1,600 Years of Ice in Andes Melted in 25 Years
Posted in the Hayti Forum
#1 Apr 6, 2013
Glacial ice in the Peruvian Andes that took at least 1,600 years to form has melted in just 25 years, scientists reported Thursday, the latest indication that the recent spike in global temperatures has thrown the natural world out of balance.
Read whole story here.
#2 Apr 6, 2013
I don't know about global warming. I don't know if it is real or a myth. I do know that some of the biggest proponents of global warming are also some of the biggest polluters around.
Allow me to pose a question to you:
What do you say to those scientists who say global warming is not man made but instead it is part of a natural cycle.
(Catfish, there's the links you wanted.)
#3 Apr 6, 2013
i would say that those sicentists were paid by the government and big oil to say that. everybody has a price. anybody can see that its pollution thats causing it. you shouldnt need to look on any websites just drive down any interstate.
Since: Oct 11
#4 Apr 7, 2013
Global Warming is real.
The scientist have been saying it for a while. The Glacial Ice every where are gone and melting. Most people don't believe till they can see it.
Is it Mother Nature-could be.
Is it pollution-it prolly don't help and makes it worse.
#5 Apr 7, 2013
It melted from all the hot air off of John Doe's questions and Comrade Winstons racist hatred of Obama.
#6 Apr 7, 2013
That is not true. Glacier ice is not melting everywhere. If you research it, ice levels in Antartica and other places are up at record levels.
#7 Apr 7, 2013
A little educational materials for the brainwashed. LOL.
#8 Apr 7, 2013
#9 Apr 7, 2013
I don't know if Global Warming is something caused by Pollution or if it is a natural thing. I read articles from both sides and just when I think I have a handle on it, something new comes out that throws all of my thoughts on the subject out of whack.
Personally, I think this is a silly thing for the left and right to fight about. If it is true, then it is something that is affecting all of us and all of us should ban together and try to do something about it. If it is nature, then we all just need to accept it and move on.
#10 Apr 7, 2013
Thank you for that link. I think we've proven that is a wealth of data out there. Some of it says pollution, some of it says nature. I know I don't have scientific knowledge to decide which side is right
#11 Apr 8, 2013
What is the difference between the hole in the ozone layer and global warming?
The holes in the ozone layer, one over Antarctica and a smaller one over the north polar region, have little to do with global warming, but ozone depletion (the cause of those holes) and global warming are both caused by human activity.
The thinning of the ozone layer, associated with the holes in the ozone layer, allows too much ultraviolet through to the earth's surface, with potentially dangerous consequences for health for those in the polar areas. CFC's, gases that have been used in refrigeration and airconditioning units, as well as in aerosol sprays, are substantially heavier than air, yet trace amounts have been seen in the upper atmosphere. Being highly reactive, they combine with the ozone in the upper atmosphere, depleting the natural concentration of ozone. The production of these CFCs has been banned in some countries for more than twenty years and the world's ozone layer is beginning to recover, but it will take many more years before we receive the protection from harmful ultraviolet radiation that we formerly enjoyed.
Global warming is a different process and the consequences are different, and perhaps more severe. Anthropogenic (man-caused) global warming dates from the beginning of the industrial age, with average global temperatures rising only slowly at first, but accelerating since the 1970s. The cause is the emission of additional carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, from the burning of fossil fuels. Potential consequences include loss of wildlife habitat, rising sea levels, destruction of coastal areas, increased storm activity, property damage and economic losses.
Global warming is an increase in surface temperatures.
The hole in the ozone layer is a natural repeating phenomenon, for the pole that is experiencing winter. Ozone decays naturally with time, and due to forcings by various contaminants. The pole that is experiencing winter receives no UV-C from the Sun, no new ozone is formed, so the poles only receive ozone by diffusion from adjacent areas. The concern is not the "ozone hole" per se, but the documented increase in the size of the ozone hole.
Both phenomenon have components that are due to the actions of Nature, and some that are due to the actions of Man (the ozone hole gets larger due to the actions of Man, for example).
Both portend drastic changes in Man's biome, and the survivability of the host of organisms we depend on for food.
#12 Apr 8, 2013
Here is the link:
#13 Apr 10, 2013
I am interested in knowing, if there is human created global warming, why did the New York Times recently report that global temperatures have stayed static for the last 10 years. Even a NASA scientist who is a pro global warming proponent has said this this is true.
#14 Apr 11, 2013
So are you asking if climate change is man made or exist at all? Your comment eludes to both. If you are a right wing then ignore facts and assume it's left wing propaganda. If you are left wing then anticipate the right wing will try and spin it to be a lie.
But if you are asking my expert opinion you are out of luck as I am no more a scientist than you but if you want my educated opinion here goes.
The heating and cooling of the Earth happens naturally in cycles (this has been proven).
The natural heating and cooling of the Earth has speed up over the last 100 to 150 years because of human beings (the exploitation of hydrocarbons).
