Click for Mulder Click for Delta Click for Nordhavn Click for Cross Click for Perko

Global Warming & rising sea level

Discussion in 'General Yachting Discussion' started by OutMyWindow, Aug 18, 2007.

You need to be registered and signed in to view this content.
  1. First Pericles

    First Pericles New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2007
    Messages:
    21
    Location:
    London (for now)
    Catmando,

    If only the science were allowed to "speak for itself". Politics and money are at work here.

    "Funding for promoters of the theory

    Atmospheric scientist Reid Bryson said in a June, 2007 interview that "There is a lot of money to be made in this... If you want to be an eminent scientist you have to have a lot of grad students and a lot of grants. You can't get grants unless you say, 'Oh global warming, yes, yes, carbon dioxide.'"[13]

    Accuracy in Media published a report in 2002 entitled "Science for Sale: the Global Warming Scam," in which they allege that "global warming is driven more by the search for funding than the search for scientific truth."[110] A similar claim is made by various scientists [111] : NASA's Roy Spencer says that climate scientists need for there to be problems to get more funding. Climatologist and IPCC contributor John Christy says of climate scientists, “We have a vested interest in creating panic because money will then flow to climate scientists.” University of London biogeographer Philip Stott says that “If the global warming farrago collapses, there will be an awful lot of people out of jobs.”

    Richard S. Lindzen, who is the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, makes the specific claim that "n the winter of 1989 Reginald Newell, a professor of meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, lost National Science Foundation funding for data analyses that were failing to show net warming over the past century." Lindzen also suggests four other scientists "apparently" lost their funding or positions after questioning the scientific underpinnings of global warming.[112] Lindzen himself has been the recipient of money from energy interests such as OPEC and the Western Fuels Association, including "$2,500 a day for his consulting services."[14]

    French climatologist and author Marcel Leroux makes a claim similar to that of Lindzen's: "In the end, global warming is more and more taking on an aspect of manipulation, which really looks like a "scientific" deception, and of which the first victims are the climatologists who receive funding only when their work goes along with the IPCC." (translated from French) [113]"

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_controversy

    AMG, About Steve McIntyre.

    Heavy!
    http://www.climateaudit.org/pdf/mcintyre.grl.2005.pdf

    Easier! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2007/08/16/eaclimate116.xml

    http://www.norcalblogs.com/watts/2007/08/does_hansens_error_matter_gues.html

    I love the last couple of paragraphs relating to incorrect data.

    "One more story to conclude. Non-compliant surface stations were reported in the formal academic literature by Pielke and Davey (2005) who described a number of non-compliant sites in eastern Colorado. In NOAA’s official response to this criticism, Vose et al (2005) said in effect -

    it doesn’t matter. It’s only eastern Colorado. You haven’t proved that there are problems anywhere else in the United States.

    In most businesses, the identification of glaring problems, even in a restricted region like eastern Colorado, would prompt an immediate evaluation to ensure that problems did not actually exist. However, that does not appear to have taken place and matters rested until Anthony Watts and the volunteers at surfacestations.org launched a concerted effort to evaluate stations in other parts of the country and determined that the problems were not only just as bad as eastern Colorado, but in some cases were much worse.

    Now in response to problems with both station quality and adjustment software, Schmidt and Hansen say in effect, as NOAA did before them -

    it doesn’t matter. It’s only the United States. You haven’t proved that there are problems anywhere else in the world."

    First Pericles
  2. OutMyWindow

    OutMyWindow Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    906
    Location:
    ...............
    FP your not being very convincing. The only conclusion summarized in you post is that scientists on both sided of the global warming dispute are fighting for a piece of the "funding pie".
    Since you have tunnel vision on the subject, here is the "other" side of the debate you don't seem to recognise...
    _______________________________________________________________
    The Global Warming Denial Lobby
    Harper: Canada is key to defeating Kyoto The people out to 'poison the debate on climate change.'
    By Donald Gutstein
    Published: May 2, 2006


    TheTyee.ca
    In early April, the Financial Post published a letter addressed to Prime Minister Stephen Harper and signed by 60 "accredited experts in climate and related scientific disciplines," as they describe themselves. They want Harper to begin a debate on the Kyoto Protocol.

    Begin a debate? What do they think has been happening since 1988, when US National Aeronautics and Space Administration scientist James Hansen testified before the US Congress that he was "99 percent certain that global warming was here." That statement has been subjected to extensive, prolonged and worldwide scrutiny ever since.

