is the earth pissed?

Temps go up and down, its normal, but we are contributing.

Will it fix everything? No, but it will slow human influence,
and let the planet do its thing more naturally.

And regardless of what we do, the Earth is still doing her thing.

The hurricanes are doing what they do, since forever, and
its us building on the coasts, and just being in the way,
that makes them such a "problem".

What would it matter if 10 Cat 5 hurricanes hit Mississippi
Coast and New Orleans every year, if no one lived there
and there was nothing but swamp and forest like it was
before we populated it?

It would matter nothing.

 

Q: An epic New Yorker series said unequivocally that the permafrost, the Arctic sea ice and the Greenland glaciers are all melting. Is that true and is it because of global warming?
A: The Arctic temperatures have been now measured for a long time. They vary cyclically. The warmest years in the Arctic were around 1940. Then it cooled. And it's warming again, but it hasn't reached the levels of 1940. It will continue to oscillate. That's the best prediction.

I agree with you Heron---

but we're far from "Mother Gaia is wiping us out cause George Bush didn't sign Kyoto."

 

Long... but well worth the read!
Love-Light and Peace
The Wiz and Rider On The Storm

1986 Continental Indigenous Council, ​

Fairbanks, Alaska By Lee Brown, Cherokee ​

There was the cycle of the mineral, the rock. There was the cycle of the plant. And now we are in the cycle of the animal coming to the end of that and beginning the cycle of the human being. When we get into the cycle of the human being, the highest and greatest powers that we have will be released to us.

At the beginning of this cycle of time, long ago, the Great Spirit made an appearance and gathered the peoples of this earth together, and said to the human beings. "I'm going to send you to four directions and over time I?m going to change you to four colors. I'm going to give you some teachings, and you will call these the Original Teachings; when you come back together with each other, you will share these so that you can live and have peace on Earth, and a great civilization will come about. During the cycle of time, I'm going to give each of you two stone tablets. When I give you those stone tablets, don't cast them upon the ground. If any of the sisters and brothers cast their tablets on the ground, not only will human beings have a hard time, but almost the earth itself will die."

And so He gave each of us a responsibility, and we call that the Guardianship.

To the Indian people, the red people, He gave the Guardianship of the Earth. We are to learn during this cycle of time the teachings of the Earth; the plants that grow from the Earth; the foods that you can eat, and the herbs that heal. Then, when we came back together with the other sisters and brothers, we could share this knowledge with them. Something good was to happen on the Earth.

To the South He gave the yellow race of people the Guardianship of the Wind. They were to learn about the sky and breathing and how to take that within ourselves for spiritual advancement. They were to share that with us at this time.

To the West He gave the black race of people the Guardianship of the Water. They were to learn the teachings of the water, which is the chief of the elements, being the most humble and the most powerful. The elders have told me that the black people would bring the teachings of the water.

To the North He gave the white race of people the Guardianship of the Fire. If you look at the center of many of the things they do, you will find the fire. They say a light bulb is the white man's fire. If you look at the center of a car you will find a spark. If you look at the center of the airplane and the train you will find the fire. The fire consumes, and also moves. This is why it was the white sisters and brothers who began to move upon the face of the earth and reunite us as a human family.

And so a long time passed, and the Great Spirit gave each of the four races two stone tablets. Ours are kept at the Hopi Reservation in Arizona at Four Corners Area on Third Mesa. I talked to people from the black race, and their stone tablets are at the foot of Mount Kenya. They are kept by the Kukuyu Tribe. I was at an Indian spiritual gathering about 15 years ago.

A medicine man from South Dakota put a beaded medicine wheel in the middle of the gathering. It had the four colors from the four directions; he asked the people, "Where is this from?" They said, "Probably Montana, or South Dakota, maybe Saskatchewan." He said, "This is from Kenya." It was beaded just like ours, with the same colors.

The stone tablets of the yellow race of people are kept by the Tibetans. If you went straight through the Hopi Reservation to the other side of the world, you would come out in Tibet. The Tibetan word for sun is the Hopi word for moon, and the Hopi word for sun is the Tibetan word for moon.

The guardians of the traditions of the people of Europe are the Swiss. In Switzerland, they still have a day when each family brings out its mask. They still know the colors of the families, and they still know the symbols, some of them. Each of these four peoples happen to live in the mountains.

Each of the four races went to their directions and learned their teachings. It was in Newsweek not long ago that eight out of ten foods that people eat on the earth are developed here in the western hemisphere because that is our Guardianship -- to learn the teachings of the earth and the things that grow from the Earth. We were given a sacred handshake to demonstrate, when we came back together as sisters and brothers, that we still remember the teachings.

It was indicated on the stone tablets that the Hopis had that the first sisters and brothers who would come back to them would come as turtles across the land. They would be human beings, but they would come as turtles. So when the time came close, the Hopis were at a special village to welcome the turtles that would come across the land.

