Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 57 of 57

Thread: Big chunk of Antarctic ice shelf falling apart

  1. #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Central West
    Posts
    1,952

    Default Re: Big chunk of Antarctic ice shelf falling apart

    Quote Originally Posted by hazmee View Post
    Hi gosseberry,

    Thank you for the clarification. However, I beg to differ. One thing that IPCC did not prove is that human activities are the main cause of global warming. I believe this whole global warming message is more that meets the eye. Even if we do try to reduce waste or use 'greener' products, is it going to change the weather at all? IIRC, no human beings can control nature. We can't even predict when a tornado / tsunami / earthquake is coming. However, that does not mean we can trash the earth anyhow.

    I think we all should learn to change our lifestyles by learning to reduce waste. That should be the main message. Poverty in poor countries are much more of great concern than this whole global warming saga.

    Hope no offence taken. Cheers!

    Hi Hazmee,

    Actually, the reports from the IPCC which are summaries and analysis of peer reviewed scientific research from around the world do show evidence - if you take a look at the Fourth Assessment Report - in summary it states that human actions are "very likely" the cause of global warming - with details of the evidence. The term "very likely" means a 90% or greater probability.
    This conclusion is backed by pretty much all national and international science acadamies and professional bodies of note. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scienti...climate_change

    The scientific message based on the evidence is that there is climate change happening, and with a 90% probability this is caused by human activity, and the message is we should change the way we are heading to avoid any possible repurcussions - this involves using less energy (be it via turning off the lights or appliances when not needed, using our vehicles less, using more energy efficient products etc), manufacturing in a environmentally friendly way (less pollution etc).

    Believe you need to separate the scientific message regarding climate change vs. the commercial marketing messages individual companies may use in marketing their products.

    I agree with you that world poverty is also another issue that needs to be looked at as well. It's pretty sobering when you see the facts that the richest 1% of the adult population owns 40% of the world's wealth, the richest 10% own about 85%, and that the poorest 50% only own 1% of the wealth. But it's not just between countries/different regions - this wealth/poverty divide occurs also, within a country, for example, take the US, where 10% own about 70% of the wealth. Even in Singapore, there is a wealth divide (but this is difficult to see as I am not aware of any goverment reports publicly available to show these figures).

    Poverty in theory is really easy to tackle. But in practical terms - trying to get the 1% richest or the 10% richest to share their wealth with the 90% poorest is very difficult. Poverty is also difficult to tackle since not everyone is affected by it. All a part of human psychology and how everyone thinks of themselves as individuals separate from everyone else.

    Climate change will affect everyone (whether rich or poor) and thus you will hear more about it as it becomes a part of everyone's lives.

  2. #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Central West
    Posts
    1,952

    Default Re: Big chunk of Antarctic ice shelf falling apart

    Quote Originally Posted by ArchRival View Post
    I'm sorry but i still have to disagree in this context the melting of the ice shelf ultimately leads to increased sea levels.

    Please correct me if i'm wrong, but referring to your image, you are comparing ice carving on the right, which is from the floating ice shelf, to the ice carving on the left, which used to be on land.

    Which means you are saying sea level rises because of glaciers flowing out to the coastline and breaking off, like at the left of your image. This i absolutely agree.

    But consider this: glaciers and ice flow out to sea all the time. If there is an ice shelf at the coastline, the outflowing ice will push the existing shelf further out to sea, or flow over it. The volume of floating ice increases, which increases sea levels. Now, if the existing ice shelf has already melted, the outflowing ice simply flows out to sea, or melts at sea. Again increase in sea levels, but no difference from the case if an ice shelf was still present.
    Excuse my poor explainations, but the iceberg carving at the edges of the ice shelf are part of the process, since they are at the edge and in contact with the warmer water. What I'm referring to is, if the temperatures have inceased such that the whole shelf melts and disappears, the ice sheet on the land will be at the 'edge' and will also mean these will melt and raise sea levels. But you don't have to take my word on it - you can read the scientific research and conclusions as to what the crumbling ice shelfs will possibly lead to.