    The point of their letter is to deny "alarmist forecasts" of global warming and to attack "the confident pronouncements of scientifically unqualified environmental groups" whose goal is to capture "sensational headlines."

    The letter is classic climate change denial and among the 60 signatories -- only 19 of whom are Canadian -- are the most prominent climate change sceptics, as they are frequently called.

    The deniers' letter was followed two weeks later by one from 90 supporters of Kyoto. This group calls itself "climate science leaders from the academic, public and private sectors across Canada." No foreigners, no weasel phrases like "related scientific disciplines" (economics? agronomy?). Their point? The evidence is conclusive that warming has occurred and most of it is attributable to human activity.

    These conclusions, they say, are supported by the vast majority of the world's climate scientists. Harper's assignment is to get on with developing an "effective national strategy" to deal with climate change.

    More debate or action?

    Financial Post editor Terence Corcoran seems to think that more debate is required. He did run the letter from the Kyoto supporters but accompanied it with an editorial attacking their credibility. Their crime is that some of them are federal government scientists and some have received peer-reviewed government grants. Therefore, what they have to say must be rubbish.

    The problem with libertarians like Corcoran is that they can be so blinded by their ideology -- anything government does is bad -- that they don't see the problems a powerful corporate sector can cause. Call it a case of libertarian looneyism.

    Funded by Exxon Mobil

    The 60 deniers had no Corcoran editorial accompanying their letter. A question Corcoran might have asked is how many of the deniers are funded by Exxon Mobil and the coal industry?

    It's a natural question to pose. The fossil fuel industry doesn't want mandatory limits on CO2 emissions because they would affect profits. It wants Canada and the rest of the world to do what George W. Bush did, establish voluntary standards and provide government subsidies to develop cleaner technologies.

    To update his knowledge on this issue, Corcoran could read the works of Ross Gelbspan, who has been covering climate change for more than a decade as a reporter for the Boston Globe. Gelbspan discovered in 1995 that some of the leading skeptics were funded by the coal industry. He wrote a book in 1997, The Heat is On, and runs the companion web site, The Heat is Online. Gelbspan's recent book is Boiling Point: How Politicians, Big Oil and Coal, Journalists and Activists are Fueling the Climate Crisis -- and What We Can Do to Avoid Disaster.

    Corcoran could also check out the May/June 2005 issue of Mother Jones, which tabulated the organizations that received funding from Exxon Mobil between 2000 and 2003 to fight CO2 emission controls.

    And he could look at the SourceWatch site created by John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton.

    Using these sources, Corcoran could put together some interesting profiles of the skeptics. Sallie Baliunas is a non-Canadian signatory to the deniers letter. She is a Harvard-Smithsonian Institute astrophysicist who has been giving global warming deniers scientific cover since the mid-1990s. She is a senior scientist at the George C. Marshall Institute (received $310,000 from Exxon Mobil). She co-wrote (with colleague Willie Soon, who did not sign the skeptics letter) the Fraser Institute pamphlet "Global warming: a guide to the science." (The Fraser Institute receives $60,000 a year from Exxon Mobil.) Baliunas is "enviro-sci" host of TechCentralStation.com (received $95,000 from Exxon Mobil) and is on science advisory boards of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow ($252,000) and the Annapolis Center for Science-Based Public Policy ($427,500). She has given speeches before the American Enterprise Institute ($960,000) and the Heritage Foundation ($340,000). The Heartland Institute ($312,000) publishes her op-ed pieces.
    Why is Exxon Mobil so taken with Baliunas? With her colleague Willie Soon, she first claimed that solar effects could account for the earth's warming. When that theory was debunked, they next wrote a paper, partially funded by the American Petroleum Institute says Mother Jones, that claims the twentieth century hasn't been all that warm. The paper quickly became a mini-bible for deniers. But the editor of the journal where the paper was published resigned, saying it never should have been published because of a deficient peer-review process.
    Exxon Mobil has been astonishingly successful in delaying action on global warming for more than a decade. During that time, oil revenues soared, Exxon took over Mobil for US $82 billion and in 2005, the combined company earned the largest profit in human history at $36 billion.

    That was the year Exxon Mobil CEO Lee Raymond retired. As thanks for his work on behalf of shareholders -- the stock price soared over 500 percent over the decade -- he received a retirement package valued at nearly $400 million.


