The artic has warmed enough to break up methane clathrates

[LunarRay]

Let's see... Is it the climate that causes the clouds or the clouds that cause the climate??Gotta wonder why folks are so entrenched in their belief... guess when one opines they gotta stick with it no matter what

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: dawp
mother nature is indifferent. think of humanity as a virus and the earth as a the infected host.

Thank you, Agent Smith.

The OP makes a flimsy claim. Nothing proves that man has caused these plumes.

From the article:

"Almost none of the Arctic has been surveyed in a way that might detect a gas release like this," Minshull says.

How do they know this process hasn't been ongoing for eons already? 30 years ago we didn't know about Black Smokers and various other sorts of hydrothermal vents either. Where is the research linking the warming of the West Spitsbergen current to AGW?

Look, I'm not a denier by any means. I readily admit the possibility that man is having an impact. But people that immediately jump to conclusions, just as the OP has, are no better than the deniers. This is a time for science, not snap decisions based on articles containing words like "possibly," "could", "may," or "if;" particularly where climate is concerned. The old saying, "You don't fuck with mother nature." works both ways.

Well damn. Look who's making sense.

 

[Moonbeam]

I hope the folk studying this realize that when the ocean bubbles a lot around you your ship will sink.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Mardeth

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Perhaps man was the cause of the last major ice age (the Cryogenian period) 700 million years ago too.

Maybe? Why not?

Silly man. Humans didnt exist yet...


What annoys me the most about this subject is how much its just black and white shit. Those who oppose to the idea of global warming seem to think that the other side is saying that its only humans and no cycle at all and get their panties in a twist and vice-versa.

Says who?

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
I hope the folk studying this realize that when the ocean bubbles a lot around you your ship will sink.

Are you saying there are places other than in frozen water that methane percolates out of its resting place?

And that perhaps what it is a naturally occurring event of no great significance given the total released daily by other means?

Or, that the bubbles are a Soviet submarine venting after a long voyage ready to launch a torpedo or two into the discussion?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: dawp
mother nature is indifferent. think of humanity as a virus and the earth as a the infected host.

Thank you, Agent Smith.

The OP makes a flimsy claim. Nothing proves that man has caused these plumes.

From the article:

"Almost none of the Arctic has been surveyed in a way that might detect a gas release like this," Minshull says.

How do they know this process hasn't been ongoing for eons already? 30 years ago we didn't know about Black Smokers and various other sorts of hydrothermal vents either. Where is the research linking the warming of the West Spitsbergen current to AGW?

Look, I'm not a denier by any means. I readily admit the possibility that man is having an impact. But people that immediately jump to conclusions, just as the OP has, are no better than the deniers. This is a time for science, not snap decisions based on articles containing words like "possibly," "could", "may," or "if;" particularly where climate is concerned. The old saying, "You don't fuck with mother nature." works both ways.

Well damn. Look who's making sense.

Far more amazing...look who's comprehending sense.

 

[Moonbeam]

Apparently more than loose lips or submarines can sink ships.

 

[GoPackGo]

No...it ancient man's fault

Link

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Apparently more than loose lips or submarines can sink ships.

Didn't you know? Glass houses sink ships.

 

[NeoV]

I continued to be amazed at people who deny even the slightest possibility that 4-5 billion people - combined with all of the industry and waste associated with supporting the lives of that many people - can have no effect on the climate on this planet - and that the 'natural' cycles of climate change are all we are seeing.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: NeoV
I continued to be amazed at people who deny even the slightest possibility that 4-5 billion people - combined with all of the industry and waste associated with supporting the lives of that many people - can have no effect on the climate on this planet - and that the 'natural' cycles of climate change are all we are seeing.

There can be no doubt that people do alter this planet's... well... many things. I suppose the issue confounding science is to what extent does the existence of people and their activities affect Climate.

This Link and this link suggests an alternative to people. But people play a part. I'd buy into this cause over any other one postulated thus far.

I think it is far from being a settled science but a science that suggests other alternative ways of doing things make good economic and ecological sense.. regardless

 

[boomerang]

To everyone deeply concerned about global warming. Shut off your computer and start helping with this problem instead of contributing to it. If all of you just shut off your computers, the net effect of reduced electrical usage would just absolutely have to have a positive effect on global warming.

It starts with you. Lead by example. If it's that important of an issue to you, it's something you absolutely must do. Don't hesitate, do it now.

