The rejection of the recent energy bill, after the Kyoto, and Bali Conferences, underscore the dangerous control that special interests exercise over this administration's policies. Their distortions of scientific data typifies their unconscionable war on science.

Evidence linking carbon pollution to warming has long been as close to certain as science can be. Its causes, consequences, and mitigation requirements have been documented by many dedicated environmental organizations including The Union of Concerned Scientists.

Special interests argue that the current warming trends follow historic warming cycles, and hence reflect natural weather patterns--but they omit obvious differences: The earlier warming trends developed at slower rates which permitted the ecosystems to adapt. Morever they resulted from temporary natural events, which allowed transitions back to normal temperature patterns--by contrast, the current warming patterns result from artificial causes that will only intensify unless mitigated.

By all indicators, global warming will self perpetuate as the melting ice sheets absorb rather than reflect heat, as the melting permafrost releases more CO2 & methane, and the list goes on. Inundation of low lying areas, spread of tropical diseases to temperate latitudes, sea life destruction from changing ocean chemistry, & currents, are only some potential consequences.

Often overlooked is the fact that, the same measures needed to mitigate global warming would be necessary even if it were no issue. Conservation, alternative energy development, anti- pollution refinements, etc are essential for other vital environmental reforms such as air and water quality, reductions in toxic waste generation, land preservation, etc.

Contrary to right wing assertions, measures to reduce greenhouse gases could only improve our economy by lessening our trade deficits, and improving our security by reducing our dependance on foreign oil. We could also regain some of our lost world respect that has resulted from our rejection of Kyoto while arrogantly contributing disproportionally to carbon pollution. With our participation in international efforts, China & India could no longer use our non-compliance as an excuse for their non-participation.

The environmental and social damage from our indifference to carbon pollution can only worsen if we allow this administration, guided special interests, to continue their war against our planet.

Swell, people can spend two barrels of oil for every one recovered...maybe.
Is it only Bush that wants to drown the symbol of Canada's 'toonie' and while we are fighting over other peoples' oil will our ABRAMS MAIN BATTLE TANK float?

Any oil man will tell you that a drill rig capable of going miles down can be extended up to a hundred feet more for the extra depth of a risen sea level. No on-site technical problem there at all

But nuclear Russia is going to be very aggressive about all this. Obama and Putin's guy are gonna have some high ole negotiatin' to do.

The ESTIMATED amount of oil and natural gas is 90 billion barrels.

ESTIMATED!

They have no idea. It is, what is referred to on The Oil Drum ( http://theoildrum.com/ ) a SWAG, or Scientific Wild Ass Guess.

This is the industry hoping that there will be something to drill for and profit from.

But this could be another Caspian Basin misadventure. Remember that one? Billions of barrels of crude, right on Russia's doorstep, just waiting to be slurped up and sold to hungry consumers in the US.

The Caspian was an unmitigated disaster. Dry hole after dry hole. And a war that is still being fought over a proposed pipeline that has never been built. Through Afghanistan.

So now you will be waiting for the sea ice to melt off, raising the planetary albedo, which will raise temperatures,and melt the permafrost causing a huge 'methane burp', which will accelerate climate change even faster, just so we can have three more years of SUV juice.

"Our strategy [after the fall of the Soviet Union] must now refocus on precluding the emergence of any potential future global competitor."
U.S. Defense Planning Guidance, 1992

" They have pillaged the world. When the land has nothing left for men who ravage everything, they scour the sea. If an enemy is rich, they are greedy; if he is poor, they crave glory. Neither East nor West can sate their appetite. They are the only people on earth to covet wealth and poverty with equal craving. They plunder, they butcher, they ravish, and call it by the lying name of "empire." They make a desert and call it "peace"."
Roman historian Tacitus

Black gold under all that ice! What about all the methane under there too? The big methane fart(burp) they are trying to supress..
http://www.energybulletin.net/node/3647

I feel sick. Those who want to cling to every little drop of fossil fuel will see this as a great new thing to go for. They'll muck up the arctic -- for what? A few years of oil & gas? We KNOW the fossil fuels are going. We have to let go, and latch onto new forms of energy. But no, we're like addicts hearing that there's just a few more fixes left, and by God we've just got to have them. Damn the ecosystems, damn the cost, damn the incredible political fighting if not downright military fighting that might result from trying to extract these few more years of fuel. Gotta have it, gotta have it. This is the worst news in the world.

Like I always said, the day we legalize hemp and allow it to compete with black gold is the day onward that Mother Earth will ETERNALLY BLESS mankind rather than ETERNALLY DAMN it. What's your choice? Keep the ban or lift it?

'enough to supply the world for three years at current consumption rates'

whoopeeeee, let's have a three year long party - maybe the polar bears can become alcoholics and join us..............

Although this:

http://www.energybulletin.net/node/3647

has been reposted on CD many, many times by many people.....might as well do it again

You really believe any government report out of this administration of liars and thieves? Do you? Would you put your children and their future at risk on the basis of a report issued by this administration? Do you? Do you have that sort of faith in the Shrub and Chains Boys? [do I have a bridge for you....]

Be serious guys, take two aspirin and think it over in the morning. Oh, and don't vote for any of those Capitol Hill carnivores who would have the taxpayer finance this frozen folly. Tell Big Pete "you like it so much, you do it."

Now, repeat after me, dispersed renewables, dispersed renewables.

the more oil we burn, the more the planet heats up and the more the glaciers melt, in turn providing access to more oil...

what a beautiful plan, W's panties are getting wet...

Thank you ~KITAJ~, that link you offered cannot be posted often enough.

We can forget the Arctic's oil or gold, or the decline of the polar bear, arctic fox and seals. When the 400 gigatons of methane gas, which is currently locked up in the Arctic's perma-frost and lakes blooms out into our atmosphere, global warming will rapidly become so fantastic, nothing will matter except being able to breathe normally and hope that it does not warm enough to allow the ocean's methane to bloom out. The odds and probablilities are, the Earth will warm enough for that final bell to toll.

Here is a current link with an article which corressponds with, and proves quite well, that the author of the article ~Kitja~ posted is spot on.

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2008/20080423_methane.html

We humans are in for a very rough ride and it is very unlikely anyone wlll EVER benefit from any new oil fields they may locate in the Arctic.

The American SYSTEM of governance, naively called a democracy or republic, is broken–hopelessly, irredeemably, irreparably broken.

Worse, and much more dangerous, the PROCESS–elections and voting–by which we attempt to change the SYSTEM is also hopelessly, irredeemably, and irreparably broken.

Of course, many of us have known this for decades, even as we dutifully "patriotically(?)" continue to go through the motions of voting for the lesser of several evils!

Sadly, nothing will change until someone(s) or something breaks the inertia of the present SYSTEM and PROCESS and sets into motion real and substantive change. None of the current crop of candidates for president is capable of making that change. No, not even the Green Party candidates.

Look, it's not the candidates that are the problem. It's the SYSTEM and PROCESS that are the problem!

So, with both the SYSTEM and PROCESS broken, at least for most of us, what can we do?

REVOLUTION is the only answer, left (comma on purpose)! We alone hold the power to make real and substantive change, but…

NOT a bloodletting revolution that leads to yet another SYSTEM and PROCESS like the one we now have, based on money and power, domination, control and exploitation of Earth. We must create a system and process based on something much more important–EARTH itself!

Nothing, absolutely nothing, will change until we humans step up and revolt for the sake of Earth!

So, are you still sitting there reading posts on Common Dreams or are you thinking about ways to make the coming revolution happen?

Earth First in All Things and Thoughts, Deeds and Decisions!

Sunny Days and Milky Way Nights.

http://www.darkskyinitiative.org

You may not have seen the ads here in the States ~COCO~. The polar bears drink "CoCa~ Cola".

Ain't this a bunch of crap? The methane threat when the Arctic thaws is largly ignored, butttt, not the oil. Incredible!

Current predictions, based upon current thaw ratea are, the Arctic will be almost totally "ice free" within five years or less. I'm personally bettin LESS and I personally cannot prevent it.

The future of the Arctic is "not" BLACK GOLD. Here is the future of the Arctic ___ and everyone's future.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/CT/animate.arctic.0.html

And

Http://www.farnorthscience.com/2007/09/26

Hi all,

I know conspiracy theories and those who repeat them get the evil eye, but I'm gonna stick my two cents worth out there anyway...

I saw a graph recording the extremes of earth temps. over the years...getting hotter AND getting colder, with the hurricanes increasing etc. It seems that the change really started to show up in about 1985...Interestingly enough, photographs of "chemtrails" began showing up around then as well. The interest in controlling the weather for various purposes has been postulated. Some of us thought one of the purposes was to try to offset or mitigate the CO2 and global warming problem. But now recognizing that the arctic ice is melting and providing easier access to the oil and gas beneath it, certainly makes me wonder if that was the point all along.

And, so is it any wonder that delay in reporting or manipulation of scientific facts has occurred? The oil corporations and the barons that run them are most likely to poo-poo this slight rise in temps. in total self interest and increasing their financial coffers....devil take the hind most.

Stewardship of the planet is a concept they do not entertain. Having concern for the web of life and its interdependence is not in their mind-set. Revering Nature and protecting her health for the health a well being of us all and future generations does not consume any of their time or activities. Africa will be plundered next.

I think we're just the hamsters running on the wheels they set up for us. And culling the herd here of the aged and infirm in the lower castes will happen when the Avian flu and other viruses are finally engineered and in place on their agenda.

That is a rather interesting theory ~MAS 1946~

I would not put anything past them. __ Nothing.

The key here is that the oil would supply current world consumption for 3 years.

As has already been pointed out here, it's critical to fund solar which has a 4.5 billion year output and sufficient for increasing needs.

While there is a drop of oil in the ground, capitalists will seek it out and flog it. After all, they don't give a damn about the planet or its people. They worship profit.

There needs to be a revolution in the world. We, the people, need to rise up and depose those who rule us for their own selfish ends. If we don't, there'll be no world left for anyone!

www.dangerouscreation.com

I wrote these comments in response to a post in the thread of the other headline article ("Greenpeace activists protest Canadian oil sands"), but they are just as a propos here.

While it is commendable that people like radio_tec are looking at ways of subverting the oil industry, it will have a net zero effect (at best) on the environment or on the ONLY issue that matters: global warming and our survival as a functioning society.

Imagine what the planet would look like in a few years time if we continue to do, essentially, nothing to change our lifestyle (as is currently the case in this country) while China and India continue to industrialize (with the aid and complicity of the American people (consciously or unconsciously), even by the most well-meaning (let alone the masses who don't give enough of a shit about anyone but themselves to examine their own behaviors, let alone change them when they find them to be unworkable).

Switching to compact fluorescents, hybrid vehicles, or paying for carbon credits don't count, because they don't LOWER the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. We need to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to less than 350 ppm from the 387 ppm we're at currently, and these measures- well-meaning as they are- will only very slightly slow the rate of increase, while allowing the few of us who can and will take such measures to feel better about our inherently unsustainable lifestyle. (You don't really expect the government ever to mandate effective enough measures, do you? It's members- both Democratic and Republican- are, as I'm sure you know by now, completely and irrevocably beholden to- and comprised of- corporate interests who have absolutely no allegiance to the other 99% of us.) Instead, we want to believe that as long as we're doing what we tell ourselves is our parts in "greening" the planet, we feel we won't have to examine the systems we continue to play by, or change our behaviors much. (Think about it. For example, when was the last time you purchased something made by a multi-national corporation? This morning? A couple of minutes ago?).

Coal is a worse polluter than oil and is a fossil fuel (and thus a potent source of greenhouse gases). We would in fact probably be worse off if the majority of us went to "non-polluting" electric vehicles overnight. (This obviously is not going to happen, as the vast majority of us could not afford to chuck their current vehicle even if they suddenly woke up to their responsibilities in the grand scheme, given the state of the economy.) Nuclear? Same problems as ever about the waste (both radioactive and water), the safety (Who is really willing to trade a few years of convenience of powering up the television, microwave, or air conditioner for the likelihood that at least one of the plants will suffer a catastrophic accident at some point in the relatively near future, and do you trust the abilities of the builders and operators of each plant?), the injustice of mining for uranium ore on sacred lands (not that all lands are not sacred- including those stripped to extract coal), and the lag time between when a nuclear plant is conceived and when it is operational. Solar? Clean in its use where there is enough sunshine, but incredibly polluting in its manufacturing, and even the best units don't last very long. (Maybe twenty-five years.) Plus, even with tax credits, only a relatively fortunate few can afford the up-front costs of buying an installing a large enough array. What's more, anyone using solar technology today has blood on their hands, as much of the key raw materials must be taken- stolen, really- from so-called "developing" nations, at a tremendous cost to the inhabitants lives, cultures, and freedoms. Wind? Least polluting of all the invasive technologies (except for hydro and geothermal), but like these can only be exploited on a large scale in a limited number of locations.

The problem, and the reason why we're on a path to our immanent demise as a functioning society ("DYSfunctioning" is probably closer to the truth), is that to virtually all of us, our way of life is sacrosanct. Very few of us are even willing to even question IF it might harm our planet, our fellow inhabitants, our psyches, and our souls (let alone in what ways). Specifically, we blithely, unthinkingly, and greedily subscribe to the ways and means of corporate capitalism, by our very actions, while never realizing that by doing so we sow the seeds of our own destruction. We live on a finite planet, yet continue to act as if it is otherwise.

So, radio_tec, do you STILL need that electric car? Wouldn't it make more sense to look at the bigger picture and opt out of contributing to a society that is based on competition and that is now in its death-throes, and be a part of creating one based on the spirit of love and cooperation instead?

Oh yeah...and 3 years of global supply from the Alaska drill...a mere minute in that scheme. The indications of finite supply were heard many years ago, and all were ignored. Other ideas and means of energy were squashed and made to disappear. Our brilliant minds are still working on ideas to rectify our energy and pollution problems. Government and their backers are no help and in fact hindering progress. See people like Richard Branson, X-prize and others as well as some university programs who get some funds from the private sector to do research to get the job done.

If you know anyone with funds to invest, check out these and other programs to help. Planet Earth and her people are counting on it.

"The Arctic countries' governments, on the other hand, see it as a massive opportunity"

What kind of opportunity? An opportunity to solve vexing social/environmental problems? No. An opportunity to intensify them. So how do individuals address this entrenched "business as usual"?

There's only one sensible approach for individuals. It won't fix anything until a critical mass of people join in, but it's still the only sensible approach for individuals to take, the sooner the better of course. That is to "vote third party" in all your exchange/association, so these shrimps who lurch for the black gold will have one fewer unit of demand for their petro-garbage.

Oh my. Well, if oil prices stay high, hope those of you in the North have a nice warm winter. Just thank the cars in Boston and factories in Beijing (Obama says they are to blame for the melting in the Arctic).

I know reason can not argue with the faith in AGW that is practiced here in the church of CD. But the link below will take you to the views of a phD in Meteorology who worked at NASA under the Clinton
administration and was censored in what he could say before Congress.

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=e12b56cb-4c7b-4c21-bd4a-7afbc4ee72f3

Of course, he must be under Lucifers influence, oops, sorry, I mean Big Oil, so you should not listen to him or you will burn in Hell, oops, sorry I meant on Earth. Keep getting my religions mixed up.

So call me a heretic, or is it denialist. Sigh.

Enjoy the coming carbon tax and carbon dollar. The fence they are building is to keep you out of Mexico looking for food and a job for when they crash the USD. Canada might be too cold due to the coming ice age, so they don't worry about you going North. Bush will have his ranch in Paraguay on land he and Rev Moon bought, where they can keep warm.

~MIMI~ You and I and others disagree, both pro and con, as to the seriousnes of the Arctic's "methane" issue. That's Okay, debate of the issue is good, at least for awhile it's good, but time is running out for debates and action is, or very well may be of prime importance, depending upon who is correct.

I personally favor the opinions of the distinguished vertebrate paleontologist, Doctor Michael J. Benton, who has proven that during the Permian era of Earth's history, methane gas did burp out into Earth's atmosphere and almost all life was then eradicted within hours.

