For me the basic element in science is doubt, all evidence for a theory has to be placed on the table and tested time and time again by qualified independent researchers. This is especially important given that there has been a lot of gnashing of teeth on the conservative news outlets about a possible "climategate" in which thousands of evil commie scientists are working night and day to perpetuate an international hoax to sabotage all the honest and hardworking American capitalists and destroy the American economy.
Now I have no problem with real and honest doubt and debate about a very complex and difficult subject such as the theory that human activity is altering the Earth's climate. Although I do find it funny that the morning morons on Fox and Friends seem to be able to boil such a complex subject conveniently down to propagandist allegations. Then again the fat afternoon drug-addicted radio talker does break away from his ultimately self-serving and narcissistic rants as well to do his share to poo-poo the basic theory. Don't know about anyone else but myself but for some reason neither the morning morons or the oxycontin hero of the radio waves nor any of their media kinfolk impress me very much with their scientific credentials.
Yeah, they can drag out a few scientists whose bottom line usually has them receiving a paycheck from some oil company or other special interest looking to protect themselves from the tree huggers. Then you have occasional fruit cake out to challenge scientific dogma. Believe me, I'm righteously cool with that but you have to be careful or pretty soon you will be denying hard proof facts like that HIV causes AIDs and that there might be a scientific basis to astrology like Nobel winner Kary Mullis.
Now comes the much tortured point to my little rant and it involves methane. Frozen in the arctic tundra and the seafloor of the Arctic ocean are vast amounts methane which everyone with IQ points in the double digits knows would be a stark and global nightmare if it was released into the atmosphere.
The scary thing is that sections of this uber-greenhouse gas are showing signs of instability:
"...research results, published in the March 5 edition of the journal Science, show that the permafrost under the East Siberian Arctic Shelf, long thought to be an impermeable barrier sealing in methane, is perforated and is leaking large amounts of methane into the atmosphere. Release of even a fraction of the methane stored in the shelf could trigger abrupt climate warming."
Here is the meat of the article:
17 comments:
And now I suppose you are going to insist the Earth is round too.
Round???? He isn't is he?
You heathen you!!!
Anyroad, if everythings hotting up why's it so damned cold here eh? Answer that!!
This might sound like a silly question, but not knowing much about chemistry and stuff I'm not sure I understand the significance of methane. Does this mean the atmosphere could ignite under certain conditions? Kind of like a donkey fart?
the only resolve some days is; act locally, think globally. best I can think at them moment...
MRMacrum: Round? Well I wouldn't go that far. For a long time I figured we were living on Bizarro worldf from the Superman comics and its a cube.
Four Dinners: Simple my friend and the answer, which you already probably know, is water vapor from increased evaporation from higher temperatures. While not being a climatologist I will hazard a guess that its sort of a self correcting measure of the climate cycle, increased temperatures results in more evaporation and if all the ducks stay in a row with us in the middle of a strong La Nina(?) we get more snow which reflects more infrared radiation back into space at least in the short term lowering the temperatures in certain areas. Like I said I'm not a climatologist. There are a whole spectrum of possible outcomes in both the long and short run from triggering another ice age in the northern hemisphere to the usual predicted outcomes of global warming.
PENolan: The big concern is that methane is a far stronger greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. If these frozen methane deposits were to thaw and out gas into the atmosphere the consequences would be horrific.
Gwen: My biggest issue is that many of the deniers like to say that China isn't pursuing any clean energy and that we would put ourselves at an disadvantage in switching gears. Well anyone with more than a fifth grade education and with a little research will find out China is building wind generators like there is no tomorrow while researching some pretty far out alternatives. So much that there is a question that the green tech Obama wants us to developed might already be owned by the Chinese.
Indeed, but the planet has endured worse and survived ; of course the living primates may have had their problems of extinction . . .
I predict a future massive change and relocation of those 80% of you who live within 50 miles of a coast here in US but for the rest of us, not much but greater storms and more severe flooding.
We have to realize that this planet is, what, 2 billion years old and still exists for our pleasure.
Every time I read one of your posts I have an epiphany Beach Bum.
You see my friend, your post has revealed to me the ultimate goal of the greedy right and why they actually want and believe in global warming.
It's hard to drill through 2 miles of ice then God knows how much perma frost and earth to get to any oil underneath Siberia. But what's even more important to the greedy righties is all the ivory from dead mammoths that will be thawed out when Siberia melts. Ivory they can't get from live elephants anymore. At least they can't get it in daylight.
Cagey bastards these righties.
Goatman: I agree, the fun will come when these massive relocations start and the rich people start whining about the government paying for their homes to be rebuilt.
For a couple of decades there has been attempts to sort of withdraw a little from the coast to try and control insurance costs. Every time any sort of bill was introduced the rich went postal about their "property rights" which meant they wanted to the government to subsidize their lifestyle.
Truth 101: I sort of believe fighting global warming is ultimately a lost cause. Read an article in the Atlantic Monthly awhile back that mentioned several countries are really looking forward to an ice-free arctic so shipping time and costs could be cut.
One of them is China and the other is Russia because they finally get what amounts to a warm weather port. Of course the bankers here are all for it cause it will make them more money.
Beach,
Send your email address to me at ham_sandwich66@yahoo.com. I've got something that I'd like to share with you.
I read about this Beach, not only here, but on one of the many sites I surf, and this is scary indeed. I have no doubt if there is a way to make it worse someone will figure out how to do just that. Secondly I am just waiting for some idiot like Bachmann or Palin to say that the methane was planted by Barack Obama.
Why would rich people complain though? Now that they have so much, they wouldn't demand 100% of the pie, now would that? Sheesh, you tree huggers, high on methane.
Man, You did so much research .
and I absolutely agree...
China will be supplying green tech to all of us in future...
Like the post...food for thought :)
Human kind is like a super gigantic ocean going tanker, it can see that it's going to hit the rocks, but it can't stop in time. Of course there are those on board the tanker that think it will stop. It won't.
Mycue: Rodger dodger, will send it ASAP.
Madmike: David Brin, all around super genius, rocket scientist, and damn nice guy has a very interesting viewpoint on how we will have to adapt if we start seeing methane plumes being released. Look up his March 9th post.
Randal: Well...not methane although I could use some reefer.
Rainboy: China wil own us all before long, and American bankers will gladly sell them our souls.
Holte: Thats why I have about a six inch pile of paperwork from several countries that I might settle in. James Lovelock, the dude that thought up the Gaia theory once said that he felt most humanity would cash it in sometime in the future and the only ones left would be on islands.
For that reason New Zealand is looking damn good but very southern Chile or Argentina will work in a pinch, Tasmania as well.
I agree with you totally on "Fox and Fiends" (you like that one, double b?). They and a lot of the others on the far-right almost seem anti-science. And I totally despise the use of terms such as hoax and myth. Doubt and debate (as you so eloquently state) are one thing. Mindless suspicion and distrust are absolutely another.
Will: This methane thing is a game changer, if this stuff starts to outgas it won't matter if global warming is a natural occurrence or caused by humans.
I'm very reluctant to cry doomsday but since methane is a much more powerful greenhouse gas it’s just about undisputed that this would induce a very rapid and disastrous climate change. Yes, it’s happened before but not with nearly seven billion people on the planet, resources strained and major powers owning nukes.
No humans are not responsible duh not for methan The cows are. They produce an awful lot. We live in a country with more sheep and cows than people. That's probably why we have a hole in the ozon layer here. We burn alive when we go to the beach in summer.
If there is now more coming up we might as well stay inside forever.
Post a Comment