They got up in the morning and looked out at the sunrise. They looked out across the desert, and they saw the Spanish conquistadores coming, covered in armor, like turtles across the land. So this was them. So they went out to the Spanish man, and they extended their hand, hoping for the handshake. But into the hand the Spanish man dropped a trinket. And so word spread throughout North America that there was going to be a hard time, that maybe some of the brothers and sisters had forgotten the sacredness of all things and all the human beings were going to suffer for this on the Earth.

So tribes began to send people to the mountains to have visions to try to figure out how they could survive. At that time there were 100,000 cities in the Mississippi Valley alone, called the mound civilization: cities built on great mounds. Those mounds are still there. They began to try to learn to live off the land because they knew a hard time was going to come. They began to send people to have visions to see how we could survive this time. They were told in the prophecies that we should try to remind all the people that would come here of the sacredness of all things. If we could do that, then there would be peace on Earth. But if we did not do that, if we had not come together as a human family, the Great Spirit would grab the earth with His hand and shake it.

The elders on the west coast prophesied that they would then begin to build a black ribbon. And on this black ribbon there would move a bug. And when you begin to see this bug moving on the land, that was the sign for the First Shaking of the Earth. The First Shaking of the Earth would be so violent that this bug would be shaken off the earth into the air and it would begin to move and fly in the air. And by the end of this shaking this bug will be in the air around the world. Behind it would be a trail of dirt and eventually the whole sky of the entire earth would become dirty from these trails of dirt, and this would cause many diseases that would get more and more complicated. So the bug moving on the land, of course it?s easy to see now. In 1908 the Model-T Ford was mass-produced for the first time. So the elders knew the First Shaking of the Earth was about to come about -- that was the First World War.

In the First World War the airplane came into wide usage for the first time. That was that bug moving into the sky. And so they knew something very important would happen. There would be an attempt to make peace on earth on the west coast of this land, and so the elders began to watch for this. They began to hear that there was going to be a League of Nations in San Francisco, so the elders gathered in Arizona around 1920 or so, and they wrote a letter to Woodrow Wilson. They asked if the Indian people could be included in the League of Nations.

The United States Supreme Court had held that a reservation is a separate and semi-sovereign nation, not a part of the United States but protected by it. This became a concern because people didn?t want the reservations to become more and more separate. They didn?t want them to be considered nations. So they did not write back, and the Native people were left out of the League of Nations so that circle was incomplete. In the League of Nations circle there was a southern door, the yellow people; there was a western door, the black people; there was a northern door, the white people; but the eastern door was not attended. The elders knew that peace would not come on the Earth until the circle of humanity is complete, until all the four colors sat in the circle and shared their teachings, then peace would come on earth.

So they knew things would happen. Things would speed up a little it. There would be a cobweb built around the earth, and people would talk across this cobweb. When this talking cobweb, the telephone, was built around the earth, a sign of life would appear in the east, but it would tilt and bring death (the swastika of the Nazis). It would come with the sun. But the sun itself would rise one day, not in the east but in the west (the rising sun of the Japanese Empire).

So the elders said, "When you see the sun rising in the east, and you see the sign of life reversed and tilted in the east, you will know that the Great Death is to come upon the earth. Now is when the Great Spirit will grab the earth again in His hand and shake it, and this shaking will be worse than the first."

So the sign of life reversed and tilted, we call that the Swastika, and the rising sun in the east was the Rising Sun of Japan. These two symbols are carved in stone in Arizona. When the elders saw these two flags, they knew that these were the signs that the earth was to be shaken again.

The worse misuse of the Guardianship of the fire is called the gourd of ashes. They said the gourd of ashes will fall from the air. It will make the people like blades of grass in the prairie fire, and things will not grow for many seasons. The atomic bomb, the gourd of ashes, it was the best-kept secret in the history of the US. The elders wanted to speak about it in 1920.

They would have spoken of it and foretold its coming if they could have entered into the League of Nations. The elders tried to contact President Roosevelt to ask him not to use the gourd of ashes because it would have a great effect on the earth and eventually cause even greater destruction and a the Third Shaking of the Earth, the Third World War.

So they knew after the Second Shaking of the Earth when they saw the gourd of ashes fall from the sky, there would be an attempt to make peace on the other side of this land. And because the peace attempt on the west coast had failed, they would build a special house on the east coast of this Turtle Island, and all the nations and peoples of the Earth would come to this house, and it would be called the House of Mica, and it would shine like the mica on the desert shines.

So the elders began to see they were building the United Nations made out of glass that reflects like the mica on the desert so they knew this was the House of Mica, and all the peoples of the earth should go to it. So they met and talked about this. They said that in the 1920's they had written and they had not been responded to, so they said this time we?d better go to the front door of the House of Mica because things might get a lot worse.

So elders representing a number of tribes drove to New York City. When the United Nations opened, they went to the front door of the house of Mica and they said these words, "We represent the indigenous people of North America, and we wish to address the nations of the Earth. We're going to give you four days to consider whether or not we will be allowed to speak."