    Sceptic in demand

    Closer to home, one of the 19 Canadian signatories to the skeptics letter is Tim Ball, a retired professor of climatology from the University of Winnipeg, now living in Victoria. As a global-warming sceptic, he is in high demand by the front groups sponsored by the fossil fuel industry.

    Ball's particular niche is the argument that since 1940, the world's climate has actually been cooling. The conclusion of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, reached by over 2,000 climate scientists, that the world is heating up is wrong, he says, because it used "distorted records."

    Undistorted records in hand, Ball is promoted by the National Center for Public Policy Research ($225,000 from Exxon Mobil), and Tech Central Station (which also receives support from General Motors). He's a hot topic on the Coalblog web site, sponsored by the coal companies. In the past year, he's given policy briefings to the Fraser Institute and the Frontier Centre for Public Policy in Winnipeg.
    You could have found him and Baliunas at a conference in Ottawa in November 2002, just days before parliament ratified the Kyoto Protocol. That conference, urging the government not to proceed with ratification, was paid for by Imperial Oil (Exxon Mobil's Canadian subsidiary) and Talisman Energy and put together by public relations firm APCO Worldwide.

    APCO's assignment for Imperial Oil was to bring together a roster of climate change skeptics to reveal Kyoto's "science and technology fatal flaws."

    An APCO specialty is supporting rogue scientists who are financed by industry and purport to challenge established scientific thinking. APCO organized The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition, which was originally funded by the Philip Morris Company, to attack epidemiological studies which implicated environmental tobacco smoke in slightly increased rates of lung cancer in non-smokers. Such studies could not be allowed to stand, given the tobacco industry's claim that harm from smoking was regrettable but due to individual choice, not second-hand smoke. This work was essential in Philip Morris' efforts to limit the impact of passive smoking regulations. APCO then widened the financial catchment to include other companies with poisoning or polluting problems. The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition was so successful that it was assigned a lead role in opposing Kyoto.

    Vancouver PR whistleblower

    And that makes Jim Hoggan mad. Hoggan runs one of the largest PR firms in Western Canada. PR practitioners rarely criticize the work of their colleagues, but Hoggan pulls no punches in his scathing denunciation of the global warming deniers and their public relations advisors.

    In December 2005, he set up his blog, which he calls deSmogBlog. In his personal manifesto, "Slamming the Climate Skeptic Scam," he writes "it is infuriating -- as a public relations professional -- to watch my colleagues use their skills, their training and their considerable intellect to poison the international debate on climate change."

    It's powerful reading.

    Hoggan recently broke the story that one of the 19 Canadian deniers had recanted, saying he was misled about the letter's content when he signed on.

    And Hoggan has a large pro bono practice in which he represents clients like the David Suzuki Foundation, one of the most consistent targets of the deniers. He's also creating a market niche around the issue of sustainability.

    In a recent post, Hoggan discusses a column by Globe and Mail columnist John Ibbitson, who complains that here's a letter from 90 scientists urging action; there's a letter from 60 scientists urging Harper to ignore calls to action. "What's a layman to do?" Ibbitson whines.

    His solution? Forget about global warming and instead work with the US to improve air quality. "After all," he writes, "a continental agreement on air quality would do far more to improve the lives of both Americans and Canadians than any actions specifically targeted at reducing greenhouse-gas emissions."

    It's called bait and switch. We're alarmed about the health of the planet our grandchildren will inherit. But (thanks to the lies and deceptions of the deniers) nobody can agree on what's happening, let alone what should be done. So let's do something that we can all agree on instead.

    Ibbitson's column makes clear the political purpose of the deniers' letter -- to help Harper out of a tight corner. His goal of capturing a majority government depends on winning seats in Ontario and Quebec, the provinces where support for Kyoto is strongest. He could court their support by giving them Kyoto, but this would infuriate his oil industry masters.

    These are people like Gwyn Morgan, retired CEO of EnCana Corp., long-time Fraser institute trustee and generous Conservative Party funder who Harper placed in charge of vetting all senior government appointments.

    So obfuscate, confuse and divert attention to clean air is the order of the day.

    Why Canada is key

    Why would 41 foreign deniers be concerned about what happens in Canada? Because what happens in Canada will shift the momentum towards or away from Kyoto.

    There's a larger issue, too. In 2007, the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is expected to warn governments that global warming could drive the Earth's temperature far higher than previously forecast.