  3. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Central West
    Posts
    1,952

    Default Re: Big chunk of Antarctic ice shelf falling apart

    Quote Originally Posted by sammy888 View Post
    Actually the IPCC has been the eye of the whole storm as their finding has been coming under some critism. The IPCC was first form in the UK by Margeret Thatcher when she wanted to see how viable it was to stop coal mining and use Nuclear reactor for power and what enviromental impact it would have on them and the earth as a whole. There are also scientists who support their finding and cause and endorsed it but as technology and more data came in some of the scientists now challenge their original findings and have even left the organisation. But IPCC refuse to take their names out of their earlier findings just to keep the validity of their findings. Now right or wrong...some are some questionable critism and claims made against them that they refuse to answer.
    May I ask where you got the credible source that the IPCC was initially setup in the UK by Margaret Thatcher ? All the articles of the history of the IPCC and how and why it was setup do not state this - the IPCC was setup by the World Meteorological Society and the UN Environment Program. While there will always be controversies and politicisation of important world issues, the IPCC is backed by pretty much all national and international science acadamies and professional bodies of note. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scienti...climate_change

    You said before on who gains on this climate change debate ? I say that everybody in the world stands to gain if we change the way we live to be more enviromentally friendly. The scientific community overwhelmingly states it case and the only opposition to such a conclusion seems to come from the companies/countries/industries that stand to gain on our current use of vast amounts of energy (the oil industry being a case in point).

  4. #44

    Default Re: Big chunk of Antarctic ice shelf falling apart

    And I thought global warming is caused by solar radiation.


    .

  5. #45

    Default Re: Big chunk of Antarctic ice shelf falling apart

    Quote Originally Posted by AReality View Post
    And I thought global warming is caused by solar radiation.


    .
    I think this is an alternative theory about global warming. Some scientists believe that it's not really due to our carbon output and more of a natural variation of the sun's output. This group of scientists believe that we are wasting valuable time and resources trying to 'combat' global warming with techniques based on the supposedly mistaken linkage with carbon emissions, and that we ought to channel the time and effort to be better able to brace for the inevitable.

  6. #46
    Senior Member sammy888's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    1,568

    Default Re: Big chunk of Antarctic ice shelf falling apart

    Quote Originally Posted by gooseberry View Post
    May I ask where you got the credible source that the IPCC was initially setup in the UK by Margaret Thatcher ? All the articles of the history of the IPCC and how and why it was setup do not state this - the IPCC was setup by the World Meteorological Society and the UN Environment Program. While there will always be controversies and politicisation of important world issues, the IPCC is backed by pretty much all national and international science acadamies and professional bodies of note. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scienti...climate_change

    You said before on who gains on this climate change debate ? I say that everybody in the world stands to gain if we change the way we live to be more enviromentally friendly. The scientific community overwhelmingly states it case and the only opposition to such a conclusion seems to come from the companies/countries/industries that stand to gain on our current use of vast amounts of energy (the oil industry being a case in point).
    As you know it is not my intention to support for or against I am for good rationale thinking for individuals to make up the decision for themselves. The debate is still "out" there are many fractions on all sides ( more then just a pro and con..there are alot of grey too)

    So I am only throwing in some of the information I read while you can throw in yours just like anyone else here. The idea is to promote that we try to undestand the situation as best we can. But to come in and say...the Sky is Fall and that is the definitive answer just because so and so say so... that is not right nor does it help people understand the real danger if that danger really exist. For if your idea of global warming is real and you want to get your message across..what is the best way to present it? But just shoving down your side of the stories with out given your audience a chance to see the other side? I mean ifyou are telling the truth...what is so wrong about letting others see the other side or worst belittle others ...that is what religion as done all these years. Do we need to take that same pathetic route going to hell? heheheheh....