They retreated to one of the Six Nations Reserves in New York State. Four days later they came back, and I believe the nations of the earth heard that the Indians had come to the door. And they voted to let the Indians in. They wanted to hear what they had to say. But the United States is one of five nations of the United Nations with a veto power, and still they were concerned because this time the Native sovereignty was even stronger. And I believe they vetoed the entrance of the Native people.

So then they knew other things would happen on the Earth. So they retreated to the Six Nations Reserve, and they talked about this, and they said the time is really getting close now -- 1949. They said, "We're going to divide the United States into four sections, and each year we?re going to have a gathering. We?re going to call these the White Roots of Peace Gatherings."

They began to have these around 1950. And they authorized certain people to speak in English for the first time about these prophecies.

One that I used to listen to many times, over and over, was Thomas Banyaca. He was authorized to speak in English about what was on the stone tablets, and he has dedicated his life to doing this. And they began to tell us at these gatherings, "You're going to see a time in your lifetime when the human beings are going to find the blueprint that makes us."

They call that now DNA, deoxyribonucleic acid. They said, "They're going to cut this blueprint."

They call that now genetic splicing. And they said they're going to make new animals upon the Earth, and they're going to think these are going to help us. And it's going to seem like they do help us. But maybe the grandchildren and great-grandchildren are going to suffer.

The elders said long ago, "They will release these things, and they will use them." This is going to be released not too long from now. They are making new animals. The elders talked about this. "You will see new animals, and even the old animals will come back, animals that people thought had disappeared. They will find them here and there. They?ll begin to reappear."

"You're going to see a time when the eagle will fly its highest in the night, and it will land upon the moon. And at that time, many of the Native people will be sleeping, which symbolically means they have lost their teachings. We're at that time now. The Eagle has landed on the moon, 1969. When that spaceship landed, they sent back the message, "The Eagle has landed."

Traditionally, Native people from clear up in the Inuit region have shared with us this prophecy, clear down to the Quechuas in South America.

At this time you're going to see that things will speed up, that people on the Earth will move faster and faster. Grandchildren will not have time for grandparents. Parents will not have time for children. It will seem like time is going faster and faster. The elders advised us that, as things speed up, you yourself should slow down. The faster things go, the slower you go. Because there"s going to come a time when the Earth is going to be shaken a third time. The Great Spirit has shaken the Earth two times: the First and Second World Wars to remind us that we are a human family, to remind us that we should have greeted each other as brothers and sisters. We had a chance after each shaking to come together in a circle that would have brought peace on earth, but we missed that.

​

 

What was that about?

 

IronGoth, Starr never blamed Bush, why are you attacking her with that? Anyways, I for one don't disagree with you, I was never sure about Kyoto, though it would be nice if the current administration would admit that global warming exists and is in part due to human activity. I'd also be nice if they weren't so generally anti-science, but that's a different topic. Bush's environmental record is terrible, but I'm not blaming him for this. It's everyone's fault, due to our lifesyles. Although, as president he could be pushing some better energy policies...

By the way, Starr, northern michigan is the best, you couldn't have picked a better place to move too...though the winters are pretty long. Though if this warming keeps up, it may not be so bad. How's that for a silver lining?

 

If the earth is pissed, can you blame Her?

 

That's exactly what I was thinking SageDreamer! If the earth isn't pissed, I think she certainly has the right to be. How humans mistreat her! So many people go along with their daily life not giving a single thought to the earth and her welfare. Seriously, I was sharing my concern for the treatment that people are giving the earth and I was laughed at. Just outright told that I was silly and that there were more important things. I was so emotionally hurt, because they also said that one person can't make a difference. I could be wrong, but I don't think that I am the only person who is seriously concerned about the earth!

 

RE: IronGoth, Starr never blamed Bush, why are you attacking her with that?

I'm not. I'm just sick of cafe au lait sipping Euros saying things like "well, ze hurricane iz becozz Boosh did not sign ze Kyoto" which I've seen repeated here over and over by our brethren in the more foul smelling, diesel-sooted parts of the world where cars are boxy and socialism reigns supreme.

RE: Anyways, I for one don't disagree with you, I was never sure about Kyoto, though it would be nice if the current administration would admit that global warming exists and is in part due to human activity.

There's no proof that global warming exists, or that it's being caused by people.

 

The US Government has acknowledged for the first time that man-made pollution is largely to blame for global warming.
But it has again refused to shift its position on the Kyoto Protocol, an international treaty designed to mitigate global warming which the Bush administration rejected last year.

In a 268-page report submitted to the United Nations, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) endorsed what many scientists have long argued - that human activities such as oil refining, power generation and car emissions are significant causes of global warming.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2023835.stm

http://www.solcomhouse.com/globalwarming.htm

PETER CAVE: Scientists in the US say the Arctic ice cap has shrunk to its smallest size in a century.

A joint study by NASA and the National Snow and Ice Data Centre has found that at the current rate of shrinkage the arctic ice cap could completely disappear within 60 years.

The Arctic climate varies naturally, but the researchers have concluded that human-induced global warming is at least partly responsible.

Jennifer Macey reports.

