PDA

View Full Version : If you care, read it...


LSU
05-14-2008, 08:14 PM
if you don't, don't.

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=man-made-warming-altering-natures-clock&print=true


Man-Made Warming Altering Nature's Clock
Widespread evidence links global warming to an array of environmental effects

By Adam Hadhazy

Starving polar bears are eating one another in the Arctic. Flowers are blooming too soon and dying. The ice caps are melting so swiftly that rising water levels will threaten coastal towns as far away as Florida within several decades. These are just a few examples of the dire consequences of climate change supported by a new analysis in Nature that paints a dark portrait of what a warming world will look like in the years to come.

The researchers assessed 829 geologic phenomena—including melting glaciers—along with nearly 30,000 changes in plants and animals (from bird migration patterns to plummeting penguin populations), and found that about 90 percent of them are in sync with scientists' predictions about how global warming will alter the planet.

In the past three decades, average global temperatures have risen about 1 degree Fahrenheit (0.6 degree Celsius) and are projected to jump by about 3 degrees F (1.7 degrees C) by the end of the century, says study lead author Cynthia Rosenzweig, who heads the Climate Impacts Group at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies at Columbia University in New York City. "We've already seen that a relatively low amount of warming," she says, "can result in a broad range of changes."

The unnatural warming spurred on by man-made greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide spewed by cars and coal-powered plants, spell trouble for entire ecosystems. In North America alone, scientists have identified 89 species of plants, such as the American holly, that have blossomed earlier in the spring. In Spain, apple trees bloom 35 days ahead of schedule in response to the higher temperatures. Other wildlife, like the insects that use certain plants for food and the birds that feed on the insects, must then move forward their seasonal stirrings and mating patterns to survive.

To try to compensate for this time shift, some birds such as robins, the classic symbol of winter's thaw, are returning to Colorado from their migrations some two weeks earlier than in years past. All these changes can throw a food chain out of whack. To wit: some bird species that arrive before the insects reappear may starve to death.

"Around the world, plants and animals are waking up to an earlier alarm clock than they used to," says study co-author Terry Root, a biologist at Stanford University's Center for Environmental Science and Policy.

The new research, a compilation of the findings of about 80 previous studies from around the world, also confirms that man—not nature—is to blame for global warming. "Overall, this study adds more meat to the IPCC (International Panel on Climate Change) conclusions" that people are causing the world to heat up, says Michael Mann, an associate professor and the director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University.

"This study really speaks to the fact," Rosenzweig says, "that we need to respond and adapt to what's happening."

ryr8828
05-14-2008, 10:10 PM
Cherries are picked earlier and more often, thus supporting this claim.

LSU
05-14-2008, 10:11 PM
Cherries are picked earlier and more often, thus supporting this claim.



I knew you cared.

domenick2x
05-15-2008, 08:49 AM
Interesting.

I guess I still disbelieve. Not in global warming, as I think there is plenty of evidence that temperatures are slowly rising. My personal question is whether that increase is a direct link to man, or an indirect one.

The GW pundits would have us believe that our CO2 and CFC and other exhalations are causing all of this, and it's only going to get worse without intervention.

My thought is that it's probably a natural cycle, and that maybe man is having a small (or even indirect) effect on this cycle. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't be looking for alternative energy sources, or trying to live with less environmental impact.

Warmer? Definitely.

Roy Munson
05-15-2008, 08:56 AM
Interesting.

I guess I still disbelieve. Not in global warming, as I think there is plenty of evidence that temperatures are slowly rising. My personal question is whether that increase is a direct link to man, or an indirect one.

The GW pundits would have us believe that our CO2 and CFC and other exhalations are causing all of this, and it's only going to get worse without intervention.

My thought is that it's probably a natural cycle, and that maybe man is having a small (or even indirect) effect on this cycle. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't be looking for alternative energy sources, or trying to live with less environmental impact.

Warmer? Definitely.
So the point from the right (besides Ed Who?, he still doesn't buy it) is that they aren't against conservation and that the world is probably warming, but we have no impact, so why affect policy and our ability to compete in a world market to force conservation. If thats the point I don't hear it very often.

If I end up buying a car that is more gas efficient, let it be known that its purely to save money. If I can afford to drive a Hummer, the environment can suck it.

ignorant
05-15-2008, 09:02 AM
So the point from the right (besides Ed Who?, he still doesn't buy it) is that they aren't against conservation and that the world is probably warming, but we have no impact, so why affect policy and our ability to compete in a world market to force conservation. If thats the point I don't hear it very often.

If I end up buying a car that is more gas efficient, let it be known that its purely to save money. If I can afford to drive a Hummer, the environment can suck it.

I would say that is mainly how I feel. If it does not hurt or ability to compete, I have no problem going green in most industries. If anything, it will help our cause, but at what cost to the economy.

I think 'green' technology is getting to the point where it is hard to ignore, but i think the only reason people are really paying attention to it is because gas and electric costs have gone up so recently. Money makes the world go round.

domenick2x
05-15-2008, 09:28 AM
So the point from the right (besides Ed Who?, he still doesn't buy it) is that they aren't against conservation and that the world is probably warming, but we have no impact, so why affect policy and our ability to compete in a world market to force conservation. If thats the point I don't hear it very often.

If I end up buying a car that is more gas efficient, let it be known that its purely to save money. If I can afford to drive a Hummer, the environment can suck it.
I think that's a solid summation of their point of view.

Personally, I think it's an important enough topic where we should act as if the GW thing is real, while continuing to study it with an open mind. What's the worst thing that happens? In the process of developing green industries, we end up getting off the teat of Big Oil (and the radicals that have influence with the sources of oil) and have a more self-sufficient society... is that so bad?

Roy Munson
05-15-2008, 09:39 AM
I think that's a solid summation of their point of view.

Personally, I think it's an important enough topic where we should act as if the GW thing is real, while continuing to study it with an open mind. What's the worst thing that happens? In the process of developing green industries, we end up getting off the teat of Big Oil (and the radicals that have influence with the sources of oil) and have a more self-sufficient society... is that so bad?
did you read this on a starbucks cup?

domenick2x
05-15-2008, 09:46 AM
did you read this on a starbucks cup?
No, I don't drink Starbucks.

But perhaps the fact that I can see 3 of them from the window of my office has influenced me.

ignorant
05-15-2008, 09:48 AM
No, I don't drink Starbucks.

But perhaps the fact that I can see 3 of them from the window of my office has influenced me.

whore osmosis?

KinjaKahn
05-15-2008, 06:27 PM
So whats the ratio of man made vs. natural cyclical warming?

Roy Munson
05-15-2008, 08:38 PM
So whats the ratio of man made vs. natural cyclical warming?
That would require some scientific experiment, which you would ignore the results of, so what's the point?

domenick2x
05-16-2008, 09:36 AM
So whats the ratio of man made vs. natural cyclical warming?
I don't think there's enough evidence to honestly compare the two.

Accurate temperatures have only been possible for the last century or so.