Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Experts: Earth Warming Faster; A Trigger for "Dangerous" Change?
OSLO/BONN - Global warming is likely to overshoot a 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 F) rise seen by the European Union and many developing nations as a trigger for "dangerous" change, a Reuters poll of scientists showed on Tuesday.
A mountain is reflected in a bay that used to be covered by the Sheldon glacier on the Antarctic peninsula, January 14, 2009, file photo. The glacier has shrunk by about 2 km since 1989, probably because of global warming. (REUTERS/Alister Doyle) Nine of 11 experts, who were among authors of the final summary by the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in 2007 (IPCC), also said the evidence that mankind was to blame for climate change had grown stronger in the past two years.
Giving personal views of recent research, most projected on average a faster melt of summer ice in the Arctic and a quicker rise in sea levels than estimated in the 2007 report, the most authoritative overview to date drawing on work by 2,500 experts.
"A lot of the impacts we're seeing are running ahead of our expectations," said William Hare of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research.
Ten of 11 experts said it was at best "unlikely" -- or less than a one-third chance -- that the world would manage to limit warming to a 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) rise above pre-industrial levels.
"Scientifically it can be done. But it's unlikely given the level of political will," said Salemeel Huq at the International Institute for Environment and Development in London.
And David Karoly, of the University of Melbourne, said the world was "very unlikely" to reach the goal.
"The concentration of long-lived greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is already enough to cause warming of more than 2C above pre-industrial levels, and we are continuing to emit more and more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere," he said.
BONN TALKS
Officials from 175 nations are meeting in Bonn, Germany, for 11 days of negotiations lasting until April 8 on a new U.N. climate treaty due to be agreed in December. Reuters got 11 replies to five questions, sent to 35 IPCC authors.
The European Union, many developing nations and environmental groups say 2 Celsius above pre-industrial levels is the maximum to avoid the worst of rising sea levels, floods, droughts or heatwaves. Temperatures are already up 0.7 Celsius.
An alliance of 43 small island developing states, who fear being swamped, want temperatures limited to an even tougher goal of below 1.5 Celsius. They say rich nations should sharply cut greenhouse gas emissions, mainly from burning fossil fuels.
Removal of manmade sun-blocking smoke under clean air laws may add a 1 Celsius rise while oceans will warm further under a lag effect, underscoring how near the 2 degrees limit is already.
The IPCC said in 2007 that it was at least 90 percent certain that human activities, led by burning fossil fuels, were the main cause of warming in the past 50 years. Nine reckoned that evidence was stronger, two said it was unchanged.
Six of the scientists said world average annual temperatures would set a new record by 2015 -- and another four projected that it would happen by 2020 -- dismissing views from skeptics that global warming has stopped.
The hottest year since records began in the 19th century was 1998, according to the World Meteorological Organization.
And the scientists generally said that sea levels would rise faster than projected in the IPCC report, in a threat to many cities, islands and coasts from Bangladesh to Florida.
The IPCC said seas would rise by between 18 and 59 cms (7-24 inches) this century. But it pointed to big uncertainties about ice sheets in Greenland or Antarctica -- one IPCC estimate was that this ice could add up to 20 cms to sea level rise.
In the poll, the lowest projection for sea level rise by 2100 was 30-40 cms, the highest up to 140 cms.
And 10 of those polled projected that Arctic late summer sea ice could vanish before 2050, with two saying it could disappear by 2020. The IPCC had said some scenarios pointed to a loss in the latter half of the century.
- Posted in
55 Comments so far
Show AllI have inventions in my notebooks to make gasoline-powered cars a third-place choice, biodiesel cars a second-place choice and personal rapid transit first, in terms of convenience, safety and cost. I believe that the next 1000 inventors all have their inventions ready too. The earth will cook out not because the inventions aren't here, but because there's no free market for these important inventions.
We need a government, it doesn't have to be the U.S. government, willing to step up and solve the political reasons why global warming is taking place. We need a government that wants to solve its own national or state economic crisis, bring about national or state energy independence, and stop global warming. It doesn't even cost that much except for the horrible fear that Rush Limbaugh will call you a socialist even while your government is creating a free market in good products.
So, governments, any volunteers? Don't all raise up on your hind legs at once.
The US and China are the two big swamp monsters that keep progress from happening, and before I go accusing China, I would have to say that the US is worse. There is probably another way to stop our planet from being incinerated. The US won't go along, because Obama is too busy giving money to banks, and patting big money oligarchs on the back. The big oligarchs are keeping this planet from taking action. Simply put it's either the oligarchs or the planet, the US or the planet. I really don't think there's a huge choice here. At some point we need to aggressively defend our planet against these individuals.
Agreed. The facts are that these monsters will not have any incentive to stop murdering our planet until they face the threat of their lives being taken.
Actually, China has very high fuel economy standards for it's cars. All passenger cars must get at least 43 mpg. No, these models will not be avaiailable in the US anytime soon, because as all the salesmen tell us knows, no one in the US wants good fuel economy.