JENNIFER MACEY: September 2005 has been the hot month in the Arctic, causing the sea ice to melt to its smallest size in 100 years.

Julianne Stroeve is one of the research scientists from the National Snow and Ice Data Centre who made the findings.

JULIANNE STROEVE: Our satellite observations have been showing that Arctic Sea ice is rapidly declining. And this year in 2005, we've reached the all-time minimum since we began the satellite observations of the late 1970s. We had sea ice this year that was about 22 per cent below the long-term mean, and about roughly the size of Alaska in terms of how much ice was lost compared to what we normally typically see in the Arctic.

JENNIFER MACEY: And Julianne Stroeve says the trend is accelerating. The last four years have seen increasing warm temperatures in the Arctic over the summer months causing the ice to shrink further and further back.

JULIANNE STROEVE: It's not coming back. And this winter was also unusual in that normally even though 2002-2003 we had this really low ice year, after the 2004 minimum, which was another, a third consecutive year of low ice conditions, we didn’t see the winter ice packs refreeze, and, or not quite as rapidly. It came back but it was a much lower extent than we'd seen in the past. In the past the temperatures have been cold enough to freeze ice and ice would grow again, and this last winter that didn't happen. We had record lows every month since last September, except during May.

JENNIFER MACEY: While scientists say this sort of warming is consistent with what will occur as a result of climate change, is the melting in the Arctic due to a natural occurrence or can it blamed on increased emissions of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere?

JULIANNE STROEVE: It’s so hard to separate out which is the controlling factor, but it's hard to deny the fact that we're emitting a lot of gases into the atmosphere that are causing warming, and the Arctic is certainly warming, and what we believe is that there's these feedbacks in the system that are occurring in the Arctic appear to be sustaining this continual decline in the sea ice cover, so that it might be not possible for it to recover anymore.

 

Rita did not get too big too fast. Rita did what she would normally do. She underwent explosive cyclogenisis because the conditions for it were perfect. The reason why Rita started to weaken was because she had hit an area with lower sea surface temperatures. Not long before doing so she had gone through and eyewall replacement cycle. I agree that we should not take for granted the fact that these systems weaken dramatically before landfall.

Matt

 

RE: JULIANNE STROEVE: Our satellite observations have been showing that Arctic Sea ice is rapidly declining. And this year in 2005, we've reached the all-time minimum since we began the satellite observations of the late 1970s.

Wow, so based on thirty years of observation, we can safely say we totally understand the weather cycle involved here?

RE: JENNIFER MACEY: While scientists say this sort of warming is consistent with what will occur as a result of climate change,

Well duh - if the climate is warming, then climate is changing. DUH.

RE: is the melting in the Arctic due to a natural occurrence or can it blamed on increased emissions of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere?

JULIANNE STROEVE: It’s so hard to separate out which is the controlling factor,

TRANSLATION: WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON. WHAT FOLLOWS IS RELIGION

RE: but it's hard to deny the fact that we're emitting a lot of gases into the atmosphere that are causing warming,

Whether that's one one thousandth of a degree's effect or what is totally unknown...

RE: and the Arctic is certainly warming,

However, we've only really been studying it since 1970, so it's a bit of a guess as to whether or not this is normal...

RE: and what we believe is that there's these feedbacks in the system that are occurring in the Arctic appear to be sustaining this continual decline in the sea ice cover, so that it might be not possible for it to recover anymore.

Sigh. They're running a computer model. That's all it is. I could run a computer model saying the earth is gonna freeze entirely within two hundred years. All I have to do is tweak the data.

They can't predict weather accurately within a day or two - so how they can say they know what's going on IS LUDICROUS.

Are you aware that Greenland is called that cause the Vikings used to be able to farm there? Or that England got royally screwed in the behind when the temperature drastically, and I mean drastically, went down as there was another totally natural shift in climate? Back then it was blamed on people's disbelief in Jesus. Now it's disbelief in those whacko greenies who're bleating on first that we're all gonna freeze (in the 70s) and now we're gonna burn. WOW. Didn't realise that the data changed THAT MUCH in 30 years.

We've discovered solar cycles and oh, by the way - we're coming out of an ice age. Shouldn't warmer temperatures be expected? There used to be glaciers covering North America - they've receded and never come back ---- might that not be NOT George Bush's fault, too?

The EPA can go and pound sand - they're the folks bankrupting the motorcycle industry all for the sake of trying to reduce by 20% the environmental impact of motorcycles, which make up 2/10% of our environmental footprint....

And Kyoto was a complete crock of bull excrement whose sole job was to try and bankrupt the States and give the money and jobs to India and China. Selling it as the USA doesn't care about the planet is complete and utter nonsense. We're not the one boiling computer components in acid in large uncovered vats stirred by small children to recover metals... it's the Chinese doing that. Kyoto would have just had them doing MORE OF IT.

 

I am skeptical about all this global warming nonsense, but this guy has an interesting point. If you believe all that Kyoto claptrap, read on - you'll be amazed at what the cooked books actually say.

