An enormous, ancient ice shelf has broken free from the arctic ice cap, the latest symptom of global climate change. With the Bush administration having yesterday admitted that global climate change is a genuine threat, perhaps this event will be acknowledged for what it is.
Comments are closed.
Actually this one was my fault. Sorry.
In the future, I pledge only to use my powers for good.
The most unbelievable quote from the story is, “This is a piece of Canadian geography that no longer exists.” Global warming is redrawing maps, and yet some Republicans still insist it doesn’t exist. I haven’t seen so many people so blind to something so obvious since baseball fans were attributing Mark McGwire’s home runs to juiced balls instead of juiced biceps.
With the Bush administration’s 180 yesterday, I hope that the Republican fad to deny reality will go out of vogue quickly.
I have to assume that global warming deniers must also oppose efforts to terraform Mars, since they argue that man is far too powerless to ever effect any real change on a planetary scale. OTOH, Mars is quite a bit smaller than Earth; maybe it’s just under their pretend line. :)
I would like to note that it’s interesting how the CNN print article stops short of using the quote from Derek Mueller (who cowrote a science paper on the event) that was used in the video clip-
And in the web print article they instead used only this part of the quote (the first half of the above quote) from him:
It’s a small difference but it shapes the message in a very definitive way.
Well, well. The treehugging environazis might have had a point after all.
I suspect they probably didn’t include it because it’s such an oft-repeated point: no individual event is necessarily a result of or evidence of global climate change. That’s absolutely true. But, of course, we’ve seen such a pattern over the course of the last ~150 years that has made the whole of the scientific world come to consensus in the past ten years or so that it’s clearly taking place. Did this ice shelf collapse because of global climate change? Probably. Can that be proved? Probably. But is the cost and time in doing so warranted? Probably not.
Is it? Perhaps in articles written and read by the scientific community. However it’s not something I’ve noticed hearing very often in the news that Joe Average might consume.
And there is where I differ in opinion with you. I think if it could’ve been definitively proven someone would have done so. But then I’m not a scientist, just a guy playing devils advocate.
Then of course the other questions- is Global Warming a result of the actions of man? or could it be just part of a larger planetary cycle?
Either way it seems only smart and reasonable to take the approach that one should always be a responsible custodian of the environment in which one lives.
Understand that I’m referring to this single incident. Given that it’s just been discovered, there’s been no time to prove it. Other such ice shelf collapses and major calvings have been proven by examining ice core samples, collapse rates, CO2 levels in the ice, sunlight exposure, regular temperature readings, etc. Taking the time to prove that this one incident was caused by global climate change may simply not be worth the time and money, because it would simply be replicating studies done many times previously in the past couple of decades.
Like I said. I’m not a scientist. Mass media is my area of specialty. I think the inclusions or exclusions are reflective of the media outlets (AP vs CBC) and the point the author wants to sell (as opposed to being an “oft repeated point”). An observation I make because it’s an interesting piece of minutia. Not to deny Global Warming- I don’t.
And another fun observation with regards to the CBC Video version- was the little tag at the end- for the unwashed under educated- which seemed to say (my interpretation)- “okay so you don’t believe in Global Warming?! Well get this- a drifting Ice shelf that large will F’ with your oil supply!”
It’s strange how, for years now — all the way back to 2001, in fact — I’ve been reading articles that talk about how the Bush administration is “conceding” or “admitting” that global warming is a serious problem. How many times to they have to concede/admit this point before we can stop using bogus and loaded terms to describe it?
Next headline: “Bush critics concede Bush acknowledged serious global warming problems years ago”
(Let me guess the response: “He may have acknowledged it, but he hasn’t done anything about it.” “He may have acknowledged it, but his policies show otherwise.” Well, fine, but let’s stop the whole conceding and admitting game.)
I know global warming is the fault of the Bush administration and their allies like Halliburton and that it was all Karl Rove’s idea in the first place, but what, exactly, should Bush and Co. be doing about the “problem?” Implementing Kyoto (as if the Senate would ever ratify it) is too little, too late according to the “experts,” to save us. (Although I concede that many of these same “experts” were warning us of an impending Ice Age just 30 years ago.)
So, while I guess it’s effective politics to keep beating Bush over the head with a thermometer every time an iceberg is created in some godforsaken part of the Great White North, failing to offer any reasonable solutions of your own will not exactly win you a nomination for Profiles in Courage. (Kinda like Iraq, actually.)
Here are five things, totally off of the top of my head:
I came up with those in three minutes. Others could probably assemble a far better list with a bit more time and at least a gesture at research. :)
6. Provide low-interest loan programs for remedial home energy materials.
7. Develop a construction standard about the minimum amount of insulation in any house.
8. Provide low-interest loans for solar/solar hot water. People in California heat their pools with solar. Some companies donate a system to someone in need everytime someone pays for a system. (BP, through a foundation)
9. Make energy education part of the required science cirricula taught in public schools.
10. Tax credits for employers that encourage car-pooling. (If this isn’t already being done in VA, I would be surprised.)
All of these things are cheaper than a new power plant, which nobody wants in their backyard anyway. And they all contribute to the reduction of the need for electric power generation.
When I lived in Sacramento, the utility there installed radio-activated switches that would cycle air conditioners when the need arose, saving brownouts.
If humans can affect the Earth’s climate in 100 years accidentally then it should be NO problem to terrafom Mars (a smaller planet) if we would really try! Right? NOT. People, there are so many factors that contribute to our climate that no one has the answers yet. Some new factors being investgated which need to be taken into account are cosmic radiation, sun cycles, Earth’s 21 year orbit fluctuations, natural thermal events, etc… By the way Mars’ polar caps are shrinking too…I am sure it is Bush’s fault. Oh yeah, back around 900 when it was very wam on Greenland and in Wurope I am sure an antcedent of Bush did that too…. WACKOS!!!