A number of electric motor scooters are aavaialble in the US - all made in China except the rather pricey Vectrix. The only presently avaialble source for the large capacity Lithium-Iron phosphate batteries for these scooters is China.
The only currently avaialbe affordable plug-in electric car in the US, the 3-wheel Xebra (admittedly of limited performance - but mods are avaialble) is also made in China.
With our world leaders busy bailing out criminal banks, sustaining the unsustainable (a constantly growing economy), getting worked up about North Korea's botched up and show off rocket launches, and giving Iraqis, Afghans, and Pakistanis lessons of proper conduct, how could they have time left for the real threat to our survival?
No evidence exists that today's climate changes differ qualitatively from in the past. In fact, not global warming but a slight cooling has taken place over the past 10 years which clearly negates the predictions of the IPCC models.
Belief in a theory does not constitute proof.
Yes, and the Wilkins Ice Shelf collapsed due to penguins shivering from the cold. They are just not used to all that cooling, you know.
Yes, and the Wilkins Ice Shelf collapsed due to penguins shivering from the cold. They are just not used to all that cooling, you know.
Oops, sorry, I didn't mean to, but maybe it bears repeating.
climate change is dramatic, as the impacts, both occurring and predicted, can be physically large and powerful, and easily witnessed...causes and cycles are easily disputed, even in the face of evident trends, due to the lengths of time and magnitudes of change involved...many of us will not be around to verify or negate hypotheses beyond a few decades...these disputes, while attention-consuming, are not really relevant, as drastic human behavioral changes (reductions) are warranted, regardless...why? chemical and environmental changes, indisputably caused by human industry, which should be the real worry...this planet is an incredibly complex, production system we're messing with, consisting of a number of vital, interwoven relationships, with no test system or backup copy...and we're not really very smart...best to stop...before we break it beyond repair...
I have a theory for Thomas More. I have evidence that many AGW deniers are actually aliens who need CO2 to survive. Their species thrives on cockroaches, rats, ragweed, and jellyfish. That's what thrives in a hothouse climate.
Have you seen the movie called Men in Black? Clearly, these CO2-breathing aliens from the planet Grog intend to take over Earth once all the oxygen-breathers have been eliminated.
The oil and coal companies are also run by this alien scourge. It's really the only theory that makes sense. Even right-wing Bambi killers in heavy denial wouldn't maintain this stance when clearly the Earth is rushing headlong towards ecocide for ecosystems that rely on a stable climate. Thomas More, I'm on to you, you alien conquistador-wannabe.
Maybe we could take some of these Climate Change deniers to a high bridge and see if they "believe" in the theory of gravity. When they got to the bottom they could tell us wether disbelief in scientific theory is effective.
In science, a theory is a proof. A question based upon evidence is a hypothesis. Climate change due to human action is a well proven theory with massive and multiple data sources confirming it. Everything from tree rings to first bloom dates to 500k year deep ice core data confirms it.
Humans are causing a period of global warming.
In my personal life glaciers that I walked on in California and Alaska as a teen are no longer there or receded miles from where I hiked on them.
Here's what I think happened several times in the past per the geological record:
. High CO2 levels warmed the poles, stopping the oceanic thermohaline circulation
. The oceans stagnated and their depths became anoxic, killing most deep sea life
. Organic matter falling from shallow waters fed deep-ocean anaerobic bacteria
. Deep-sea bacteria filled the oceans with their waste, poisonous hydrogen sulfide
. When the anoxic H2S zone reached the surface, shallow water life went extinct
. Worst case: the sea occasionally burped up enough H2S to kill most life on land
You can check out the evidence in recent scientific papers by Googling "stagnant oceans". It seems that the well-mixed oceans we know are not the norm for Earth.
This scenario not only agrees with data but explains three significant mysteries:
. How have the anaerobic life forms found only at deep sea hydrothermal vents spread worldwide? Even their larval forms can't survive the long trip through the oxygenated waters between vents, but they could spread easily in anoxic oceans.
. More significantly, how did the world's crude oil form? Oil is associated with black stratigraphic layers composed of decayed organic matter containing carbon. The next question is, why are these layers associated with mass extinctions? As noted above, an anoxic ocean saturated with hydrogen sulfide kills all the oxygen breathers, which then sink to the bottom. The anaerobes feed on them but do not metabolize their hydrocarbons, leaving the makings of crude oil in dark layers.
. Most significantly, what resets the Earth's thermostat after a greenhouse warming episode? The warming skeptics have it right that plant life grows better at higher CO2 levels (as in the Carboniferous age, when our coal deposits were laid down). However, the massive ocean dieoffs above that gave us our crude oil thereby sucked a lot of carbon out of circulation. This ended the greenhouse warming part of each perfectly natural global climate cycle. Too bad we're making the warming part happen so quickly this time, especially considering that the extinctions we cause may include our own!