    ONe small hint lah ...if you want to give some details and to prood a serious point..be very careful about linking them to a place like wikipedia.. Just like global warming...wikipedia has it own problem abpout telling what is truth or madeup or in some case cover up. Google it sometime heheh... anyone can actually make changes to anything in wikipedia..it is not 100% police or fact check though they have done some thing to improve the accuracy..it is still left wanting. More schools like in the States are starting to tell their student to go beyond using wikipedia for their homework heheh Just a food for thought lah...not that I want to go off track

    But yes...I have read about Margeret Thatcher in a few place. I was recalling this as I wrote some of the stuff earlier and well I tried to find from some of my old favorite to let you read them. IT is not unsual if this is true or not..as I said...you toss some info here...I go the same..the idea is to let more resource come in to let readers go make up their own conclusion that is what will will the real cause at the end of the day. Okie..the short part..Margeret wanted to promote the use of Nuclear power in UK..so how does she go about convincing everyone in her part and the general public is to have as most politiian does.." do survey and get statisitic " ...example how LTA gather information and then use that to justify increasing ERP fee...okie..I digress. So in short it was speculated for a long time that the scientists she set up govt grant to do those survey was to find ways to showing why going nuclear was best as oppose to coal mining for etc. And then that was where some report say the IPCC was born. It was not IPCC from day one...but progressively..the organisation grew and it is where it is today. From your list you mentioned existing in wiki..did you go a fact check to see if those people or organisation are still a member? From some other sites I read even those that have left for one reason or another..they don't drop their name. Some scientist actually had to take action to get them to take it down. Seem it is IPCC's way use it as a "show of force" you know have as many scientist or VIP endorsing them...still or in the past. I guess it just makes good CV or portfolio. But really...whoes to say how much of what I just say is totally real or not but it does show...the decision is stil. and there are more sides to this whole deal.

    Let's not even go there about it BEING THE OIL COMPANIES doing that is such a tired excuse that I have been hearing time and time again for at least a decade. I can think of alot more other people who will benefit from it....MORE then the oil industries.

    Okauy let me toss in some link here (pro or con)...now..don't just read this first pages..to through all their other parts as well and then from there..go use what new information you have learn to find out more online or at your public libraries..

    http://www.spiked-online.com/index.p.../article/3540/
    http://membrane.com/global_warming/n...ar_energy.html
    http://www.evworld.com/news.cfm?newsid=14616
    http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/23565.html
    http://forests.org/shared/search/wel...climate+change
    http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/...no_thanks.html
    http://www.john-daly.com/history.htm
    http://www.john-daly.com/
    http://environment.newscientist.com/...change/dn11643
    http://www.infowars.com/articles/sci...rming_hoax.htm
    http://www.care2.com/c2c/groups/disc...714&pst=743655
    http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/milloy031907.htm


    I have more links if you want..and more Pro Global warming ones too if you ant to read more to support your view or more "in-between" ones too.

  7. #47
    Senior Member sammy888's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    1,568

    Default Re: Big chunk of Antarctic ice shelf falling apart

    Quote Originally Posted by cjtune View Post
    I think this is an alternative theory about global warming. Some scientists believe that it's not really due to our carbon output and more of a natural variation of the sun's output. This group of scientists believe that we are wasting valuable time and resources trying to 'combat' global warming with techniques based on the supposedly mistaken linkage with carbon emissions, and that we ought to channel the time and effort to be better able to brace for the inevitable.
    Yup..this is the view I am more incline to support...it is the middle ground and most likely to happen. ( though it will not be in my life time I hope) There is only one small problem that no one is talking about and in anycase no matter how you try to ignore it or prevent it or prolong it from happen...you know what that thing is..THE SUN. Who in the world can make it less hot or more hot? Is it still getting hotter through the millenium, or has it stop and remain constant or is it getting colder?

    If anyone study science and know that when a sun dies..it does not flame out. It becomes a super nova, imploding on itself where upon it creates a gravitational field that is sucks everything into itself...along with good old mother nature's earth...well something like that lah heh

    Science is interesting read man heheh...

