Green | July 23, 2008 | 17 comments

Alarming NASA climate report

source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWewg_5pdfo&fmt=18

Vierotchka
NASA Climate Report. Ice could be gone by the end of Summer 2008 not 2012 now! Potential of unlimited methane gas release due to the rapid warming of the ocean!

It is high time we all radically change our lifestyles in order to stop and reverse this trend.
  1. groups:
    Green,   Earth and Science
  2. tags:
    Green,  Earth and Science,  Video,  Climate Change,  5 more
  3.     
    |

17 comments // Alarming NASA climate report // Video

  • jubal
  • JoQ
  • J_Jammer
  • crob80227
    • 0
      crob80227  

    • I think something to be wary of are people (scientists, politicans, etc) who think that diagnosing a problem is the justification for taking no action at all.

      "Relax! The ice melt -- while catastrophic -- is totally natural so we should do absolutely nothing."

      Well, I'm sure the ebola virus is "natural" too but we should TAKE ACTION to contain any outbreaks of it, shouldn't we?

      The term "naturally occuring" is fast becoming buzzwords among the climate-change deniers for "let's do absolutely nothing."

      Which is why the phrase "naturally occuring" is almost always followed by the accusation of fear-mongering.

      "Relax! That Class 5 hurrican is a naturally occuring phenomenon. So don't engage in fear mongering by telling people that they need to evacuate the area! It's a natural phenomenon!"

      See how that technique works?

    • 3 years ago
  • scabbio
    • 0
      scabbio  

    • maybe people need to be scared of the possibilities. cause that's the only way people get coaxed into action, with fear of loss.

    • 3 years ago
  • sheamus
    • 0
      sheamus  
    • scabbio:

      Fear tactics are what convinced the world that it was reasonable for the US to invade Iraq. While it may be an effective tool for mobilization, it doesn't necessarily do much to facilitate an informed citizenry. Efforts to educate people about the causes, mechanics, and effects of climate change encourage conversations which lead to realistic solutions.

      To mix metaphors a little:
      Knowledge is power, and with great power comes great responsibility.

    • 3 years ago
  • victimofcoal
    • 0
      victimofcoal  

    • Very powerful vid. Appears to me more than ever that our leaders are looking to kill off most of the planet thinking they somehow will survive and not be bothered with the rest of humanity.

    • 3 years ago
  • kcfoxie
    • 0
      kcfoxie  
    • victimofcoal:

      You should watch "Moon for Sale" on Discovery.

      We've found that Helium3 gas is common in the ore of the moon.

      Many want to strip mine the moon for the Helium3-rich ore, so we can have cheap Fusion Nuclear power on earth.

      They say they want to enrich the lives of all humans.

      But at the expense of the moon, which controls our tides and ocean....

      Greed has no bounds.

    • 3 years ago
  • Abamanation
    • 0
      Abamanation  
    • victimofcoal:

      Except that strip-mining the moon which is basically a barren rock would have virtually no effect on the tidal influence that it has on the earth's oceans.

      Which by the way would potentially be another great source of renewable power, if it weren't for you lefty eco-nuts.

      While greed may have no bounds, neither does stupidity, and it unfortunately affects a larger portion of humanity.

    • 3 years ago
  • kcfoxie
    • 0
      kcfoxie  
    • victimofcoal:

      We have no evidence that suggests that altering the moon by strip mining won't affect it in some way. We lack facts. I believe in siding with caution as opposed to making things worse. I can't prove that if we strip mine the moon it will cause the tides to screw up, but the risk is there since we know it does affect the tides.

      Furthermore, they're using solar power to make the mining operations (at least part of them) happen, why not use that industrial-grade technology, tweaked to also collect power from incandescent light pollution that plagues our planet at night (entirely possible and has been done with modified PV cells), to resolve our energy crisis... without spending money and possible losing lives and/or screwing up the tide to mine another planet?

