posted on April 19, 2006 11:58:57 AM
Lastnight on our local PBS station on Nova they were discussing effects of and causes of global warming.
That was mostly in the first part of the program but in the second part they were discussing global dimming and the causes of and effects of it.
Basically, global dimming is caused by too much particulate polution in the atmosphere, like soot and ash particles. It has a tendency to block sunlight, especially when combined with water particles in cloud formations that further reflect light back into space and it has a cooling effect on the planet that to some degree counteracts the effects of global warming.
The science of it all, as the way that it was explained seemed pretty sound but what I found alarming was that they were talking about countries, partiularly in Asia, which includes China and India, that if they and other countries that are currently emitting huge amounts of particulate polution into the atmosphere were to suddenly clean up their emissions then global warming, which currently has risen by a small amount, could suddenly rise dramatically.
I can't remember now what sort of a rise in temperature they said this could cause but I do remember them saying that it could rise enough to cause the release of trapped methane gas deposits below the oceans and then if that happens it will snowball out of control, raising temperatures worldwide and we could be looking at another worldwide mass extinction occuring within, I think they said, the next ten to twenty years.
I was only halfway watching the program because I was doing some work on my computer at the same time but it sure got my attention when they started talking about the causes and effects of it all. They usually rebroadcast the same program later in the week and I need to watch it again.
Did anyone or has anyone else seen this program, if not, it is worth watching, in my opinion.
At the end of the program they recommended Googling global dimming for more information but I haven't done that yet.
ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø
[ edited by piinthesky on Apr 19, 2006 12:03 PM ]
posted on April 19, 2006 01:39:36 PM
I believe that was the program. Thanks, Linda but when I click on the video link this comes up,
The requested URL /dimm-flash.html was not found on this server.
posted on April 19, 2006 01:41:56 PM
::global dimming::
I'm surprised Classic hasn't jumped at this one.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
People put their hand on the bible, and swear to uphold the constitution. They do not put their hand on the constitution, and swear to uphold the bible.
posted on April 19, 2006 03:52:40 PM
I'll try those links in a bit, I just got back from grocery shopping and I need to put it all away.
Thanks again, Linda.
You know, I used to be of the opinion that the global warming issue needed some more investigation and study to verify it as actually happening and being caused by humans because it seems like not enough time has passed since studies were first started on it but now I think there might just be something to it after looking at the evidence.
I used to think that the changes in climate temperatures worldwide were a natural occurance of the planet but now I am starting to believe that humans are the cause of it.
posted on April 20, 2006 10:40:42 AMI used to think that the changes in climate temperatures worldwide were a natural occurance of the planet but now I am starting to believe that humans are the cause of it.
Of course we are. Just a few changes from only 150 years ago let alone millions of years ago.
* We drive cars. They generate all kinds of heat. From the exhaust, the radiator, brakes and lighting.
* We heat our homes in the winter.
* We use air conditioning in the summer which to work, has to heat up the condensor to take heat away from inside the house or building. The heat is then distributed outside. It works that way with cars too.
* Refridgerators and Freezers work the same way.
* Light bulbs generate heat. Many restaurants use heat lamps to keep food warm.
Just with those examples, common sense would dictate that we are contributing to global warming.
posted on April 20, 2006 02:08:23 PM
Wrong Stone, sort of. It's not the heat from all those things that you mentioned that is the main cause of global warming but instead it is the release of greenhouse gases like methane from Bears Liberal cows, carbon dioxide and a few others that are man made.
How it works is when sunlight strikes the Earth’s surface, some of it is reflected back towards space as infrared radiation (heat). Greenhouse gases absorb this infrared radiation and trap the heat in the atmosphere, thus cause temeratures to rise.
What the program that I saw was mainly about is another aspect of these processes known as global dimming. Where the sun reflects off of polution particles that are floating around in the atmosphere and the sun's heat radiation is reflected back into space before the radiated heat ever reaches the Earth's surface thus having a cooling effect on the planet.
When the newly industrialised nations start installing scrubbers on their polution emmitting smoke stacks, then the amounts of polution particles in the atmosphere will decrease and global warming will increase dramatically unless the amounts of greenhouse gases released are dramatically reduced also.
posted on April 20, 2006 04:39:14 PM
Here is a copy of a post card I received from A.I.M [Accuracy In Media - online website]....which is addressed to:
Mr. Jeffrey Immelt
General Electric Company
3135 Easton Turnpike
Fairfield, CT 06828-0001
Quote:
Dear Mr. Immelt:
While you have been out promoting the DUBIOUS global warming treaty, to the detriment of GE and the country at large, MSNBC-TV host Keith Olbermann has been trying to boost his ANEMIC ratings by insulting people, including Accuracy in Media and his cable TV competitor Bill O'lReilly of Fox News.
He even went on C-Span to suggest that you and other GE and NBC executives are upset with him because of his LIBERAL views.
We suggest you leave the issues of global warming to the EXPERTS, who are DIVIDED on the matter, and pay more attention to the programming FIASCO known as "Countdown," the Olbermann show. MSNBC can do better.
posted on April 20, 2006 09:59:23 PM
It's amazing to me that there are still people who want to make this a political issue, or still think the experts are "divided".
What's the point of arguing whether it's human caused or not, except to make feeble excuses for mankind's consumptive lifestyle. As roadsmith says. It's real. The evidence for climate change is overwhelming. Gonna getcha, and if not you, your kids.
____________________________________________
posted on April 21, 2006 04:18:45 AM
Personally, I think it's a combination. I do believe it's a natural cycle of the earth. But man has not and is not helping it any. Humans are hastening this due to our ravenous lifestyles.
posted on April 21, 2006 06:26:07 AM
Unregulated industry protected by the Bush administration is a cause for much of the polution. In fact, several Bush appointments to Departments including the Environmental Protection Agency are people with a history of opposition to environmental rules for industry. Bush policy is to ignore global warming, shrink the environmental budget and continue to oppose environmental protection that might diminish corporate profit.
posted on April 21, 2006 08:10:48 AM
As shown in the program those "unregulated industries" are getting cleaner every day, with particulate emissions falling dramatically. Meanwhile, Eastern Europe, Russia, and Red China spew HUGE amounts of emmissions into the air, increasing geometrically.
posted on April 21, 2006 08:25:12 AMBush's pollution of science threatens our future
By Edward J. Markey
Originally published April 21, 2006
But when it comes to some issues, the Bush administration takes a different and very dangerous approach. Again and again, evidence has emerged of political tampering with what was meant to be independent, trustworthy scientific research. This has been especially true when it comes to environmental science.
Last year, for example, it was reported that a political appointee in the White House was editing the government's reports to downplay the role of fossil fuels as a cause of climate change. And this year, a top scientist at NASA complained that White House public affairs staff ordered that his lectures, papers and discussions with journalists be reviewed and in some cases canceled.
Why? President Bush seems to oppose any measure that will meaningfully reduce the pollution that contributes to global warming, as do most of his supporters from the fossil fuel industry. They don't want scientific truth because it may inspire policies to transition us to cleaner energy technologies and upset what is for them a very profitable status quo. Politics is driving science.
According to the assessment, nearly two-thirds of nature's gifts, such as fresh water, a stable climate and fisheries, and the ecosystems that support them are being degraded beyond what they can possibly bear. When those gifts become scarce or disappear, we may well find them very costly or even impossible to replace, and that would land many people around the world, rich and poor, in crisis.
posted on April 21, 2006 10:03:26 AM "Meanwhile, Eastern Europe, Russia, and Red China spew HUGE amounts of emmissions into the air, increasing geometrically."
It's funny how you right-wingers always try to negate the obligation of your administration to support and abide by international law and in this case it's failure to adhere to polution standards by comparison to other countries who also fail or fail worse. The United States of America has more political, economic and military power than any other country in the world. When Bush tries to justify the use of torture, illegal wars and pollution of the world he is sending a message to other countries that torture, illegal invasion of soverign nations and pollution is OK.
posted on April 21, 2006 10:10:36 AM
According to Dr.Ralph J. Daug,PhD, 99.9999% of "so-called" GLOBAL WARMING can be directly attributed to...COW FAHTS!
posted on April 21, 2006 10:57:49 AM
When all other arguements fail, the left falls to their bacis strategy, blame it all on Bush....
But wait, not so fast there......
Scientists cool outlook on global warming
By Jennifer Harper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
April 21, 2006
Global warming may not be as dramatic as some scientists have predicted. Using temperature readings from the past 100 years, 1,000 computer simulations and the evidence left in ancient tree rings, Duke University scientists announced yesterday that "the magnitude of future global warming will likely fall well short of current highest predictions."
Supported by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation, the Duke researchers noted that some observational studies predicted that the Earth's temperature could rise as much as 16 degrees in this century because of an increase in carbon dioxide or other so-called greenhouse gases.
The Duke estimates show the chances that the planet's temperature will rise even by 11 degrees is only 5 percent, which falls in line with previous, less-alarming predictions that meteorologists made almost three decades ago.
In recent years, much academic research has indicated otherwise, often in colorful terms and citing the United States as the biggest contributor to global warming. This month, a University of Toronto scientist predicted that a quarter of the planet's plants and animals would be extinct by 2050 because of rising temperatures. On Wednesday, two geophysics professors at the University of Chicago warned those who eat red meat that their increased flatulence contributes to greenhouse gases.
Last year, Oregon State University research linked future "societal disruptions" with global warming, while the Carnegie Institution reported that the insulating influence of northern forests alone would raise the Earth's temperature by 6 degrees. In 2004, Harvard University scientists informed Congress that warming had doomed the planet to climatic "shocks and surprises." The Duke research, however, found substantial ups and downs in the Earth's temperature before modern times, countering other studies that confine noticeable temperature increases to the industrialized era. Marked climate change in other centuries resulted from "external forcing," said the Duke findings, citing volcanic eruptions and other influences.
"Our reconstruction supports a lot of variability in the past," said research director Gabriele Hegerl of Duke's Nicholas School of the Environment and Earth Sciences.
Although her study found that the Earth is, indeed, warming, Ms. Hegerl discounts dire predictions of skyrocketing temperatures. The probability that the climate's "sensitivity" to greenhouse-gas levels would result in drastically higher temperatures is "substantially" reduced, she said. Ms. Hegerl and her four-member team based their conclusions on thermometer readings over the past century, along with "ancient climate records," including tree-ring studies and ice-core samples that revealed hot and cold spells and airborne particulates over a 700-year period. In addition, they created 1,000 computer-based weather simulations for the past 1,000 years.
"Ancient and modern evidence suggest limits to future global warming," the study concluded. It was published in the journal Nature.
The topic of global warming, meanwhile, will be framed dramatically in "An Inconvenient Truth," a 94-minute documentary featuring former Vice President Al Gore, who has deemed rising temperatures "a planetary emergency." The Hollywood production will be released to theaters in May and is billed by producer Davis Guggenheim as "the most terrifying film you will ever see."
The production also recommends that viewers take "political action." On Tuesday, Mr. Gore paid Roy Neel, a longtime Democratic adviser, $40,000 to help him create a public outreach program on global warming, the New York Daily News reported.
The American Spectator and columnist Jonah Goldberg have accused Mr. Gore of "green" scaremongering.
posted on April 21, 2006 09:55:48 PM
Linda, in case you and bear missed it, that report he posted acknowledges global warming. There'll always be disagreement about the timetable, causes and severity of global warming, but the percentage of actual scientists who completely deny it has fallen to the lunatic fringe level. It's not a left right issue, no matter how much you and the President want it to be.
____________________________________________
posted on April 22, 2006 11:25:10 PM
I didn't figure you did. Whatever the cause, it's happening. Laying blame isn't the point, figuring out how we're going to survive, is.
____________________________________________
posted on April 23, 2006 12:04:19 PM
They could probably come up with an int'l agreement if the lefties could come up with something better than hamstring American industry while letting the "2nd world" do whatever they want.
posted on April 23, 2006 12:46:40 PM
Your use of relative morality to excuse U.S. industry from their failure to implement environmental protection is ludicrous.
posted on April 23, 2006 07:00:13 PM
:: you people will be worm food before....::
Ron... doe this mean you are immortal?
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
People put their hand on the bible, and swear to uphold the constitution. They do not put their hand on the constitution, and swear to uphold the bible.
