Global warming, global cooling

Status
Not open for further replies.
2minkey said:
would such a major eruption impact my ablity to achieve and maintain an erection, assuming i'm not in the immediate lava flow and i've no preexisting erectile dysfunction?
Click to expand...

If you were within fifteen miles of Mt. St. Helens in 1980 it would have knocked your dick in the dirt and then covered it with 26 feet of pyroclastic mud flow. So, yes, it would definitely have a detrimental effect.
 
jimpeel said:
If you were within fifteen miles of Mt. St. Helens in 1980 it would have knocked your dick in the dirt and then covered it with 26 feet of pyroclastic mud flow. So, yes, it would definitely have a detrimental effect.
Click to expand...


:hmm: Fine. Just walk over my joke, whydoncha...:bluegrab:
 
I guess the Earth is sweating again.

0_65_020608_volcano_ecuador01.jpg
2_63_volcano_tungurahua_1.jpg
2_64_volcano_tungurahua_2.jpg


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,329133,00.html

Volcano Erupts, Forcing 3,000 Villagers to Flee in Ecuador
Wednesday, February 06, 2008

QUITO, Ecuador — Ecuador's Tungurahua volcano shot columns of ash miles into the air on Wednesday, as officials ordered the evacuation of 3,000 villagers living near its slopes.

Some 1,000 villagers from the western flanks of the 16,575-foot volcano fled their homes for shelters at dawn, said Mauro Rodriguez, director of Civil Defense.

He said 11 families who refused to leave, fearing looters, were removed by force.

"We've taken all of the precautions possible," President Rafael Correa told reporters on Wednesday, adding that a state of emergency already in place in the area will be extended for 60 days.

Juan Salazar, the mayor of the nearby village of Penipe, said 3,000 people needed to be evacuated — a figure that included the 1,000 villagers who had already fled.

• Click here to visit FOXNews.com's Natural Science Center.

• Click here for photos.

Experts at the Geophysics Institute warn that the intense activity shows no sign of slowing down, and compared it to the massive 2006 Tungurahua eruptions that buried entire villages, leaving at least four dead and thousands homeless.

"The volcano has entered a new explosive eruption cycle, a process which does not seem to be slowing down," said Hugo Yepez, director of the Geophysics Institute.

The institute said Wednesday's eruptions shot ash six miles into the air.

Populations on Tungurahua's western flank have been most affected, particularly the communities of Bilbao, Cusua, Chacauco and Puela. The popular tourist town of Banos near the volcano, is currently not at risk.

There were no reported victims, according to Roberto Rodriguez, the Civil Defense director.

Ash billowing from Tungurahua, whose name means "throat of fire" in the local indigenous Quichua language, has already covered thousands of acres of farmland, destroying property, crops and livestock.

Tungurahua, located 95 miles southeast of the capital of Quito, has been active since 1999.

Separately, a volcano in southern Chile that erupted the first day of the year has resumed "permanent eruptive activity" but it poses no immediate danger to any populated area, authorities said.

"The volume of lava emission is very small and it has reached only some 4,900 feet from the crater" of the Llaima volcano, said Juan Cayupi, a vulcanologist with the Emergency Bureau. Llaima volcano lies 400 miles south of Santiago.
Click to expand...
 
The latest eruption.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,381321,00.html

Alaska Volcano Erupts With Little Warning
Saturday, July 12, 2008

ANCHORAGE, Alaska — A volcano erupted Saturday with little warning on a remote island in Alaska, sending residents of a nearby ranch fleeing from falling ash and volcanic rock.

The Okmok Caldera erupted late Saturday morning, just hours after seismologists at the Alaska Volcano Center began detecting a series of small tremors.

The explosion flung an ash cloud at least 50,000 feet high, said geophysicist Steve McNutt.

Nine people, including three children, were at Fort Glenn, a private cattle ranch six miles south of the volcano on Umnak Island, located in the western Aleutians. They managed to call authorities on a satellite phone before losing their connection, according to the Coast Guard, which had a cutter en route to the island, about 860 miles southwest of Anchorage.

Coast Guard Petty Officer Lee Goldsmith said those at Fort Glenn reported rock and ash falling around them.

A Coast Guard cutter set out for the ranch but wasn't expected to arrive until Sunday morning, Goldsmith said. Because of the ash and rock, the Coast Guard could not send aircraft, Goldsmith said.

The Fort Glenn residents were planning to use a small private helicopter to fly to nearby Unalaska Island, which is separated from Fort Glenn by a five-mile channel.

"They can only carry one person at a time in that helicopter," Goldsmith said.

Okmok is 60 miles west of the busy fishing port of Dutch Harbor on Unalaska Island. Ash was reported falling in the region, McNutt said.

Two planned flights from Unalaska were canceled in response to the eruption, said Jerry Lucas, a spokesman for PenAir, the primary airliner serving the area.

The 3,500-foot volcano last erupted in 1997, according to McNutt. The volcano has shown signs of increased activity during the last few months, he said.

Previous eruptions have typically produced lava flows, but the volcano center could not immediately determine if that had occurred in Saturday's explosion, McNutt said.
Click to expand...
 
ClarabellaUK said:
*Visualises duvet wrapped mountains*

Its kinda a cute idea! And should work!
Click to expand...

As with all things .. 'should work' and 'should be done' are very different animals. As with all things that involve mankind trying to 'fix' nature ... they usually wind up making a yet bigger mess than they solved. This case in point. Wonderful, an extra month's worth of snow was preserved under that blanket. How much damage was done to the surrounding area while installing that blanket in the first place. Dragging that much fabric up a hill doesn't happen for free. Fuel was burned in the process. Men and vehicles were stomping and tromping all about the surrounding areas. Energy doesn't disappear. Has anyone considered where the reflected/deflected energy displaced by that blanket is going? Didn't think so. What about the local ecology that might be living on that ice? Bacteria, algae, insects?

As usual, this reflects short term, knee jerk thinking at it's very worst. At it's best, this is town trying to keep it's economic identity at the expense of further raping the environment for personal profit, and trying to hide it behind a PC facade. A raping which began with a skiing industry that's probably wreaked far more havoc on that glacier than any factory in Detroit ever did.
 
We've got to be seen to be doing something... whether it destroys other climatic balance in the process or not... it seems!

I'd imagine which ever nation does come up with a suitable solution... will treat it as card blanche to continue adding to global warming in the original way!

Its the BIC Nations that need to be gauded into buying into the idea of global warming and curb their emission... but who's gonna want to stand in the way of their progress? And who was telling the existing developed world what to do when we were developing into super powers?

Its a toughy!
 
No, not really. It's called personal environmental responsibility. All the native cultures had it. Cultures with cities don't. Anyone who's ever watched their food crop die in a field knows they have to think, think, think. To find better, long term ways. City folk still think food comes from a grocery store. Unfortunately now, most farms are run by corporations ... operating from cities. I've yet to ever see a corporation with a true long term view, only today's profit matters. If there's no profit tomorrow, they sell their shares for another.
 
Yeah... Things would indeed be far simpler if things were once again simpler...

Our "advancement" has had a great impact on this planet and its populations... environmentally, socially, emotionally, ethically!

I was thinking the other day... if I lived say 500 years ago... at 27 I'd have never travelled further than I could walk in half a day from my village... I'd be married... probably almost with grandchildren by now... My family would work a small holding for the Lord... and my only worry would be where my next meal from my family would come from and whether I'll live past 35!!! :swing:
 
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,473925,00.html

Yellowstone Quake Swarm Worries Scientists

Tuesday, December 30, 2008

CHEYENNE, Wyo. — Yellowstone National Park was jostled by a host of small earthquakes for a third straight day Monday, and scientists watched closely to see whether the more than 250 tremors were a sign of something bigger to come.

Swarms of small earthquakes happen frequently in Yellowstone, but it's very unusual for so many earthquakes to happen over several days, said Robert Smith, a professor of geophysics at the University of Utah.

"They're certainly not normal," Smith said. "We haven't had earthquakes in this energy or extent in many years."

• Click here to visit FOXNews.com's Natural Science Center.

Smith directs the Yellowstone Seismic Network, which operates seismic stations around the park. He said the quakes have ranged in strength from barely detectable to one of magnitude 3.8 that happened Saturday. A magnitude 4 quake is capable of producing moderate damage.

"This is an active volcanic and tectonic area, and these are the kinds of things we have to pay attention to," Smith said. "We might be seeing something precursory.

"Could it develop into a bigger fault or something related to hydrothermal activity? We don't know. That's what we're there to do, to monitor it for public safety."

The strongest of dozens of tremors Monday was a magnitude 3.3 quake shortly after noon. All the quakes were centered beneath the northwest end of Yellowstone Lake.

A park ranger based at the north end of the lake reported feeling nine quakes over a 24-hour period over the weekend, according to park spokeswoman Stacy Vallie. No damage was reported.

"There doesn't seem to be anything to be alarmed about," Vallie said.

Smith said it's difficult to say what might be causing the tremors. He pointed out that Yellowstone is the caldera of a volcano that last erupted 700,000 years ago.

He said Yellowstone remains very geologically active — and its famous geysers and hot springs are a reminder that a pool of magma still exists five to 10 miles underground.

"That's just the surface manifestation of the enormous amount of heat that's being released through the system," he said.

Yellowstone has had significant earthquakes as well as minor ones in recent decades. In 1959, a magnitude 7.5 quake near Hebgen Lake just west of the park triggered a landslide that killed 28 people.
Click to expand...
 
Gonz said:
If we can do zero to stop it, why concern ourselves? We live in deserts, in earthquake zones, in hurricane & tornado alleys....it's all part of the experience.
Click to expand...

This is really starting to annoy me .. the whole, "me agreeing with Gonz" thing :D

Jim - when you've actually lived on a volcano and have taken the years it takes to dedicate your life to studying at least two of the varying types of volcanoes instead of reading a few articles, watching a few NatGeo presentations then declaring yourself a 'know-all' on yet another subject, I just might listen to you for 5 minutes. Until then ... *whistles*

BoP you are sooo my freaking hero :D:rofl3:
 
nalani said:
This is really starting to annoy me .. the whole, "me agreeing with Gonz" thing :D

Jim - when you've actually lived on a volcano and have taken the years it takes to dedicate your life to studying at least two of the varying types of volcanoes instead of reading a few articles, watching a few NatGeo presentations then declaring yourself a 'know-all' on yet another subject, I just might listen to you for 5 minutes. Until then ... *whistles*

BoP you are sooo my freaking hero :D:rofl3:
Click to expand...

At what point did I claim to be an expert vulcanologist? All I've done is to post articles -- not written by me -- on the Yosemite Caldera and a few other active eruptions around the world. I didn't know that posting articles makes one an expert in anything.

What I have several miles north of my location is an explosive composite volcano which holds great promise for extreme destruction.

You live on a shield volcano which simply oozes lava instead of doing a Krakatoa under your ass.

Lucky you.
 
STATS said:
Climate Scientists Agree on Warming, Disagree on Dangers, and Don’t Trust the Media’s Coverage of Climate Change
S. Robert Lichter, Ph.D, April 24, 2008
STATS survey of experts reveals changing scientific opinion on global warming, extent of pressure to play up or down threat.

Over eight out of ten American climate scientists believe that human activity contributes to global warming, according to a new survey released by the Statistical Assessment Service (STATS) at George Mason University. The researchers also report that belief in human-induced warming has more than doubled since the last major survey of American climate scientists in 1991. However, the survey finds that scientists are still debating the dynamics and dangers of global warming, and only three percent trust newspaper or television coverage of climate change....
Click to expand...

Source

But of course jimpeel's 2 of 10 are right, because jimpeel is NEVER wrong! And besides even if he is wrong, none of us will have to deal with the consequences. We'll be comfortably dead. Screw any future generation. Who gives a crap anyway? I mean it's just too damn inconvenient to create new jobs and protect the environment. It's just too hard too recycle, landfills are much cooler....

:tomato:

:tomato:
 
jimpeel said:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,473925,00.html
Click to expand...


YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK, Wyo. (AP) -- More earthquakes are rattling Yellowstone National Park.
The small quakes include three more Friday that measured stronger than magnitude 3.0. The University of Utah Seismic Stations say the strongest was 3.5.
Several hundred quakes centered under the northern end of Yellowstone Lake have now occurred since Dec. 26. No damage has been reported.
Earthquake swarms happen fairly often in Yellowstone. But scientists say it's unusual for so many earthquakes to happen over several days.
Yellowstone lies mostly in northwestern Wyoming and is the caldera of a volcano that last erupted 70,000 years ago. Scientists have not concluded what is causing the earthquakes.
© 2009 The Associated Press.
 
randomJACKASS said:
Source

But of course jimpeel's 2 of 10 are right, because jimpeel is NEVER wrong! And besides even if he is wrong, none of us will have to deal with the consequences. We'll be comfortably dead. Screw any future generation. Who gives a crap anyway? I mean it's just too damn inconvenient to create new jobs and protect the environment. It's just too hard too recycle, landfills are much cooler....

:tomato:

:tomato:
Click to expand...
The question is not whether some scientists agree that human activity increases a warming trend...the question is "By how much and what effect will it have?"

We don't know what a 2º overall rise in global temperatures over the next 50-100 years will/may have...nor what percentage of that amount is caused by humans.

If 5% of the 2º rise is caused by humans...and we remove the human equation (shut down all manufacturing, machines, transport, burning of fossil fuels for heat, farming etc...) then we're still stuck with a 1.90º rise in temperature in the next 50-100 years.

That 1/10th of a degree more... what difference does that make exactly?

Hell, for all we know..the 2º rise will have a positive effect. :eek6:
 
My point is, what is it going to hurt if we start using clean burning renewable energy? How is recycling a bad thing? If anything new energy sources will create jobs and stimulate the economy. Of course big oil men who don't invest in new technologies will suffer, but then would that really be a bad thing? Most of them with half a brain would be heavily involved in creating new clean burning fuels I suspect.

Oh and also my point is, jimpeel can reference as many links that support his position as he can find, but the fact of the matter is the consensus in the majority of the scientific community differs in opinion.
 
randomJACKASS said:
My point is, what is it going to hurt if we start using clean burning renewable energy? How is recycling a bad thing? If anything new energy sources will creat jobs and stimulate the economy. Of course big oil men who don't invest in new technologies will suffer, but then would that really be a bad thing? Most of them with half a brain would be heavily involved in creating new clean burning fuels I suspect.
Click to expand...

The problem is that we don't have a clean, renewable form of energy handy. Nor are we likely to have one that can replace petrol anytime soon...in the amounts needed. Ethanol is not an option now...and it continues to release CO2 into the atmosphere when burned, much like oil.

Better to reduce usage and work on engine efficiency rather than try and create a new fuel for which we have no impact studies.

Recycling is a good thing..when it actually happens. With the current economy, recyclable materials are being stockpiled instead of worked into new products. I do the 3 R's - but I still feel that reduce is the best option of the three..forcing companies to reduce the amount of packaging needed for a product so that the package takes up less than 50% of the total mass of package/product...which is not always the case.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top