It's your thread ZeGermans. What about it? Are you man enough to turn it off and leave it off? To lead by example?

 

[daishi5]

Originally posted by: WHAMPOM
Here we are in the "cool" cycle of the Sun(big bright hot orb in the day sky). A point in the Sun's cycle which in the 1800s would have left the Polar ice unbroken and with out a thaw for two or three summers in a row. Now why would I not suspect a Man made addition to the Earth's greenhouse effect?

I wonder if we did not have global warming, would this solar cycle have been enough to drop us into an ice age. From what I understand cooling is also a reinforcing cycle, with the ice reflecting the heat of the sun more efficiently. I always hated the idea that man changing the environment was bad. We live on a planet that has killed 99% of the species that ever lived on it, and for some reason we assume that letting that planet do its own thing will be to our benefit.

This subject is too political, it seems almost impossible to get good information that would be required to make a decision. Informing the public, that makes getting good information look like it is as simple as tying my shoes.

 

[dphantom]

Originally posted by: NeoV
I continued to be amazed at people who deny even the slightest possibility that 4-5 billion people - combined with all of the industry and waste associated with supporting the lives of that many people - can have no effect on the climate on this planet - and that the 'natural' cycles of climate change are all we are seeing.

No one is saying "no effect". That is the leftist interpretation of a skeptic of AGW viewpoint. What many of us do say is to what degree is any supposed warming man caused or not. And many of us also say we should be beter stewards of our planet, but do not see man as the sole cause and hence the source of evil.

No, what we would like to see is a vast expansion of energy development at all levels including a restructuring and upgrade of power grids to support the development of wind and solar while increasing the amount of other energy sources. Energy equals wealth. Only wealthy nations and peoples can afford to go "green". And the route to wealth is energy.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: dphantom

Originally posted by: NeoV
I continued to be amazed at people who deny even the slightest possibility that 4-5 billion people - combined with all of the industry and waste associated with supporting the lives of that many people - can have no effect on the climate on this planet - and that the 'natural' cycles of climate change are all we are seeing.

No one is saying "no effect". That is the leftist interpretation of a skeptic of AGW viewpoint. What many of us do say is to what degree is any supposed warming man caused or not. And many of us also say we should be beter stewards of our planet, but do not see man as the sole cause and hence the source of evil.

No, what we would like to see is a vast expansion of energy development at all levels including a restructuring and upgrade of power grids to support the development of wind and solar while increasing the amount of other energy sources. Energy equals wealth. Only wealthy nations and peoples can afford to go "green". And the route to wealth is energy.

Shhh... the MMGW cultists can't process that. They are in so deep they start believing that anyone who doesn't fully swallow the MMGW doctrine is automatically a "denier".

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
lol, so you are admitting that we didn't change the climate then correct?

you know whats funny about a guy like you? You come down on the green hippies for saying its one way when you are the exact same kind of "I'm so sure". We should all be open to the science as it develops.

lol, I am open to the science. You ASSume I am not because I fight against idiots who claim it's settled as "fact".

The issue I'm taking with all this is that most of the time the idiots try to blame man first without even looking at nature. In the case of the dust bowl - yes, we made the effects of drought worse, but we did not cause the drought. Someone PM'd me about river damning and the like - sure, you can "affect" nature and "climate" on a micro scale by damning rivers(obviously the temp in that immediate surrounding area will be cooler due to the increased volume of water) - but we aren't talking micro here with the whole "greenhouse gases" baloney.

You claim you're open to science then dismiss greenhouse gases as a possible cause without any proof. Uh, huh. You're open all right. :thumbsdown:

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
lol, so you are admitting that we didn't change the climate then correct?

you know whats funny about a guy like you? You come down on the green hippies for saying its one way when you are the exact same kind of "I'm so sure". We should all be open to the science as it develops.

lol, I am open to the science. You ASSume I am not because I fight against idiots who claim it's settled as "fact".

The issue I'm taking with all this is that most of the time the idiots try to blame man first without even looking at nature. In the case of the dust bowl - yes, we made the effects of drought worse, but we did not cause the drought. Someone PM'd me about river damning and the like - sure, you can "affect" nature and "climate" on a micro scale by damning rivers(obviously the temp in that immediate surrounding area will be cooler due to the increased volume of water) - but we aren't talking micro here with the whole "greenhouse gases" baloney.

