23 replies to this topic

[bmyates]

Paul,

I think you raise a fascinating question, and I'll be interested to hear more. If I was willing to get off my butt and into my dry suit to do more diving here in Puget Sound , I might be able to see if the same phenomenon is occuring up here U.S. Pacific NW (and SW Canadian) waters. But I'm afraid I'm too busy preparing for my next trip to Indonesia!

What I CAN tell you is that I was just up in Svalbard (just "slightly" North of you -- at one point we were at 81 degrees N latitude, only about 560 miles from the North Pole!) on a polar bear trip, and our guides were amazed at how much ice was just GONE. Not only were many fjords that they expected to be iced over completely devoid of ice, but some of the glaciers have retreated MILES in the last few years (as you said, this stuff is NOT just this one year)! We were able to go much farther North and East than they have ever been able to go, and even then we saw very little ice... Very disturbing (like Al Gore's movie, only up close and personal!), not just because the polar bears don't have ice on which to hunt, but because it is bound to have many other far-reaching ecological implications...perhaps even as far "South" as Wales...

[jarhed]

Thought I might weigh in on what is a very touchy subject around the globe. I think most agree that were going through some sort of warming cycle here on earth. What is unclear is whether it's a natural cycle, man induced, or some combination. I study this stuff on the graduate level, and there is really no consensus even among the academics here in Monterey.

Certainty we can determine that pollution is bad, and the emission of green house gasses by developing nations is contributing to the issue, but the earth has been going through warming and cooling cycles for longer than humans have been around.

It's easy to cherry-pick data to support both sides of the argument. I tend to believe in a sort of gray scale approach, it's always good practice to reduce pollution, but global warming isn't the end of the world, it's happened before we got here and the cycles will continue. We just need to learn to live with it.

Anyone want to discuss the effect of noise pollution in the ocean and it's effects (or lack thereof) on marine mammels?!?

John

(Oceanographer)

[Glasseye Snapper]

It's easy to cherry-pick data to support both sides of the argument.  I tend to believe in a sort of gray scale approach, it's always good practice to reduce pollution, but global warming isn't the end of the world, it's happened before we got here and the cycles will continue.  We just need to learn to live with it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This isn't the place to discuss details of climate science but in the past sudden increases in global temperature happened at the end of ice-ages, not while in an interglacial period. Moreover, although our species has survived past comings and goings of ice ages, many other species have not. Survival of our species is also little comfort given the potential for enormous hardship and suffering during the acclimatisation period. So do we want to gamble and assume we can learn to live with it or do we put our minds and will into preventing/reducing the impact. As you say "it's always good practice to reduce pollution" and the sooner we get started the better.

Bart

[brycegroark]

I highly recommend everyone in the world to see the new Al Gore movie, An Inconvenient Truth. Yes, it is a bit political and way to the left, but the underlying message regarding what's actually happening with the earth is shocking. Much of it we've all heard before, but the actual statistics really hit home.

I found it interesting that here in US, our emission quality standards are the LOWEST in the world. It would be illegal to sell a US made car to someone in China, because it wouldn't meet their standards? WHAT?

As problematic as this issue is becoming for the world, I like to believe that good things can still happen. At least people are finally taking this issue a little more seriously.

Aloha
Bryce