Sunday, July 10, 2005

North Atlantic reaches all-time temperature high





"Ocean temperatures in the North Atlantic hit an all-time high last year, raising concerns about the effects of global warming on one of the most sensitive and productive ecosystems in the world."

4 comments:

Ken said...

Up here in Alaska, too. Jumbo flying squid have been caught off British Columbia, sharks are becoming more prevalent here in the Shumagin Islands, certain salmon runs are shockingly early, the tree line is moving North, perma frost melting and allowing over 100 tundra lakes to drain dry, etc., etc. And, so far, it's been a good summer for my Hollyhocks and Brussels Sprouts.

Although IMO no thoughtful person could deny that humanity has an impact on the Environment, and almost certainly contributes to global warming in some appreciable amount, IMO the primary cause or causes are far beyond the ability of us to influence. Causes such as solar variability, long and short term oceanic current cycles, volcanic emissions, long and short term global thermal cycles, to name but four. There's nothing we can do about these, though some postulate that the alleged "chemtrails" are an effort to block solar input. If that effort really is so, those who know don't talk, and those who talk don't know. Me, I don't know.

Even with all the unknowns, near-religious beliefs, misstatements and distortions, there can be no doubt - as far as I'm concerned - that the planet IS warming. However, since our written/recorded data are SO incomplete, and of no more than about 150 years'duration, I feel that precise causes are as yet unknown, actual effects are unknown, and the extent of future changes are also unknown. Everybody likes to predict - why, they're prescient: nobody likes to admit they're wrong. Do recall, that thus far computerized climatological models cannot even duplicate known weather of the past; how then, can we trust their predictions of the future? As to the effect of rising North Atlantic temperatures, this might *might* lead to alteration of the Gulf Stream, and radically altered European climate. But again, even given the probabilities, nobody actually KNOWS for sure. Even so, new ice and oceanic sediment cores, along with tree ring analysis, add to our knowledge by the day. The Little Ice Age, and Medieval Warming, for example, are now documented environmental eras. So, we're learning more all the time.

And I personally misdoubt that any human treaties or actions will have any appreciable effect, save for phenomena such as the Asian Brown Cloud, about two miles high, " The potent haze lying over the entire Indian subcontinent -- from Sri Lanka to Afghanistan" ( http://www.infoimagination.org/ps/warm/brown_cloud.html is surely human caused, of global import,and can be ended. These human acts are not inconsiderable, and as above stated contribute to the problem. Yet, IMO, the complete cessation of pollutant emissions would only have the effect of slowing (perhaps imperceptibly) the rate of warming.

Roughly speaking, the climate debate can be divided into two camps. Those who say it's all our fault, and those who deny it's happening - though those diminish in number as time goes by. Folks just can't admit their ignorance, rely on faith (the most insidious of human traps) and rush off in some futile direction. Me, I don't know rat$#!+: just try to learn constantly. No pontifications yet, sorry. Maybe later. :)

Anyway, what ever's happening sure as hell really is happening, keeps on happening, and will continue to do so.
The main thing, to me, is to treat this lovely - and very dangerous - planet with the respect it deserves. In other words, don't $#!+ in our own nest.

Ken

Mac said...

I'm very interested in how much of global warming is "natural," as some of it probably is. Nevertheless, we've traced so much climate change to CO2 emmissions that it seems frighteningly probable to me that we're playing a significant role; indeed, if the temperature *wasn't* rising to match the greenhouse gases we continue to pump into our atmosphere, something would be fundamentally screwy with our approach.

Computer models can be wrong, and they can be wrong for many different reasons. Even so, I think it can be safely assumed, given the current state of knowledge, that anthropogenic climate change is real -- and potentially reversible.

Ken said...

"Anthropogenic"?!? Hmm. Learn something new every day. Of course, you are correct, Mac. This is not a question of who is right and who is wrong, but rather how proportional these varied causes may be. IMO, which has very often been incorrect and which may also be incorrect concerning climate change, "Natural" causes override "Anthropogenic" causes (which are surely quite significant)in strength and effect. Which is NOT to say we shouldn't clean up our act. We absolutely, certainly, should and must. Also, should "Anthropogenic" causes be of the greater import, I've no problem in being proven wrong. All I want is truth. I don't have to like it.

Anthropogenic. Must remember that.

Mac said...

Ken,

I'm glad to learn you're the opposite of people like Michael Crichton, whose answer to the global warming issue, amazingly, is to blame left-wing conspirators for making things up.