    The UK's Royal Society, in a confidential internal memo leaked to The Guardian last month, predicts that the lobbyists will try to undermine the IPCC's report. "There are already signs these groups will be targeting European countries and Canada to seek to provoke opposition to the Kyoto protocol."

    And thanks to deniers for hire and newspapers like the National Post that spread their baloney, their task will be made that much easier.

    Donald Gutstein, a senior lecturer in the School of Communication at Simon Fraser University, writes a regular media column for The Tyee.
  3. First Pericles

    First Pericles New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2007
    Messages:
    21
    Location:
    London (for now)
    Outofmywindow,

    Your first two sentences are incorrect.

    FP your not being very convincing. The only conclusion summarized in you post is that scientists on both sided of the global warming dispute are fighting for a piece of the "funding pie".

    First sentence should read "FP you are not being very convincing. If you wish to use an abbreviated Colloquialism the the word is "you're". As for being convincing to you, as you are fervently (religiously) committed to the falsehood that global warming is mostly due to human activity, then rational argument will not change your mind on this point.

    I looked back at my posts to see in which post I am supposed to have summarized that scientists on both sided of the global warming dispute are fighting for a piece of the "funding pie". None as far as I can see.

    You are probably misinterpreting this paragraph. The last sentence is the correct conclusion. "University of London biogeographer Philip Stott says that “If the global warming farrago collapses, there will be an awful lot of people out of jobs.” See the rest below.

    Accuracy in Media published a report in 2002 entitled "Science for Sale: the Global Warming Scam," in which they allege that "global warming is driven more by the search for funding than the search for scientific truth."[110] A similar claim is made by various scientists [111] : NASA's Roy Spencer says that climate scientists need for there to be problems to get more funding. Climatologist and IPCC contributor John Christy says of climate scientists, “We have a vested interest in creating panic because money will then flow to climate scientists.” University of London biogeographer Philip Stott says that “If the global warming farrago collapses, there will be an awful lot of people out of jobs.”

    As for the rest of your post? It's just an op-ed and James Hansen is right now embroiled in controversy over his refusals to provide the source code for his temperature calculations.

    Weather data collection sites are supposed to be place where they are not affected by local conditions, so for example, in the car park at Tuscon campus with all its concrete and buildings would not be considered suitable, yet there is one! False data leads to false conclusions i.e. the planet is heating up.

    Read this. It's hard going, I know, but stick at it. http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1952#more-1952

    First Pericles
  4. airship

    airship Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2006
    Messages:
    297
    Location:
    French Riviera...
    Does anyone else find this debate a little weird, or is it just me?

    It's just that 99% of the content of the posts by some protagonists appear to be verbatim et litteratim ("copy and pastes" to you and me) of the text in the links posted. Links that we're commanded to consult in their entirety "at pain of remaining ignorant for the rest of our existences"...

    Do the contributors here have anything to say that they can express in their own words, in a way that we can all comprehend (making allowances for the intelligently-challenged amongst us like myself obviously), if not always agree with?

    Otherwise, I can easily see this thread degenerating into just a series of links to arguments as opposed to a real discussion.

    Unlike some perhaps, I'm not paid to contribute here or post links that benefit the propaganda of any political or commercial interests whose funding depends upon perpetrating claptrap, if that is what it is.

    Troll springs to mind too...
  5. Loren Schweizer

    Loren Schweizer YF Associate Writer

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2004
    Messages:
    1,352
    Location:
    Coral Gables/Ft. Laud., FL
    Um, nice day if it don't (colloquialism intended) rain, eh? ;)
  6. Rene GER

    Rene GER Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2004
    Messages:
    742
    Location:
    Northern Germany, West Coast
    airship, I'm right there with you!

    The one party says this and the other party says that. From that what I can read (you know english is not my mother language) here are two arguments:
    Humans are guilty and humans are guiltless about the global warming. Hmmm...this is difficult o_O
  7. DocRon

    DocRon Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2007
    Messages:
    91
    Location:
    Durban, South Africa
    John Lenon once wrote " All we are saying, is give PEACE a chance!" I wonder what he would say about this global warming issue...possibly " All we are saying, is give the WORLD a chance"

    I once read about a women that said each time she goes to the beach she tries to remove one additional piece of litter than what she arrived there with. Her motivation was that at least she left the beach in a cleaner state than when she arrived, even though she did not clean up the whole beach. What an amazing attitude she has toward life and our planet.