Personal view: Forget global warming. Let's make a real difference
By Bjørn Lomborg (Filed: 13/06/2005)

Last Tuesday, 11 of the world's leading academies of science, including the Royal Society, told us that we must take global warming seriously.

Their argument is that global warming is due to mankind's use of fossil fuels, that the consequences 100 years from now will be serious, and that we therefore should do something dramatic. We should make substantial and long-term reductions of greenhouse gases along the lines of the Kyoto Protocol.

This is perhaps the strongest indication that well-meaning scientists have gone beyond their area of expertise and are conducting unsubstantiated politicking ahead of next month's meeting of the G8.

Of course, as scientists, they should point out that fossil fuels will warm the world. This is indeed the majority opinion and likely to be true. Moreover, they should also tell us the likely impact of global warming over the coming century, which is likely to have fairly serious consequences, mainly for developing nations.

But to inform us accurately they have to go further than that. They should tell us what will happen even if we implement the fairly draconian measures of Kyoto - which they curiously do not.

They do not tell us that even if all the industrial nations agreed to the cuts (about 30pc from what would otherwise have been by 2010), and stuck to them all through the century, the impact would simply be to postpone warming by about six years beyond 2100. The unfortunate peasant in Bangladesh will find that his house floods in 2106 instead.

NOTE TO ALL OF YOU "BOO HOO WE SHOULD HAVE DONE KYOTO" FOLKS: SIX YEARS.

Moreover, they should also tell what they expect the cost of the Kyoto Protocol to be. That may not come easy to natural scientists, but there is plenty of literature on the subject, and the best guess is that the cost of doing a very little good for the third world 100 years from now would be $150billion per year for the rest of this century.

Even after the Brown/Blair exertions to extract more aid for Africa, the West spends about $60billion helping the third world. One has to consider whether the proportions are right here.

This brings us to the strongest evidence that the national academies are acting in a political rather than scientific and informational manner. Why do they only talk about climate politics? Surely this is not the only important issue with a considerable science component? What about the challenge of HIV/Aids? What about malaria, malnutrition, agricultural research, water, sanitation, education, civil conflicts, financial instability, trade and subsidies? The list goes on.

What is more than curious is that the national academies have not found it necessary to tell the politicians that solutions to these many problems should be top priorities too. Even the host of the G8, Tony Blair, has recognised that the problems of Africa should also be a top priority.


--------------

So the computer models indicate (and we all know how accurate they are 100 years from now) that even if we cut our own throats, we'd see a SIX YEAR DIFFERENCE in the environment?


What we need to do is HONESTLY understand what is going on, if anything.

And to do that, we have to slaughter the sacred cows and eat the burgers.

Are we screwing with the environment? Absolutely we are. You put a levee in New Orleans, it erodes the wetlands. You put a refinery on the coast, you affect that ecosystem. I'd be a paid shill of the Administration if I said otherwise.

But as for what's happening to the climate, all this stuff about how "it's proven we're causing global warming" (not the case) and "we have to implement Kyoto" (no we don't - even if we did, what would it accomplish? and why?) needs to stop.

Simply repeating the same assertion over and over and over doesn't mean dick.

"OMG OMG OMG the oceans are heating up!" Can we really say that from measuring a few spots in the ocean? Most of those probably near large habitations?

"OMG OMG OMG we've gained 1 degree F since 18whatever!" most of that gain was pre 1940, before we started industrialisation on a large scale. And even then, the jury is out as to what temperatures actually say. Terrestrial thermometers could be affected by nearby cities, satellite ones might not read temperatures as accurately.

I'm not saying we're not seeing changes in the climate. Drunken forests, hurricanes, etc. all of this is happening. But to say we know what, when, where or how is total NONSENSE.

I am NOT going to sacrifice being rational and sane on the altar of political correctness and unthinking mob rule. Science doesn't work like this.

 

‘The West Antarctic peninsula only covers one tenth of the south pole's ice. There are rarely spectacular reports about the much larger parts of the continent. These do not provide a uniform scientific picture. In total, however, the ice masses of the
continent, which hold about 70 per cent of the world's fresh water resources, seem to be growing. This conclusion was reported at the Earth Observation summit in Brussels in the middle of February by Antarctic researcher Duncan Wingham (University College London). Wingham presented new satellite data which show that the Antarctic ice cover is getting thicker. "To claim that the ice sheets are melting is rather daring," Wingham said in an interview with Die Welt.’

REALLY?

OMG I thought the ice was all melting cause we've gained 1F in 100 years!!!!!


‘The fact that a report that glaciers are melting over one extremely small portion of Antarctica that is showing warming, while the rest of the continent is cooling, grabs not only newspaper headlines but finds its way without a regional perspective into a prestigious publication like Science is troubling…The general cooling of Antarctica is highly scientifically significant because climate models run under increasing levels of greenhouse gases predict that the Antarctic continent as a whole, not just the Peninsula, should be rapidly warming. This is clearly a model failure and no amount of going on and on about the impact of warming in the Peninsula, is going to change that fact.’

