[extropy-chat] Bill Moyers' Comments - GlobalEnvironmentCitizenAward

[Jon Swanson]

> Which is a self contradicting statement. If the arctic ice cap is
> melting due to warming, then there isn't gonna be any cold to cool
> europe down. You can't chill your champagne without any ice, bub.

I'm not really an expert on the idea, but I have heard of it before
and decided to throw it out there because it seems to be /the theory/
cited by people who predict cooling in certain areas of the world as a
result of global warming.

The contradiction you point out makes sense. Perhaps though the
melting is going on during the summer. Salinity levels would not
change all that much during the winter months, and thus the conveyor
belt would still be shut down.

Perhaps the belt is currently warming the north enough that the
additional warmth from the green house effect is sufficient to melt
the ice.  Again, I just read the article and paraphrased, but for the
sake of illustrating an idea lets just assume that thermohaline
circulation is responsible for making northern regions 10 degrees
warmer than otherwise, and global warming adds another 2 degrees.
The extra 2 degrees may be enough to increase the rate of freshwater
melt during the summer months to the point that it shuts down the
cycle.

Once the cycle is shut down, the average temperature would 8 degrees
lower than normal. In this extremely contrived example.

There have been numerous studies on this, and these people are not
stupid.  The idea may be used for propaganda, claiming that it may
bring about an ice age certainly seems to be propaganda, but that does
not mean that it is scientifically unsound.

> There are plenty of methods of carbon sequestration that would be
> cheaper than hamstringing every developed economy with overbearing
> taxes on energy that would never be used on the environment, instead
> the energy tax revinues are to be used on constructing a global wefare
> state, not what the proponents of the greenhouse theory claim, but
> looking at the groups doing the talking, it is their primary agenda.

People in the US argue back and forth about the merit of Kyoto. I'm
more curious about the cheaper alternatives you suggest, and why they
are superior to cutting back our CO2 emissions. I'm not saying there
aren't any, so please don't rip me apart. I'd just like to know which
cheaper and /or superior solutions you are suggesting.  Please correct
my ignorance.

Again, if you want a more detailed explanation of the idea outlined in
my previous post, check out:
http://www.whoi.edu/institutes/occi/currenttopics/abruptclimate_joyce_keigwin.html


On Sat, 8 Jan 2005 21:33:52 -0800 (PST), Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> --- Jon Swanson <jon.swanson at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Global warming is causing the ice cap to melt, which is releasing
> > tremendous amounts of fresh water into the north atlantic, thus
> > increasing the buoyancy of the surface water. Increased buoyancy may
> > prevent the current from sinking into the depths and moving
> > southward, thus shutting down the cycle in the north atlantic.
> >
> > With no more warm water flowing into the north atlantic, winters in
> > NA and Western Europe will most likely become much colder.
> 
> Which is a self contradicting statement. If the arctic ice cap is
> melting due to warming, then there isn't gonna be any cold to cool
> europe down. You can't chill your champagne without any ice, bub.
> 
> >
> > I haven't come across any articles claiming that this can bring about
> > an ice age, but it will cause colder winters in north america and
> > europe.
> 
> North America gets its cold from Alaska and the Yukon. As there is no
> ice there, the winter wouldn't get colder.... you folks need to start
> using real logic when you construct your propaganda.
> 
> >
> > What are the better solutions to the CO2 problem you had in mind?
> 
> There are plenty of methods of carbon sequestration that would be
> cheaper than hamstringing every developed economy with overbearing
> taxes on energy that would never be used on the environment, instead
> the energy tax revinues are to be used on constructing a global wefare
> state, not what the proponents of the greenhouse theory claim, but
> looking at the groups doing the talking, it is their primary agenda.
> 
> =====
> Mike Lorrey
> Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
> "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
> It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
>                                       -William Pitt (1759-1806)
> Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism
> 
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
> http://my.yahoo.com
> 
>