    Maybe we can all become like her and each do our bit to lessen our human impact towards global warming. If every person made a small effort to prevent this crisis from getting worse, then our planet would be better. So switch to more efficient power sources, walk or cycle to work instead of driving those fuel guzzling vehicles, recycle waste, vote for politicians who are pro peace and pro environment....or if there are none around, run for office in your area....

    Remember,we attract into our live what we focus on.

    YOU can make a difference!!! Start today.
  8. First Pericles

    First Pericles New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2007
    Messages:
    21
    Location:
    London (for now)
    Good enough. Let's agree to differ.

    First Pericles
  9. airship

    airship Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2006
    Messages:
    297
    Location:
    French Riviera...
    René, human-beings cannot be guiltless (unless perhaps, they are Bushmen who communicate mainly in "clicks" or similar and have negligible impact on their environments). Also, I'd just like to remind you that Jesus died for all our sins. But I'm unsure that He would so willingly "take the rap" for global warming today...?!

    I love the optimism shown in DocRon's post!

    I believe that human activities over the past couple of centuries have been a major impetus in global climate change. Whether the end-result will be an eventual cooling in some areas (say, if the Gulf-stream no longer goes up as far north as it does today) instead of the continued general global warming we've been seeing recently, well, my mind's open...

    There's little doubt that people in the 1st world and most developing countries will probably be able to adapt reasonably painlessly (ie. they are rich enough to be able to take adequate counter-measures). But what about the rest of humanity that basically live on a "day to day" basis (not forgetting the increasing nimbers of 1st world citizens who are in fact also living on a "day to day" basis...)? And what about the wildlife? When I've read about some annual water-courses that have "dried out" recently hereabouts, I've asked myself the question: "How does the wildlife cope with that?". Not that there's much wildlife left in Europe. And you only have to read about the attempted reintroduction of bears into the Pyrenee region of France to understand that there is no future for wildlife that "likes to eat mutton". (A great encouragement to the African and Asian countries that can still boast a true wildlife, and how to conserve it in the face of pressures from farmers and animal herders...?!)

    When the next tsunami strikes, it may be interesting to note that: those who live off the sea cannot any longer afford to live by the sea. Those spaces have been bought up by second-home owners, or occupied by hotels and other tourist resorts. I think that must be something developed by Wall St. - the packaged redistribution of risks or summat...?!
  10. DocRon

    DocRon Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2007
    Messages:
    91
    Location:
    Durban, South Africa
    Airship, you have brought up a good point... our animals. We should moniter their activities more closely as they somehow can sense things before we humans can. In the Tsunami in Malaysia in Dec 2004, apparantly all the animals headed for high ground before thr Tsunami actually hit the islands.

    Also migration patterns of various species have changed over the last decades. Some scientists attribute these changes to the warming of our oceans and changes in pH of the water. Certain fish species can only live within a very narrow range of pH and temp. Also changes are atributed to extinction of certain species and that disrupts the whole food chain as animals go in search of food.

    Has anyone seen the footage of polar bears drifting on small blocks of ice hundreds of miles away from the Arctic due to huge break ups of our glaciers. Eventually the bears drowned as they cannot swim back.... how sad is that!!!!

    And as far as our weather patterns are concerned.... UK has experinced the worst flooding in a century, Ohio is experincing severe flooding, Huricanes are becoming more violent (Dean reached Cat 5), Millions of acres of land is burning as you read this due to runaway fires, devastating earthquakes in Peru,.... the list goes on....I do not remember when our world experienced such diverse and severe weather patterns which are occuring much more frequently.

    As I mentioned on my previous post, we can all help a little by changing our habits today. Every small contribution adds to the whole!!
  11. OutMyWindow

    OutMyWindow Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    906
    Location:
    ...............
    Not all is bleak, things are looking up on the Whale front...

    Rare sighting of blue whales sparks optimism
    Linda Nguyen, Vancouver Sun
    Published: Saturday, August 18, 2007
    A scientific whale-spotting expedition has reported sighting five blue whales near the Queen Charlotte Islands -- the largest number seen in B.C. waters for half a century.

    The five blue whales, including one calf, were seen near the southwest end of the Queen Charlotte Islands near Cape St. James last Saturday, Fisheries and Oceans Canada biologist John Ford said Friday.

    The extremely rare sighting of blue whales is grounds for optimism they are making a comeback in B.C. waters, Ford said.

