Global warming could cause a new ice age in as few as 2 years. AGGHHH!!!

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

Anybody see this article by Thom Hartman in early February? A friend just told me about it. This is scary stuff!

http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=17711

[Dogmudgeon]

1. Visit Environment/Energy/Science

There's plenty of threads on this over there.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=115

The two years figure refers to how quickly it would take to establish an ice age; my own estimate for the soonest it would begin is 2010. It's possible it's getting started right now, but not very likely.

--bkl

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

3. Thanks I'll stop by over there - been meaning to!

:toast:

[alfredo]

22. Is the gulf stream slowing down?

[Khephra]

2. I'd consider that a blessing if we were in the middle of a 2nd Bush term

[Mari333]

4. add to that peak oil

and the price of heating ones home or shipping food or living in a particularly bad winter...which, in Michigan this year, was the worst I have seen in over a decade..our heating bill was over 900 dollars for one month and we didnt even turn it up..
now we have to pay it off in increments.
Time to do some major rethinking about how we intend to live, and we are cut down to just about nothing now.
If next winter is as bad as this one, its time to cut down even more.
Northeast getting snow? Seattle will freak out..they cant handle one inch let alone an actual snowstorm.
I would have never had kids if Id known our world was going in the direction it is. Boy, was I stupid at 27. and selfish.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

5. Interesting you say that

I just read a few peak oil threads and it gave me the same creepy feeling as this Ice Age thing.

The future ain't lookin' too good

[Dogmudgeon]

6. Coincidence?

Multiple disasters have a way of happening all at once.

I think the proper erudite term for it is convergence.

That means that an ice age and an energy crash aren't the only things we maybe facing. Sure, an asteroid impact and an eruption of Yellowstone could happen, but I'm thinking more along the lines of nuclear terrorism or a biotech accident.

--bkl

[Minstrel Boy]

8. When things start going bad,

I mean, really bad, people and their governments will act with uncalculated desperation.

If sudden climate change occurs, nuclear winter won't be far behind.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

9. Holy shit!

that's grim - because its plausable.

[bobbieinok]

10. religious right answer - 'it's the beginning of the End Times'

...

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

15. time for the rapture

hope I don't get left behind!

[callous taoboy]

17. Reagan

said that this may be the generation that witnesses Armageddon

[davekriss]

26. Hate to inform you...

...but, based on the dismal stream of events from December 11, 2000. I'd say the rapture already happened and we are the left behind!





;)

[Nihil]

14. Pole flip?

.

[Dogmudgeon]

18. Pole Flips and Other Things

One of the interesting things observed at the beginning of an ice age -- I don't mean a "little ice age", but a return to the usual glacial pattern that's been around for the past 3 million years -- is that the magnetic poles disappear and re-form with polarities reversed.

As you might expect, the magnetic poles have lost 10-50% of their strength since the 19th century (the actual figure depending on the point being tested). It is also speeding up.

In occult literature, following Hapgood and Brown, the flips are supposed to reorient the world by 90-180 degrees in a day or two. However, smaller pole shifts have certainly happened, with changes of 1-5 degrees in a year or a decade. Recently, some geophysicists modeled such a change, and found that it could possibly be as "earth-shaking" as the more radical version. The Earth is a slightly flattened ball, and if you change its polar axis, it will change shape. I think that the figure cited is a flattening of some 45 km.

And wouldn't you know, the figures for "polar wandering" have increased significantly in the last century, when figures started being kept.

I don't look at any of these individual findings as a portent of the end of the world. I do think that the Earth is currently in a major period of change, a change that Humanity may have triggered early. Survival, as always, will depend on foresight and optimism.

--bkl

[Nihil]

19. Estimates from a short baseline

> And wouldn't you know, the figures for "polar wandering" have
> increased significantly in the last century, when figures started
> being kept.

I looked into polar wandering about 8-10 years ago and it was very
directed towards long term, slow changes - anything involving timescales
of centuries or less was referred to as "ignorant", "catastrophism" or
"non-scientific". In recent years, the scientific establishment has
become more honest (well, certainly in the Earth Sciences) and has
started to admit that when the baseline of reliable measurement is
little more than a century long, it is not terribly "scientific" to
extrapolate that across millions of years.

