PDA

View Full Version : Last one to Antarctica's a rotten egg


hamusandtahini
3rd May 2004, 04:41
Antarctica is likely to be the world's only habitable continent by the end of this century if global warming remains unchecked, the British government's chief scientist, Professor Sir David King, said last week.

He said that the Earth was entering the "first hot period" since 60 million years ago, when there was no ice on the planet and "the rest of the globe could not sustain human life".

The shock warning -- one of the starkest yet delivered by a top scientist or senior government figure -- comes as British ministers are deciding whether to weaken measures next week to cut the pollution that causes climate change.

That is despite Tony Blair last week describing the situation as "very, very critical indeed".

BlueDiamond
3rd May 2004, 06:02
No worries ... Antarctica's just down the road from here.

:ok:

EDDNHopper
3rd May 2004, 06:09
Oh dear, earth would flip over with everyone squeezing in down there!

hamusandtahini
3rd May 2004, 07:06
"It isn't pollution that's harming the environment. It's the impurities in our air and water that are doing it."
Dan Quayle. :}

sprocket
3rd May 2004, 07:41
All those in the Northern Hemisphere, move to the back of the queue please!:p

QNIM
3rd May 2004, 10:21
Gday
Unless they find the secret to eternal youth very shortly, I don’t think it is going to worry any of us personally.
Cheers Q ;)

pigboat
3rd May 2004, 14:52
...entering the first hot period since 60 million yeas ago. Not to worry, the Kyoto accord is gonna change all that. ;)
Personally, I'm moving to Axel Hieberg Island.

lineboy_nz
3rd May 2004, 18:40
The dude says its gonna happen within this century. Thats a pity, I am 24. My kids are going to be born into that sort of reality. I am not old enough and do not have enough to have any influence to make decisions now that would prevent this from happening.

Thanks for the legacy.

:oh:

airship
3rd May 2004, 18:51
The simplest solution is not to have any kids... :8

1) That way, one won't be leaving anyone a nasty legacy.
2) Also, one may be treating the probable cause.

:oh:

Wino
3rd May 2004, 18:58
It's another crock o shite....

So 65 million years ago life was even more diverse and the planet was more lush, and dinosaurs walked the earth. What about that would make the planet uninhabitable for humans?

More hysterical claptrap....


And of course the fact that the planet has had these hot periods well before humans walked the earth just further proves that worrying about it is a waste of time... Tell me if it is a normal cycle in the life of the planet, would it really be wise to try and interfer with it?

Cheers
Wino

hamusandtahini
3rd May 2004, 23:58
"This is a real wake-up call for people who mistakenly think global warming is only going to be a problem way off in the future or that it has no impact on their lives," said Christine Rogers, Ph.D., a senior research scientist at the Harvard School of Public Health. "The problem is here today for these children and it is only going to get worse."

The problem is multi-dimensional, Rogers said. Asthma among pre-school children is at an all-time high: It grew 160 percent between 1980-1994, with the highest incidence found among poor and minority children in urban centers. These children are at greatest risk for suffering increased health problems as a result of the CO2-generated increase in allergenic pollen.

Cities also have higher concentrations of air pollution, such as soot and ozone, caused by fossil fuel emissions. On top of that, global warming has led to an increasingly earlier pollen season in the spring. The result? "These children get hit with a powerful one-two punch," said Rogers.

Under the Clinton administration, the U.S. had committed to an international treaty to reduce the emissions causing global climate change. But President Bush withdrew the U.S. from the Kyoto protocol and backed out of his own campaign promise to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide, a major contributor to climate change

Wino
4th May 2004, 15:24
mmm no it didn't.

Under the Clinton Administration the congress UNANIMOUSLY (both democrat and republican) rejected the Kyoto treaty. Under US law all treaties must be ratified by the senate.

Looks pretty bipartisan to me. Infact the only partisan person who signed it was that idiot Al, (I invented the internet) Gore...

