, there have been warm and cold periods. Just look to the Vikings in Greenland a few hundred years ago. Notwithstanding this, it is an indisputible fact that greenhouse gases can cause warming. When we start messing around with this and el nina's and el nino's and slight shifts in temperatures of the oceans and there patterns, and couple this with our knowledge of atmospheric patterns and cycles,...say hello to more and bigger hurricanes, more and bigger tsuenami's (sp?), more earthquakes, more drought, more floods and more tornadoes hitting major popluation centres, more wild fires......

 

No it doesnt happen over night, like the movies,..but look over a generation or 2 and track C02 (or equivalent) concentration in the atmosphere with global average temperatures, with occurance of natural disasters etc.

 

Remember that just because in Ontario we have experienced 2 cold wet summers in a row, doesn't mean the rest of the world has, it doesnt mean even the rest of Canada has. I could write pages about this, but my school time is finished long ago,..so this is the 10 minute version,..Lol

 

Sometimes as proud Canadians, we think the world revolves around us, but soooo many people like to be ignorant,...ignorance is bliss. I love this country and would rather live nowhere else, but we are also the same nation that sold 20 million tonnes of Asbestos to India last year even though we have banned it here and dont even get me started on the toxic waste exports.

 

Oh and BTW,...before someone calls me a tree hugging, lefty environmentalist, I got into this field, becasue I knew there were better ways to do things, and there was money too be made, and while its been a bit of a Struggle, I WAS RIGHT!!!

 

 

Rain Rain Rain!!!

Edited September 10, 2009 by StoneFly

[alctel]

Dan Bouck............lol

 

 

So now all the salmon are going to die?and all the fish are dying in the north?I didn't see anything in the link you provided backing that up, wow you're a true believer. As I said earlier we can all agree we need to stop pollution. Carbon dioxide is not pollution and the world isn't going to end if we don't adopt cap and trade.

 

 

The EPA classified Carbon Dioxide as pollution http://www.enn.com/pollution/article/40422

It would have been done years ago but as stated in an above story the Bush administration refused to open the email with the findings, heh.

 

Here is more info about the acid rain caused by the oil sands - http://www.canada.com/saskatoonstarphoenix...738&k=66051

Its really really polluting but its so hard to get hard data about since the conservatives refuse to commission a study so its left to provincial governments to do their own ones, and they don't have the resources.

 

Also I really am not a fan of cap-and-trade either, its a neo-liberal compromise designed to get businesses to go along with reducing their emissions based along the lines of 'the free-market is always right!!' which is a concept I find ridiculous. Its a bit of a crappy compromise that noone likes except big companies who get to make more money off of it

Edited September 10, 2009 by alctel

[gdelongchamp]

I wonder what the average age of the posters in this thread is. And would I be wrong in thinking that the older ones are less likely to believe in global warming? Just a thought as I wade through all of these posts. Now it's time for a beer.

[hotrod]

Alctel the epa is a tool of the government that has their own agenda. If you read the link you provided they are trying to make it a pollutant so they can ram cap and trade through so all their buddies can get rich. Just think about it man, every time you breathe you are polluting?????? and what about all the fish in the north that you said are dying??? do you make this up as you go along? what does Bush have to do with it??? sounds like he did something right.

 

 

I was thinking the same thing guppy, most(not all.. right Bigfish?) I would guess are the younger generation who have been indoctrinated with the global warming mantra for years now in school, much as I was with the ice age, we're running out of oil and are going to freeze to death crap when I was a kid. I've been through it before and I'm sure there will be something else 20 years down the line that needs to be addressed now or else the world will end.

[alctel]

Alctel the epa is a tool of the government that has their own agenda. If you read the link you provided they are trying to make it a pollutant so they can ram cap and trade through so all their buddies can get rich. Just think about it man, every time you breathe you are polluting?????? and what about all the fish in the north that you said are dying??? do you make this up as you go along? what does Bush have to do with it??? sounds like he did something right.

 

 

I was thinking the same thing guppy, most(not all.. right Bigfish?) I would guess are the younger generation who have been indoctrinated with the global warming mantra for years now in school, much as I was with the ice age, we're running out of oil and are going to freeze to death crap when I was a kid. I've been through it before and I'm sure there will be something else 20 years down the line that needs to be addressed now or else the world will end.

 

The Bush white house asked the EPA some years back to do a report on whether CO2 was a pollutant (this is years after most of the other western governments had done their own studies and found that it was). The EPA did a extensive study, found that it was a majorr factor in climate change and emailed the full report to the white house, who refused to open it because it disagreed with what they wanted to hear. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/25/washington/25epa.html is the full story.

 

Yes CO2 is a natural gas, but we are pumping a TON of it into the atmosphere and overloading the natural carbon sinks that the planet has.

[StoneFly]

The Bush white house asked the EPA some years back to do a report on whether CO2 was a pollutant (this is years after most of the other western governments had done their own studies and found that it was). The EPA did a extensive study, found that it was a majorr factor in climate change and emailed the full report to the white house, who refused to open it because it disagreed with what they wanted to hear. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/25/washington/25epa.html is the full story.

 

Yes CO2 is a natural gas, but we are pumping a TON of it into the atmosphere and overloading the natural carbon sinks that the planet has.

 

Anyone ever hear of the "West Dallas Lead story". Google it!!! This is a story of the 30 years of the EPA at its finest. You will not find the 100's of refereed journal articles that I have read, but you will get the point!!!!

[hotrod]

The science is junk and is all about political agendas. I know my breath is bad sometimes but calling it pollution is a little strong don't you think? And the Dems only hear what they want also. I've had enough for tonight.

 

UK's Lord Christopher Monckton, a former science advisor to Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, claimed House Democrats have refused to allow him to appear alongside former Vice President Al Gore at a high profile global warming hearing on Friday April 24, 2009 at 10am in Washington. Monckton told Climate Depot that the Democrats rescinded his scheduled joint appearance at the House Energy and Commerce hearing on Friday. Monckton said he was informed that he would not be allowed to testify alongside Gore when his plane landed from England Thursday afternoon.

 

“The House Democrats don't want Gore humiliated, so they slammed the door of the Capitol in my face,” Monckton told Climate Depot in an exclusive interview. “They are cowards.”

 

The entire article is here:

http://www.climatedepot.com/a/429/Flashbac...ssional-Hearing

[StoneFly]

The science is junk and is all about political agendas. I know my breath is bad sometimes but calling it pollution is a little strong don't you think? And the Dems only hear what they want also. I've had enough for tonight.

 

UK's Lord Christopher Monckton, a former science advisor to Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, claimed House Democrats have refused to allow him to appear alongside former Vice President Al Gore at a high profile global warming hearing on Friday April 24, 2009 at 10am in Washington. Monckton told Climate Depot that the Democrats rescinded his scheduled joint appearance at the House Energy and Commerce hearing on Friday. Monckton said he was informed that he would not be allowed to testify alongside Gore when his plane landed from England Thursday afternoon.

 

“The House Democrats don't want Gore humiliated, so they slammed the door of the Capitol in my face,” Monckton told Climate Depot in an exclusive interview. “They are cowards.”

 

The entire article is here:

http://www.climatedepot.com/a/429/Flashbac...ssional-Hearing

 

The Brits (royals) are inbreeders and your farts have 21x as much greenhouse gas as your breath, however if you eat some pork,. your breath will 310x as much as normal

[Cudz]

Well there are valid arguments on both sides. I know where I stand and yes I agree with some of with regards to climate change. Climate change is occuring. At the same time many those same people use words like "we are the culprits" or "humans are the cause". There is no arguing that burning fossil fuels as a rule has a negative impact on the environment but..... More than 90% of greenhouse gases are simply water vapour that occurs naturally in the atmosphere. Our ddition to that amount is not really sustantial. I will admit that humans do accelerate the process but not as much as the media might want us to believe. CO2 is always blamed for the 'global warming' phnomenon. I do not believe this to be the case at all.

I once closely monitored an experiment on forest growth and forest harvest. In this controlled experiment they sprayed 5 acres of woods with 5 times the amount of CO2 than an adjacent 5 acre forest plot. That nasty CO2 caused the trees to be much larger, stronger and helthier than the adjacent forest trees. After only 3 years the CO2 forest would be able to produce more than 2 times the amount of wood and product as the non-CO2 plot. Is CO2 as nasty as we think. Doubt it. We just need to point fingers and blame something.

 

As far as age goes on this discussion, it is natural for youth to believe what they believe. I see it everyday. I believe it was Winston Churchill who hit the head on the nail when he said "Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains."

[troutologist]

Let me pull on the reins there for you. True scientists can have benevolent agendas and there are certain groups that offer self-serving studies (picking the furthest end of the spectrum, worst case scenario). Truth be told you can do a lot with statistics depending on the methods you use and how you interpret the findings.

 

Here are some things I think about. When else in the history or earth, (the 6000 or 4.5 billion years take your pick) has there been an input of the cocktail of emissions like now? The dinosaurs weren't an industrial bunch by all accounts. Now whether this is causing warming, cooling or what, don't sit there and tell me it is doing nothing to the biosphere as a whole and subsequently causing a trickle down effect to ecosystems and individual species. There literally are infinite ways to observe and study effects of this change.

 

Im a biologist and did my thesis on causes and measures of long term stress in animals exposed to environmental change. This included polar bears. As I stated earlier in this thread there are real, tangible observations of a change in condition of these animals in 20yrs. This can be directly correlated to rapid environmental change.

 

Currently I work on a project studying the presence of killer whales in the Canadian Arctic. There are very good records from whaling for over a century regarding killer whales in this area. In many communities there was no verbal history of killer whales. In the last few decades this is a very novel thing to many Inuit. Killer whales cannot persist in the fast ice or solid pack ice as the traditional arctic whales can...they need open water.

 

My take home message: Something is happening, it can be attributed to human action. Can it really hurt to turn off a light or walk to the corner store? Maybe in your opinion small actions are worth while. I still drive a truck and plan on using oil until something better is offered. Why chance it? Can doing your best (or anything) to reduce your impact hurt? Really I couldn't give a damn if anyone believes in global warming, HOWEVER, the attitude of not being willing to try to lessen your personal impact is ignorant.

[StoneFly]

Well there are valid arguments on both sides. I know where I stand and yes I agree with some of with regards to climate change. Climate change is occuring. At the same time many those same people use words like "we are the culprits" or "humans are the cause". There is no arguing that burning fossil fuels as a rule has a negative impact on the environment but..... More than 90% of greenhouse gases are simply water vapour that occurs naturally in the atmosphere. Our ddition to that amount is not really sustantial. I will admit that humans do accelerate the process but not as much as the media might want us to believe. CO2 is always blamed for the 'global warming' phnomenon. I do not believe this to be the case at all.

I once closely monitored an experiment on forest growth and forest harvest. In this controlled experiment they sprayed 5 acres of woods with 5 times the amount of CO2 than an adjacent 5 acre forest plot. That nasty CO2 caused the trees to be much larger, stronger and helthier than the adjacent forest trees. After only 3 years the CO2 forest would be able to produce more than 2 times the amount of wood and product as the non-CO2 plot. Is CO2 as nasty as we think. Doubt it. We just need to point fingers and blame something.

 

As far as age goes on this discussion, it is natural for youth to believe what they believe. I see it everyday. I believe it was Winston Churchill who hit the head on the nail when he said "Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains."

 

C02 is the benchmark for the other culprits, CH4 is 21x, NOx 310x the greenhouse gas potential of C02. There are several others that have not even gained status yet, that is the politics.

[Cudz]

You know what would be interesting? To see how closely Grizzly bears and Polar bears are (genetically speaking of course, not ecologically speaking). I wonder if they could successfully breed with one another?

just throwin that out there.

 

Something is happening indeed. Aided by human action but not solely attributed to humans.

[troutologist]

They are extremely close. Not sure of the exact number but over 80% (most likely over 90%) homology between their genotypes. There seemed to be a case of a "pizzly" shot by a hunter a few years ago. Had one parent of each species.

 

Polar bears diverged from grizzly and brown bears around 10 000 yrs ago. Evolutionarily speaking this is very recent.

[StoneFly]

Let me pull on the reins there for you. True scientists can have benevolent agendas and there are certain groups that offer self-serving studies (picking the furthest end of the spectrum, worst case scenario). Truth be told you can do a lot with statistics depending on the methods you use and how you interpret the findings.

 

Here are some things I think about. When else in the history or earth, (the 6000 or 4.5 billion years take your pick) has there been an input of the cocktail of emissions like now? The dinosaurs weren't an industrial bunch by all accounts. Now whether this is causing warming, cooling or what, don't sit there and tell me it is doing nothing to the biosphere as a whole and subsequently causing a trickle down effect to ecosystems and individual species. There literally are infinite ways to observe and study effects of this change.

 

Im a biologist and did my thesis on causes and measures of long term stress in animals exposed to environmental change. This included polar bears. As I stated earlier in this thread there are real, tangible observations of a change in condition of these animals in 20yrs. This can be directly correlated to rapid environmental change.

 

Currently I work on a project studying the presence of killer whales in the Canadian Arctic. There are very good records from whaling for over a century regarding killer whales in this area. In many communities there was no verbal history of killer whales. In the last few decades this is a very novel thing to many Inuit. Killer whales cannot persist in the fast ice or solid pack ice as the traditional arctic whales can...they need open water.

 

My take home message: Something is happening, it can be attributed to human action. Can it really hurt to turn off a light or walk to the corner store? Maybe in your opinion small actions are worth while. I still drive a truck and plan on using oil until something better is offered. Why chance it? Can doing your best (or anything) to reduce your impact hurt? Really I couldn't give a damn if anyone believes in global warming, HOWEVER, the attitude of not being willing to try to lessen your personal impact is ignorant.

 

Did anyone notice that oil hitting $150 per barrel made the alternative fuel/energy agenda and hybrid vehicle manufacturing hit the roof? Anyone in the field knew thats what it would take,...we will all be better off for it. As long as it continues and gets better, in 5 years from now, it will be much more normal and the pain will be gone. PS. ethanol from crops that could otherwise feed people of the foodchain is not a good thing!!! We have enough energy available in what we dump and landfill to make an incredible difference. There is also alot of $$ to be made, it is however a shift in where that $$ goes.

[Cudz]

They are extremely close. Not sure of the exact number but over 80% (most likely over 90%) homology between their genotypes. There seemed to be a case of a "pizzly" shot by a hunter a few years ago. Had one parent of each species.

 

Polar bears diverged from grizzly and brown bears around 10 000 yrs ago. Evolutionarily speaking this is very recent.

lol.

I know. I was just stirring the pot a bit. soryy, it is in my nature.

[StoneFly]

They are extremely close. Not sure of the exact number but over 80% (most likely over 90%) homology between their genotypes. There seemed to be a case of a "pizzly" shot by a hunter a few years ago. Had one parent of each species.

 

Polar bears diverged from grizzly and brown bears around 10 000 yrs ago. Evolutionarily speaking this is very recent.

 

Doesnt nature always find a way? ever see the black squirels in the city with the red tails?