Skip to comments.
Arctic Temperatures Warming Rapidly - Polar Explorer
Yahoo! News ^
| 5/17/04
| David Ljunggren - Reuters
Posted on 05/17/2004 11:54:12 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120, 121-140 last
To: CWOJackson
well....
it's gone to Mars.
That's it.
Mars has our water.
121
posted on
05/17/2004 7:47:55 PM PDT
by
Robert_Paulson2
(the madridification of our election is now officially underway.)
To: NormsRevenge
I wonder if there is any data on temperatures on Mars or Venus? If they have also increased proportionately the same as the Earth... could it be something other than the methane from a cows butt?
122
posted on
05/17/2004 7:50:36 PM PDT
by
Porterville
(Kerry has no gravitas!!!)
To: NormsRevenge
Sun's Output Increasing in Possible Trend Fueling Global Warming By Robert Roy Britt Senior Science Writer posted: 02:30 pm ET 20 March 2003
article
123
posted on
05/17/2004 7:53:47 PM PDT
by
Porterville
(Kerry has no gravitas!!!)
To: NormsRevenge
The ozone hole over Antartica is largest during the Antartic Spring due to the polar vortex and certain clouds which form - causing ozone to decrease. Similar things happen in the Artic but not to as great of an extent except for certain times in the past due to unusual weather, mostly....at any rate, the main concern with the Artic region at the present time is that the 'hole' will 'move' and affect other, populated areas - so it is definitely something people should keep tabs on.
To: Porterville
The space aliens are using chlorine as a fuel and dumping it in the stratosphere, perhaps?
To: CWOJackson
I just did some search and calcs. If the arctic, antarctic and Greenland melted completely the Earth's water surface would raise about 250 feet. Hardly Waterworld.
126
posted on
05/17/2004 8:39:11 PM PDT
by
William Terrell
(Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)
To: Joe Hadenuf
Of course, it's a dry heat.So's an oven.
127
posted on
05/17/2004 8:51:39 PM PDT
by
Doctor Stochastic
(Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
To: William Terrell
The consequences of such melting are not easy to predict. Sometimes the eke-freaks seem to think that the whole world will become desert. This ignores evaporation; if more water is available at a warmer temperature, there will be more evaporation.
There are lots of possibilities: general warming with desert equator, tropical mid-latitudes and temperate poles is popular but probably not likely. More evaporation could lead more snowfall so we could have rainforest tropics and ice covered poles with no temperate zones. Too much evaporation could trigger widespread glaciation; lots of snow in Winnepeg; no melt during summer; even more snow the next year as the previous snow would reflect sunlight.
More clouds could reflect sun or hold in heat; can't really predict.
About the only prediction I would make is that changes will occure quickly (1-5 years) rather than slowly (100 years.)
128
posted on
05/17/2004 9:01:46 PM PDT
by
Doctor Stochastic
(Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
To: NormsRevenge
What is not being reported is where the temperatures are a lot lower than normal. They only concentrate on the hot spots.
129
posted on
05/17/2004 9:04:50 PM PDT
by
AGreatPer
(Take my advise, I'm not using it.)
To: William Terrell
I just did some search and calcs. If the arctic, antarctic and Greenland melted completely the Earth's water surface would raise about 250 feet. Hardly Waterworld. LOL! Tell that to all the *major* population centers that dot our coastlines....
130
posted on
05/17/2004 9:07:48 PM PDT
by
Joe Hadenuf
(I failed anger management class, they decided to give me a passing grade anyway)
To: Joe Hadenuf
LOL! Tell that to all the *major* population centers that dot our coastlines.... You mean the blue areas on the political map?
131
posted on
05/17/2004 9:42:19 PM PDT
by
William Terrell
(Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)
To: AGreatPer
What is not being reported is where the temperatures are a lot lower than normal. They only concentrate on the hot spots. Good point. The earth gets X amount of heat from the sun each year. Some years it gets X+y, some X-y. There's nothing constant about the sun's output nor our orbit around it.
How this heat is dispersed is interesting in that some years it may impact the northern hemisphere more than the southern and vise versa.
Sled-boy may just be out of sync with these perterbations. As to the lack of Polar bears: just what might a PB pelt be worth in a newly capitalized, formerly socialized society?
To: budwiesest
The climate guys mostly look at global averages though. They average over (what little data they get) the globe then look for trend lines over time. Individual locations contribute only to the average. The point is to try to see how much net energy is being accumulated (or lost) over some years.
133
posted on
05/17/2004 10:03:20 PM PDT
by
Doctor Stochastic
(Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
To: William Terrell
LOL! Tell that to all the *major* population centers that dot our coastlines....
You mean the blue areas on the political map?
Well, uh yeah. Hehehe.
134
posted on
05/17/2004 10:12:53 PM PDT
by
Joe Hadenuf
(I failed anger management class, they decided to give me a passing grade anyway)
To: alaskanfan
There's only a small patch of ice left in the backyard.
If summer falls on a weekend, maybe we can have a barbeque!!!
To: CWOJackson
Want to rethink that! It's a matter of weight not volume.
136
posted on
05/17/2004 10:59:43 PM PDT
by
rock58seg
(Character and integrity do count. BUSH/CHENEY 04)
To: CWOJackson
"So where does the yellow go?"Ummm.........you really don't want to know..........
To: budwiesest
Some years it gets X+y, some X-y. There's nothing constant about the sun's output nor our orbit around it.
Yes, and whenever it goes X+y, it may do so for a hundred years in a row
To: William Terrell
I just did some search and calcs. If the arctic, antarctic and Greenland melted completely the Earth's water surface would raise about 250 feet. Hardly Waterworld.
Why would you count the ice floating in the arctic?
If a large chunk of ice floating in a glass of water melts, does the water level rise?
The ice had already sunk into the water to the point where the weight of the water displaced equalled the total weight of the ice.
To: Cheeeeze
I just listed the arctic becaue it is always included in the global warming fright list. Melting Greenland would account for 39 feet and Anarctic, 210 feet.
140
posted on
05/19/2004 8:39:49 PM PDT
by
William Terrell
(Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120, 121-140 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson