ash sucky as it gets

(1/6) > >>

Lilli (April 20, 2010, 15:52:20 PM):
I was supposed to be flying to Iceland next week. I was really excited. I've been on business trips in SA, but this was going to be super cool. I just got out of a meeting, the trip (and the project) has been cancelled due to the project proponent being stuck in London, anyways, until further notice.
http://www.news24.com/World/News/Ash-cloud-to-move-to-Arctic-20100420
Eish... is it awful that I care more about my business trip than the potential effects of this event on a global scale? Do we even know what the effects are/will be? Can't help but think its kinda funny that we, the human race, has all this technology, knowledge, capabilities etc, but when something erups, there sweet nothing we can do about it...
GCG (April 20, 2010, 16:01:24 PM):
i had thought, that this is, unfortunately for your trip tho, quite cool.
the scientisty people said, that if this volcanic eruption continues, it will block out sun-rays, and cause global cooling.
since we are poeping ourselves about global warming...
hey presto!!!!
problem solved.
fabulous.
Jane of the Jungle (April 20, 2010, 16:50:08 PM):
Lilli sorry your trip got cancelled, but on the positive side, maybe you would be able to have a glimpse of the site, from the air when they do send you there, super cool! ;)

i had thought, that this is, unfortunately for your trip tho, quite cool.
the scientisty people said, that if this volcanic eruption continues, it will block out sun-rays, and cause global cooling.
since we are poeping ourselves about global warming...
hey presto!!!!
problem solved.
fabulous.


I’ve watched a few Nat Geo programmes on this, but something is tickling me here, if someone would care to enlighten me on this(sorry a bit off topic ;)):
From my understanding, earth is currently still in the ice age that began at the start of the Pleistocene (because Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets still exist) So according to me, earth is still in a natural heating up process.
Wouldn’t normal temperatures anyways have increased even if these greenhouse gasses were absent? Reliable surface temperature record exists only since about 1850. Can Industrialization be blamed for all?

.....and Osama wanna halt USA for it ::)
Quote
Osama bin Laden blamed the United States and other industrialised countries for causing global warming in an extraordinary message issued yesterday.
In a departure from his usual religious rants, the Al Qaeda leader lectured on the dangers of climate change, claiming the only solution was to 'bring the wheels of the American economy' to a halt.
Rather than vows to inflict death and destruction on the U.S. and its allies, the man behind the September 11 atrocity in New York discussed the environmental future of the planet and monetary policy.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1247033/Now-Osama-bin-Laden-gets-worried-global-warming.html#ixzz0leTBNlz7


GCG (April 20, 2010, 17:10:29 PM):
you know, if i had said it, then i would have heard a thousand voices telling me im a nutjob.

but yes, i have wondered the same, actually. and as much as humanity has buggered up the environment with regards to polution, killing off species, trees, etc. and, i might add, placing back corbandioxide back into the atmosphere in the form of burning fossil fuels.
but, too, the planet, in my mind anyway, is still young, tectonic plates going bossies, so it hasnt settled yet. so fluctuations in temps should be quite normal, methinks. and, as i hear, temps had been climbing for the last few hundred years. so i dunno.
im not so stressed about global warming, as opposed to our environment being destroyed before anything can adapt to living in the heat conditions.
and as sad as it is that polar bears will have nowhere to live anymore, alot of other species survived and adapted the climate shift throught the millenia, some died out, others adapted and have turned into what we know today.
it should be an exciting prospect, we are seeing our planet in motion.
Mefiante (April 20, 2010, 17:17:20 PM):
Wouldn’t normal temperatures anyways have increased even if these greenhouse gasses were absent? Reliable surface temperature record exists only since about 1850. Can Industrialization be blamed for all?
This is the essence of why global warming is such a fiercely contentious issue. We certainly are at the tail end of an ice age but nobody can demonstrate convincingly (a) at what rate global temperatures are changing on average, (b) what proportion of temperature change is anthropogenic and what natural, (c) what the major physical factors are that drive temperature change, (d) what the longer term prognoses for various scenarios are, and (e) what, if anything, humans can do to improve the situation. In short, the jury’s still out on this question and it doesn’t help that there are numerous special interest groups, each pushing its own agenda.

The eruption in Iceland has spewed lots of sulphur-based compounds, chiefly sulphur dioxide, into the air. Sulphur dioxide reacts with water in the upper atmosphere to form sulphurous acid, which increases the capacity of clouds to reflect incident sunlight (but the sulphurous acid eventually returns to the ground in the form of acid rain, decimating vegetation). Climatologists believe that the oceans are somewhat cooler today than they would be had the Krakatoa eruption not occurred in 1883.

Oh, and Osama bin Laden is clearly a dedicated scaper of goats… ::)

'Luthon64

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Skeptic Forum Board Index

Non-mobile version of page