      Seems we have tons of things at our disposal that solve our problems, but inviting complex solutions are the only approved method to deal with our problems.

      Counterproductive.

    • 3 years ago
  • Abamanation
    • 0
      Abamanation  
    • victimofcoal:

      My counter-punch would be that we don't have any evidence that it would either.

      Although the last that I checked.... we have some pretty massive stripmines here on earth and to date I don't believe that any of them have altered the mass, rotation, velocity, or axis of the earth.

      Although I do acknowledge that they are not very environmentally friendly. Which I don't think would be much of a problem on the moon .... Unless of course we happen to find some sort of life there.

    • 3 years ago
  • kcfoxie
    • 0
      kcfoxie  
    • victimofcoal:

      Which is a good counter. Its just like the particle accelerator that may, or may not, make black holes that consume everything on earth.

      I think that we need to fully learn to live on, not off, one planet before we try and synthesize how it works on another one (be it the moon or mars).

      I'm sorry if you think I am short-sighted in this, but the whole idea screams big business. I think we need community, not business, in our lives.

      Besides, if we couldn't afford to have all the electricity we're used to... is it so bad to play Uno or Bridge by candle light? We do it, just to cut the cost down... not that we have to do it because we can't afford it, but because I don't want to waste something that is valuable.

      I will say tho you make a valid point, we have a stalemate on this particular angle of the argument.

    • 3 years ago
  • Abamanation
    • 0
      Abamanation  
    • victimofcoal:

      I see your point, while I don't agree with it you do raise some valid concerns that shouldn't be ignored.

      My main point is that we tend to make rash decisions before examining the greater picture. This goes for both sides of the issue.

      I can see where just running in and stripmining the crap out of the moon could be a problem, but I also don't believe in completely ignoring a potential valuable resource.

      Either way it's pretty much a moot point as the technology required for such a project is atleast 20 - 30 years away.

      BTW .... the partical accelerator has pretty much proven that it is fairly safe .... After all there are 25+ active accelerators in existance and we are still here....

    • 3 years ago
  • sheamus
    • 0
      sheamus  

    • I'm not saying it's not happening. The arctic is in constant fluctuation, as the video above shows. I was just pointing out how the original video dramatizes it in a condescending way that supposes people don't know anything about climate change.
      Here is some info from an article on NewScientist.com which further explains the trend:

      "You know when climate change is biting hard when instead of a vast expanse of snow the North Pole is a vast expanse of water. This year, for the first time, Arctic scientists are preparing for that possibility.

      "The set-up for this summer is disturbing," says Mark Serreze, of the US National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC). A number of factors have this year led to most of the Arctic ice being thin and vulnerable as it enters its summer melting season.

      In September 2007, Arctic sea ice reached a record low, opening up the fabled North-West passage that runs from Greenland to Alaska.

      The ice expanded again over the winter and in March 2008 covered a greater area than it had in March 2007. Although this was billed as good news in many media sources, the trend since 1978 is on the decline.
      Young and thin

      Arctic ice at its maximum in March, but that maximum is declining by 44,000 km2 per year on average, the NSIDC has calculated (see graph, top right). That corresponds to an area roughly twice the size of New Jersey.

      What is more, the extent of the ice is only half the picture. Satellite images show that most of the Arctic ice at the moment is thin, young ice that has only been around since last autumn (see picture, right).

      Thin ice is far more vulnerable than thick ice that has piled up over several years."

      The full text of the article is at http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/dn13779-north-pole-could-be-ic...

    • 3 years ago
  • Vierotchka
  • stonefree87
  • sheamus
    • 0
      sheamus  

    • This video is kind of deceptive. It makes it seem like the arctic ice just keeps melting away and away, but the melting is seasonal. Every summer Ice melts and then it freezes again as the arctic turns away from the sun on the far end of the earths orbit.

    • 3 years ago
more from Green:
from the community

top videos