KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
Not that I support Vilham's viewpoint, but it has been discussed that the Gulf Stream will be diverted and expose northern and western Europe to extreme cold. Just because the entire Earth is heating up does not mean that everywhere on Earth is heating up.
Point noted KEN. The one thing that I would like to point out is that is pure speculation made in a science that is still in its infancy. It is only a hypothesis at this time. I would also like to point out the following graph.
Example of regional variations in surface air temperature for the last 1000 years, estimated from a variety of sources, including temperature-sensitive tree growth indices and written records of various kinds, largely from western Europe and eastern North America. Shown are changes in regional temperature in ° C, from the baseline value for 1900. Compiled by R. S. Bradley and J. A. Eddy based on J. T. Houghton et al., Climate Change: The IPCC Assessment, Cambridge UniversityPress, Cambridge, 1990 and published in EarthQuest, vol 5, no 1, 1991. Courtesy of Thomas Crowley During the time of the medieval warm period or 'Medieval Optimum' as it is also called, Greenland was colonised indicating to me that Europe was also enjoying balmier temperatures. This also indicates that fears of a gulf stream shift may be ungrounded.
Graph Compiled by R.S. Bradley and J.A. Eddy based on J.T. Houghton et al., Climate Change: The IPCC Assessment, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1990 and published in EarthQuest, vo. 1, 1991. Courtesy of Thomas Crowleytopal63 wrote:
... It is not too late; it is not fucked beyond recourse - but that is certainly a relative YET.
It clearly is not to late to reverse the trend, but reversing the overall trend of environmental impact by human populations - will involve a global effort and that will be difficult to encourage; promote as a necessary cause; as it sounds like an anti-people agenda when spun from a political perspective that simply doesn’t care about the impact of the near-term on the long-term. Population increases press the margins of the last wild refuges. How do you sell a less people in the world, humans can’t touch that; idea; policy; agenda - and that that is a good thing. It inherently feels anti-people; anti-humanity; evil in intent even.
The idea that man-made pollution is responsible for global warming is not supported by historical fact. The period known as the Holocene Maximum is a good example-- so-named because it was the hottest period in human history. The interesting thing is this period occurred approximately 7500 to 4000 years B.P. (before present)-- long before human's invented industrial pollution. Caused by the transition from the stone age to the bronze?
Again, I have to say, in the event that we ARE helping to warm up the planet, there is also a good deal of data that suggests that this would be a GOOD thing.
Topal, you point to an article that sports this....
topal63 wrote:
Nearly 4 million acres of mature white spruce forest on the Kenai Peninsula have been killed by a growing population of spruce bark beetles (Dendroctonus rufipennis) since about 1987. This is a very active event, mediated by climate change, which has spread to about 38 million mature spruce. Scientists, including Dr. Edward Berg and Dr. Kenneth Raffa, attribute the beetle infestation to rising average temperatures in South-Central Alaska in both winter and summer. More beetle larvae can survive, and higher summer temperatures allow the insects to mature faster and complete a two-year life cyle in one year. The trees, which previously lived in balance with the beetles, do not have enough natural defenses against this assault. “
But the very next portion of the articles says this....
'New growth of black spruce on a hillside in Denali National Park headquarters, where botanist Glenn Juday has found that forest cover has advanced in elevation at the highest elevations over the last century. This is consistent with the hypothesis that forest area has
increased during a 150-year warming trend. Average temperature at Denali park headquarters is 1.3° C warmer just since 1976. Other studies reported by the IPCC show that across the Arctic, boreal forests are
expanding at a rate equal to about 100 - 150 km per degree centigrade of average temperature increase.'
Ok, so the white spruce is not doing as well under pressure from the beetles, but the black spruce is doing very well. Do we have some sentimental attachement to the white spruce over the black variety?
Topal63, I am rather disappointed in you because from reading your posts it doesn't appear that you have taken the time to read and consider many of my preceding posts on this topic. You are normally more thorough.
Vilham wrote:
topal63 wrote:
The correlation of a human impact on the global warming trend is valid and significant - but is it a doomsday scenario NOT!
exactly, we are causing an effect by accelerating it, animals and plants on a general note cant cope with fast changes, changes very fast normally cause the extinction of animals. If changes in temperatures kill off lots of species this will directly affect other species and therefore screw things up, life will go on of that there is no doubt and its likely as creative animals we will find a way round this but it wont change the fact that we fucked up the world.
I think you missed a critical sentence there Vilham. I hate to point this out but you seem to be one of this crowd...
with your 'we are fucking up the world' view.