We are but children: we learn from what little we have seen in our
short lives and try to deduce the nature of the universe from those
derived "rules". Every now and then, we suffer a slight upset as a
new piece of the universe drifts into view and what had previously
been a nice, "straight-line" view becomes just a short segment of a
chaotic curve.

Nihil

[muriel_volestrangler]

20. Shape change?

When they're talking about a magnetic pole flip, it's due to the circulation of the magnetic molten rock (iron - plus anything else? I don't know) inside the Earth.

A shape change shouldn't be associated with this. If you're talking about an axis, you're implying the actual point that the surface revolves around changes too. Have there really been scientists saying this is happening? Have you any internet links?

There was a TV program last year in the UK about magnetic pole shifts - in that, they said it could affect the aurora, and possibly have a minute effect in UV exposure, but not much more than that (apart from making magnetic compasses almost impossible to use while the change happens, of course).

[Dogmudgeon]

21. Flip dynamics -- the data or lack of it

The wanderings and polarities of the magnetic pole are well-established and have been used in archeology. The changes are assumed to be associated with changes in the Earth's core, and was the premise behind the movie "The Core". However, magnetic pole reversals seem to be more important in climatology and geology than the weakness of the field would indicate.

The changes in the Earth's axis of rotation have been followed for some time, but no significance has been agreed on, except for a few notable blips accompanying major earthquake and volcanic activity. I would hasten to add that even these have not been definitively shown to be connected. However, the polar wandering has certainly speeded up in the last few decades. Why this is so, remains unknown.

My point of view is that they may be connected -- and probably are -- with the changing climate. I have no trouble taking sides, but I do expect to be found wrong at least some of the time. To the best of my knowlege, there is still too little information about these phenomena to make hard inferences with a high level of confidence.

I wish I could find the results of the study on the shape of the Earth's change ('isostasis') with the bigger polar wanderings. I know that the "Zeta Talk" people talk about it, but it comes from an academic paper. "Zeta Talk" is an occult apocalyptic site. Again, the academic paper drew no conclusions about real-world geology. I assume it was done in response to some of the more outlandish "pole shift" ideas -- like those at "Zeta Talk". The work of both Charles Hapgood and Hugh Auchincloss Brown are based in geology, not part of any occult or paranormal movement of which I'm aware -- and of course, are subject to scientific scrutiny and revision. PoleShift.org has a large amount of information on pole shift ideas along with the critics' explanations. It's a good site to get started and contains a wide variety of interpretations, debunkerizings, revelations from the higher aethyrs, and bibliographic citations.

--bkl

[Renew Deal]

7. And deflation of the economy.

Stick your head between your legs and kiss your ass goodbye. Well maybe

[Dogmudgeon]

11. Keep hope alive

As I've written many times before, the best response is to face it head-on and reduce the human cost of a new ice age. Even a few half-assed plans for resettlement and emergency preparedness could greatly increase survival rates.

For the energy problem, we already have a lot of low-power, high-efficiency technology that we don't use. Brainpower will substitute for oil power.

We've had 30 years to deal with the energy situation, and we wanked them away. Wallace Broecker first reported on abrupt climate change a few years later, and we've ignored him, too. If we make the most of the 3-10 years remaining before the problems begin in earnest, there should be a minimum of trauma.

--bkl

[CaptainClark23]

13. In other words...

When the going gets Weird, the Weird turn pro.

Guess thats what we're all doing here.

[IrateCitizen]

16. Here's my beginning of a three-point plan to deal with this:

1. Cohousing. As these problems develop, people will need to have pre-established networks in which resources can be pooled and tasks which previously might have been centralized be distributed among the members of a community. These networks will function best among those who value people more than wealth. As for the rest who value wealth more than people, they will make things difficult not only for themselves but for everyone else as well.

2. Decentralization of energy production. Not only will SERIOUS reductions in power usage be required, but also a re-thinking of the way we "do" energy. The big power plant supplying several counties will become a thing of the past, as transmission capabilities over long distances decline in correspondence with the transportation needed to service them. Those who will do best will be those who have already implemented measures like ground source heating and cooling, small-scale wind generators, home solar collectors, etc.

3. Decentralization of food production and distribution. Communities that have the capability of producing a significant portion of their own food will be better off than those who don't. If petroleum is not as readily available, large-scale farming will become impossible. This will absolutely devastate existing cities, where there is almost no capacity for food production. Look for a big-time return to the equivalent of "victory gardens" and a much less meat-intensive diet.

[Karenina]

27. Heads up!

:kick:

[Minstrel Boy]

12. "Southern Ocean Deep Water Oxygen Content Drops 3% In 35 Years"

Don't miss this story:

"Dr Matear said the decline in oxygen levels in deep water of the Southern Ocean was exactly what computer modelling suggested would be seen if global warming slowed this circulation, reducing the cold water flowing south of Australia."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x5810

[grasswire]

23. help me understand this

They're saying that the NE United States would be uninhabitable, but that the Pacific coast would remain as it is? I'm not up to speed on global predictions.

[Dogmudgeon]

24. It's a little different

In most of the ice ages, the extent of the glaciation has reached further south on the East coast than the West coast. The Pacific ocean is less subject to thermohaline breakdown, so there was a largely ice-free area around the Aleutians. Continental ice did make it down the West coast, but not nearly as far. The Pacific also moderated prevailing easterly winds; Siberian wind across the north pole and Canada stayed as cold, or got even colder, since most of Canada was under a massive sheet of ice.

In an ice age scenario -- a future prediction, let us say -- the American Southwest would become drier and cooler, but not glacial. During the next ice age, the ice could come as south as Boston, or NYC, or even Raleigh-Durham, in different circumstances. The last glaciation in North America, called the Wisconsonian, brought the ice down to approximately New York City, northern Pennsylvania, down through the Midwest, and then upward again into the Dakotas. Of course this ice line changed position in quite a few places, but it was generally stable until 15000 years ago when the ice began to recede.

I posted a graphic of the ice extent here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x5754#5786

--bkl

[JoeKSimmons]

25. Man I;m really scared now.

Ice age in two years from global warming? Cool! Now I can go sledding in a tshirt! Bring it on!

[veggiemama]

28. Have you seen the Pentagon's projections about climate change?

"The Observer" published the following last month:

<snip>

· Future wars will be fought over the issue of survival rather than religion, ideology or national honour.

· By 2007 violent storms smash coastal barriers rendering large parts of the Netherlands uninhabitable. Cities like The Hague are abandoned. In California the delta island levees in the Sacramento river area are breached, disrupting the aqueduct system transporting water from north to south.

· Between 2010 and 2020 Europe is hardest hit by climatic change with an average annual temperature drop of 6F. Climate in Britain becomes colder and drier as weather patterns begin to resemble Siberia.

· Deaths from war and famine run into the millions until the planet's population is reduced by such an extent the Earth can cope.

· Riots and internal conflict tear apart India, South Africa and Indonesia.

· Access to water becomes a major battleground. The Nile, Danube and Amazon are all mentioned as being high risk.

· A 'significant drop' in the planet's ability to sustain its present population will become apparent over the next 20 years.

· Rich areas like the US and Europe would become 'virtual fortresses' to prevent millions of migrants from entering after being forced from land drowned by sea-level rise or no longer able to grow crops. Waves of boatpeople pose significant problems.

<<

http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,12374,1153547,00.html

Then there's the companion piece:

<snip>

Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters..

A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a 'Siberian' climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world.

The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring the planet to the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat to defend and secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies. The threat to global stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to its contents.

'Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life,' concludes the Pentagon analysis. 'Once again, warfare would define human life.'

The findings will prove humiliating to the Bush administration, which has repeatedly denied that climate change even exists. Experts said that they will also make unsettling reading for a President who has insisted national defence is a priority.

The report was commissioned by influential Pentagon defence adviser Andrew Marshall, who has held considerable sway on US military thinking over the past three decades. He was the man behind a sweeping recent review aimed at transforming the American military under Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Climate change 'should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to a US national security concern', say the authors, Peter Schwartz, CIA consultant and former head of planning at Royal Dutch/Shell Group, and Doug Randall of the California-based Global Business Network.

An imminent scenario of catastrophic climate change is 'plausible and would challenge United States national security in ways that should be considered immediately', they conclude. As early as next year widespread flooding by a rise in sea levels will create major upheaval for millions.

<<

http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,12374,1153530,00.html

There's tons of information archived here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/0,12374,782494,00.html

And if you want to have some fun, just google "Sir David King" to see how our British allies are coping with the coming catastrophe!