Antarctic Ice Shelf Collapses

Originally posted by Alexander: Well, I guess we will just have to wait until all our cities are flooded, we run out of gas, and the planet heats up to 100 degrees Fahrenheit before the Republicans and conservatives finally admit that we should pay attention to the environment and not let big businesses get in the way. This planet gives us life, and in return we destroy and rape it. And many people in my country don't think twice about it.

And this will take place when? and Ummm I do hope that you do not use electricity, gasoline or ...or...or hey!!! You are being so hypocritical, here you are sucking down kilo-watts of electricity to sit and blame the republicans for the destruction of the world....hmmm
I would also point out that prior to 1994 it was the democrats who controlled both the house and the senate for the previous ..what 30 to 40 years?

Oh just a little tid bit of trivia here....Im not a republican...I did vote for bush but Im a Libertarian [img]smile.gif[/img] just thought Id set the record straight.

[Silver Cheetah]

Originally posted by MagiK: Oh and we still have as much rain forest as there was 12,000 years ago...it was supposed to be gone in 1999. My point here is not to suggest we not try to be environmentally sound...What I want to suggest is that we approach the issues with sound scientific methodology and not media centric extremeism. Don't let the media hype spook you.

Chapter and verse for the rainforest stats? Prove it, please. On the oil point, it's the oil companies themselves that have given us 45 years of oil supplies, approximately, remaining to us, at current rates of consumption. Of course, consumption is more likely to rise than fall, given that the global population is expanding rapidly, although the bulk of the increase is taking place in less developed nations. Given the US and European drive to develop markets in the 'third world' however, it is likely that their consumption of fossil fuels will also rise in the near future, overall. We need to get alternatives in place at a somewhat faster pace than is currently happening, that is for sure.

Originally posted by Silver Cheetah: quote: Originally posted by MagiK: Oh and we still have as much rain forest as there was 12,000 years ago...it was supposed to be gone in 1999. If anyone is worried that our cars and SUV's are poluting the atmosphere...stop worrying, according to the scientists we will be out of oil in 30 years. (of course they said that 30 years ago too....) Don't let the media hype spook you.

Yo MagiK dude..... can I have the source for your rainforest statement there please? I'd just love to get a handle on the whole argument... from your viewpoint.
.[/QUOTE]Yeah it was a Book called "The Ecology and you" used im Mrs. Marsh's 10th grade Science class. It had a really cool looking green and white peace sign on the cover and had a couple of mentions about Green parties or Green something or others. In the 1970's ..early to mid there were many many many news paper articles telling us that the gas shortages were the precursors of the end of the fossil feul reserves. I don't dispute that at some point Oil will become scarce enough to make competing technologies more economicly competitve, Personally Im betting on Hydrogen Fuel Cell's as the near term solution Solar is good but too weather and latitude dependant.

in the 70's the ecologists really had the US citizenary (me included) spooked, the Book and Movie "Soylent Green" will give you an idea of what they were telling us we were headed for. Soylent Green and Future Shock were two very influential public scare sources. While the news papers and print jounalists were jumping on each new "ecology" based theory and thought that came out.

SC [img]smile.gif[/img] Im not against adopting Ecologicaly sound principals, I just want to see the stuff based on REAL, HARD science and not the theory of the week reactionism that is currently the fad.

There is one other ecology book I remember from the 70's...but I can't quite remember the title. It was widely used in the Public High School system and was rather thick with a hard cover....damn...hehe I wish I had a totally eidetic memory.

I do hope you don't believe I just make this crap up. Im pulling from a very real personal past here. I will gladly admit Im wrong when and if I see proof I can believe. In the mean time I say, do real research not like the crap done at MIT which completely biases all of its research articles (Yeah I subscribe to the MIT Technical Review) by starting with the basic Idea.."whatever it is..it is the Right Wings fault.".

[Talthyr Malkaviel]

On whole, we humans do have a devastating effect on the environment... compared to other animals, and although we do have a duty to our environment, I think peiople are throwing the exact amount of human input out of proportion.
Times change, they always have, and they always will, this is why humans are still here, because we are adaptable, and I expect the worlds temperature has fluctuated greatly in it's time, so who are we to detract from nature's balance if we are supposedly looking out for nature???