TM: Please go back to whatever right-wing, corporatist, group you crawled out under from. Global Warming is a fact, not a "theory" as you keep saying. I'm weary of reading your posts. All you do is parrot-mouth what your masters tell you to say.
Not only will global warming not be stopped, but the enviromental damage continues unchecked. Coal companies continue to remove mountain tops and destroy valleys with debris. Oil companies, despite historic profits, refuse to clean up oil spills and pollution. Millions of automobiles continue to pollute as unprofitable public transportation remains undeveloped.
Why?
Global warming will not end until run-amok gangster capitalism is ended. Pollution is not ended because it would mean forcing profitable businesses to use their profits to end their pollution. To end pollution and global warming would mean that profitable polluters would have to be forced to shut down. A transition to renewable energy is essential.
This will not happen while big business controls both Democratic and Republican political parties. The federal government has been "privatized" and democratic government "of, by and for the people" destroyed. A new anti-capitalist socialist political party is needed.
The financial collapse of capitalism, the unending wars and militarism, the destruction of the "unprofitable" public sector (public schools, health care, infrastructure, etc.),
the massive destruction of humanity will continue until U.S. and global capitalism is ended.
The essential need to transition to a socialist economy should now be painfully obvious to all not profiting from this destruction of humanity. A socialist economy, owned and managed by the people, is operated to fill the economic needs of all people, not to the accumulation of wealth and profit by a tiny minority. The vast proportion of wealth created by humanity is now owned and controlled by the polluters, the war-profiteers, and other capitalist parasites. The capitalist ruling elites of the world are forever waging a war of genocide against "unprofitable" humanity.
Socialism is essential for the survival of humanity.
Read daily the World Socialist Web Site http://www.wsws.org
Central to capitalism is the corporation. Specifically, the legal "personhood" of corporations. Thom Hartmann has spoken very clearly and forcefully to this and, along with Chomsky, Korten and Hawken, and others, has solutions to offer.
I agree that each step we take away from capitalism, the better.
I'm no anthropologist, but know of no culture emerging from the last iceage that was capitalistic or incorporated. Corporatism is the vehicle for concentration of wealth and power, but does not produce societies capable of long-term survival on earth.
One of my favs is from LaoTzu:
Those who would take over the earth
And shape it to their will
Never, I notice, succeed.
The earth is like a vessel so sacred
That at the mere approach of the profane
It is marred
And when they reach out their fingers it is gone.
For a time in the world some force themselves ahead
And some are left behind,
For a time in the world some make a great noise
And some are held silent,
For a time in the world some are puffed fat
And some are kept hungry,
For a time in the world some push aboard
And some are tipped out:
At no time in the world will a man who is sane
Over-reach himself,
Over-spend himself,
Over-rate himself.
LaoTzu #29 600 BC
global warming is a big joke.
Compelling.
Indeed...
Maybe its time to "drop out" en mass like the hippies of the 1970s. Develop colonies or communities with a low fossil fuel energy life-style and self-reliance, including medical. Start a back to basics movement. Its hard when you have to have a job, insurance, and a car to "survive".
We will all be living a very simple life if all this stuff hits the fan in 20 years.
Exactly! Simplify and decentralize. The new culture will replace the old culture when a majority of people sign on to it. Decentralization (local) systems of simpler more sustainable lives will prohibit our enslavement by the elites and sustain our ability to function democratically.
The banking and other corporate elites are attempting to simplify our currencies, i.e. a euro-like currency for the America's called the Amero, and also one for the asian countries. This currency simplification will enable more globalization and centralized power for the wealthy ultimately leading to a world currency, the Phoenix, and world government. The danger lies in elites taking control of the system by appointing a (board of governers) to run the world financial system absent democratic participation resulting in the Lord and Serf syndrome. Our job is to decentralize and adjust our lifestyles downward quickly such that we will remain functional and able to resist corporate and government enslavement. The elites are too few, even with their private armies, to overcome a decentralized and simplified economy and it's people. So, as dark as the economy is, and it is, the opportunity is there for collective understanding and decentralized action leading to a better world where people, not elites, govern.
To understand this better go to: http://www.globalresearch.ca/ and read the article entitled, "
The Financial New World Order: Towards a Global Currency and World Government
- by Andrew G. Marshall - 2009-04-06"
Be sure to read it all including the "Conclusion." You will better understand why the Bilderbergs and the Trilateral's are so actively pursuing the control of regional and world currencies. No amount of private armies, limited use of the U.S. Army on the homeland, and large concentration camps can defeat an informed populace armed with common understandings and goals, simplified survival lifestyles, and decentralized living and actions. They neither have the wealth or the numbers to defeat the American People. We are not sheep but wolves, and the sooner the elites recognize that the better. We prefer peaceful change but have every right and responsibility to defend ourselves if necessary.
We do not need government to change the environment, we can do it ourselves.
________________________________________________________________________________
THE OBAMA LEGACY TO DATE: RESCUE THE BANKS AND ENSLAVE THE WORKER
Decentralization will motivate me to move back to the small towns. :)
Rather than engaging in a collection of rants, however well-founded they may be, let's all get behind a developing technology that is cheaper than any other for the production electricity in a clean, renewable way:(ref: http://vortexengine.ca)
By doing so, we can cut off "at the knees", those behind the anti-AGW, info-wars, and enable clean, renewable, small-scale "distributed energy" systems, beyond their control, to be developed and implemented.
This would buy enough time to rectify all the other "evil" practices being carried out, which only benefit the world-wide, corporate, military-industrial complex, to the detriment of the planet's ecosystem on which we all depend.
We are being distracted, people. We need to come together and FOCUS on something that will work.
We need to act quickly. Stopping global warming now would mean the world giving up the use of fossil fuels and nuke construction. But that would REALLY change things.
Still though, and like a poster said, some hippies dropped out. They went back to the land and had a good time until they were co-opted, assimilated, became yuppies and joined the rat race.
Living like Indians in harmony with nature with the help of information and appropriate technology, could be the inescapable fate of humanity. I can imagine a worse fate. We simply have to decide whether it will happen pre- or post-apocalyptically.
So many things are upside down and backwards these days, it's not such a stretch to see the indigineous and native cultures that exitted from the last ice age and prospered in the holocene as being at the top of the pyramid of societies appropriate to planet earth.
thomas more,
you, like joehopeless a few weeks back, never cease to amaze with your utter nonsense. to save myself time and not be redundant, go back and read my post on alister doyle's article this past monday, you know the one about the ice sheet breaking off from your so-called cooling trend.
there aren't that many caves in texas. it should be relatively easy to find yours and then place a boulder in front of it to keep you tucked safely away from the general public, that is providing you're in it and keeping warm from this cooling trend.
Ok, so you don't agree with what Thomas More said but calling him a caveman is totally disingenuous. What's wrong with you ?!?
In addition to what PaulK pointed out on the fact that true inventions are rarely given a first chance, I would add that we keep postponing the goals on stopping global warming. In the 1990s, we said 2010, earlier this decade 2020, and now some are calling for 2030 or even 2050. This is the main reason why a lot of folks feel that they're correct to deny its existence. When does all this procrastination end? Why not NOW ? An old friend of mine discussed the idea of hemp (legalize it first) and algae for oil and the fact that with decentralization, it can work and very well. And if metro would lower its obscenely high priced fares or at least improve its infrastructure, there'd be less driving traffic and less global warming.
P.S.: Looking back at the archived posts on this site, JWVerez and others brought up the issue of the EU being in bed with Big Agri, a major source of global warming. Blaming small farms all the while going to bed with Big Agri when in fact is disingenuous of the EU. Unlike Big Agri, farmers on small family farms don't use as many chemicals for their crops and they don't do corn-fed, anti-biotic forced, overprocessed meat and diary which burns more fossil fuels.
For a more informative and specific discussion on the relationship of global warming and capitalism, please note the link below to the following article:
Antarctic ice shelf collapse: climate change and capitalism
8 April 2009
(Read the full article here.)
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/apr2009/pers-a08.shtml
"The disintegration last Sunday of a 40-kilometre ice bridge connecting the Wilkins Ice Shelf to the Antarctic Peninsula is another stark indicator of the threat posed by climate change.
...
A recent study by the US Geological Survey and British Antarctic Survey found that 142 of the 172 ice coastlines were in retreat.
“The changes in the map area are widely regarded as among the most profound, unambiguous examples of the effects of global warming on Earth,” Dr. Ted Scambos, of the Colorado National Snow and Ice Data Center, concluded."
...
As the record demonstrates, this potential catastrophe has been known about for some time, but action to avert it has been blocked by governments acting on behalf of powerful corporate interests.
...
Subsequent international conferences on global warming have foundered on irreconcilable conflicts between various national governments. Their primary concern has been to protect their own corporations, which invariably regard greenhouse gas reductions as antithetical to their short-term profit interests. The 1997 Kyoto Protocol—which involved minimal pollution cuts, falling far short of what climate scientists determined was actually required—was stymied by the US government’s refusal to ratify. Washington’s stand was above all driven by concern to protect the interests of the major oil conglomerates, which had the closest of relationships with senior Bush administration figures.
The election of President Barack Obama has not significantly altered US policy....
...
By its very nature, climate change is a global problem, but it cannot be solved within the framework of the capitalist system. All rational plans for tackling this crisis immediately founder on the dictates of the profit system and the conflicting interests of the major capitalist nation states. To cut carbon emissions to the required levels requires nothing less than the complete re-organisation of the global economy—including the restructuring of energy generation and distribution, urban planning and public transport, agriculture and industrial production, waste disposal, and a host of other areas.
...
Well put and spot on. Although it may be more appropriate to see it as "coping with an inevitable situation" rather than "solving a problem".