You claim you're open to science then dismiss greenhouse gases as a possible cause without any proof. Uh, huh. You're open all right. :thumbsdown:

Hey look, another cultist who trots in with the whole - "if you don't agree with the MMGW cult" you must be closed to science. :roll:

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
lol, so you are admitting that we didn't change the climate then correct?

you know whats funny about a guy like you? You come down on the green hippies for saying its one way when you are the exact same kind of "I'm so sure". We should all be open to the science as it develops.

lol, I am open to the science. You ASSume I am not because I fight against idiots who claim it's settled as "fact".

The issue I'm taking with all this is that most of the time the idiots try to blame man first without even looking at nature. In the case of the dust bowl - yes, we made the effects of drought worse, but we did not cause the drought. Someone PM'd me about river damning and the like - sure, you can "affect" nature and "climate" on a micro scale by damning rivers(obviously the temp in that immediate surrounding area will be cooler due to the increased volume of water) - but we aren't talking micro here with the whole "greenhouse gases" baloney.

You claim you're open to science then dismiss greenhouse gases as a possible cause without any proof. Uh, huh. You're open all right. :thumbsdown:

Hey look, another cultist who trots in with the whole - "if you don't agree with the MMGW cult" you must be closed to science. :roll:

The amusing part is all of these enviro-libs who rail against "fundie wingnuts" don't even realize that they are more fanatical and overzealous in their crusade for Mother Nature than most "fundies".

It takes one heck of a leap of faith (and a generous helping of arrogance too) to think that man can significantly alter the earth's environment.

Do we have an effect on the environment? Sure, there is no doubt about that. How great is our impact though? Even all of the "science" really doesn't have any conclusive idea. So, those of us who aren't devoted to the cult of Gaia are saying, "Hey, let's take things one step at a time, work on alternative energy and conservation without throwing our entire economy and way of life down the toilet in the process."

...and we are summarily insulted and derided by the Algore acolytes as "flat-earthers who don't believe in science".

:roll:

 

[dphantom]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: dphantom

Originally posted by: NeoV
I continued to be amazed at people who deny even the slightest possibility that 4-5 billion people - combined with all of the industry and waste associated with supporting the lives of that many people - can have no effect on the climate on this planet - and that the 'natural' cycles of climate change are all we are seeing.

No one is saying "no effect". That is the leftist interpretation of a skeptic of AGW viewpoint. What many of us do say is to what degree is any supposed warming man caused or not. And many of us also say we should be beter stewards of our planet, but do not see man as the sole cause and hence the source of evil.

No, what we would like to see is a vast expansion of energy development at all levels including a restructuring and upgrade of power grids to support the development of wind and solar while increasing the amount of other energy sources. Energy equals wealth. Only wealthy nations and peoples can afford to go "green". And the route to wealth is energy.

Shhh... the MMGW cultists can't process that. They are in so deep they start believing that anyone who doesn't fully swallow the MMGW doctrine is automatically a "denier".

I know. That's why it is so hard to have a rational discussion with those who are such fanatics. I follow the science very closely and after 50 years, still am not convinced that man is the one and only cause of global warming. I am not even sure this is not some normal cyclical event. The Little Ice Age (LIA) was certainly not man caused nor was the Medieval Warm Period (MWP). Yet, we know very little about these and other events. Were they global in extent or continental/hemispheric?

So how can we possibly say today when temperatures are cooler than the MWP but warmer than the LIA that we - man - is the sole cause because of our production of carbon dioxide exceeds the current ability of Earth to sequester gas? I do think that we do have some affect on the climate, but to what extent I do not know. Nor can anyone else possibly make any definitive statement either. Doing so then becomes a political act, not a strictly scientific act.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

Originally posted by: OCguy
So what are you doing about it? Did you stop driving? Did you stop shipping/recieving mail? Do you grow your own food so you dont have to buy goods that were transported by internal combustion engines? Did you stop using plastics?

Or do you use the same amount of Fossil Fuels as the next guy, but bitch about "climate change", so that makes you better?

They keep using electricity and gas and all this other polluting stuff so they can spread the word. If they really cared they'd prove it by killing themselves so they were no longer a burden on Mother Earth, but in reality they don't because they are truely the selfish ones.

 

[NeoV]

No one is saying "no effect"?

"You kiddo are the flat earther - who takes it on faith that man is causing climate change and even further could do something about it even if it were true."

I didn't say that. Genius-boy CAD said it.