So yes the New York Times maybe correct with it's claim of temperatures being static over the last 10 years but that's like saying global warming is bogus because it snowed in Oklahoma yesterday.After all that's hardly a study of geologic time. And as for this so called NASA scientist (if he exists)is probably just an anomaly.
My suggestion to you is do your own research and make your own conclusion. After all it doesn't matter if it's man made or not, we aren't about to change our lifestyles to make it better for anyone right?
#15 Apr 14, 2013
Ice cores taken from two regions of the Antarctic give a mixed story on the impact of human-induced climate change on the icy continent.
Summer ice melting on the Antarctic Peninsula is at its highest in 1000 years, report scientists in today's Nature Geoscience journal.
But an analysis of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet stretching back 2000 years indicates "rapid ice loss may not be all that unusual" in that area of the continent, report another group of scientists in the same journal.
The studies add to the international effort to better understand the causes of environmental change in Antarctica and to make more accurate projections about the direct and indirect contribution of Antarctica's ice shelves and glaciers to global sea level rise.
Dr Nerilie Abram, of the Research School of Earth Sciences at the Australian National University, says her team studied a 364-metre ice core drilled from James Ross Island on the Antarctic Peninsula.
"This is an area right near the tip of the Antarctic Peninsula," she says. "The reason we went to this place is it is a region that is warming faster than anywhere else in the southern hemisphere over the past 50 years."
By examining the ice core, the team wanted to track how unique this warming was.
However when they extracted the ice core, the researchers realised it also contained a "rare record" of melting events -- only the second of its kind from the Antarctic continent.
Abram says the core shows summer ice melting has increased 10-fold in the past 1000 years with the most rapid increase occurring in the past 50 years.
The coolest conditions and lowest melt at the ice core site occurred from about AD 1410 to 1460 when mean temperatures were about 1.6°C cooler than between 1981 to 2000.
"At that time (1410) around 0.5 per cent of snow that fell each year melted and refroze," says Abram.
While temperatures have gradually warmed since then "the melt record actually doesn't show large changes in melt until we get to the warming over the past 50 years", she adds.
Today about 5 per cent of annual snowfall melts each year, Abram says.
Critically, the record shows a "non-linear relationship" between ice melt and climate warming, she says.
"What that means is that the Antarctic Peninsula has warmed to a level where even small increases in temperature can now lead to a big increase in summer ice melt. This has important implications for ice instability and sea level rise in a warming climate."
However, Abram says the findings for the Antarctic Peninsula cannot be extrapolated to the whole southern continent.
She says while warming in this area can be attributed at least partly to human-induced climate change and the resultant strengthening of westerly winds, changes to the West Antarctic Ice Sheet cannot be so easily linked to this.
This view is supported by the second study published in Nature Geoscience led by Professor Eric Steig at the University of Washington.
His team, which included Dr Ailie Gallant, from Monash University, analysed a new ice core from the West Antarctic Ice Sheet Divide that goes back 2000 years, along with a number of ice cores dating back 200 years.
The divide is the highest point on the West Antarctic Ice Sheet and marks the division where ice "flows" toward either the Weddell or Ross seas.
Gallant says their work focused on the isotope, oxygen 18; higher levels of oxygen 18 indicate higher air temperatures.
She says while they discovered large increases in temperatures during the 1990s, there were several decades that exhibited similar climate patterns in the past 200 years.
"Then when we looked over 2000 years, there were a few other blips in about 1 per cent of the record," says Gallant.
"What this tells us is that what we saw in the 1990s is very unusual but not necessarily unprecedented."
#16 Apr 14, 2013
Steig says while recent changes in climate and ice thinning are dramatic in the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, they cannot be attributed with confidence to human-induced global warming.
But the same is not true for the Antarctic Peninsula where rapid ice loss is even more dramatic, he adds.
The research shows the West Antarctic climate of the 1940s and 1830s would be similar to modern conditions. Along with the 1990s, these decades were also periods of unusual El Niño activity.
Gallant says their research suggests these decadal variations in temperature are linked to wind circulation patterns in the tropical Pacific Ocean and sea surface temperatures.
She says the study highlights the need to better understand how tropical Pacific climate will change in the future as it will influence what happens to the West Antarctic Ice Sheet.
#17 Apr 18, 2013
Scientists ar baffled as report shows that global warming has stopped....And this aricle is current as of this week. Not all the ancient trash that has been posted as fact on here. Here educate yourselves.
Add your comments below
|Coisha McVay||32 min||Nosey||3|
|Clifton Puckett (Jan '11)||49 min||Lulu||13|
|spanky crawford||3 hr||idiots||5|
|sugar momma||Aug 24||who||3|
|Police Dept||Aug 22||Local Citizen||6|
Find what you want!
Search Hayti Forum Now
Copyright © 2016 Topix LLC