And before you go blaming Asthma on all things modern. Inner city polution is MUCH lower than it was in the past, or have you forgotten the London Smog when millions of coal stoves were in use in drafty houses, and before the clean air act significantly cleaned up inner city polution in the USA? Air quality in the cities is FAR better than it was in the 70s before the catalytic converter.

Oh yeah well we don't want to mention that.

But as conservation increased so has Asthma possibly because of INDOOR polution which is not the result of global warming, but attempts to FIGHT it. Furthermore, Asthma is an allergic reaction in most cases and it can be from anything from diet to mold that triggers causes it.

Sorry, you can't pin this on the greenhouse.

Cheers
WIno

Teddy Robinson
4th May 2004, 15:40
Wasn't there some research that suggested that the earth's polarity suddenly changes every couple of hundred thousand years along with a big climate change ? ... so that would make it the northern hemisphere ?

ssultana
4th May 2004, 16:43
Well being human (one of the most adaptble species on this planet, and off it) i'd build a house and greehouses with aircon to grow crops. Energy could be drawn from the rivers of meltwater.

Other than a collision with a huge asteroid, humans are virtually indestructible.

Mr Chips
5th May 2004, 14:59
Global warming is a myth

According to my mate down the pub (after one or two sherberts), there is no such thing as Global Warming per se. It is all down to the well known (in our pub at least) plughole effect Simply - the earth is getting nearer to the sun, like water draining down a plughole (round and round and down and down)

How far is the Earth fom the Sun? 93 million miles. But when was it last measured?

I rest my case. Disprove me if you can. Or if you dare. Or if you can be bothered!

airship
5th May 2004, 15:04
Is Mr Chips a myth? , I only ever saw the movie once... :p

Wino
5th May 2004, 15:27
Actually that's an interesting question I will have to ask my wife. She's the astronomy buff,

But it could be running the OTHER way. Is the solar wind pushing the planet out a little? Its not adding angular momentum which would push the planet (well maybe it is slightly if you throw in the rotation like a curve ball) so maybe the planet is moving a foot or two in either direction every billion years or so.

OTOH The planet is bombarded by tons of debris every day (most of it burns up in the atmosphere) and if more is hitting on the front face then the planet would be slowing down and be in decaying orbit. (though decaying VERY slowly)

But the sun does have its own 11 year cycle where it gets hotter and colder.


Cheers
Wino

Biggles Flies Undone
5th May 2004, 15:43
Come on Wino – we’ve had this argument before. The reason the US failed to ratify Kyoto was political not environmental – any government that deprived the great US public of its enshrined right to cheap gasoline would be out of office in a flash. There is much I admire about the US, but I find its insular, selfish attitude to this matter totally reprehensible.

The climate change is there for all to see – we’ve had a series of record hot summers and other extremes during our winters. I never, ever suffered from hay fever until 2 years ago and now it gives me real grief.

I remember the London smogs from when I was at primary school and, yes they are a thing of the past – but look at the massive increase in cars with their attendant pollution.

ssultana
5th May 2004, 17:00
The climate changes, it always has, 60m years ago it was hotter, 20,000 years ago it was colder. Anyone who expects things to stay the same will be disapointed. We've had mass extinctions before aswell.

I know the climate is warming faster than 'ever?' before, but remember that all the oil, coal, gas etc used to be in the atmosphere. Ultimatley we may end up with a more diverse planet beacuse biodiversity increases with temperature.

we can'tstop it so start making contingency plans!

Wino
5th May 2004, 17:03
Biggles you might be right if the rejection hadn't been UNANIMOUS.

Not a SINGLE senator agreed with you. Surely atleast one would have put the envirnment first, there are always several in their final term (a senatorial seat is for 6 years, a large number are always on their last term due to the length of the committment)

Unanimous votes are exceptionally rare. Even the declareation of war after pearl harbor was not unanimous...

The planet has variation in termperature, it is part of the normal cycle of life. The Planet has been MUCH warmer in the past, so I would hardly call any temperatures record breaking. The only thing record breaking about them are that they occured during the last 100 years or so when we started keeping records. IT IS WAY TO SHORT A DATABASE TO HAVE ANY STATISTICAL RELEVENCE on a planetary scale that is billions of years long.

Are you telling me that even over the last 100 million years we are aproaching anything near a record temp?

How about that the planet is FINALLY resuming its rightfull temperature after the iceages and comet impacts and whatnot?

Its just as silly as the scare before it that we were causing an iceage... After all, the 70s had some record cold years...

As to the cars and the smogs. Cars are way cleaner today then every before and are still getting cleaner, more than ofsetting their increase in number. Coal stoves were NEVER clean, nor were they efficient...

Cheers
Wino

Justiciar
5th May 2004, 19:25
I'm certainly with Wino on this. It is a very convenient weapon to use against the glabalising western economies to accuse them of contributing to the so called greenhouse effect. In fact, ice cores taken in Greeland show evidence of repeated sudden (i.e a few decades) rapid rises in temperature followed by equally rapid cooling which lasted centuries.

As for cheap petrol in the US: I think you'll find that changing as world demand escalates hugely and available reserves decline. There is a lot more crude to get out of the ground, but as I understand it it is not yet economic to extract it, though it will become so with time. In the mean time crude prices threaten to remain high and probably go even higher.

Kind of hope so actually, as I'm invested in some potentially very profitable oil companies:ok:

tony draper
5th May 2004, 20:02
Tiz our Moon that exerts the largest braking force on the Earth,that is the reason the Moons rotation has slowed down until one side always faces us, eventually the same thing will happen to the earth, the braking force exserted by infalling debris or solar wind is miniscule in comparison.
Said it before on threads like this tiz only the last thirty thousand years or so that the earths climate has been stable enough for us to create the civilisation we have, before that the climate was up and down like a hoors nightey.
I agree the idea that outr puny efforts can effect climate is ludicrous IMHO
Remember one super Volcano or flood basalt eruption event can spew out more greenhouse gas in a week than mankind has produced since the discovery of fire.
One also ventures to suggest that most countries signed the Kyoto agreement in the full knowledge that the USA was not going to, they could therefore hug themselves and burrble how green we are, how caring about the planet without actually doing squat all about it.
On a item on the news on this this morning it was mentoned that Europe in one of the largest hypocrites in the matter of greenhouse gasses, spouting holier than thou shite at the rest of the world when they have done buggah all themselves,of course as per usual they can blame the USA.

goates
5th May 2004, 20:52
I'm a little curious as to why so many people are so hung up on the Kyoto aggreement. As Draper pointed out a volcano can put out far more CO2 in a single eruption than we could in a hundred years. When Mt. Pinatubo (my spelling could be off) erupted, it caused global temperatures to drop a degree or so for the next year. If everyone followed the Kyoto agreement, we might change the Earth's temperature by half a degree celsius by the end of the century. Not to mention the US would just buy up most of the CO2 credits from third world countries that don't currently need them and not have to change much if anything. Those third world countries would now be limited to how far their industrial capacity, and economy, could develop in the future unless they can get clean technologies cheap, which I doubt.

The part that has me really confused is why people are so concerned about CO2 emissions in the first place as little is said about CFCs in the third world and other pollutants everywhere. These are things made by humans that are causing problems and that we can correct. If everyone would just go out and plant a tree to make up for all of the ones cut down in Europe, North America and elsewhere, CO2 levels would drop. The oceans are also absorbing more CO2 than people originally thought so this isn't anywhere near as big a problem as chemicals causing birth defects or killing entire ecosystems.

I'm not saying we should go crazy with producing CO2, just that there are far worse pollutants to worry about and ones that we can actually do something about.

goates

Wino
5th May 2004, 21:07
Shhhhhhh Goats,
Don't let a little reality interfere with good old fashioned yank and Bush bashing <G>....

Cheers,
Wino

pigboat
6th May 2004, 00:40
Hey Wino, he has to say that. He's from Houston North.:E ;)