  8. #48

    Default Re: Big chunk of Antarctic ice shelf falling apart

    Quote Originally Posted by sammy888 View Post
    Yup..this is the view I am more incline to support...it is the middle ground and most likely to happen. ( though it will not be in my life time I hope) There is only one small problem that no one is talking about and in anycase no matter how you try to ignore it or prevent it or prolong it from happen...you know what that thing is..THE SUN. Who in the world can make it less hot or more hot? Is it still getting hotter through the millenium, or has it stop and remain constant or is it getting colder?

    If anyone study science and know that when a sun dies..it does not flame out. It becomes a super nova, imploding on itself where upon it creates a gravitational field that is sucks everything into itself...along with good old mother nature's earth...well something like that lah heh

    Science is interesting read man heheh...
    I thought Super Nova refers to an exploding star? An imploding star results in a black hole.
    hasta la justicia siempre

  9. #49

    Default Re: Big chunk of Antarctic ice shelf falling apart

    Quote Originally Posted by sammy888 View Post
    Yup..this is the view I am more incline to support...it is the middle ground and most likely to happen. ( though it will not be in my life time I hope) There is only one small problem that no one is talking about and in anycase no matter how you try to ignore it or prevent it or prolong it from happen...you know what that thing is..THE SUN. Who in the world can make it less hot or more hot? Is it still getting hotter through the millenium, or has it stop and remain constant or is it getting colder?

    If anyone study science and know that when a sun dies..it does not flame out. It becomes a super nova, imploding on itself where upon it creates a gravitational field that is sucks everything into itself...along with good old mother nature's earth...well something like that lah heh

    Science is interesting read man heheh...
    Not all stars become super novas. Only if their mass exceeds a certain limit. Our sun will just becomes a red giant (swallowing our mother earth in the process) when its primary fuel (hydrogen) starts running out and it starts fusioning other elements like helium, and after that eventually, shrink to a white dwarf when it dies... At least that's what will happen on theory. We won't be around to witness it la, since scientists estimate I think another 3-4 billion years.

    Black holes are not imploding stars... when stars with huge masses die, they explode after collapsing within their own gravity(super nova) but leave behind a core so dense that basically not even light can escape its gravitation pull. I think a spoonful of that stuff weigh more than our planet. Center of super nova is where scientists sometimes hunt for black holes. If you guys did science, you should know that light has been proven to be a particle, i.e. photon so basically it can be sucked in too. I could be wrong since it's been a long time since I read those stuff... but the idea's roughly there... :P

    BTW that's just the common scenarios. There are other ways which black holes are formed...
    Last edited by chongkm; 31st March 2008 at 12:07 AM.
    Olympus EM-1, 7-14/2.8, 12-40/2.8, 40-150/2.8, 17/1.8, 25/1.2, 60/2.8

  10. #50

    Default Re: Big chunk of Antarctic ice shelf falling apart

    Wah... suddenly talk about supernovas and whatnot. Let's not project too far out into the future.

  11. #51

    Default Re: Big chunk of Antarctic ice shelf falling apart

    Quote Originally Posted by cjtune View Post
    Wah... suddenly talk about supernovas and whatnot. Let's not project too far out into the future.

    “When it comes to the future, there are three kinds of people: those who let it happen, those who make it happen, and those who wonder what happened.”

    John M. Richardson, Jr. quotes

  12. #52

    Default Re: Big chunk of Antarctic ice shelf falling apart

    Quote Originally Posted by slaam View Post
    “When it comes to the future, there are three kinds of people: those who let it happen, those who make it happen, and those who wonder what happened.”

    John M. Richardson, Jr. quotes
    Ermmm. I think your context a bit salah right? How you let or make a super nova or black hole happen? Or even try to live long enough to do anything about it...

