Lance
Sam James
Josh Adams
fooser
jslef
Terry Woods
Ryan
davenate
Mike O
Brian McConnell
Brian LePort
halldg
Reading on Walden Bookstore
Tyler D.
Hugo
Jon
goesdownbitter
jack3566
ccscoachadams
killerbuffalo
Garnet SpyTaking a break from the 2008 election, I saw an article in the paper today describing an ice sheet in Antarctica that has begun to melt.
The Larsen ice shelf, on the western edge of Antarctica, has begun to melt even though land temperatures have remained essentially unchanged. In fact, the study claims, its rate of melting has increased over the past 10 years. No one knows exactly why the ice shelf is shrinking, but here’s how the article quoted a senior scientist at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Lab, which conducted the study; “Something must be changing the ocean to trigger such changes. We believe it is related to global climate forcing.”
No doubt they’re right about global climate forcing. Giant ice shelves like the Larsen don’t just start to melt because of a hot summer day. In fact, ice shelves like the Larsen don’t melt even after 100 years of hot days…even after 500 years of hot days. Glaciers’ advances or retreats lag behind the times, and depending on their size, some lag more than others. Ice shelves of Larsen’s size tend to lag behind global climate change by 1000-10,000 years. In other words, the sharp rise in temperatures during the 20th century cannot be responsible for NASA’s study. It was more likely brought about by some other warming that happened 1000 or more years in the past. NASA is correct about glaciers’ being affected by global climate forcing, but “global climate forcing” is an incredibly vague term. Climate is constantly fluctuating, and while man has had an undeniable impact on our environment and climate on a global scale, the retreat of the Larsen ice shelf is not evidence of the fact.
Filed under: Politics
Whether or not the overall temperature of the planet is rising and whether or not Al Gore is right about his doomsday predictions for the immoral human species are two completely different conversations.
Just though I’d point that out
Absolutely. I’m not arguing the existence of global warming. It’s here and we should deal with it. But I advise caution. Because whenever something environmental changes, we rashly attribute it to global warming. The changes on Larsen have little to do with the Industrial Revolution, but that won’t stop the press from making the tenuous jump.
The climate is always changing, but history tells us that we should worry more about cooling than warming. The good things in human history happened when it was warmer than it is today. The bad things, when it was cooler.
Using “the sky is falling” as the title is rather ironic, don’t you think? I mean, in the fable, the sky isn’t actually supposed to be falling.
Eh, maybe it wasn’t the best choice. I was using it ironically to denote the fact that Anthropogenic Global Warming isn’t melting all the ice caps and destroying the planet. Other forces are at work, and they’re not necessarily the bringers of doom. Glaciers advance and retreat all of the time, and keeping ourselves from being alarmists will help us face whatever problems we end up encountering.