----

As shown on the front page of the September 29 New York Times, NASA has pronounced that the September, 2005 coverage of Arctic sea ice is the lowest since their satellite record began in 1979.

We offer a more measured reaction: ho-hum. Summer (that’s when ice melts) Arctic temperatures in the late 1970s were at their lowest levels since the mid-1920’s. Since then, they have risen to slightly exceed the previous 100-year high point of the late 1930s.

Read that again. From roughly 1925 through 1940, a 15 year period, Arctic summer temperatures rose just about as much as they have from 1979 through 2005, a 25 year period. If sea-ice wasn’t near or at its end-of-summer lows this year, something would be wrong with a very basic physical theory: warm temperatures melt ice.

This generated headlines elsewhere than in the Times:

“Arctic ice ‘disappearing fast’” [BBC News]

“Arctic ice melts faster as it gets warmer” [USA Today] and

“Arctic meltdown just decades away, scientists warn” [Sydney Morning Herald]

This arctic ice story is now an annual event, reminding us of the annual release of the global average temperature. This always occurs in early December (rather than at the end of the year) because research groups are competing to see who can get it out first that we are setting, or just missing, a new record. But the great El Nino of 1997-1998 put the kibosh on this annual media event, jacking up temperatures to heights that went far beyond the previous record. None has been set since. (Funny, no one notices that, even in a warming world, it takes nearly a decade to establish a new record!).

So now, it is the record low Arctic ice announcement that makes the headlines. And it’s a better poster child for global warming than rising temperatures. One only needs to ignore the inconvenient fact that the amount of ice at the other pole is growing.

But, the fact of the matter is that these annual announcements really represent just another example of telling less than the whole story in an attempt to tell a particular story. As a refresher, here are a host of things that were left out of the press reports:

Temperatures and no doubt ice conditions fluctuate in the Arctic and have likely been as warm or warmer (and thus as ice free or more so) at various times since the end of the last ice age. For instance, researchers Overland and Wood examined overwintering logs from ships taking part in Arctic expeditions from 1818 through 1910. They found that “climate indicators such as navigability, the distribution and thickness of annual sea ice, monthly surface air temperatures, and the onset of melt and freeze were within the present range of variability.”

In a sweeping review of conditions in the Western Arctic, Kaufman et al. summarized “The spatio-temporal pattern of peak Holocene warmth (Holocene thermal maximum, HTM) is traced over 140 sites across the Western Hemisphere of the Arctic (0–180W; north of 60N). Paleoclimate inferences based on a wide variety of proxy indicators provide clear evidence for warmer-than-present conditions at 120 of these sites.”

And, it is a well-established scientific fact that summer temperatures in the high arctic averaged about 1-2°C warmer than today’s for several millennia, centered about 6,000 year ago. That’s right—for a good 30-40% of the last 7,000-8,000 years, summers were warmer (see here for example). Which, of course, means that the late summer ice was much less (or even non-existent). Where was the ecological tragedy? Inuit culture flourished.

 

This particular article talks of "computer models" which mean absolutely sweet FA

but hey, it's an avenue to consider, right?

Unless of course you are one of The Faithful

Is soot, not CO2, to blame for the loss of Arctic ice?
Filed under: Climate Forcings, Aerosols, Climate Changes, Polar, Arctic, Glaciers/Sea Ice —

There are three primary tools that global warming alarmists use in their arguments that anthropogenic enhancements to the world’s naturally occurring greenhouse effect are causing the climate to behave as it never has before and this will ultimately be catastrophic. They are 1) the “hockey stick” temperature reconstruction for the past 1,000 years, which purports to show that left to its own devices, the global average temperature changes very little, yet it jumps at the slightest provocation from mankind; 2) the IPCC 21st century temperature projections which show a range of possible warming by century’s end that spans 1.4 to 5.8ºC (of course, the alarmist attention is given to the high end projection); and 3) the sea ice in the Arctic Ocean has been steadily declining for the past several decades and will be entirely gone in the summertime in the next 50 years as a result of rising levels of atmospheric greenhouse gases. With the latest publication by NASA scientists Dorothy Koch and James Hansen, the final of these arguments now joins the first two in being soundly repudiated.

The first one, the “hockey stick,” has been under relentless attack since it was first proposed in the late 1990s. It was ultimately killed with the publication of the work of Sweden’s Anders Moberg just a month ago. Moberg and colleagues have shown that the true temperature history of the past 1,000 years was likely much more variable than the “hockey stick” reconstruction makes it out to be, with a sizable warm signal during the Medieval Warm Period about 1,000 years ago, followed by a substantial cooling (The Little Ice Age) bottoming out in the 1800s. Consequently temperature changes observed during the early and late 20th century don’t look so unusual in the historic record. We documented the death of the “hockey stick” in detail in an earlier posting (see http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2005/03/03/hockey-stick-1998-2005-rip/).