Dr. Benton states it can happen again if global warming continues unabated and the Arctic's methne releases when the perma-frost thaws suffeciently. It's now thawing suffeciently to allow that to occur in the learned opinion of the distinguished geologist, John Atcheson, who wrote the article in this link.

http://www.energybulletin.net/3647.html

Now no one can deny, with any credibilty, that the Arctic is currently thawing at an incredible and dramatic rate, it has never thawed within a few short years time frame as it is currently doing.

The issue and major question now is, and that which you and I argue is: (Will the methane which is safely locked up becuse of it's being frozen in the Arctic's perma-frost and in the frozen waters, going to "BURP" out into our atmosphere.)

If Benton and Atcheson are correct, ___and no credible scientists or geologists, and or the International Geological Society members disagree with them, ___ then we humans here on this only place we have to exist, have a most serious problem.

If on the flip side of the coin, you and those who agree with you are correct, there is nothing at all to worrry about. And please do trust me, I wish I could agree with you with any confidence. I cannot agree with you and also agree with Benton and Atcheson and the hundreds of other highly qualified scienitsts who state your opions are horribly flawed and the links you provide to support your opinons are also horribly flawed.

Many times I have asked you and other deniers, such as ~GEO522, Namaste, Presence, Sigurdu11~, etc, who post comments here as frequently as I do on the subject, to explain to all of us, why Dr. Benton is wrong, and no one ever replies to that request, except to at times make comments such as, "Lots of scientists disagree with Michael J. Benton and John Atcfheson, etc, etc.

Now either Dr. Benton and those who fully agree with him are correct, or they are totally incorrect? THAT IS THE ISSUE. If they are correct we'd better start a massive clean energy program and stop burning coal an do it ASAP.

If they are incorrect, no sweat. You and the others I often term as "deniers", or friggin idiots, will be correct and all of these blogs we write are just wasted effort and no harm, except perhaps for some hurt egos or feelings is done.

You'd better hope to heaven that you're correct MIMI, because if you are wrong, the unfair harm will be for our children and theirs, and of course the polar bears, elephants, Aardvarks and loving house pets. If you are wrong, your type of arguing is doing a great deal of harm, which helps to confuse the issue and prevent any sensible action from being initiated.

Is this the most importnat issue humanity faces? Tell me one other issue that could eradicate almost ALL life within hurs on this water world we have named Earth. Even nuclear war wold no tdo that. A massive asteroid strike could. But global warming, caused from burning fossil fuels is a problem we humans could fix.

Oh, but according to you, burning fossil fuels is not causing global warming is it ~MIMI~? Now that of course is another arguemnt, but again, Atcheson and Benton say it is the cause and I agree with them and the hundreds of scientists who also agree with them. One of us, between you and I, are wrong ___ and one is right.

~MAS1946~ I agree with Kem Patrick that your theory holds water. It is economics that drives this world and 'joining dots' as you have done adds plausibility to some of the wildest theories. But the heck of it is, they actually can make sense and do explain why this or that delay, this or that denial, this or that obfuscation.

I think the Elite have known all along what the results would be. But their agenda is inhumane, and immoral. Moral people are always dumbfounded by the illogic of immorality, and this is because there never will be any understanding of illogic. You cannot understand idiocy it defies logic.

So relying upon logic to make sense of the illogical is just...in a word...nuts.

And it will drive one nutty trying to make sense of it.

And of course that only helps them. Because trying to make sense of apparent stupidity gives them an asset - time.

Thus we aid and abet the ridiculous and the ludicrous instead of acting to stop them.

It's a bit like thinking that lying down in front of the hurtling train with a soft human body is going to stop the train. That some appeal to reason, is going to stop those who do not compute on the same level or standard because they are not moral in the usual sense and unreason is where they operate, albeit with a degree of cunning that's just diabolical.

When nations and corporations act with such speed to take advantage of a situation such as the melting of the arctic you know they've been planning it, organizing it. Figuring out how and when to do it.

When the major problem is the size of the human footprint on the planet and its runaway breeding at the lemming like rate of rodents, well...do we really think that these factors are not going to be considered by the best economists and money-crunchers that wealth can afford to buy?

It's in the interests of the Darwinian-justified Elite to perpetuate the situation and end up owning the earth and everything on it, with a much-reduced population. "Oh, there was a little die-off, but we, because of our superior intellect, economic ability we survived. Dreadful really, but what could we do? Something had to give."

People who will lie to the world about the reasons and motivations for war, will have no compunction about putting in place much larger lies and perpetuating them to their own advantage either. It's the ultimate in the application of the Shock Doctrine.

We just have to start thinking on a planetary scale.

Dig it, man!

The photo caption refering to the pole(s) as "frozen wasteland" is a perspective that that requires immediate change. It is profoundly injurious perpetuation of 'desireability' thinking that negates actual biomic roles. It is the same mindset that refers to the Amazon as not having been stewarded by indigenous peoples for millenia.

Well, I'll just add to this on-going debate with this:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9644
Kem, I consider you/others neither right-or-wrong -- this 'issue' is surely-complicated by the outright-Lies we've all been subjected-to and made victim-of.

~ME ALSO TOO~ Interesting article there, I understand now why you are termed one of the deniers here. That's the flip side of the coin and I don't agree with it, ___ you do.