    We [haven't] seen a concentration of five blue whales for a very long time," Ford said of the massive animals, which can grow to 30 metres in length and weigh 100 tonnes.

    "It's very encouraging because they might be starting to recolonize off our coast again."

    Ford, part of a 13-member crew on an annual 10-day mission, was doing a survey of ocean wildlife with U.S. company Cascadia Research when he spotted the blue whales, the largest animals ever to exist.

    The team believes the whales, which are actually grey in colour, were feeding nearby.

    They were able to spend more than five hours photographing the back pigment markings on the majestic animals in order to be able to identify them later.

    "We came out to see these 30-metre-long animals in our tiny five-metre boats.

    "Most of us were accustomed to seeing humpback whales, but these were just huge animals," he said.

    "They didn't seem to mind us being there at all."

    Three of the whales were seen again the following day.

    The blue whale population has dwindled to near extinction due to commercial whaling.

    The blue whale population was once estimated at 300,000 worldwide. Blue whales have been protected since 1965, but only 10,000 of them are now known to exist.

    Off British Columbia, the blue whale population has never recovered, unlike off southern California, where it has grown to 2,000.

    "They've come back strongly in California but we've always wondered: 'Why not along our coast?'" Ford asked. "We're going to try to link the ones we saw last Saturday with that [California] population, to see if they're moving back up."

    In the past five years, the survey team has only seen one blue whale per expedition.
  12. DocRon

    DocRon Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2007
    Messages:
    91
    Location:
    Durban, South Africa
    Dolphin Species Goes Extinct Due to Humans

    That is superb news about the blue whales "outmywindow". Unfortunately things are not so great for the dolphins according to the following news exerpt:
    "The Yangtze River dolphin is now almost certainly extinct, making it the first dolphin that humans drove to extinction, scientists have now concluded after an intense search for the endangered species. The loss also represents the first global extinction of megafauna—any creature larger than about 200 pounds (100 kilograms)—for more than 50 years, since the disappearance of the Caribbean monk seal (Monachus tropicalis).

    The Yangtze River dolphin or baiji (Lipotes vexillifer) of China has long been recognized as one of the world's most rare and threatened mammal species.

    "It's a relic species, more than 20 million years old, that persisted through the most amazing kinds of changes in the planet," said marine biologist Barbara Taylor at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Fisheries Service. "It's been here longer than the Andes Mountains have been on Earth."

    In 1999, the surviving baiji population was estimated to be as low as just 13 dolphins, compared to 400 known baiji in 1981. The last confirmed glimpse of a baiji was documented by a photo taken in 2002, although unverified sightings were reported as recently as 2006.

    An international team of scientists conducted an intense six-week search for the dolphin in two research vessels during November and December 2006, covering the entire known range of the baiji in the 1,037-mile (1,669-kilometer) main channel of the Yangtze River. The researchers and their instruments failed to see or hear any evidence that the dolphin survives.

    "It was a surprise to everyone on the expedition that we didn't have any sightings at all, that the extinction just happened so quickly," Taylor recalled.

    This would make the baiji the first cetacean—that is, dolphin, porpoise or whale—to go extinct because of humans.

    The species was probably driven to extinction by harmful fishing practices that were not even devised to harm the dolphins, such as the use of gill nets, rolling hooks or electrical stunning. The findings are detailed Aug. 7 in the journal Biology Letters.

    "In the past, you had this out-of-control whaling that still didn't result in any extinctions, but these accidental deaths, which are much less visible to people, are much more insidious," Taylor said.

    Even if any baiji exist that scientists did not find, the continued deterioration of the Yangtze region's ecosystem—home to roughly 10 percent of the world's human population—means the species has no hope of even short-term survival as a viable population, the researchers added.

    "To help save the endangered Yangtze finless porpoises (Neophocaena phocaenoides asiaeorientalis) that also live in the river, we'll likely have to keep them in lake preserves or raise them in captivity, because the situation in that river doesn't look like it can be controlled at this point," Taylor explained.

    With the loss of the Yangtze River dolphin, the world's most critically endangered cetacean species now is the vaquita or Gulf of California porpoise (Phocoena sinus), of which 250 survive. The vaquita and other coastal dolphins around the world now face the same peril that claimed the baiji—accidental deaths from fishing.

    "We have to find a way to let small-time fishermen put food on their tables that doesn't involve putting gill nets in the water that decimate these species," Taylor said. "Unless we figure out a way to deal with this problem, the baiji may be the first in quite a long line of animals to face extinction."

    IMAGE GALLERY: Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
    10 Species Success Stories
    Top 20 Extinction Hot Spots
    Original Story: Dolphin Species Goes Extinct Due to Humans:"
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience...duetohumans;_ylt=AuPIW9crMvylk9E1Ny0C4Xt4hMgF
  13. DocRon

    DocRon Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2007
    Messages:
    91
    Location:
    Durban, South Africa
    Belching moose add to global warming

    FP this one is for you, even though I disagree with your thinking that we humans have little impact towards global warming.

    "OSLO (AFP) - A grown moose belches out methane gas equivalent to 2,100 kilograms (4,630 pounds) of carbon dioxide a year, contributing to global warming, Norwegian researchers said Wednesday.
    That is more than twice the amount of CO2 emitted on a round-trip flight across the Atlantic Ocean from Oslo to the Chilean capital Santiago, according to Scandinavian Airlines.

    "An adult moose emits about 100 kilograms of methane gas a year. But methane gas is much stronger than carbon dioxide, so to get the equivalent you have to multiply by 21," professor Odd Harstad at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences told AFP."

    Ref:http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070822/sc_afp/sciencenorwayclimate;_ylt=AipvmrRFBXOOcEENJdwgJyOs0NUE
  14. catmando

    catmando Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    471
    Location:
    Arlington Tx
    Excellent post!!:)

    I just got back from the Alabama Gulf Coast where I spent two days watching Offshore racing. Each time I left the beach I found litter to dispose of. Sadly, I saw very few people doing that. :(

    I drive a diesel truck that gets 23mpg. I recycle. I turn off unneeded lights in my home. I use the latest and greatest air conditioning system(helps to have sons in the business:D )

    We all need to do our part to improve our immediate environment, but having said that, I believe the evidence for GW is overwhelming. It is clear that almost all the deniers have ties to Big Energy. I tend to believe those scientists who are impartial.
  15. DocRon

    DocRon Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2007
    Messages:
    91
    Location:
    Durban, South Africa
    Thanks catmando.

    The world can certainly do with more people like you..... cool :rolleyes: calm ;) & efficient:)

    I agree that 'Big Energy' controls the world and the politicians in it!!!!

    Wow, this might spark off a new thread of conspiracy theories!!!




    You can make a difference!! Start today!!!
  16. YachtForum

    YachtForum Publisher/Admin

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    1,310
    Location:
    South Florida
    Guys,

    After considerable research and compiling an extensive amount of data, I'd like to submit the following chart as evidence of global warming...

    Attached Files:

  17. catmando

    catmando Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    471
    Location:
    Arlington Tx
    LOL bring on da HEAT!! :D
  18. DocRon

    DocRon Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2007
    Messages:
    91
    Location:
    Durban, South Africa
    Hey Yacht Forum, at least not all is bad concerning GW,:p LOL!!! 'Things' are really going to get heated up in years to come....lol:) :) :)
  19. OutMyWindow

    OutMyWindow Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    906
    Location:
    ...............
    With the Antarctic ice thawing faster than predicted the International scramble to secure their piece of the pie is on:
    _________________________________________________________
    Rhetoric heats up as Arctic ice melts away
    Randy Boswell and Mike De Souza, CanWest News Service
    Published: Friday, August 10, 2007
    Prime Minister Stephen Harper made two major funding announcements today to boost Canada's sovereignty in the resource-rich North as Denmark's science minister claimed his country has a strong case for ownership of the North Pole.

    "Canada's new government understands that the first principle of Arctic sovereignty is: Use it or lose it," Harper said in Resolute Bay, Nunavut, as he announced that the community, about 600 kilometres from the magnetic North Pole, will be the site of a new $4-million military training centre. The centre is to be manned by up to 100 Canadian Forces personnel at a strategic site along the Northwest Passage.

    Harper also confirmed that the government will spend $100 million to build Canada's first deep-water Arctic seaport at Nanisivik, on the northern tip of Baffin Island. The port would be key to shipping through the Northwest Passage, which is expected to provide a summer sea route to Asia within decades as global warming melts the ice floes.

    The two initiatives will "benefit communities throughout the region by creating jobs and opportunities and enhancing the safety and security of the people who live here." And, along with a 900-person boost to the Canadian Rangers' 4,100-member patrol, the investments will "significantly strengthen Canada's sovereignty over the Arctic."

    Meantime, however, Danish science minister Helge Sander was announcing that recent findings by his country's researchers suggest "Denmark could be given the North Pole."

    His assertion comes on the eve of a Danish-led research expedition to the Arctic and amid intensifying interest among all northern nations in securing shipping and seabed rights in the oil-rich region around the North Pole.

    The joint Danish-Swedish expedition, which will carry one Canadian scientist, will have its path cleared by a chartered Russian icebreaker. Its aim is to cement Denmark's claims to extended seabed territory north of Greenland, an island controlled by Denmark, Sander said in a Danish television interview.

    Sander said "preliminary investigations done so far are very promising," suggesting the disputed Lomonosov Ridge - a 1,500-kilometre undersea mountain range that runs past the Pole between Siberia and North America - is a geological extension of the northern coast of Greenland.

    "There are things suggesting that Denmark could be given the North Pole," he said.

    Canadian scientists, however, believe the Lomonosov Ridge could be seen as a continuation of Ellesmere Island, giving Canada a strong counterclaim against potential Russian and Danish land grabs.

    In Ottawa, the Danish ambassador to Canada, Poul Kristensen, told CanWest News that "it's no secret that Denmark, on behalf of Greenland" has interests in Arctic resources and "of course, potentially, we can make claims."

    While scientists from the five polar nations continue to collaborate on research aimed at mapping the Arctic sea floor, the governments of Canada, Russia, the U.S., Denmark and Norway remain at odds over an area thought to contain one-quarter of the planet's untapped petroleum reserves.

    Earlier this month, Russia ruffled feathers by dropping a Russian flag on the North Pole seabed at the end of a deep-sea expedition to claim the mineral riches of the Arctic.

    Today, Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahs Stoere called Russia's move "show business more than political reality," adding that: "What is important is that the Russians follow the international legal regulations in force, as they are doing."

    Harper said last week that Russia's flag-planting trek to the Pole shows that "sovereignty in our Arctic is going to be an important issue as we move into the future."

    Now the Danes - still at odds with Canada over the ownership of tiny Hans Island in the boundary waters between Ellesmere Island and Greenland - are again pressing their claims to the potentially lucrative sea floor around the Pole.

    The Danish government first stated its intent to vie for possible North Pole riches in 2004, when its Hans Island feud with Canada - now being dealt with quietly by diplomats - was still prompting heated public exchanges over the remote and icy rock.

    When it comes to potential Arctic oil, "we are speaking of values in the billions," said Denmark's Kristensen, "and therefore the area, of course, is of interest to us."

    University of British Columbia professor Michael Byers, Canada's leading expert on Arctic sovereignty, said in an interview that "all the other Arctic countries are fully committed to claiming the maximum amount of seabed to which they're entitled under the law of the sea convention."

    Byers added that "chartering the Russia icebreaker is a particularly inspired move and should send a strong signal to Ottawa" to make sure this country does everything possible to "secure all the seabed that is rightfully ours. The only thing holding us back right now is a lack of political will."

    Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the five polar nations could acquire huge swaths of Arctic sea floor if they can prove the claimed areas are linked to their continental shelves.

    Canada and Denmark have been collaborating over the past two years to gather data on the Lomonosov Ridge. Russia claimed ownership of the ridge in 2001, but the UN sent its scientists back to the Arctic to gather by 2009 more evidence to support the claim.

    Canada has until 2013 to submit its territorial claims, but the federal scientist leading the sea floor studies, Jacob Verhoef, said earlier this week there's a chance the research mission could be in jeopardy because of the tight deadline, strained resources and unpredictable Arctic ice conditions.

    On Thursday, a top U.S. climate researcher announced that the Arctic ice cover is shrinking faster this summer than at any time since reliable satellite images of the polar cap became available in 1979.

    © Vancouver Sun 2007

    Attached Files:

  20. catmando

    catmando Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    471
    Location:
    Arlington Tx
    Funny how this works, but rising temps and melting ice in the Arctic causes sea levels to rise in the Southern Hemisphere and vice versa. Alost all the South Sea Islands are reporting advancing sea levels. Also in the South, several years ago an iceberg the size of Rhode Island broke off from the Ross Ice Shelf in Antarctica.

    Arctic ice is melting as well, causing polar bears to drown because they can't reach ice before they tire out. The ice melt is threatening the Ice Road to ANWR oil drilling sites. Ironic isn't it?