Originally posted by Azred: Yorick et alii are correct--we are on the downhill slide towards the next ice age. On the plus side this will eventually counteract any effects of "global warming" (a modern day "Emporer's New Clothes" if I ever heard one); on the minus side the more severe cooling is centuries away. Soil cores prove conclusively that climate is a cyclic process (what isn't?) that changes places like the Sahara from lush grasslands into desert and back again. The fact that pieces of the ice shelves in the Antarctic fall off is just part of the process. off-topic: I once heard someone's theory that Antlantis (for lack of a better name) was actually located on the unfrozen continent of Antarctica. re: SUVs. SUVs are owned for status. "I have the biggest, baddest, and coolest vehicle on the road!" Whatever. Many of the "cultures of the earth", primitive hunters/planters that they were, practiced ritual animal and/or human sacrifice. Make of that what you will. [img]graemlins/blueblink.gif[/img] If the climate did warm up and shift the temperate region correctly, Canada would most likely become the largest food-producer in the world. Ocean salinity governs the ability of the water to hold thermal energy. Salty water holds heat longer than fresh water in the same way that putting sugar/creamer in your coffee helps it stay warm longer. Conversely, fresh water heats up faster than salty water; as an ice shelf melts the fresh water can heat up, thus speeding up the melting of the shelf. The only ones who really have to worry about this are the species of marine life who cannot survive in fresh water. Wow. I really bounced around all over the place today.

NOT all SUV's are owned for status..In washington DC yep you betchya...in billings Montana...nope, there are definite NEEDS there. and in many other places.

The real issue that I wanted to make is that the "Severe" cooling may not in fact be a gradual thing. The Ocean Salinity theory I was talking about earlier, might actually account for a sudden (decades) major drop in temperatures. The deep ocean currents that distribue the heat away from the tropical oceans into the more northern climes apparently can be affected quite rapidly by the lowered salinty...the guys (and no Im not gonna dig for titles and page numbers if you want to know all about it you will have to look it up your self) who reaserching this have been quite alarmed.....Of course Ill believe it when it is a bit more conclusive. In the mean time I will continue as before.

This is a public apology to Silver Cheetah.

I responded unkindly to her last post because my paranoia led me to assume she was being sarcastic and indirectly accusing me of being a liar. After talking to her via AIM I learned that she was indeed interested in the source material and not just harassing me. I have deleted the unkind post and Apologized to her..and now to all of you for being so quick to make assumptions as to motivations.

I am stubborn and definatley old school in a lot of things but I am not above common courtesy.

[Talthyr Malkaviel]

Well, when the next ice age comes along it doesn't really matter, we've survived one before and we can adapt for the next, then it will probably settle into a more temperate period like now and carry on, we've adapted before, and if we can't this coming time, hey that's evolution for you!

On a more positive note,

I have been reading about some great break throughs in Hydrogen Feul Cells that are happening in both the USA and Europe. I am also really interested in the "Pebble Bed" nuclear reactors that are in design in europe and in Canada. This is really cool tech that have very real possibilities of working out.

Originally posted by Talthyr Malkaviel: Well, when the next ice age comes along it doesn't really matter, we've survived one before and we can adapt for the next, then it will probably settle into a more temperate period like now and carry on, we've adapted before, and if we can't this coming time, hey that's evolution for you!

I do not doubt you there [img]smile.gif[/img] The real point in this thread...point of contention that is...is just how much of the change is Homo-Sapien induced. I say not much...others disagree.

[Talthyr Malkaviel]

Originally posted by MagiK: quote: Originally posted by Talthyr Malkaviel: Well, when the next ice age comes along it doesn't really matter, we've survived one before and we can adapt for the next, then it will probably settle into a more temperate period like now and carry on, we've adapted before, and if we can't this coming time, hey that's evolution for you!

I do not doubt you there [img]smile.gif[/img] The real point in this thread...point of contention that is...is just how much of the change is Homo-Sapien induced. I say not much...others disagree.[/QUOTE]Well, I'm not going to try and pin-point an amount, as it will want a lot of proof for that, All I will stick by is what I wrote in my first post on this thread, that some are blowing our participation out of proportion, and others are belittling it.
Also that even if we aren't changing it that much that doesn't give us reason to speed it up too much, we should try to be as environmentally friendly as possible and let the next ice-age come when it will.
But I do wish we had some accurate way of knowing how badly we are effecting it, it may be more than some expected and might convince them to be more kind to our habitat.