The second notion, that the high-end temperature projections issued in the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are even plausible has been dead for a while. This was killed by a collection of articles which showed that observed climate changes—changes which wholly integrate all physical processes (unlike global climate models)—indicate that the most likely future pathway taken by global temperatures will be one that lies very near the low end of the IPCC warming rate projections, or about 0.15ºC or so per decade. We detail these results also in an earlier posting (see http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2004/04/14/observations-not-models/).

And now comes a severe blow to the third argument—that anthropogenic changes to the greenhouse effect, resulting from the burning of fossil fuels, are leading to the rapid loss of Arctic ice. Instead, Koch and Hansen, writing in the Journal of Geophysical Research, document that the impact of black carbon (soot) pollution on the Arctic climate is quite likely the primary driver of Artic temperature increases and sea ice declines during the past several decades. Soot is an entirely different beast than carbon dioxide, in that it is a particulate that remains only in the atmosphere for a short time, and which can be relatively easily removed from smokestack emissions. In fact, most first-world countries have programs aimed at reducing air pollution that include soot reduction measures.

Koch and Hansen suggest that soot warms the Arctic is two primary ways. When it is suspended in the atmosphere, soot absorbs incoming solar radiation and warms the atmosphere while possibly decreasing cloudiness. On the ground, it blackens the snow and ice, making it less reflective so that it absorbs more warming radiation.

Where does all of this warming soot that finds its way into the Arctic environment come from? According to Koch and Hansen, primarily from the heavy industry and biomass burning in South Asia and Russia. The current North American contribution is estimated to be only about 10-15 percent.

Since Hansen frequently claims that we take his conclusions out of context, we reproduce below the text of a March 23, 2005 NASA press release (http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20050323/) discussing the findings of Koch and Hansen:

Soot is normally something you think of at the bottom of your chimney, but it also gets into the air, and scientists have been finding it at the frozen Arctic. Soot gets into the air when fuel, vegetation and firewood are burned. When you watch the smoke and soot drift away from your chimney, you normally wouldn’t think that it would drift to the North Pole and change the ice and snow there.

NASA has been exploring how black carbon or soot affects the Earth’s climate, by using satellite data and computer models that recreate the climate. New findings show that soot may be contributing to changes happening at the North Pole, such as increasing melting of sea ice and snow and warming atmospheric temperatures.

Dorothy Koch of Columbia University, N.Y. and NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), New York, and James Hansen of NASA GISS are co-authors of the study that appeared in a recent issue of the Journal of Geophysical Research.

“This research offers additional evidence that black carbon may have a significant warming impact on the Arctic,” Koch said. Warmer temperatures in the Arctic mean melting ice and snow, among other things. These temperature and ice changes also wind up affecting climate patterns around the world.

The Arctic is especially vulnerable to pollution. In recent years the Arctic has significantly warmed, and sea-ice cover and glaciers have diminished. Likely causes for these trends include changing weather patterns and the effects of pollution. Airborne soot also warms the air and affects weather patterns and clouds.

Black carbon has already been implicated as playing a role in melting ice and snow. Basically, when soot falls on ice, it darkens the surface and accelerates melting by absorbing more sunlight than ice would, just as wearing a black shirt in the summertime makes you feel hotter than if you wore a lighter color. Dark colors absorb heat and light, and lighter colors reflect it keeping surfaces cooler.

Koch and Hansen used a NASA computer model and information gathered by many NASA satellites to get their finding.

The research found that in the atmosphere over the Arctic, about one-third of the soot comes from South Asia, one-third from burning biomass or vegetation around the world, and the remainder from Russia, Europe and North America.

South Asia is estimated to have the largest industrial soot emissions in the world, and the meteorology in that region readily sweeps pollution into the upper atmosphere where it is easily transported to the North Pole. Meanwhile, the pollution from Europe and Russia travels closer to the surface.

During the early 1980s the main sources of Arctic pollution are believed to have been from Russia and Europe. Both of those areas have decreased their tiny particles of pollution in the last 20 years, but the pollution from South Asia has increased. Koch and Hansen suggest that Southern Asia also makes the greatest contribution to soot deposited on Greenland.

By exploring processes in the Earth’s atmosphere, NASA scientists are seeking answers to how pollutants like soot are changing the climate of the world around us.

In their paper, Koch and Hansen offer up more on the impact of soot vs. an enhanced greenhouse effect. They argue that the temporal and spatial patterns of temperature changes and sea ice declines bear a greater resemblance to patterns of historical soot emissions than to carbon dioxide emissions. Here is what they have to say:

According to the 2002 AMAP [Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program] Assessment (MacDonald et al., 2003), the past three decades show significant decreases in sea ice thickness and extent. This recent decrease is greatest in spring and fall and occurs in the western Arctic (western North America and Siberia). These observations defy recent modeling efforts, which show the largest impact of increased CO2 on the Arctic winter rather than summer (MacDonald et al., 2003). The pattern of sea ice loss is believed to be linked to the phase of the AO [Arctic Oscillation] (MacDonald et al., 2003). However it is interesting that these decades correspond to the increases in BC [black carbon, soot] from south Asia, and that this BC is transported over the Pacific and into the western Arctic, during summer as well as spring. Prior to this, sea ice also decreased during the 1930s–1940s. However this occurred during winter in the eastern part of the Arctic. Again it is interesting to note that during this earlier period, pollution from coal burning in the United States, Europe and Russia (Novakov et al., 2003) would have been transported to the Arctic during winter-spring, and the Eurasian sources would deposit heavily in the eastern Arctic.

Clearly, Koch and Hansen believe that black carbon soot is a major contributor to the observed Arctic warming as well as to the sea ice decline there. That soot emissions are much more readily controlled than carbon dioxide emissions argues that the most effective strategies in slowing Arctic climate change is through control of black carbon. In the U.S. and in many other technologically advanced countries, air pollution measures targeting soot are already in place, and more are being proposed. According to Koch and Hansen, the culprits lie in the less technologically-developed countries.

The conclusions of Koch and Hansen stand in stark contrast to the tone of the recently released Arctic Assessment Report and of the November 16th, 2004 Senate Hearing held by Arizona Senator John McCain. Both push the idea the primary responsibility for warming in the Arctic lies with the first world emissions of greenhouse gases. During the hearing John McCain uttered words of disbelief and disgust that anyone would dare contend something other than what was written in the Arctic Assessment Report. After the hearing, we compiled a list of scientists and their publications who have characterized the recent climate events in the Arctic in a different manner than that of the Arctic Climate Report (see http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2004/12/10/open-letter-to-senator-mccain/). We’ll be sure to add Dorothy Koch and James Hansen to that expanding list.

 

I don't know about whether the earth is angry or not. I think that depends on your beliefs. However, I do think that our actions are finally having an effect. However, the ones who are going to reap the consequences will be us. The earth isn't going to self-destruct. It will keep on trucking, so to speak, and, (hopefully) eventually, thing will return to their normal cycles. We might just not survive to tell the tale...

 

RE: However, I do think that our actions are finally having an effect

Find evidence for this! The greenies, the UN etc would LOVE to have it!

 

Thanks for such a in-deph response...

Reading your posts and comparing it with the report and other info.. away from the language you use.. you would be suprised how much you have in common with your goverment.
http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/UniqueKeyLookup/SHSU5BNPYJ/$File/ch1.pdf

[notice 'The 'science']

The report does not claim too 'know what, when, where or how'

I am as sceptical as the next person..and this is a lot like 'is the earth flat'.. I don't suppose we will know what the whole 'truth' is.. till many more years into the future.. Though saying we have only been studying this with satelites for 30 years so don't know jack [so dismisively] is a bit unfair.. As what is informing your opinion is in part from the same research.

Personaly i do think money should be used more effectively, if we eliminate/eradicate and hopefuly cure the glaringly obvious disasters in our time .. Poverty/Aids/Malaria/famine etc .. If we battle those obstacles, we can all fight to rectify [as far as we can] the enevitable climate changes and the effects caused by those changes... The cost of correcting what we have played a part in [not just America].. won't get any cheaper.. though more of the globe can help pay for it.. through being more economicaly wealthy.

Hope :

http://www.usembassy.it/file2005_07/alia/a5070810.htm

 

Ain't MY government. I'm a Canadian in exile

 

in exile? what does that mean?

 

we've been enduring cataclysms since the beginning. the problem is recorded history is recent in the grand scheme of things. the hopi and kogi and most indigenous tribes are good at prophecy because of oral tradition (which is sacred, as are the symbols), passing the story down the line. this plus that equals that (or this). i dont think the earth is pissed, when people decide to build cities in giant bowls, well, you dont have to be a mental giant to see this is not the earths fault, but our lack of responsibility with how "we" are living. i used to live in coastal regions, but the plates are shifting, so i moved (oh yeah, and other reasons, which may be intricately tied to my path or system).

have you heard about The Eleventh Hour? its timelessness:

"You have been telling the people that this is the Eleventh Hour. Now you must go back and tell the people that this is the Hour. And there are things to be considered:

Where are you living?
What are you doing?
What are your relationships?
Are you in right relation?
Where is your water?
Know your garden.
It is time to speak your Truth.
Create your community.
Be good to each other.
And do not look outside yourself for the leader.

This could be a good time!

There is a river flowing now very fast. It is so great and swift that there are those who will be afraid. They will try to hold on to the shore. They will feel they are being torn apart, and they will suffer greatly.

Know the river has its destination. The elders say we must let go of the shore, push off into the middle of The river, keep our eyes open, and our heads above the water. See who is in there with you and celebrate.

At this time in history, we are to take nothing personally. Least of all, ourselves. For the moment that we do, our spiritual growth and journey comes to a halt. The time of the lone wolf is over. Gather yourselves!

Banish the word struggle from your attitude and your vocabulary.

All that we do now must be done in a sacred manner and in celebration.

We are the ones we've been waiting for.

The Elders
Hopi Nation
Oraibi, Arizona
2002