Arctic ice melt could trigger uncontrollable climate change at global level


#1

“Arctic ice melt could trigger uncontrollable climate change at global level” at theguardian.com/environment/2016/nov/25/arctic-ice-melt-trigger-uncontrollable-climate-change-global-level?CMP=share_btn_tw

Arctic scientists have warned that the increasingly rapid melting of the ice cap risks triggering 19 “tipping points” in the region that could have catastrophic consequences around the globe.

The Arctic Resilience Report found that the effects of Arctic warming could be felt as far away as the Indian Ocean, in a stark warning that changes in the region could cause uncontrollable climate change at a global level.

Temperatures in the Arctic are currently about 20C above what would be expected for the time of year, which scientists describe as “off the charts”. Sea ice is at the lowest extent ever recorded for the time of year…


#2

Artic Sea Ice Extent
nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries.png


#3

Here is the report on which the article is based: sei-international.org/publications?pid=3047

Loss of sea ice is one of the 19 documented or potential “tipping points,” called “regime shifts” in science. These regime shifts are explained and discuss starting on page 66.


#4

We know what is coming. We need to start planning for it.


#5

Best start building my ark.


#6

Every few years for decades someone supposedly reputable warns of global disaster because changes in the climate, giving a year when it will be too late to save us if action is not taken. When the year they gave comes, nothing has happened. And so I am quite skeptical of the latest claim of approaching world disaster.


#7

One can be skeptical of near-term predictions of disaster, and still see a longer-term problem on the horizon. There is no justification for being overly confident that everything is okey dokey with the climate.


#8

Don’t get any rabbits… :wink:


#9

There is also no justification for being overly confident that everything is doom and gloom in the long-term.


#10

This is a long term catastrophe and we are just in the initial stages. Most people cannot yet perceive it, even though people are being harmed even now, especially the poor.

From the GHGs we have emitted so far and will be emitting over the next few decades (if we follow a business as usual path) the harms to life on earth could be playing out for 1000s, even 100,000s of years. The end-Permian great warming went on for 200,000 years (triggered by GHG emissions from burning coal, the Siberian traps), and killed off 95% of life on earth. In fact, it is also possible that we have already passed tipping points; the scientists, I’m sure, will eventually be able to tell us, assuming science is still being done.

It is sort of like cancer – which in its initial stages is imperceptible, except by medical tests, but in later stages when it does become perceptible, it is often too late to cure.

Or, it is like the Titanic – by the time the navigators saw the iceberg (the rich patrons had taken the telescopes), it was too late to turn the ship away.


#11

A video that will help explain regime shift is “Let the Environment Guide Our Development” at ted.com/talks/johan_rockstrom_let_the_environment_guide_our_development


#12

:tanning: - I’m willing to help, but apparently turning on my air conditioner just makes things worse.


#13

Well, ya gotta stay cool, Captain Fun, eh? :smiley: At least that’s what I, Corporal Cheer, always say. :shrug: But please check out this article:

arctic-news.blogspot.com/p/global-extinction-within-one-human.html

The timetable is obviously off, but the information itself, fearsome as it is, may not be far off the mark. Hopefully it is, but for all we know… :confused:


#14

We also use an AC. However, over the years we reduced our GHGs thru energy/resource efficiency/conservation (reduce, reuse, recycle, etc) by about one-third (including keeping a thermostat about one or two degrees warmer when using the AC, and turning it lower for a while only when the humidity got to us). Then in 2002 we went on 100% wind-generated power, got a Volt in 2012 (which we drive about 85% on alt-energy electricity), and solar panel in 2013 (that generate about 40% of our electricity). So when we use our AC, it is being powered by the wind and sun.

Bottom line is not only are we reducing our GHGs, but also local and other pollution, AND saving money to boot! That is without lowering our living standard hardly at all.

It’s doable and God will help. We need many prayers for God to show us the way, and many more prayers for God to help us get off our duff and do the needful.


#15

The “experts” can’t accurately predict the weather 2 days from now, but they want us to believe that they know what will happen decades and centuries from now? :rotfl:


#16

I’ll bet that you can’t accurately predict the weather 2 days from now either. Yet you are fairly confident that next summer will be warmer than this winter. Of course you can’t say for sure what the temperature will be on June 17, 2017. But it is a very good bet that it will be warmer than on January 17, 2017.

The reasoning behind predicting that summer will come is very similar to the reasoning behind predicting that global warming will come. It stems from a certain imperfect but usable understanding of the mechanisms behind it. In the case of summer coming, it is the tilt of the earth’s axis and the subsequent increase in the sunlight per day. In the case of global warming it is known effect of greenhouse gases in trapping heat and the measured increase in these gases, confirmed by the correlation of temperatures rising rapidly over the last 50 years. It is really not so mysterious of a prediction.


#17

There is a difference between weather and climate. Climate is the statistical aggregate of weather (over time and larger regions) and is actually impacted only by a few factors, compared to the many factors that impact weather and make it difficult to predict. Thus climate can can more easily be predicted than weather.

Another example of statistical aggregates being more easily predictable is Durkheim’s study of suicides. While one cannot predict an individual suicide, the suicide rates remain fairly constant, sometimes going up or down slightly over the years due to various factors – Durkheim’s famous factor was anomie, with which he was able to explain why suicide rates were higher in Protestant than Catholic countries, among men than women, among single than married people, among the rich than among the poor, etc.

As for climate, we have this old atlas from the 70s we picked up at a garage sale (“reuse,” a very good environmental principle), and the climate maps there are still fairly accurate. There has been a shift due to global warming, but not much – one has to look carefully.

Here is the plant hardiness zones for 1990 and 2012 – climate change has just shifted these a bit over the 22 years:

99wsimpleclimate.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/merged_usda_plant_hardiness_map.jpg?w=396&h=597simpleclimate.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/merged_usda_plant_hardiness_map.jpg?w=99&h=150


#18

Hitler had some good ideas on health. He opposed smoking, long before other world leaders ever thought of it. Smoking is, in fact, a serious health issue with **proven **long term consequences. The Nazis were ahead of the curve on that one.

OK.

I would not, under any circumstances, endorse the Nazi health plan. The fact that Hitler was **proven **right on one thing does not make me encourage anyone to consider any of his health program, even where he is proven right. I would object to someone who said “Well Hitler was wrong on some things, true, but we must look at his overall positives, too”.

I looked at some of the other presenters promoted through this link, who push legal abortion and same sex marriage. :mad: The damage done by legal abortion already, and (I predict) by same sex marriage, far outweighs all the harm done by Hitler, or by the predictions of climate change.

Why should anyone in the US care less about flooding in Bangladesh in 25 years, if we have been trained to be indifferent to babies getting ripped apart in our own city, in 2016?

I don’t mean to beat up on the immediate poster, just pointing out how we all have been conditioned, anesthetized, to accept evil. It would not shock me to see articles pointing out how the concentration camps were Energy Efficient (“not saying they were perfect, mind you”). I am sure some will say, yeah Hitler had his problems with anti-Semitism, can’t condone that, but we can talk about that another time.


#19

That is a very good point, when a society delves deeper and deeper into evil and immorality, even to the point of calling evil good and good evil, people are not going to suddenly be moral and good, sin is progressive by nature, it WILL get worse.


#20

Everything feels warmer when your running around with your hair on fire.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.