It is connected. The currents are changing because the layered structure of the water is going away. The layered structure is going away because of changed salt balance in the water (less salt). The salt balance is changing because ice from the poles has melted away. The ice is melting away because of the heating of the planet
Yes, but the poles and glaciers have been melting since the end of the ice age. Perhaps now they melt more rapidly, but that doesn't automatically mean it's due to our fossil fuel emissions. No doubt that plays some part, but to what extent we can't be sure because we aren't as familiar with the history of the evolution of global weather cycles as we all wish we were.
SDW, I was really reffering to the mountains of research and papers that have been written on the subject, all of which have been discounted.
Well, the thread was started with a link to the article. What mountains of evidence can you link to showing disastrous climate change within 20 years? Or even 50, or 100?
You really are showing off your superior research skills.
Show me the report that the article is based on. That's all I'm asking for. I know it will cause you pain to stoop to my level of stupidity, but please humor me by doing so.
Pardon me, but WTF does that link prove? I'm not discounting the possibility of global warming. What I am doing is questioning whether or not climate change is actually a greater threat than terrorism...specifically in the next 20 years.
...what else will they blame on bush now? sigh its getting so old, just like almost all of europe its called a headline reading news public, why do you think their editorials are so thin? heh
while I'm not sure why everyone think think the problem is uniquely global warming there are also other huge factors... the earth could be changing poles (which could be far worse, I hear, tectonic plate movement, Antarctica has been moving you know for quite some time now heh, as is america and europe seperating from each other, the minute differences over time will evenutally change the moderate weather we are used too, but you know 100,000 years ago no one was inhabiting england as much as they do now supposedly. you can't control the climate folks, even if we manufactured excess ozone and pumped it into the sky it'd still happen. and people the number one reason why governments exist is to protect us from... you guessed it other people, diseases, and climate are always thought to be secondary.
Anders: Why much surprise? Are you some kinda chauvinist, or just supremely uncharitable?
We do get some.
Chauvinist? What on earth do you mean by that and how do you read that into my post? Only one person (or rather view) can make "Most sense" at a time and since I don´t agree with your worldview it was to much surprise (for me) you were the one coming closest to the truth.
It was meant as a cadeau from someone who at the time didn´t believe with you. How you can turn that into something negative is beyond me.
This thread is about how a report - from the Pentagon, what's more - suggests that global climate change is both real and a genuine threat to the lives of Americans.
The weird thing with this report is that they predict major troubles in two or three years, while the others and even the most pessimistic ones only predict it for the next coming decades (2050).
The weird thing with this report is that they predict major troubles in two or three years, while the others and even the most pessimistic ones only predict it for the next coming decades (2050).
Bingo. And that's really the first we've heard of something like that.....all from an unproduced report that just happens to be tied into Bush's #1 reelection issue...terrorism. Hmmmm.
The weird thing with this report is that they predict major troubles in two or three years, while the others and even the most pessimistic ones only predict it for the next coming decades (2050).
It doesn't actually predict it, but says it is plausible and discusses some of the indications that it may be on its way. The main thrust of the report speculates what the political consequenses could be.
Basically, the point is to show that abrupt climate change is a real possibility and that we need to be better prepared for it.
It doesn't actually predict it, but says it is plausible and discusses some of the indications that it may be on its way. The main thrust of the report speculates what the political consequenses could be.
Basically, the point is to show that abrupt climate change is a real possibility and that we need to be better prepared for it.
Well then, I'm sure you wouldn't mind linking to the relevant parts of the "report".
Comments
Originally posted by Anders
It is connected. The currents are changing because the layered structure of the water is going away. The layered structure is going away because of changed salt balance in the water (less salt). The salt balance is changing because ice from the poles has melted away. The ice is melting away because of the heating of the planet
Yes, but the poles and glaciers have been melting since the end of the ice age. Perhaps now they melt more rapidly, but that doesn't automatically mean it's due to our fossil fuel emissions. No doubt that plays some part, but to what extent we can't be sure because we aren't as familiar with the history of the evolution of global weather cycles as we all wish we were.
Originally posted by Harald
SDW, I was really reffering to the mountains of research and papers that have been written on the subject, all of which have been discounted.
Well, the thread was started with a link to the article. What mountains of evidence can you link to showing disastrous climate change within 20 years? Or even 50, or 100?
Assuming you're not joking, start here:
http://www.usgcrp.gov/usgcrp/Library...ewfindings.htm
Pesky liberals at .gov again.
Originally posted by SDW2001
WHERE IS THE REPORT?
The answer to this is so obvious it hurts.
You really are showing off your superior research skills.
Originally posted by Anders
^
This thread deals with Powells speech and to much surprise SJO is the one making most sense in hindsight. [/B]
Anders: Why much surprise? Are you some kinda chauvinist, or just supremely uncharitable?
We do get some.
Originally posted by giant
The answer to this is so obvious it hurts.
You really are showing off your superior research skills.
Show me the report that the article is based on. That's all I'm asking for. I know it will cause you pain to stoop to my level of stupidity, but please humor me by doing so.
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
If I may?
Assuming you're not joking, start here:
http://www.usgcrp.gov/usgcrp/Library...ewfindings.htm
Pesky liberals at .gov again.
Pardon me, but WTF does that link prove? I'm not discounting the possibility of global warming. What I am doing is questioning whether or not climate change is actually a greater threat than terrorism...specifically in the next 20 years.
while I'm not sure why everyone think think the problem is uniquely global warming there are also other huge factors... the earth could be changing poles (which could be far worse, I hear, tectonic plate movement, Antarctica has been moving you know for quite some time now heh, as is america and europe seperating from each other, the minute differences over time will evenutally change the moderate weather we are used too, but you know 100,000 years ago no one was inhabiting england as much as they do now supposedly. you can't control the climate folks, even if we manufactured excess ozone and pumped it into the sky it'd still happen. and people the number one reason why governments exist is to protect us from... you guessed it other people, diseases, and climate are always thought to be secondary.
Originally posted by sammi jo
Anders: Why much surprise? Are you some kinda chauvinist, or just supremely uncharitable?
We do get some.
Chauvinist? What on earth do you mean by that and how do you read that into my post? Only one person (or rather view) can make "Most sense" at a time and since I don´t agree with your worldview it was to much surprise (for me) you were the one coming closest to the truth.
It was meant as a cadeau from someone who at the time didn´t believe with you. How you can turn that into something negative is beyond me.
This thread is about how a report - from the Pentagon, what's more - suggests that global climate change is both real and a genuine threat to the lives of Americans.
Originally posted by Powerdoc
The weird thing with this report is that they predict major troubles in two or three years, while the others and even the most pessimistic ones only predict it for the next coming decades (2050).
Bingo. And that's really the first we've heard of something like that.....all from an unproduced report that just happens to be tied into Bush's #1 reelection issue...terrorism. Hmmmm.
Originally posted by Powerdoc
The weird thing with this report is that they predict major troubles in two or three years, while the others and even the most pessimistic ones only predict it for the next coming decades (2050).
It doesn't actually predict it, but says it is plausible and discusses some of the indications that it may be on its way. The main thrust of the report speculates what the political consequenses could be.
Basically, the point is to show that abrupt climate change is a real possibility and that we need to be better prepared for it.
Originally posted by giant
It doesn't actually predict it, but says it is plausible and discusses some of the indications that it may be on its way. The main thrust of the report speculates what the political consequenses could be.
Basically, the point is to show that abrupt climate change is a real possibility and that we need to be better prepared for it.
Well then, I'm sure you wouldn't mind linking to the relevant parts of the "report".
Originally posted by SDW2001
Well then, I'm sure you wouldn't mind linking to the relevant parts of the "report".
Why put it in quotes?