If the natural cycle, as shown on Gore's wall chart, holds true in spite of the added GHGs, we will have dodged a bullet, but will have to contend with whatever it is that defeats and reverses the temp/CO2 curves.
Recent seismic activity suggests tectonic movement may play a part in the change. Ref: USGS/earthquake data, 8-30 days
Sea ice has been increasing in the Antarctic since 1979 at a rate of 4.4% per year. Calving of ice shelves is necessary to relieve the accumulation, otherwise, all of the water on the planet would eventually end up in the Antarctic over time. It's just giving us back what it does not need.
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/s_plot.png
Yep, this old Indian would have to get some real long odds in Vegas to place a bet upon this world saving the earth. Don't even know if the earth needs saving? I don't worry about it or fear these things happening.
Our Prophets foretold a time would come when the earth was being destroyed. They foretold a time would come when the Europeans would come & build their Snake World upon our land. In the prophecies of the Israelites in the Book of Revelation Creator/God states he is the destroyer of those who destroy the earth.
Uh,oh, you mean Creator is a tree hugger? You mean Creator already has plans of destroying those who destroy the earth? It's already over. It is already finished. It is already done. It just has not happened yet in the Construction of Time.
The story of Jesus visited Wovoca is at www.wovoca.com Jesus was just doing a little Interdimenstional Traveling that day. There are also stories of Jesus living within Tribes that come from Tribes long long ago.
I've been having some fun with Christians who are Right Wing Political Conservatives & think they own Jesus. Been shutting them up. Been shutting thier mouths when they begin to speak to me.
Said to them if Jesus returned to this world do you think he would "Convert" to your Religion or "Convert" to your Politics when he said his Kingdom is not of the world of man, this world. I said to them, do you think at all beyond your worldly political brainwashing & cliches?
I said to them you'd have about as much chance as "Converting" Jesus to your Religion & politics as the Pharisees had in "Converting" Jesus to their Religion & Politics.
I said, Jesus told the Pharisees they would travel a 100 miles to find one "Convert" and then turn them into a Child of Hell 1000 times worse than they.
Jesus was telling the Pharisees they were the Children of Hell.
I said what Jesus said is you have to seek & find the Kingdom. Seeking & finding the Kingdom isn't "Coverting" to a Religion.
They didn't understand that I already belong to Jesus's Kingdom so I am not "Converting" anyone's religion or politics. Just pay my bills. Obey the law. Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's as I am merely on my journey throught his world.
I wonder if Jesus was thinking or knew that even though it may appear Caesar is building some really grand swell world that in the long run all Caesar would really do is build Hell on Earth?
Perhaps Jesus already knew that some 2000 years ago?
Perhaps?
Life is good. What an experience! It's always best to forgive.
nice..I like your viewpoint..
This thing will soon overtake everybody's power to act. There are too many people on this small planet and we are already wrecking everything around us in a futile lust to increase our standard of living. The collapse of our energy production will soon overtake everything when the price of our essential oil cranks on upward to $200 a barrel. Then it will be dog eat dog, and we will all lose, and given that oil production has already peaked this will happen within very few years.
Governments are supposed to be the will of the people. In actual performance they appear to be a centre of massive corruption and denial. Only massive public pressure gets anything out of politician. Those still in jobs like myself hang grimly on to the economic position and lifestyle to which we are habituated. Those out of jobs are too busy looking for the next meal and shelter.
The capitalist system is based on the over-exploitation of nature to support an unnatural number of human beings. It supports a god-like lifestyle at the top of the wealth heap only by wastefully exploiting fossil fuels and the not so long time lag until repayment with devesting climate change. Nature is busily collapsing around us, as noted in many comments here.
The collapse of banking, jobs, social supports, and access to the neccesities for health and education in the US and many other nations indicates the human plague has reached its unsupportable peak numbers.
On the long way down it looks like every nation, city, town, race, religion will be fighting each other to survive on the last bits of natural commons. Everything that divides us will conquer us.
Obamas war of terror in Baddy-Stans is a public distraction, a huge waste of time and energy, so that the US can look great while it sinks beneath the waves.
The phenomenon of global warming has been known to be a threat for decades as has overpopulation. Let's not blame it all on the instruments of greed like corporations. If you want to see human's own worst enemy you need look no further than a mirror. We need to be reducing our enemies by using birth control and abortion. Every abortion saves several hundred barrels of oil and tons of CO2. Catholics need to be withholding money from the church until they see the light and advocate more contraception which prevents abortion which they apparently abhor more than condoms.
All of us need to be working to control our out of control growth rates. Perhaps more likely we will just watch this disaster unfold like war in the Congo, Darfur, or any other disaster that humans are capable of fostering by our sheer numbers seasoned with some stupidity and nature. The die appears cast for Homo sapiens and alas for the earth. Relax a little it is likely too late already and if you love children, don't have any!
How about changing society's lopsided infrastructure and evening out the population? It is utterly sickening that so much more land is being depopulated while the cities and surrounding suburbs are getting more packed up. I'm sorry but this alone defeats the Malthusian argument of "too many people". Fix the policies and decentralize everything for Christ's sake.
It's not either/or, it's both. There are too many people and land use could be improved.
I could be wrong, but I think global warming is real and humans are a factor. But for the "greener than thou" folks who are sure all of the scientific evidence is on their side and they know precisely what to do about it, here are just a few of the growing number of experts with whom you need to quarrel: Richard Lindzen, professor of meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Patrick Michaels, Research Professor of Environmental Sciences at the University of Virginia; Nigel Calder, editor of New Scientist from 1962 to 1966; John Christy, professor and director of the Earth System Science Center at University of Alabama; Paul Reiter of the Pasteur Institute; the and former British Chancellor of the Exchequer, Nigel Lawson.
Writing them off as mouthpieces for corporate pillagers is a) false, and b) fails to address the issues they raise.
Then, for we posters who "don't get it," please explain in simple terms your plan for greening the planet and preventing global heating and the horrors that may accompany it, while still increasing the energy allotment for the third world right now. And, how you convinced the third world to get on board. Does your plan call for even greater use of coal, nuclear. gas, and other non-renewables? If so, reveal the magic, pollution free, earth-saving formula. If not, then in order to overcome the impression of hypocrisy, you need to clearly tell how you are currently and unequivocally using less C02-producing non-renewable energy in a two week period than what it actually takes for everyone else to post a single comment here on Common Dreams. That's how much non-renewable energy most people in the third world are using. And under any energy allocation that is not hypocritical, you are not entitled to use their fair share of non-renewable energy.
I think the cut-off date for the anti-hypocrisy energy allocation program was yesterday.
There are lots of ways to reduce the energy consumption of internet clients ands servers. One idea is a rebate from your ISP when your lower your bandwidth consumption. Trading in CRTs for LCDs. Multi-speed CPUs and energy-smart software. Better caches.
The internet is like everything. It's a tool that we can use thoughtfully or thoughtlessly. US elites promote thoughtless consumption. The problem is the elites, not the tools. This fact is hard for liberals to accept because liberal philosophy holds that freedom is more important than responsibility. Anyway, lots of us here on the far left enjoy the challenge of optimizing the tools and systems, to minimize consumption, to get the most "bang for the buck", alien to liberalism.
Computers now have three basic energy-saving modes. Shutting off the display (not screensaver, but shutoff), suspend to ram, and suspend to disk. In the display shutoff mode your computer may continue to do background tasks, even heavy ones. In suspend to ram, your computer is asleep but keeps connections open, and wakes up relatively fast. In suspend to disk, it's practically shutdown but wakes back up with state preserved - unless you're running Intel/Microsoft then who knows what will happen?
jennifer bedingfield/05.08.09/4:04pm - "unlike big agri, farmers on small family farms don't use as many chemicals for their crops and they don't do corn-fed, anti-biotic forced over-processed meat and diary which burns more fossil fuels." they don't use as many chemicals as what? would that be per square acre, per square foot? have you done any research on the cancer rates of humans who are related to small family farms? do you know how many small family farms wait on the government to instruct them on which crops to plant, how many acres of said crop(s) to plant, regardless of the fact that there might be a drought of exceptiona proportions occurring? what, exactly, do you think small family farms, and ranchers, feed their animals that are either hauled off to market for slaughter which in turn ends up in our food chain or that they grow for their own consumption. if there is in fact a drought of exceptional proportions, then obviously, there is no grass for these animals to eat. do you think they're going down to whole foods in austin texas to buy organic greens for their farm and ranch animals? do you think these small family farms, and ranches, aren't vaccinating their livestock to prevent the occurrence of disease(s)?
jennifer bedingfield/05.08.09/9p.m. - "it is utterly sickening that so much more land is being depopulated while the cities and surrounding suburbs are getting more packed up." which part of the country do you live in? unless it's eastern utah, or pecos texas, then you really don't have a grasp on what you're saying. most all viable farm, and ranch, land is feeling the effects of a growing population combined with a diminishing natural resource. if you decide that you must continue with your joehopeless/thomas more diatribe, please continue with some knowledge of what you speak.
by the way, go to gillespie county, texas for information on the farmer/rancher cancer rates. if they'll give it to you. or guadalupe county texas for information on the small family farms waiting on instruction(s) on which crops to plant, how many acres, and blahblahblah. that's if they, too, will give it to you.
"they don't use as many chemicals as what? would that be per square acre, per square foot? have you done any research on the cancer rates of humans who are related to small family farms? do you know how many small family farms wait on the government to instruct them on which crops to plant, how many acres of said crop(s) to plant, regardless of the fact that there might be a drought of exceptiona proportions occurring? what, exactly, do you think small family farms, and ranchers, feed their animals that are either hauled off to market for slaughter which in turn ends up in our food chain or that they grow for their own consumption. if there is in fact a drought of exceptional proportions, then obviously, there is no grass for these animals to eat. do you think they're going down to whole foods in austin texas to buy organic greens for their farm and ranch animals? do you think these small family farms, and ranches, aren't vaccinating their livestock to prevent the occurrence of disease(s)?"
Actually, when I grew up in small town MO, I came across lots of small family farms, most of which were crushed by Big Agri in the last two decades. I never said that small family farms are waiting for government. In fact, they can't afford those expensive chemicals that Big Agri uses. They don't do wholesale volume sale you know. Grass has grown just about everywhere except in the frigid cold weather. Droughts are another issue but corn only makes matters worse as it consumes more fossil fuels and water unlike grass. Grass-fed meat and diary were abundant unlike corn-fed and agri-business went haywire. Go to www.meatrix.com. You'll see what I'm talking about.
"which part of the country do you live in? unless it's eastern utah, or pecos texas, then you really don't have a grasp on what you're saying. most all viable farm, and ranch, land is feeling the effects of a growing population combined with a diminishing natural resource. if you decide that you must continue with your joehopeless/thomas more diatribe, please continue with some knowledge of what you speak."
I live in St Louis. I used to live in rural MO before I moved out. Most of it has been depopulating. I wouldn't be surprised to see similar patterns in other states and have confirmed that general trend. I'm not joehope or thomas more. I'm just pointing out that blaming the population numbers alone just isn't right. Go to Kerela, India where the population density is high and yet things are working out well there. Then please tell me that Malthus is correct.
"by the way, go to gillespie county, texas for information on the farmer/rancher cancer rates. if they'll give it to you. or guadalupe county texas for information on the small family farms waiting on instruction(s) on which crops to plant, how many acres, and blahblahblah. that's if they, too, will give it to you."
For your own information, small farms have been crushed by Big Agri and Big Brother for the last 50 years and more so in the last 20 years. And FYI, Big Agri still gets over-subsidized by gubbmint.
Who is in denial ?
from the Torygraph
One of his most shocking discoveries was why the IPCC has been able to show sea levels rising by 2.3mm a year. Until 2003, even its own satellite-based evidence showed no upward trend. But suddenly the graph tilted upwards because the IPCC's favoured experts had drawn on the finding of a single tide-gauge in Hong Kong harbour showing a 2.3mm rise. The entire global sea-level projection was then adjusted upwards by a "corrective factor" of 2.3mm, because, as the IPCC scientists admitted, they "needed to show a trend".
When I spoke to Dr Mörner last week, he expressed his continuing dismay at how the IPCC has fed the scare on this crucial issue. When asked to act as an "expert reviewer" on the IPCC's last two reports, he was "astonished to find that not one of their 22 contributing authors on sea levels was a sea level specialist: not one".
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/5067351/Rise-of-sea-levels-is-the-greatest-lie-ever-told.html
feel free to froth at the mouth
Unless you have a stack of peer reviewed scientific papers that totally refute Climate Change theory you're just another crackpot.
Sorry, but one article in a newspaper does not cut it.
Are you refuting gravitation and magnetism also or are we just denying the parts of reality that right wing whackos tell you to?
mrjohn,
Perhaps you are not aware, since you are not a mariner, that tides behave differently in different ocean pans. For example there are four tides on the east coast of the U.S. but only two per day on the West Coast.
Measuring a minor tide (one foot and a half) in Hong Kong Harbor is like only measuring the temp inside your fridge and concluding that the temperature all through your house is Forty degrees....
Your reference, by the way, is non-credible. You cannot cite science as your reason for being a Climate denier if you cite the error-prone lay press.
Try this instead:
Global warming is the increase in the average temperature of the Earth's near-surface air and the oceans since the mid-twentieth century and its projected continuation. Global surface temperature increased 0.74 ± 0.18 °C (1.33 ± 0.32 °F) during the last century.[1][A] The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concludes that anthropogenic greenhouse gases are responsible for most of the observed temperature increase since the middle of the twentieth century,[1] and that natural phenomena such as solar variation and volcanoes probably had a small warming effect from pre-industrial times to 1950 and a small cooling effect afterward.[2][3] These basic conclusions have been endorsed by more than 40 scientific societies and academies of science,[B] including all of the national academies of science of the major industrialized countries.[4][5]
Or this:
Positioned in the Arctic, the Greenland ice sheet is especially vulnerable to global warming. Arctic climate is now rapidly warming and much larger Arctic shrinkage changes are projected.[4] The Greenland Ice Sheet has experienced record melting in recent years and is likely to contribute substantially to sea level rise as well as to possible changes in ocean circulation in the future. The area of the sheet that experiences melting has increased about 16% from 1979 (when measurements started) to 2002 (most recent data). The area of melting in 2002 broke all previous records.[4] The number of glacial earthquakes at Helheim and the northwest Greenland glaciers increased substantially between 1993 and 2005.[5] In 2006, estimated monthly changes in the mass of Greenland's ice sheet suggest that it is melting at a rate of about 239 cubic kilometres (57.3 cubic miles) per year. A more recent study, based on reprocessed and improved data between 2003 and 2008, reports an average trend of 195 cubic kilometres (46.7 cubic miles) per year.[6] These measurements came from the US space agency's Grace (Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment) satellite, launched in 2002, as reported by BBC.[7] Using data from two ground-observing satellites, ICESAT and ASTER, a study published in Geophysical Research Letters (September 2008) shows that nearly 75 percent of the loss of Greenland's ice can be traced back to small coastal glaciers.[8]
Modelling results of the sea-level rise under different warming scenarios. The curve labels refer to the mean annual temperature rise over Greenland by 3000 AD. Note that the temperature projections shown are greater than globally averaged temperatures (by a factor of 1.2 to 3.1)[2]
If the entire 2.85 million km³ of ice were to melt, global sea levels would rise 7.2 m (23.6 ft.).[2] Recently, fears have grown that continued global warming will make the Greenland Ice Sheet cross a threshold where long-term melting of the ice sheet is inevitable.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland_ice_sheet
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland_ice_sheet
A mind, Mr. John, is a terrible thing to waste. I suggest re-taking basic science courses to get a feel for logical, critical thinking.
TJ
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." - Thomas Jefferson
So? What are you going to do? Turn on air conditioners, install huge refrigerating units to 'cool' the planet back down(actually that is oxymoronic). I don't doubt the climate is getting warmer, but according to NOAA's web site, the stage the planet is in of this current cycle of the ice age, it is supposed to be getting warmer.
And to say humans are not responsible for some of the warming is not true either for just this reason: through our mindless and greedy destruction of the environment and ecosystems, there are major losses of the sinks(rain forests, tropical and temperate) that keep the biggest green house gas, water vapor, in check. But is the warming any more that what has been before during the millions and millions of years of ice age cycles?
I see worse issues that have for a long time been going on from human activity and that is the pollution that we freely allow corporations to do. Sea levels will rise as more and more land based ice melts or goes from land to sea but how much more will the sea rise?
It's climate, live with it. And from the human stand point, it was decided, ignorantly, thousands of years ago to allow 'unfetterd' human population growth. Expect discomfort and inconvenience, trying to control the climate is like trying to stop animals(humans are animals) from reproducing, and at a unchecked pace.
True happiness is closely related to how much energy one consumes. You just cannot have a happy fulfilled life without a large carbon foot print. That and brand name goods.
That's not what our ancestors indicated. Try again.
Here I go again: Plant a garden. Plant vegetable seeds, fruit and nut trees and vines NOW if you live in the northern hemisphere. Eliminate or cut way back on meat consumption. Carpool, ride a bike, walk or take public transportation. Recycle, or better yet, precycle. Decentralize.
These simple, conscious actions taken little by little by everyone, every day can make such a huge collective difference. Oh, and don't have more than 2 kids. Better yet, adopt. We need to get proactive. Even our smallest choices make a big difference.
I don't mean to preach. I'm just offering solutions. We cannot wait for some savior to bail is out. No one's gonna bail out us peasants anyway. We gotta get together and share our ideas, or inspiration and our strength.
"You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model which makes the existing model obsolete"
-R. Buckminster Fuller
"Plant a garden. Plant vegetable seeds, fruit and nut trees and vines NOW if you live in the northern hemisphere."
And what if of those of us who live in the suburbs and cities and in apartments, condos, or townhouses ? There's HOA hell to deal with even if space just doesn't happen to be an issue. If you live in a rural area, no problem but if you live in the crowded cities or even surrounding suburbs, forget it.
"Eliminate or cut way back on meat consumption."
That has worked well and I not only reduced my weight but even went from plump to slender in 1-2 years as a result of cutting back drastically on meat eating.
"Carpool, ride a bike, walk or take public transportation. "
Carpool ? Yes when it's possible and I can get someone decent to ride along with. I'm single and most people in my neighborhood are either married or have inconvenient work schedules so I'm SOL on that one. Ride a bike or walk? I live 45 miles away from work ! As for public transportation, only when one lives near one and it's not so overpriced and piss poor quality. I twice asked metro to lower its fares and they said they would never think of doing so. In fact, plenty of business scandals with privatized public transportation unlike Europe.
"Recycle, or better yet, precycle. Decentralize."
Agreed. On the idea of decentralization, government is killing our efforts at trying so we're still battling those crooks but we're not giving up either on the idea.
"but if you live in the crowded cities or even surrounding suburbs, forget it"
nah, any little thing can help. you can grow really nice tomatoes in pots on a 30th foor balcony. herbs and lettuce too. in fact 10sf of planter can give you most of the fresh leafy veggies you need, and still have room to sit and have a beer.
HOAs are a PITA. but the bylaws are not cast in stone. Get a bunch of people together, run for the board, take it over and repeal those bylaws. then pass bylaws to stop the use of pesticides/herbicides.