Greetings! From Beautiful Lake Dallas Texas!
Wish You Were Here!
January 16th, 2015
Posted on 01/30/2006 4:02:45 PM PST by NormsRevenge
LONDON (AFP) - Global warming could cause ice at both poles of the Earth to start melting this century, driving up sea levels, according to a major study published by the British government.
The study, "Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change", collates evidence presented by scientists at a conference staged a year ago ahead of the 2005 Group of Eight (G8) summit, where Britain placed global warming high on the agenda.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair added his voice to the warning on Monday.
"It is clear from the work presented that the risks of climate change may well be greater than we thought," Blair said in the study's foreword.
"It is now plain that the emission of greenhouse gases, associated with industrialization and economic growth from a world population that has increased six-fold in 200 years, is causing global warming at a rate that is unsustainable."
The consensus view among scientists, the document warned, is of large-scale and irreversible disruption to the planet's climate system if temperatures rise by more than 3 degrees Celsius (5.4 Fahrenheit) above current levels.
Such a rise is well within the range of climate change projections for the century, it said, warning: "In many cases the risks are more serious than previously thought."
The international conference, which took place in Exeter, southwest England, was the biggest gathering of climate scientists since a landmark report in 2001 published under UN auspices.
That report confirmed that temperatures were rising and pinned the blame on carbon emissions disgorged mainly by the burning of oil, gas and coal.
It said that future greenhouse gas emissions were likely to raise global temperatures by between 1.4 and 5.8 degrees Celsius (2.5 and 10.4 degrees Fahrenheit) from 1990 to 2100. The temperature has already risen about 0.6 Celsius (1.6 Fahrenheit) since 1900.
But the UN report also acknowledged some uncertainties as to when, where and how this pollution would affect the climate.
The latest study says that some of the knowledge gap has been filled.
Compared with the UN report, it said, there "is greater clarity and reduced uncertainty" about the impacts of climate change across a wide range of systems, sectors and societies.
There is a serious risk of large-scale, irreversible system disruption, including the possible destabilisation of the Antarctic ice sheets if the warming goes beyond 3 Celsius (5.4 Fahrenheit) above current levels, the report warned.
A regional increase of 2.7 Celsius (4.9 Fahrenheit) above present levels could trigger melting of the Greenland ice cap, it said.
It said increasing acidity in the ocean would be likely to reduce the capacity to absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and affect the entire marine food chain.
Even a more modest rise in global temperatures of about 1 Celsius (1.8 Fahrenheit) would probably lead to extensive coral bleaching, the report said.
Meanwhile...down here in antarctica we have not seen the bay open up from the ice that it is for over 6 years now because the ice sheets GREW!
Can someone explain to me how melting of the sea ice will raise the levels of the oceans? Most of the ice in the Arctic, and a good deal of it in the Antarctic, is sea ice, not on land.
A simple experiment can make one wonder - fill a glass with ice so that the ice is over the top of the glass. Add as much water as you can, then leave it in a warm spot. When the ice melts, does the glass overflow?
1. I seem to recall that at one time, the overwhelming consensus amongst scientists was that the Earth was the center of the universe, all other heavenly bodies being in rotation around it. Those who believed otherwise were deemed heretics and as risk of being burned at the stake.
2. Science is not a discipline driven by consensus. An hypothesis is advanced and defended by experimentation and stands or falls on its merits. Most significant scientific advances have been made by those considered to be heretics (see above). In my own field, earth science, the notion that the continents are in motion was considered to sheer folly during my lifetime. I don't know of anyone who today thinks otherwise.
3. If all of the sea ice in the world (all of the Arctic, much of Antartica) were to melt tomorrow, sea level would not rise (except for the difference in specific gravity of sea water and fresh water). I believe that this principle was illustrated by Archimedes.
4. This is not science, it is political baloney.
The Sun and Global Warming
Of the many trends that appear to cause fluctuations in the Sun’s energy, those that last decades to centuries are the most likely to have a measurable impact on the Earth’s climate in the foreseeable future. Many researchers believe the steady rise in sunspots and faculae since the late seventeenth century may be responsible for as much as half of the 0.6 degrees of global warming over the last 110 years (IPCC, 2001). Since pre-industrial times, it’s thought that the Sun has given rise to a global heating similar to that caused by the increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. If the past is any indication of things to come, solar cycles may play a role in future global warming.
Of course, even NASA has to be politically correct. Further down the article:
Though complex feedbacks between different components of the climate system (clouds, ice, oceans, etc.) make detailed climate predictions difficult and highly uncertain, most scientists predict the release of greenhouse gases from the burning of fossil fuels will continue to block a larger and larger percentage of outgoing thermal radiation emanating from the Earth.
Further down the article they again point fingers at the sun:
The Sun’s affect on global warming can mostly be attributed to variations in the near-infrared and visible wavelengths of solar radiation. As previously stated, these types of radiation are absorbed by the lower atmosphere, the oceans, and the land. UV radiation, on the other hand, interacts strongly with the ozone layer and the upper atmosphere. Though UV solar radiation makes up a much smaller portion of the TSI than infrared or visible radiation, UV solar radiation tends to change much more dramatically over the course of solar cycles.
Most of these global warming people like to blame us, humans, for the problem, and the USA in particular. They ignore the one source that has more to do with it than anything else: the sun. We humans may be contributing to this, but it is the sun that is the main culprit.
Of course, blaming global warming on Americans keeps many people in the spotlight and many scientists and schools getting hefty grants. After all, if we let people know that the biggest culprit is the sun, there is little we can do about that and therefore the money and fame just might dry up.
As long as I get my shore front, to heck with the rest of you lowlanders. (Feeling ok at 100+ft.)
PS might be willing to sell my shorefront in the future. ;)
Actually I don't think that is correct. Kyoto wouldn't reduce temperatures at all. It would just reduce the projected increase in temperatures by .04 degrees.
I'm some miles south of you so I best start on the dike now.
Sigh...these "scientists" don't have a clue what will happen. My guess is as good as theirs.
But just in case, I think I'll go somewhere south of Corsicana and buy a lot which will soon be beachfront property.
Okay, I'll go with that.
Well, there goes all those fears about running out of water.
Yawn. When one of these geniuses can predict the weather with any accuracy one month down the road then I'll start believing. Until then it's all a "what if," "I can top your gloom and doom" game designed to suck the scared taxpayers dry.
Don't forget to plant Palm trees!
Which is it? Ice Age or Melting Polar Ice? Guess the Scientists are confused, funny thing all they have to do is take a few history, geology classes they would know that nothing ever stays the same and we can't stop the inevitable.
It is no such thing.
The consensus view among scientists, the document warned, is of large-scale and irreversible disruption to the planet's climate system if temperatures rise by more than 3 degrees Celsius (5.4 Fahrenheit) above current levels.
The 17,000 scientists that signed a petition declaring that Kyoto was based on junk science might beg to differ.
Sorry that's Antarctic.
Couldn't help pointing that out. No offense.
You laugh you smile but I have a 16x30x14ft greenhouse that Mrs. nomorelurker fills up with so many big (as in too big to lift without the tractor I bought last year)tropical plants.
The icecaps might melt or they might start creeping southward
or they might stay about like they are now.
Why do they worry about the polar icecaps starting to melt this century when apparently they have already begun to melt last century? BTW, it is distinctly warmer this afternoon, -15, which is much more comfortable than the -40 and colder we have had the past week.
Aw, the untenured con-men are looking for a taxpayer grant teat to suck on. Isn't that cute.
HEY, GORE!!! GET IN HERE AND CHANGE THE DIAPER.
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.