I have a few questions. If the author of that article is correct, why is the Arctic thawing at an alarmng rate and no slowdown is expected or progammed? Why are the world's glaciers disappearing at alarming rates, why are major rivers drying out and the largest lake in Africa is now a third of it's previous size? Those are just a FEW examples of why that article you posted is highly questionable.

Sunspots? Sun activity has nothing whatsoever to do with our current global warming, it's the Greenhouse effect from excess Co2 in the atmosphere that is causing global warming.

Finally, methane in the atmosphere has risen at an alarming rate since 2006 and this year it is even worse by day than it was in 2007. That is the kicker, as one didget of methane is equivelant to 25 didgets of Co2 and is adding to the Greenhouse effect in a most negative manner. That in turn creates the "feedback" situation. More warming-more methane-more methane-additional warming, a vicious cycle until the methane "Burps" as Dr.Benton and Jphn Atcheson term it.

The author of the article you posted states that global warming WILL END this year and global cooling will then commense. Since the Greenhouse effect is the problem, what is going to eleminate that situation? Sorry, that article is bogus.

In addition ~ME ALSO TOO~ the link you provided states that global warming is a hoax and any warming wil end next year. Before you ever decide to post that link again, you should scroll down and read the article about the government must release the EPA report on climate change. You MAY have second thoughts about it, for there is a serious conflict with the two articles. As you correctly stated, the public has been and is being lied to about the issue.

Kem:
From Benton's mouth
""This survey is especially useful as a relatively well informed and sober re-analysis of some current models," says paleontologist Michael Benton of the University of Bristol.

He notes there is no direct evidence for methane releases at the end of the Permian, but both Benton and Berner say it is not obvious what kind of "smoking gun" geologists could look for.

Kem:
Long term average temps:
We went through a cycle of warming up till around 1940.....stabalized, and then cooled till around 1980. During the next two decades we recovered the lost heat, but in the past 7 years we have lost the heat gained and are at temp levels of approx 1900 now.
If this cooling trend continues, we are in the hurt bag bigggggggg time. If you think agriculture has been disrupted as off late, think about what will happen in another 10 years!
I live in ND, and we seem to have had 40 year cycles according to tree rings. I have no clue as to the cause of said cycles, but I do know we have experienced a growing season a lot cooler this year than in the 90's. GDU's.......growing degree units as they are called to establish crop growth and maturity...are around 200 units less than average this year. I am hoping for a very long and frost free fall. If we don't get that, we are in the hurt bag biggggg time when it comes to food.
Being a farmer, I try to study trends etc so I know what crops to grow. I grew a lot of corn in the 80's and 90's. Got burnt big time in 2005 with an August frost. IF it freezes again this year early, I will quit growing corn and grow more edible beans etc as wheat is not economical to grow at the current price with the cost of inputs.

Something else for you to look at and think about. The geese flew over this year in June.....reallllllllllllllly realllllllllllly late compared to normal. (I live in a major flyway). And let me tell ya, when I saw two flocks heading south prior to one of our cold snaps in late June I was worried!!!!!!!!!! My question was at that time......why in the world are they this far south now?????

Revolution is definitely the answer to holding the world's leaders at bay. We can all live well by taking a week off not using current resources. ie. Gasoline, Gas, all transport and I'm sure there are many other ideas we can think of. All people of the world will then demand worldwide meetings between leaders and commoners representing all facets of life. It may take a years but it will solve a lot of problems and finally give this world peace. You think the Capitalists hate it when their slaves take a day off work? Imagine how they will feel when we take a week off? And then if they don't listen we keep the Revolution up till they are taken out and the world is in the hands of all people. This is what real Democracy and freedom is about. The voice of the majority.

Antarctic temperatures disagree with climate model predictions
COLUMBUS , Ohio – A new report on climate over the world's southernmost continent shows that temperatures during the late 20th century did not climb as had been predicted by many global climate models.

This comes soon after the latest report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that strongly supports the conclusion that the Earth's climate as a whole is warming, largely due to human activity.

It also follows a similar finding from last summer by the same research group that showed no increase in precipitation over Antarctica in the last 50 years. Most models predict that both precipitation and temperature will increase over Antarctica with a warming of the planet.

David Bromwich, professor of professor of atmospheric sciences in the Department of Geography, and researcher with the Byrd Polar Research Center at Ohio State University, reported on this work at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science at San Francisco.

"It's hard to see a global warming signal from the mainland of Antarctica right now," he said. "Part of the reason is that there is a lot of variability there. It's very hard in these polar latitudes to demonstrate a global warming signal. This is in marked contrast to the northern tip of the Antarctic Peninsula that is one of the most rapidly warming parts of the Earth."

Bromwich says that the problem rises from several complications. The continent is vast, as large as the United States and Mexico combined. Only a small amount of detailed data is available – there are perhaps only 100 weather stations on that continent compared to the thousands spread across the U.S. and Europe . And the records that we have only date back a half-century.

"The best we can say right now is that the climate models are somewhat inconsistent with the evidence that we have for the last 50 years from continental Antarctica .

"We're looking for a small signal that represents the impact of human activity and it is hard to find it at the moment," he said.

Last year, Bromwich's research group reported in the journal Science that Antarctic snowfall hadn't increased in the last 50 years. "What we see now is that the temperature regime is broadly similar to what we saw before with snowfall. In the last decade or so, both have gone down," he said.

This from Ohio State University.

"Our Global Climate Is Now Actually Now Cooling"

"The record cold of the decades of the 1890's, 1940's, 1970's, 1980's and most recently the bitter northern hemisphere winters of 2000-2001, 2001-2002, 2002-2003 argue against the occurrence of harmful man induced climate change (global warming). Also Winter 2000-2001 and 2004-2005 in Siberian Russia, as well as Winter 2004 in Antarctica were the coldest in recorded history. And let's not forget that January 2004 in Boston, MA was the coldest January in 111 years. Grand Forks, ND set it's all time record low of -44 deg. below zero F, Fosston, MN also at -50 deg. below zero F and Saskatchewan, Canada saw minimum temperatures fall to -62 deg. below zero F, all in Winter 2003-2004."

"Satellite based systems that measure the complete land, ocean, atmosphere interface show a definite cooling trend between 1979-2004 of -0.5 deg, F. Radiosonde balloon launches show no temperature change between 1960-2004. Antarctica has been cooling at the rate of 1.4 deg. F per every ten years for the past 20 years. Also between 1895 and 2004 January average temperature in Florida has fallen approximately 1 deg. F. Also glaciers in Greenland and Antarctica are expanding. How can that possibly be if harmful man induced climate change (global warming) is occurring???"

I am laughing as I remember veryyyyy well the -44F day. Let me tell ya, steel is veryyyy brittle at -44. I was too!

Kem:
It has been a pleasure exchanging ideas with you. However, be careful with Dr. Benton. I had read this a while back and had one heck of a time finding what he said. I do not post something unless it is verifiable, so it took me this long to find the scientific paper again.
Stay well. I am an Icelander by decent, and when you talk of Arctic Ice I kinda laugh because my relatives still remember. We are such a small bunch. There is lore of them sailing the NW passage when it was ice free during the past Medivial Warm Spell.

~SIGURDUR11~ Fraid you went too far back into Michael J. Benton's history bud. __ BE CAREFUL. And do not just offer a single sentence, which may be taken out of context.

Dr. Benton's LATEST book of over 20, is titled, ___ "When Life Nearly Died", ___ The greatest mass extintion of life on Earth of ALL time. Over 90% of ALL life, down to the microbal level, was eradicated within hours. A far greater disaster than the extention of the dinosours.

Dr. Benton states that mass extention in the Permian era, was caused by ___(excessive Co2)___ in the atmosphere and the resulting Greenhouse gases. ___ THOSE ARE Dr. M. J. BENTON'S WORDS.

Resulting greenhouse gases? like John Atcheson, Dr. Bentom says this: __ NOT Kem Patrick says, ___ the distinguished Vertebrate Paleontologist, MICHAEL J. BENTON WROTE THIS:

"As with the PTEM greenhouse gases, (mostly Co2) during the Permian extension, came from volcanic activity over many years time. That "excessive" Co2 in the atmosphere warmed the earth and seas enough to allow the release of massive amounts of METHANE GAS from the sensituve ocean's clathrates, setting off a RUNAWAY Greenhouse effect."

"RUNAWAY"! ___ Just as the international Geological Society scientists and the distinguished geologist ~John Atcheson~ warns us of, ___ unless we stop polluting our atmosphere with Co2. Annualy, humanity is now, and has been for many years, putting the equivelant amount of Co2 into our atmosphere by burning fossil fuels, as that of 17,000 active volcanoes. ___ (17,000)!

Read that twice, so you have it down pat, or three or more times, whatever it takes so you fully understand what Dr. Michael Benton states after his "extenisve scientific research" of the issue.

What Dr. Benton may have said years ago is a moot issue when both he and we are discussing the potential and very likely release of the Arctic's and ocean's methane. As his recent book details EXACTLY how global warming caused from (excessive Co2) created the Greenhouse effect in our atmophere and the result was almost all life was eradicted within hours, when--the--ocean's--methane--suddenly--burped out.

It will happen once again, unless we humans initiate a massive program to stop burning coal and replace that energy fuel with something less polluting, or non polluting.

BAM! Case closed ~SIGURDUR11~. And indeed, it is fun to discuss this with you.

Kem Patrick. You want me to disprove an article whose conclusions are:

"If we trigger this runaway release of methane, there's no turning back."

IF we trigger it. Well, thats a pretty big If.

"Humans appear to be capable of emitting carbon dioxide in quantities comparable to the volcanic activity that started these chain reactions."

We "appear" to!. Besides, there is no consensus that the Methane burp was caused by atmospheric CO2 induced by volcanic activity, although heat from submarine volcanic activity may have caused the methane release. We do not know what caused it.

"How likely is it that humans will cause methane burps by burning fossil fuels? No one knows."

I tend to agree. "Nobody" "knows".

Yet I am all for a Manhattan type project for alternative fuels that do not release CO2 or other pollutants. Paid for with government issued debt free money. That would help in case I am wrong. But now, they tell you it is an emergency, not only will it happen, its going to happen SOOON. We must act IMMEDIATELY, and again, the evidence does not support this.

I completely oppose a carbon tax or carbon cap and trade on emission to drive energy prices higher and profit the SOB's behind this globalist motivated movement. Up until I started hearing about this, I accepted CO2 was the cause of what certainly seemed to be some global warming in the 80's and 90's. I never bothered to study it, since why would people lie. Money, money. Ok, so after looking into it, I realize it was a con for political purposes and social control. I was wrong. Trust but verify. never accept anything based on faith, and always look for a hidden motive that involves money and/or social control.

