IslandMix - Soca, Reggae, Zouk and Caribbean Entertainment

Here is the Image I was talking about. I wish I had better ones.
this is the one from 1979

here is the image from 2003


http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0217-06.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4228411.stm
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n..._earthday.html

from National Geographic article

.....

Just as the evidence is irrefutable that temperatures have risen in the last century, it's also well established that carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere has increased about 30 percent, enhancing the atmosphere's ability to trap heat.

The exact link, if any, between the increase in carbon dioxide emissions and the higher temperatures is still under debate.

...

Industrialization taking it's toll on the world. Decreasing the amount of plants and trees in the world in combination with the oxidation of carbon monoxide has solely caused the increase in carbon monoxide. The interesting part is that the model is not consistant...when ice melts, it melts uniformly (if in fact global warming was the cause because heat dissapates evenly) but as you see in the pictures, the ice is melting faster in certain sections denoting increases in heat in specific areas. Hmmmm, should do research.

Take into account, prevailing and changing ocean currents, wind and weather patterns.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcr...8warnings.html

^^^( a lil snippet from above) The giant ice sheet in the east is probably more than 15 million years old. But the West Antarctic Ice Sheet is younger, and scientists fear, much less stable. While the ice on the eastern side of the continent rests on dry land, most of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet sits precariously on bedrock that lies below sea level. Part of the ice sheet is in direct contact with sea water, which is much warmer than the air. And that means the ice can melt much faster….In the last century, global temperatures have risen about one degree Fahrenheit, possibly as a result of industrial activity. But on the Antarctic Peninsula, it's warmed up more than four degrees during the same period…When it comes to global warming, popular fears usually focus on the Water world disaster, melting polar ice caps and devastating floods. But now, there's concern that if the world gets too warm, high temperatures could help trip a climate trigger, and plunge us into a colder and icier age. If the ice teaches us anything, it's that there is no room for complacency. This is a volatile world. If climate shifted abruptly in the past, not just once, but repeatedly, it's inevitable it will happen again. The question is, when?
In the bolded statement, it brings to light in our previous discussion your point of the climates being cyclic. However these cycles can be “triggered” and forced to occur faster than it normally would, if factors that aid in creating “global warming” come into play.


http://www.boston.com/news/science/a...t_faster_rate/
^^ (a lil snippet from above )An increase in surface air temperatures appears to be causing the glaciers to flow faster, albeit at the still-glacial pace of eight miles to nine miles a year at their fastest clip, and discharge increased amounts of ice into the Atlantic…. Rignot and Kanagaratnam believe warmer temperatures boost the amount of melt water that reaches where the glaciers flow over rock.
Some stats on ice melting. http://www.earth-policy.org/Updates/Update8_data.htm
http://www.earth-policy.org/Updates/Update8.htm
^^^Also in this article you will see along with the link for stats, that Glacier ice over sea melt faster than ice over land. One reason, which is unanimous with all the articles, is that the ice is thinner over the sea and the seas in these regions are warmer than the air. These two contribute to the ice shelves melting faster. Also referencing the article on the Antarctic, melting ice on continental glacier may take years to cause an effective or sufficient melting due to the rate at which heat travels through the ice. Which will explain why you see most of the change occur closer to the USSR and not so much over Greenland and the north Atlantic region. http://www.whoi.edu/institutes/occi/...hange_wef.ht l
^^^ In a prefect environment, melting would be uniform, but take into consideration land formation and ocean currents that can affect weather patterns. These are other factors that will affect melting. This article discusses ocean currents and the change is salinity in the northern hemisphere. In short saying, within the last 40+ years (almost same amount of time given to say that human emissions have been causing a warming effect) the waters in the north are becoming fresher, one reason could be contributed to the melting snow, but what’s happening is the warmer waters that would travel north normally and release heat in the atmosphere and then sink to the bottom to maintain the colder saltier underlying current is slowing down, the fresher warmer waters are remaining longer on the surface…you get the point.
vvv They have linked human emissions as a contributing factor to “global warming”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attribu...nd_Attribution
^^ (a lil snippet from above) The current scientific consensus, as expressed in 2001 by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), and recently confirmed by a joint statement of the G8 academies of science, is that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities. ^^^With our argument as to whether or not Global warming is a contributing factor, I say yea. Now granted global warming and cooling are natural climatic occurrences that have been taking place for hundreds of thousands of years. However, looking at the studies its safe to admit that human emissions are speeding up if you will, in “triggering” what’s suppose to be the natural climate change.

But isn't the scientific argument is that global warming influences changes in weather patterns and stuff. Sounds like the "Chicken and the Egg" paradigm.

W.E...i goh read that when time permits

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=17568

Interesting article.

your right it is interesting.
I would not go as far as to say it is immediately catastrophic In this type of work you must state the worst case scenario to get a reaction. The claim that it’s just a bunch of hoo-ha created to aid "corporations who will reap a financial windfall from a switch to alternative fuel sources" is downplaying how serious things can become. Think about it if some will go as far to exaggerate the evidence to make money, Others will down play it enough to continue making money.