    You got a suggestion besides wondering?
    Olympus EM-1, 7-14/2.8, 12-40/2.8, 40-150/2.8, 17/1.8, 25/1.2, 60/2.8

  13. #53

    Default Re: Big chunk of Antarctic ice shelf falling apart

    Quote Originally Posted by chongkm View Post
    Ermmm. I think your context a bit salah right? How you let or make a super nova or black hole happen? Or even try to live long enough to do anything about it...

    You got a suggestion besides wondering?
    if everyone takes the view that global castrophe is far away then it might be too late when it happens.
    granted yes the supernova stage is abit too far to project into the future but that kind of thinking is dangerous.
    I was merely pointing out this fact.
    if u missed it sorry it wasn't that clear
    Last edited by slaam; 31st March 2008 at 02:02 PM.

  14. #54
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Central West
    Posts
    1,952

    Default Re: Big chunk of Antarctic ice shelf falling apart

    Quote Originally Posted by sammy888 View Post
    As you know it is not my intention to support for or against I am for good rationale thinking for individuals to make up the decision for themselves. The debate is still "out" there are many fractions on all sides ( more then just a pro and con..there are alot of grey too)

    So I am only throwing in some of the information I read while you can throw in yours just like anyone else here. The idea is to promote that we try to undestand the situation as best we can. But to come in and say...the Sky is Fall and that is the definitive answer just because so and so say so... that is not right nor does it help people understand the real danger if that danger really exist. For if your idea of global warming is real and you want to get your message across..what is the best way to present it? But just shoving down your side of the stories with out given your audience a chance to see the other side? I mean ifyou are telling the truth...what is so wrong about letting others see the other side or worst belittle others ...that is what religion as done all these years. Do we need to take that same pathetic route going to hell? heheheheh....
    Hang on a sec... can you show me exactly where I have been saying that "the sky is falling" and being all doom and gloom ? and where have I been "shoving down my side" and not letting people discuss their point of view ? I thought we were having a civilised discussion here.

    One of the reasons why I originally posted in this thread was that you had asked drakon09 if he "could name which organisation, institute and the actual name of scientists" which support the view he mentioned on climate change. So I had pointed out that the IPCC was an objective source for getting this information.

    hazmee had then said that the IPCC hadn't proven climate change was linked to man's activities. I had replied saying that the IPCC doesn't actually carry out any of the research itself - it reviews and analyses all the peer reviewed published scientific research from scientists around the world to try and come up with a summary and picture of what is happening based on the evidence at hand.

    You then replied to my suggestion of the IPCC as a source, by saying that the IPCC is in the centre of the storm of controversy and that the IPCC was originally started in the UK by Maggie Thatcher - all I did in response was to ask you whether you could point me to a credible source for this as I was simply curious to read it as it is something I have never heard claim before.

    You seem to have taken this simple question as a personal attack and now falsely claiming that I am not allowing other people to voice their opinions, perhaps as a distraction to the question I had asked. I can assure you that my question was asked simply because I am curious to read such information.

    As to the IPCC. Have you taken a look at the IPCC reports ? Like for example the latest Fourth Assessment Report (http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-syr.htm) - I have read it, and perhaps I may have missed it (the full report is about 52 pages afterall), but I do not see them making any sensationalistic claims about doom and gloom and destruction. Can you point out where in the report they are saying this ?

    As far as I can tell from the report, all they are saying is that, based on currently available scientific evidence and research
    - warming of the climate system is unequivocable (measured rises in average global temperatures, and measured rises in average global sea levels)
    - it is "very likely" (ie 90% or greater probability) that this is due to human activities
    - if current or greater levels of greenhouse gas emissions continue, it is "very likely" that changes in the climate system will be larger in the 21st century than those observed and measured in the 20th century
    - these climate changes will continue for centuries even if current greenhouse gas concentrations were to stabilise (due to the nature of the processes involved)
    - they then go to summarise some various different options to mitigate the issues (and the costs involved) and give a summary of different policies that can be taken up by various policymakers.