If anything, CO2 may be delaying the onset of the next ice age which come every 100,000 years or so. The average interglacial is 12,000 years, and thats how long this has lasted. But we do not know.

A hypothesis by definition lacks proof. It is a working hypothesis only if it has predictive value. They have a poor track record in predicting Climate, because they only have 50 years of decent data, and only 30 years of satellite data. Hansens predictions in 1988 did not predict a 10 year period of no global temperature rises despite rising CO2 levels, and were very much on the high side.

Continued with ~Sigurdu11~: ___ The North West passage in northern Canada has never been TOTALLY ice free all the way across in human's recorded history, that's especilly true during the long winter months.

That has NOW CHANGED, and the scary part of it is, it has changed within three years time and the ENTIRE Arctic will be ice free within five years OR LESS. ___ Not just the NW passage will be ice free, the ENTIRE Arctic to the North pole and back, ___ in all directions, from northern Canada to Siberia, to Greenland, etc.

That has not happened for billions of years, if ever, and it is not a slow regress of the ice. The Arctic is RAPIDLY thawing. Check it out, don't take my word for it, my words are as meaningless as yours are. I'm quoting the facts as shown by satelite photos and the words of highly regarded scientists.

And you are mis-taken about Antarctic also, the fresh water ice there is melting away, rapidly melting away. You can talk surface temperatures till the moon blows up, but the ice is melting and it should not be.

The human caused Greenhouse effect is the problem. Thin sea ice near the shore lines is no indication of what is occurring with the massive, miles thick, "fresh water" ice packs in Antartica. They ARE breaking up and melting and no one can deny it. You can deny it, but they are rapidly melting anyway.

~MIMI you are saying that Dr. Benton does not know what he is talking about. Read his book.

He states that Co2 from volcanic activity caused global warming much like what we are currenty experiencing. Co2 in our atmophere is already over 350 ppm in our atmosphere. Last year the ppm of methne rose .06%. That is alarming and it is rising faster so far this year and no signs of stopping.

It's the methane which will accelerate Global warming and again the feed-back problem then commenses. It likely already has begun.

How many years do we have before truly massive amounts of methane burst out into the atmosphere? __ Who knows? ___ Maybe 50, maybe 30, or 20 or less? Can we afford to bet on it?

I don't know what better proof you need ~MIMI~ than to observe with your own eyes what is happeing to the Arctic's and Antartic's ice. Scienitsts who are right there studying it are ALARMED. Why would they say that unless they are ALARMED.

Last month some Russian scientists working near the North Pole, were so alarmed by what they were seeing with their OWN EYES, as methane was gushing and boiling out from now ice free lakes, they got their butts outta there. ___ Why are we arguing this? Is anyone willing to gamble with the possibilty that Dr. Benton and his very credible peers are wrong?

`

From LIFE to DEATH! But as long as we can keep driving our cars...who cares, eh?

Kem:
In the March 25 2008 issue of EOS, there was a News item by Marco Tedesco titled "Updated 2008 Surface snowmelt Trends in Antarctica" (subscribers only). It reports the following:

Surface snowmelt in Antarctica in 2008, as derived from spaceborne passive microwave observations at 19.35 gigahertz, was 40% below the average of the period 1987–2007. The melting index (MI, a measure of where melting occurred and for how long) in 2008 was the second-smallest value in the 1987–2008 period, with 3,465,625 square kilometers times days (km2 × days) against the average value of 8,407,531 km2 × days (Figure 1a). Melt extent (ME, the extent of the area subject to melting) in 2008 set a new minimum with 297,500 square kilometers, against an average value of approximately 861,812 square kilometers."

This evidence suggests that Antarctica, where 90% of the land based ice in the world resides, is increasing in mass. And this fact is ignored or downplayed in virtually every mainstream report available today, and indeed the mainstream press continues to infer that Antarctica is melting at an alarming rate. But on balance, the ice mass in Antarctica is not melting, it is probably getting bigger

Kem:
You refuse to see the emperical evidence that we are not warming but actually cooling. We are defff not as warm as the Mediviel Warm spell.
Dr. Benton's theory that the methane burp tool a whole 3-4 hours is just that, a theory. And if it did happen in 3-4 hours, there were a lot of volcanic eruptions to provide the methane increase of the magnitude he talks about.
Methane release, the boiling in the lakes thing, is not manmade. Just like the constant methane release of Santa Cruz, which has been studied quit extensivly.

The global warming models seem to be in disaray as they predict things that aren't happening. The models themselves are flawed with the effects of their drivers.

I, like MIMI, think that conservation is a wonderful thing and should be done. Unlike Mr. Gore, I work to keep my carbon footprint as low as I can, but I do it on my own because prudence dictates such.

This carbon cap and trade baloney is just that. A new tax is all it amounts to for reasons that have not been proven.

As far as the NW passage. Go to Iceland...or do some research. I wasn't kidding when I said there are stories of Vikings sailing the NW passage. Even Amundson did so in the early 1900's. He got trapped each winter......no surprise there, but he went the distance. And if you look closely at Arctic Ice, you will see it is building on the east side, while wanning on the west side.

Another item you refuse to look at is what effect the sun has on us. There, the evidence is very clear and not in dispute at all. Man has been able to view the sun for quit some time now, and the intensity of the sun changes. We are now in a solar minnimum, which I find very very uncomfortable. The flop to ice ages seems to be very fast and dramatic. The current temps over Antarctica and the Arctic, plus the average temps taken via satelite, (which takes out the city, urban effect), has shown quit a dramatic cooling over the past 7 years. I keep hoping the sun will start being more active again, as cool is a lot worse than warm for humanity.

Expand your thinking a bit and look closer at emperical evidence Ken. And also give thought to what effect the inner earth has on the outer.

I like that we are both concerned about prudent use of our resources. Being I live in an area that is affected by temp extremes, close to the 49th parrelel, I see everyday the pluses and minuses of either warming or cooling.

One thing we all know for sure, and this issss a certainty, earth has and will always be changing. It happened long before man showed up, and it will continue long after man is gone. We have had periods where it was a lot warmer, and we have had periods when it was a lot colder. I prefer the warmer.

Kem:
Also, and this is local, our spring seeding time has been pushed back by an average of 8 days now compared to the long term trend. My dad, who has farmed since 1956, always figured one should be seeding by the 20th of April. Well, for the past 6 years, it has been so cold that we have not been able to start till the 1st week in May.
I also grow spuds, and have now been caught 2 out of the past 7 years by extreme freezes in September which in essense ruined my crop because it was so cold. Old timers always figured it was safe for harvest till the 15th of Oct, and after that you were on thin ice. That isn't the case anymore, and we are geared to try and be done in Sept now, rather than early Oct because of the early onset of quit cold temps.
When I was looking for causes for this, I was surprised to find that we had actually been cooling, as I thought the GW models should have been accurate.
That brought my sceptisism to a much higher level, and as I researched, and remember, this has profound economic interests for me; I found a whole consensus of meteorologists that disagree with the global warming theory. Then I questioned why their views weren't as publisized as much as the GW views. I came to realize that it was the money.

I don't know how old you are, but in the 70's, the hysteria was global cooling. There were models etc showing the world was coming to an end and rapidly. I am still here, so guess it didn't happen. We lucked out and got a period of solar flares and a slight increase in the sun's power. The past 2 years, the energy from the sun has been less than during the previous 20 or so and is now showing up as cooling.

Gotta go. Stay warm and well.

~SIGURDUR11~ The only reason I bother to reply to you, is because some others may read your latest posts and tend to believe what you say is factual. A few statements you wrote are true, or partially true, but for the most part, your comments are very misleading and are not factual and are obviously written wirh an attempt to prove "global warming" is a myth. __ It is not.

Again the Northwest Passage has never been totally ice free year round until the year (2007). That was last year BTW and 2007 was the FIRST year ships couldd get through without the need of an icebreaker. Vikings were able to get as far west as Ellesere and Skeling islands. Edmudson and his team got through by putting axels and wheels on his boats and in places they pulled them for miles over the ice. Now, due to "global warming" the passage is ice free.

In addition, the Northwest Passage is primarily located near the "southern" portion of the Arctic Circle and indeed much of that area is quite normally "ice free" during the summer months, it always has been except during ice ages. Currently, currently I repeat, the MAJORITY of the Arctic mass is nearly ice free in the summer and will be totally ice free within five years or less and you keep ignoring that and making commments to confuse the issue. That is what Trolls do. Are you a Bushie or a troll ~SIGURDUR11~? You sound just like one, ____ just askin.

Now let us go to your comments in regards to what Doctor Michael Benton wrote. What you just posted about his words is NOT true, in other words your's are lies, intentional or not. His lastest book has been likened to a geological murder mystery, he presents all of the FACTS and conclusions and he does not say what he has discovered or proven is a THEORY as you state. Benton says it's factual and it did occur as he has scientifically PROVEN and if global warming continues unabated, it WILL re-occur. ___ Your comments are lies. If the word lie is too strong a word for your comfort zone, I'll say your comments are totally wrong and you should be and likley are aware that they are.

Dr. Benton and many other highly qualified scientists and geologists have well proven, that it was methane gas releases that caused the mass extention of life and that disaster did occur within a few hours time when the methane burped.

Snowfall in Antarctica?? Actually Antarctica is deserty, a frigid cold desert where any snow fall is normally very light. It took millions or even billions of years for 90% of the Earth's fresh water to accumulate there and freeze into solid ice packs. Now however, within a very few years, those gigantic miles thick ice packs are rapidly melting away. That's because of "global warming".

The fact that snow fall is currently far above average there is because of global warming and CLIMATE CHANGE, which is not the same as GLOBAL WARMING, the two are seperate but related issues. The current climate change is due to global warming, an issue which you maintain is bogus and you are totally wrong. The recent snow falls in Antarctic is not going to slow down the melting of the ice packs there either.

And indeed, some places on Earth are much cooler than normal and some are much warmer, that's "climate change", once again, brought on by "global warming". The average atmospheric temps are rising, as is the Co2 and methane in the atmosphere.

On another similar and recent thread, you and I went all over this and you and two others were the only ones of over 25 bloggers who deny global warming and you three deniers keep repeating the same misleading comments. So I will keep responding to you, even though you write that I'm some sort of a child or are very childish and ignorant about the issue.

I will reply that you are obtuse about the global warming issue and very harmful for all o fmankind when you post comments that are Neo-con falsehoods.

Oh BTW, you asked my age era. In the 70s, I retired from a 23 year tour in the U.S.Air Force, entered civilian life and began to get more educated on importnt issues.

In the 70s, global warming and the Greenhouse effect on the atmophere had not as yet reared it's ugly head to the general public and C02 in our atmopshere was nowhere near 350ppm at that time. Big, BIG difference bud. ____ Study it, you may get yourself educated on an important issue.