Financial gains and losses aside. Future generations will either gain or lose from what we choose to believe now and the choices we make today.
Singer wrote, "Sea level will continue to rise by only seven inches per century as it has for thousands of years no matter what we do or what the EPA [U.S. Environmental Protection Agency] says. And temperatures in the next 100 years will likely rise by less than one degree F--not exactly a catastrophe." '

http://today.reuters.com/investing/f...30_N27391356:1


^^^ In reading that article Singer really believes that with the growing global population and the increased demand for fuel and amount of gases released in the atmosphere that the global temp won’t increase more than the 1 degree F, much less in the 100yrs he’s talking about. When making sugar art, if your heating temp or cooling temp is off by one degree it can spell disaster for your culinary art piece. The balance is just that delicate that maybe one degree should be taken into consideration (Will be back to give more environmental examples of how 1 degree can make a world of change)

vvv If the intensity of the cosmic rays is what drives the earth’s climate, How would the increase in CO2 and other solar energy trapping green house gases affect the climate if the cosmic ray intensity is increasing?


"The controlling driver of global temperature fluctuations, according to Dr. Benny Peiser of England's John Moore's University, is solar ray activity. "Six eminent researchers from the Russian Academy of Science and the Israel Space Agency have just published a startling paper in one of the world's leading space science journals. The team of solar physicists claims to have come up with compelling evidence that changes in cosmic ray intensity and variations in solar activity have been driving much of the Earth's climate," Peiser was quoted as saying in the May 17 National Post.]The controlling driver of global temperature fluctuations, according to Dr. Benny Peiser of England's John Moore's University, is solar ray activity. "Six eminent researchers from the Russian Academy of Science and the Israel Space Agency have just published a startling paper in one of the world's leading space science journals. The team of solar physicists claims to have come up with compelling evidence that changes in cosmic ray intensity and variations in solar activity have been driving much of the Earth's climate," Peiser was quoted as saying in the May 17 National Post."

True. The clincher is that the earth is not a uniform system, and not so simple as merely ice and heat. In a closed system, sure. As heat energy is applied to the test tube, the ice inside will melt until the heat energy within the test tube is at equilibrium with the outside. Not so with our planet, otherwise we would all be ice pops. We have a planet leaning on it's axis, rotating, revolving, convection currents in the air and in the seas, and then man adds to the mix with green house gases, flouro-carbons and all manner of environmental contaminants, which alter the delicate balance between these systems. WadadliEmpress raised a good point as far as temperature change. 0 C and 0.1 C is the difference between ice and water.

.true...other factors i neglected to mention.
But Agony, where do you stand on the issue, do you feel that the evidence is being exaggerated, and humans do not contribute to "global warming” that the melting/heating up is just another phase in the climatic cycle? Or Are we a speeding up our own demise?

Look what i found... I knew the ocean was involved, but i never even thought to invlove plate movement. Interesting concept.

the article
In recent years, scientists have been building a persuasive, but still controversial case that changes in the solid earth (the crust and mantle) spurred changes in the liquid earth (the oceans and atmosphere). In other words, so-called tectonic forces—the drifting and collisions of Earth’s tectonic plates—may lead to climate changes.

Rising mountains, closing gateways
The following articles outline two theories that link tectonic and climatic changes. One theory, outlined by Gerald Haug of the Eidgenossiche Technische Hochschule (ETH) in Zürich, Switzerland, and colleagues, proposes that the opening and closing of oceanic gateways between land masses—a result of continental drift—may have altered global ocean circulation patterns, which, in turn, led to climate changes. According to another theory, outlined by Peter Clift of Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, the uplift of great mountain belts—caused by continental collisions—may have disrupted atmospheric circulation and triggered a cascade of other climate changes.

“Understanding the links between solid and liquid Earth systems is a first-order scientific problem for the 21st century,” says Clift, a marine geologist.

So global warming is not as much of an impact as you think? I proposed that theory on FL hurricane at one point.... Oceans are warming because there is more magma exposed at the ocean floor due to plate tectonics.

but its not a fact yet, speculations. But makes logical sense

I believe the earth naturally has it's climatological shifts. But notwithstanding, the plant and animal life has always had the ability to adapt to these changes. I believe industrialized man has exacerbated the issue (and I fear the worse is still yet to come). Animal and plants are endangered, thanks to man's intrusion and exploitation. The same for the planet; it is endangered, thanks to man.

You may remember the much ignored Asian Smog Cloud. What I see now is a, however disjointed, movement to explain away man's involvement by pointing at natural processes. So just like evolution, we can give it plausibility by employing the same principle of innocuity. "It's been happening for a zillion gazillion years ...."