    The IPCC is looked upon by various governmental groups and policymakers around the world to help them in making policy decisions.

    I don't see them going around shouting the sky is falling, the sky is falling. You are confusing what is actually being claimed by the scientific community with sensationalistic newspaper articles/movies/stories or companies using this sensationalism for their advantage. Whatever wild claims these other groups are making, does not invalidate the underlying scientific evidence and conclusions that are behind the climate change discussion.


    Quote Originally Posted by sammy888 View Post
    ONe small hint lah ...if you want to give some details and to prood a serious point..be very careful about linking them to a place like wikipedia.. Just like global warming...wikipedia has it own problem abpout telling what is truth or madeup or in some case cover up. Google it sometime heheh... anyone can actually make changes to anything in wikipedia..it is not 100% police or fact check though they have done some thing to improve the accuracy..it is still left wanting. More schools like in the States are starting to tell their student to go beyond using wikipedia for their homework heheh Just a food for thought lah...not that I want to go off track
    The reason I use the wikipedia link is because it provides a good single starting point if people want to research further - it provides references and links to actual scientific publications, articles and quotes for people to look into it themselves and double check what is actually being claimed by the scientific community and what is sensationalistic theories/news.

  15. #55
    Senior Member sammy888's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    1,568

    Default Re: Big chunk of Antarctic ice shelf falling apart

    Quote Originally Posted by cmeptb72 View Post
    I thought Super Nova refers to an exploding star? An imploding star results in a black hole.
    From what I read there are difference types of Supernovas. There are experts who said that our Sun might not go supernova as it is too small but who is to say what is really small or how small. Alot of the how supernova are defined is so far what was observed ansd studied by scientists throughout history with the technology to do so...it had happen to very huge suns...stars if you want to call but any other name. You can read up more about it here.. http://www.space.com/supernovas/ and you also get other views or extension on it at other sites. Which just support why I say go read up more..there are so many varying views out there if you are in to that kind of thingy.

    We are only still scrapping the very begin here about our own sun though it has been here for billions of years. The information is still coming in and as technology and the means to creat ship craft and analysis equipment to do more studies...alot will still be theories and hypothesis, and still argued in various universities and what's truth today will tomorrow be rewritten as it has always done. Science is like that. It is always on going to get to the truth.

    Good example.... So called planet PLUTO...no longer is it classified a planet. How's that for a big bang to the science and world at large after all these time since it was seen with some old telescope.
    Last edited by sammy888; 31st March 2008 at 05:10 PM. Reason: typos

  16. #56
    Senior Member sammy888's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    1,568

    Default Re: Big chunk of Antarctic ice shelf falling apart

    Quote Originally Posted by gooseberry View Post
    .........- warming of the climate system is unequivocable (measured rises in average global temperatures, and measured rises in average global sea levels)
    - it is "very likely" (ie 90% or greater probability) that this is due to human activities
    - if current or greater levels of greenhouse gas emissions continue, it is "very likely" that changes in the climate system will be larger in the 21st century than those observed and measured in the 20th century
    Okay you got alot of valid pointers there and yes "very likely" they are right and what you brought to light are truth. But I still choose and to always read all sides of the stories.

    In the mean time, Let's see what Al Gore does now...all his work is preparing to get him to the very news you see in the papers today...because of what he is "known" for as championof the environment crusade, now we have people wanting him to be in the running for President instead of Clinton and Obama.

    This from a man who was a champion of Global Warming and then when he was the VP...did almost nothing about it. Even the IPCC chief feels he did just that when he was asked in an earlier intervewed. Politcally motivated? Playing the role of the "relutant' President? Maybe..maybe not. What do you think?

  17. #57
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Sengkang
    Posts
    2,922

    Default Re: Big chunk of Antarctic ice shelf falling apart

    Ok chill out guys. No need for another 'warming' around here. After reading both sides of reports, only time will tell whether this global warming caused by humans is fact or fiction.

    However, earth is warming up according to the reports and I do agree on that part.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •