NE warming faster

[ski_resort_observer]

There is an interesting recent article about climate change in Journal of Geophysical Research Letters entitled “ 20th Century climate change in New England”, which will not be a comfort to ski area operators.

Rich Wolfson, professor at Middlebury who studied and analyzed temperature data from 73 climate stations from 1903 to 2000 in New England and New York. The data that jumped out at me was that New England is warming faster than the rest of the country. Professor Wolfson has a theory about that but I got a headache trying to read it….lol

My buddy and host Will, a Vermont native, says it’s cause we fart more but nothing was mentioned about that. Since both sides of the global warming debate cannot prove their case little is being done so I can only get solace in the fact I won’t be around in 50 years when most skiing just might be done indoors.

 

[riverc0il]

Since both sides of the global warming debate cannot prove their case little is being done so I can only get solace in the fact I won’t be around in 50 years when most skiing just might be done indoors.

the case has been proven that the earth is in a warming trend. the reasons why the earth is warming is what has yet to be proven with verifiable evidence. interesting that the data suggests new england is warming faster, though i don't think this will have any immediate effect on ski area operators. they seem to be bragging every third year about record setting numbers, blah blah blah, but we all know what a sham that type of stuff is.

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

Since both sides of the global warming debate cannot prove their case little is being done so I can only get solace in the fact I won’t be around in 50 years when most skiing just might be done indoors.

When people see that global warming is having an adverse economic effect they will demand that elected officials take action, in free countries anyway. Until then it's easier to do nothing so it remains an incontinent truth. I'm probably being overly optimistic, but I really think people are beginning to pay more attention to what CO2 emissions are doing to our environment and I think many governments around the world will take action to curtail it, but who knows?

Individuals can help too of course with market demand, and vote with their dollars on environment friendly products.

 

[riverc0il]

i wish i was that optimistic HPD. my only hope lies in, as you said, economic conditions causing change when enough people are hit hard enough in the pocket book. i am pesimistic that enough people will be economically hardshipped before it is too late to do anything about it. i think there is a lot of lip service right now. surely SUV sales are taking a slight hit, not a huge one though. you definitely see a few hybrids out there, but clearly these autos are not in high enough demand to change the industry. the america that drives the economy still has way too much disposable income to be concerned with $3 gas. for a long time, i thought that would be the breaking point but at $2.999, it isn't.

$2.999, what a joke. the cash meter on the pump only goes down to the penny so they round up any ways unless you are buying a hundred gallons. but you have to re swipe the card after $50. what a joke!!! IT"S THREE FREAKING DOLLARS! okay, /rant.

 

[ctenidae]

When people see that global warming is having an adverse economic effect they will demand that elected officials take action, in free countries anyway. Until then it's easier to do nothing so it remains an incontinent truth. I'm probably being overly optimistic, but I really think people are beginning to pay more attention to what CO2 emissions are doing to our environment and I think many governments around the world will take action to curtail it, but who knows?

Individuals can help too of course with market demand, and vote with their dollars on environment friendly products.

I think you're right on there needing to be serious and obvious economic impacts for anyone to care ($3+ gas su.ks in the short run, but will, I think, have positive effects in the near future).

The truth's not incontinent yet, though. It'll piss all over itself and crap all over the room eventually, but for now, it's holding. Mighty convenient typo, though.

 

[Marc]

The truth's not incontinent yet, though. It'll piss all over itself and crap all over the room eventually, but for now, it's holding.

Sounds kinda like when I drink...

 

[ctenidae]

Sounds kinda like when I drink...

Marc- The Incontinenet Truth.

Think we can gete anyone to make a movie of that?

 

[Marc]

Marc- The Incontinenet Truth.

Think we can gete anyone to make a movie of that?

I don't know, but I think we're sittin' on a gold mine here...

 

[ctenidae]

I don't know, but I think we're sittin' on a gold mine here...

Gold mine, land mine, what's the difference?

 

[Marc]

Gold mine, land mine, what's the difference?

The difference is about five million a piece and bj's all around from co-star Paris Hilton.

 

[ctenidae]

The difference is about five million a piece and bj's all around from co-star Paris Hilton.

I'll take the gold mine, thanks.


On topic, I find any scientist that will look at 100 years of data and make sweeping climate predictions to be questionable. While I have no doubt that the human influence on our environment is not good and could be pushing us towards rapid and irrecoverable climate change, it really becomes that much harder to work on when shoddy science presents such easy targets for naysayers. Sort of the PETA effect- sure, animals need to be protected and treated humanely, but the whackjobs at PETA make me want to go kick puppies.

 

[Angus]

any chance of posting a link to that article if it is on-line. thanks in advance.

 

[riverc0il]

On topic, I find any scientist that will look at 100 years of data and make sweeping climate predictions to be questionable..

on what basis? a good scientist can look at one day of data and make sweeping predictions and hypothesis if that data is legit and the science and reasoning sound and experiments repeatable and accurate.

the basis on which climate predictions are being made aren't just based on 100 years of data, but rather the fact that the previous 100 years of data is so different than past history. normally, you would suspect slow moving climate changes to occur, not significant and major climage changes within one person's lifetime. the predictions being made are based upon huge deviations from a previously established norm. if it was a slight deviation, no big deal, but we are looking at significant changes faster than can reasonably be expected based on past history. one need not make predictions about climate change, it is already happening and predictions are just extrapolating based on current trends which don't seem to show much sign of reversing at this point. the first step in any good science is hypothesis, the best scientists of our times were scoffed at similarly, often times not having their ideas become the gold standard until posthumous recognition.

 

[ctenidae]

The trouble is that we don't ahve any other 100 year data to compare it too. Getting temperatures from ice cores gives general trends over long periods of time. There's no way to tell with the data we have if the last 100 years is actually anomolous.

What the data shows is easy. What it means is somethign else entirely.

 

[loafer89]

Through the study of dendrochronology (tree rings) one is able to get specific climate data for the past 10,000 years + and these rings give a good indication of the temperature, humidity and rainfall for that period.

Ocean sea floor sediment coring gives data of the past climate for the past 140,000 years. Modern instument data actually is closer to 200 years old.

As far as climate change is concerned, glaciers, especially in subtropical areas are like the canaries in the coal mine, and ALL are retreating, in some cases at a rapid pace. Killimanjaro is set to loose it's glacial cap by 2020, and that ice is 12,000 years old.

We are in a period of global warming, I think for the most part bacause of a natural cycle, and all that mankind is doing is speeding up the process with greenhouse gas emmisions and I really doubt we can stop the warming.

 

[riverc0il]

We are in a period of global warming, I think for the most part bacause of a natural cycle, and all that mankind is doing is speeding up the process with greenhouse gas emmisions and I really doubt we can stop the warming.

i agree. but if you come from the assumpsion that man kind is speeding up the process, that means we can also slow the process down, or at least more the speed of warming back towards its natural progression even just a little.

 

[loafer89]

The big factors that will come into near term global warming are:

1) Loss of summer sea ice at the North Pole, which is estimated by some to occur by 2030. As more ice melts, the Artic Ocean losses an insulating ice cap and the Arctic warms up.

2) Melting of extensive permafrost in the Arctic of Russia and Alaska that could potentially melt off better than a 10' deep layer of frozen earth spanning more than 1 million kilometers. This is expected by 2100 and could result in a massive release of methane gas, which would speed up global warming.

3) Extensive melting of the Greenland Ice Cap which is estimated to be melting at the rate of 1 meter around the edges every year, and causing a sea level rise of 0.4" every 75 years at the present rate of melt.

4) Melting of Northern and Sub Tropical glaciers, that will cause severe drought conditions in Peru, China, the Northwestern United States, Western Canada, Alaska and parts of Europe.

I do not see how we can change much if any of this from happening, let alone slowing it down.

 

[ctenidae]

loafer89- Yup. One problem I see is that while everyone's arguing over whether we had anything to do with it or not, no one's asking what we're going to do to adapt.

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

loafer89- Yup. One problem I see is that while everyone's arguing over whether we had anything to do with it or not, no one's asking what we're going to do to adapt.

That's a real good point. I guess it's human nature to live in the short term.

 

[Angus]

more regarding the ice caps

http://www.utexas.edu/opa/news/2006/08/engineering10.html?AddInterest=1285