Arctic sea ice melt at record level

[Shane Nokes]

You do realize that they already did core samples and found that this matches up to a cycle that happens about once every 150 years right? It's varies, but the average is 150. This time it was 130...and that's not the shortest interval that has occurred according to the core sample data.

So no, we're really not causing any detectable issues as of yet.

[Hum]

Bye bye Florida :woot:

[Nathaniel Smith_329019]

Geo engineering,GMOS should be looked at not man made warming.

[DrakeN2k]

I like how humans thinks of "progress" is consuming more finite resources.

[Growled Member]

Just a question, do you think the earth changes have gotten to the point of no return? Is it too late to stop the changes regardless of what we do.

[DrakeN2k]

I say no, but the quicker we act the cheaper it will be to resolve and less destructive the future will be.

Leave it some big big measures will be need just to secure basic needs water and food, but a few billion people will die first.

[FlintyV]

Just a question, do you think the earth changes have gotten to the point of no return? Is it too late to stop the changes regardless of what we do.

It's estimated we need to keep it under 450 parts per million in CO2 in the atmosphere and a quick visit to the ESRL tells us we're at 394.29 ppm which is certainly an increase over last year to keep us below the 2C of warming. Some scientists have have predicted we'll hit the tipping point within the next 5 years, but it seems not many people believe we'll be able to stay under that 450ppm limit.

We've had things like the Kyoto Protocol but with China and the USA refusing to sign it and actually polluted more and it pretty much wiped out the emission cuts made by Europe and other countries.

[theyarecomingforyou]

Just a question, do you think the earth changes have gotten to the point of no return? Is it too late to stop the changes regardless of what we do.

The scientific community is of - or coming to - the consensus that the point of no return has either passed or is not possible to avoid. However, it is still possible to mitigate the severity of such changes by taking action - particularly because there are so many inter-connected changes that do not occur simultaneously. We cannot simply say "it's too late therefore why bother?".

Regardless of climate change mankind needs to use the resources of the planet sustainably. The most pressing problem facing the planet in the near future is a shortage of fresh water, which will hit the US south-east and Australia in the coming decades. Aquifers have been used for farming in a completely unsustainable manner and farms are running on borrowed time. Many farms in the US and Australia have already changed crops based upon water efficiency, rather than market value. Little has been done to curb water usage or invest in infrastructure and it's now only a matter of time before a crisis. It has been predicted in Australia that the city of Perth could become completely uninhabitable - that's a city with a population of nearly 2 million. Large scale desalination plants are being constructed but it's a very inefficient process and enormously power intensive.

A simplified analogy would be that everybody in our generation has been given a hundred thousand pounds / dollars / euros to live on for the rest of their lives and they've already blown half of it on cocaine and hookers. While there is no doubt that people will suffer further down the road, if people can moderate their actions now then they can help reduce the amount of poverty they will face later.

[DrakeN2k]

Some people seam to not understand or want to be educated about renewable energy , they just say climate change is a scam. therefore lets burn fossil fuels for ever and ever and ever .

Oh by the way low educated people , they will run out and when the peak hits it will he felt hard.

Also people go on about our energy bills will hit ?10,000 a year in the future as we need to bill so many wind mills that don't work.

90% of energy bill rises were due to price rises not renewable energy. they never think what will the price of oil and gas be in 20 years time. I am going to bet it will twice what it is now.

[BillyJack]

We have only been recording temperatures and weather related data for a short period of time and out of that time only a few larger cities have been keeping records. I think it is like a hundred years or less. Science can only come up with some assumptions. In reality we know very little for the billions of years that earth has been around. So what do we know. Weather is affected by the sun, volcanoes, humans, the ocean, space, lots more and probably lots more that we do not know.

I think that people hollering about global warming are just like some one saying 2012 is the end of the world. They don't know enough and yet try to convince everyone. I do not deny that things have been changing and are different. I just think it is part of a normal weather pattern that we know very little to nothing about and that we cannot control.

[FlintyV]

We have only been recording temperatures and weather related data for a short period of time and out of that time only a few larger cities have been keeping records. I think it is like a hundred years or less. Science can only come up with some assumptions. In reality we know very little for the billions of years that earth has been around. So what do we know. Weather is affected by the sun, volcanoes, humans, the ocean, space, lots more and probably lots more that we do not know.

I think that people hollering about global warming are just like some one saying 2012 is the end of the world. They don't know enough and yet try to convince everyone. I do not deny that things have been changing and are different. I just think it is part of a normal weather pattern that we know very little to nothing about and that we cannot control.

I wouldn't put the Mayan/2012 conspiracy people in with people who believe in science and the scientific data points towards global warming with man-made contributions and we can certainly have some control over it. I just don't understand how people can say no one knows when there's pretty much a solid consensus by scientific leading bodies that the planet is warming up and humans have contributed to it.

FYI, temperature data has been available from the 1850's onwards

[McKay]

[rhianntp]

Wow been measuring it for 30 years eh? thats a long time...heh..and yea, humans have been able to understand climate for what a hundred years or so ..even if it was 500 years.. as if thats even a millisecond in the scale of the earth and solar system..... gimmie a call in 10000 years when WI is under a mile of ice again and tell me how much anything we did today mattered... silly.....

[theyarecomingforyou]

We have only been recording temperatures and weather related data for a short period of time and out of that time only a few larger cities have been keeping records. I think it is like a hundred years or less. Science can only come up with some assumptions. In reality we know very little for the billions of years that earth has been around.

Look, if you don't have a clue what you're talking about just say so - don't make wild assumptions and blind guesses. Scientists have been able to accurately determine the constitution of the atmosphere and the temperature of the Earth over hundreds of thousands of years thanks to ice core analysis. Further, the balance of carbon-13 and carbon-14 isotopes in the atmosphere can accurately determine the source of CO2 emissions and they are overwhelming related to human activities (fossil fuels, cement production, etc); humans contributes more than 130 times the amount of CO2 than comes from natural sources. So can we please stop pretending that climate change is a theory or is not related to human activities? Factually that isn't true.

[rhianntp]

EXACTLY :)

[Shane Nokes]

...and that chart shows what I was talking about when I said the melting events happen about once ever 150 years. :)

75 major swings if taken at an even up & down means about 37 of each, which comes out to about 120ish years between. So the math comes close to adding up. It looks like the cold periods are longer though typically so that makes sense still to come up with that 150.

So again folks, nothing to see if you look at historical weather trends. It's just the earth doing it's own thing. ;)

Look, if you don't have a clue what you're talking about just say so - don't make wild assumptions and blind guesses. Scientists have been able to accurately determine the constitution of the atmosphere and the temperature of the Earth over hundreds of thousands of years thanks to ice core analysis. Further, the balance of carbon-13 and carbon-14 isotopes in the atmosphere can accurately determine the source of CO2 emissions and they are overwhelming related to human activities (fossil fuels, cement production, etc); humans contributes more than 130 times the amount of CO2 than comes from natural sources. So can we please stop pretending that climate change is a theory or is not related to human activities? Factually that isn't true.

Ok, then care to explain why we are right on time for another event then if we've sped it up? Shouldn't it have happened sooner if we were causing a problem?

[Shiranui]

Humans would have had Mars populated before anything major happens. The human race will live on.

I fear we will turn the Earth into another Venus, long before we get round to populating Mars.

Anyway, living on Mars will be crap and nothing like the original Total Recall - insufficient gravity, too cold and no tri-breasted hookers.

[rhianntp]

At the risk of just throwing numbers out there....lets look at the total greenhouse gases human have contributed since the industrial revolution.. ok.. thats a bug number right?.. impressive.. now lets say the earth decides, on its own no less, to have a 10 year period where major eruptions happen say 40 % more often ...I'm no rocket scientist but I'm fairly certain those ten years would dwarf anything humans could possibly do...the point is the earth will long out live our species many times over...hell, come back in 50,000 years and you wont even see one recogizable feature to suggest we ever existed... and of course when the asteroid or comet eventually hit it will further render meaningless all our drama over what we tiny insignificant specs have done to the planet... makes for great bleeding heart nonsense, but not much else

I fear we will turn the Earth into another Venus, long before we get round to populating Mars.

Anyway, living on Mars will be crap and nothing like the original Total Recall - insufficient gravity, too cold and no tri-breasted hookers.

your fear is misplaced.. fear a tyranical government ready to put you in chains for eating a big mac or drinking a 16 oz soda and throwing the container in a landfill...heh

[theyarecomingforyou]

At the risk of just throwing numbers out there....

Baseless conjecture is baseless.

[BillyJack]

Look, if you don't have a clue what you're talking about just say so - don't make wild assumptions and blind guesses. Scientists have been able to accurately determine the constitution of the atmosphere and the temperature of the Earth over hundreds of thousands of years thanks to ice core analysis. Further, the balance of carbon-13 and carbon-14 isotopes in the atmosphere can accurately determine the source of CO2 emissions and they are overwhelming related to human activities (fossil fuels, cement production, etc); humans contributes more than 130 times the amount of CO2 than comes from natural sources. So can we please stop pretending that climate change is a theory or is not related to human activities? Factually that isn't true.

Come on. You seriously think you are smarter. We all know how to read and I have read as much as you. There is is even more that scientist are studying then what you have mentioned. Should I suggest you have no clue? My simple post and opinion which you did not like summarizes everything I am trying to express, but I will make it easier for you to read.

• The earth has been around for a long time and we have a small record of that time.
  
• Science still has a long way to go in order to increase our knowledge about weather.
  
• People do not need to freak out like some people are.
  
• We cannot control the weather.
  

[theyarecomingforyou]

Come on. You seriously think you are smarter. We all know how to read and I have read as mush as you.

Honestly? Yes, I do believe that I am smarter than you. You came in here erroneously claiming that we only have temperature records for about a century and tried to use that to downplay the significance of climate change and undermine its scientific credibility. I provided evidence to the contrary, yet your 'rebuttal' of my post was to simply repeat your post again. You refused to address a single point I raised.

The definition of a discussion:

Consideration or examination by argument, comment, etc., especially to explore solutions.

By failing to address any of the points I raised you have failed at a fundamental level to engage in a discussion. Therefore, I have nothing further to say to you.

[Shane Nokes]

By failing to address any of the points I raised you have failed at a fundamental level to engage in a discussion. Therefore, I have nothing further to say to you.

Ok, then the same goes for you. I addressed your point directly and you failed to even attempt to discuss it with me...so good to know when someone actually wants to discuss with you, you ignore it when a valid point is raised.

Pot, meet kettle.

[theyarecomingforyou]

Ok, then the same goes for you. I addressed your point directly and you failed to even attempt to discuss it with me...so good to know when someone actually wants to discuss with you, you ignore it when a valid point is raised.

Calm down, I just hadn't got around to it. :)

Ok, then care to explain why we are right on time for another event then if we've sped it up? Shouldn't it have happened sooner if we were causing a problem?

My concern looking at the graph is the dramatic drop after the rise in temperatures following 1800, which coincides with the industrial revolution. Further, it hasn't been established that we haven't sped up climate change. We know that human activities dramatically exceed natural CO2 production and that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, so we know that our activities have had an impact upon global temperatures. The graph attributes rises to solar activity yet a direct correlation has yet to be established (see Solar variation and Climate). And we know that solar activity proxies show no significant variation from previous centuries. I would need to know more about the way the graph was compiled and the examine the sources before making any further conclusions, so I'm afraid I can't answer your question more directly.

Most of the effects of climate change are yet to occur but we know that they are going to happen. Ice shelves are melting at a faster rate and we know that a sea levels will rise considerably over the next century. All we can say for certain is that humans activities are contributing to climate change and we should take action to mitigate that change. The consumption of fossil fuels is completely unsustainable and even setting aside climate change that should be a cause for concern.

The current ice age is rapidly coming to an end and we need to be prepared for that. It annoys me that people are obsessed with trying to quantity the exact extent of our impact. Obviously such information is important but it should not prevent us from taking action now. Unfortunately economic growth is deemed more important than the sustainability of the planet's resources or the impact upon the planet.

[Shane Nokes]

Yes, but aren't you yourself trying to quantify the exact extent of our impact yourself?

The cycle is repeating as it usually does, and it's not varying from previous established norms as per ice core drilling. The ice caps melt on a periodic basis. The fact that it's happening again isn't a cause for alarm.

Now if evidence came up that showed that something like this had never happened before and wasn't part of a natural cycle then I'd be worried. However we're still within norms for previous cycle change events.

Look at it this way. You have a battery powered clock in your house. It ticks faster than it should when you put in fresh batteries (at least a lot of mine have) and it ticks slower when the batteries are low. You change the batteries at some point, and the cycle repeats. Now do you worry about the clock ticking faster when you replace the batteries or slower when they are running low? No. It's part of the norm. Now if the clock is not keeping time when you replace the batteries and is consistently slow (new behavior) then you know it's time to look at something being wrong.

I will however agree that usage of fossil fuels needs to stop...but only because I want to see us innovate on clean power cell tech since that will help us with space travel and in various other areas as well :)

[FlintyV]

Yes, but aren't you yourself trying to quantify the exact extent of our impact yourself?

The cycle is repeating as it usually does, and it's not varying from previous established norms as per ice core drilling. The ice caps melt on a periodic basis. The fact that it's happening again isn't a cause for alarm.

Now if evidence came up that showed that something like this had never happened before and wasn't part of a natural cycle then I'd be worried. However we're still within norms for previous cycle change events.

Just today NASA have shown that the ice caps have actually melted earlier and the most since they started recording in 1979.

"Implications are serious: the increased open water lowers the average albedo [reflectivity] of the planet, accelerating global warming; and we are also finding the open water causing seabed permafrost to melt, releasing large amounts of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas, to the atmosphere." said Professor Peter Wadhams of Cambridge University.

"Measurements from submarines have shown that it has lost at least 40% of its thickness since the 1980s, and if you consider the shrinkage as well it means that the summer ice volume is now only 30% of what it was in the 1980s," he added.

So yes things are happening differently.