The Methane Time Bomb

Arctic scientists discover new global warming threat as melting permafrost releases millions of tons of a gas 20 times more damaging than carbon dioxide

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2008/09/23-0

Post on this forum while you can !

Sweet global warming is natural!

Originally Posted by andrei155

Sweet global warming is natural!

Sure. Go tell that to the Polar bear who drown because there is not enough ice in the arctic anymore.

"The Arctic region as a whole has seen a 4C rise in average temperatures over recent decades and a dramatic decline in the area of the Arctic Ocean covered by summer sea ice. Many scientists fear that the loss of sea ice could accelerate the warming trend because open ocean soaks up more heat from the sun than the reflective surface of an ice-covered sea."

Totally natural.

Originally Posted by andrei155

Sweet global warming is natural!

Sure. So is child mortality. Both are bad things, though.

At least we can't prevent it, since it's 20 times worse than whatever we're doing. Takes a lot off my mind!

Originally Posted by andrei155

At least we can't prevent it, since it's 20 times worse than whatever we're doing. Takes a lot off my mind!

Have you actually read the article?

You are right, we can't prevent it. Global warming is natural.
Some people blame cow farts. Let's kill all the cows, have a world wide bbq and forget about it right? this way, your mind will be at peace and your belly will be full. What a happy world !

I read the first few paragraphs. That's where i got the fact that the methane gas is 20 times worse than our green house gases.

I'm just choosing to look at it from a different perspective. We are constantly being blamed for destroying our world. However, quite contrarily, it's destroying itself!

Originally Posted by andrei155

I read the first few paragraphs. That's where i got the fact that the methane gas is 20 times worse than our green house gases.

I'm just choosing to look at it from a different perspective. We are constantly being blamed for destroying our world. However, quite contrarily, it's destroying itself!

The methane gas being released is 20 times worse then our green house gas. That's true. But WHY is it being released? Because the ice is melting, because of global warming. WHO caused global warming in the first place? Dinosaure? Cows? No, a certain kind of monkeys called HUMANS!

We are the reason why this gas is being released. Also, saying "it's not our fault" is not gonna make it any better and definitely not gonna solve anything.

Originally Posted by andrei155

I'm just choosing to look at it from a different perspective. We are constantly being blamed for destroying our world. However, quite contrarily, it's destroying itself!

For good reason.

Did you know the United States of America (plus Canada and Mexico) had lions, tigers, camels, elephants, and more, until humans showed up 11,000 years ago? If you look at the prehistory of human migration, the truth is everywhere humans showed up, that's when and where big animals died out. The same thing happened 35 to 40 thousand years ago when people reached Australia, which used to have a marsupial cat the size of a cow.

You see human activity being given credit for the destruction of the natural world in the same way that you see electricity being given credit for allowing computers to work, and gravity for things falling.

Why can't the methane gas melt it? Maybe it was just there for a while, and slowly it escaped. I'm sure we helped, but not too largely.

I can't argue with you there John. All I can say is; "survival of the fittest". If we still had dinosaurs roaming around, we wouldn't be the top predator!

Originally Posted by andrei155

Why can't the methane gas melt it? Maybe it was just there for a while, and slowly it escaped. I'm sure we helped, but not too largely.

I can't argue with you there John. All I can say is; "survival of the fittest". If we still had dinosaurs roaming around, we wouldn't be the top predator!

If we still had dinosaurs roaming around, the earth wouldn't be dying.

We are sadistic predator and our best prey is the earth. We are killing it slowly but surely.
Have you ever heard about the story of the frog in a pot?

"if you put a frog into a pot of boiling water, it will leap out right away to escape the danger. But, if you put a frog in a kettle that is filled with water that is cool and pleasant, and then you gradually heat the kettle until it starts boiling, the frog will not become aware of the threat until it is too late.
The frog's survival instincts are geared towards detecting sudden changes."


I guess you are not any smarter than a frog.

I hope that was a joke .... or else that comment wouldn't be too nice.....

If you were caught in rain while walking home, and when you reached your "destination" you were completley soaked ... would it make a difference if some guy sprayed you with his super-soaker?

Ok, now ..

Let x = amount of greenhouses gases.

If the world was already releasing 20x, would it make a difference if we released x?

Originally Posted by andrei155

I can't argue with you there John. All I can say is; "survival of the fittest". If we still had dinosaurs roaming around, we wouldn't be the top predator!

That's the problem. The periodic table has about 120 elements. Nature uses about 20. Mankind uses all of them - even the toxic ones. A snail "knows" (with the knowledge being embedded in its behavior - the way an insect "knows" how to walk because the control algorithm is built into the legs) that it has a stake in its children's survival, as well as its grand children, and so on for 1,000 generations, on to infinity. It has a genetic stake in its descendants also being able to live, and carry on its genes.

Human industrial activity is rapidly (in geological time) making our planet uninhabitable. If after 10 generations humans are no longer able to survive, then by definition we aren't fit. This lack of fitness comes from the pollution that's going on today.

Unlike the dumb snail, we actually have the intelligence and tools to change the destiny we're creating for ourselves, if only we choose not to finish digging the grave - and follow that choice up with action.

The problem is that no one is willing to take a step back 500 years.

Everything we're doing is causing some form of environmental damage! I don't see us just dropping everything sometime in the near future.

We're just going to keep trying to "fix" the problem.

Originally Posted by andrei155

I hope that was a joke .... or else that comment wouldn't be too nice.....

If you were caught in rain while walking home, and when you reached your "destination" you were completley soaked ... would it make a difference if some guy sprayed you with his super-soaker?

The difference is that if we were as smart as we pretend to be, we would have brought a rain jacket or an umbrella to get home dry.

Originally Posted by andrei155

Ok, now ..

Let x = amount of greenhouses gases.

If the world was already releasing 20x, would it make a difference if we released x?

No you are right. There are so many industries releasing garbage all over the world that it doesn't matter if you throw your mc donald or starbucks cup on the ground. With only 6.7 billions people on earth, it really doesn't matter if everyone contributes even just a tiny bit to the world pollution. We are enough people to blame it on someone else.

Originally Posted by andrei155

The problem is that no one is willing to take a step back 500 years.

You're absolutely right on this point.

But do you think 500 years from now, they'll be willing (and able!) to travel 500 years back in time to, well, today, to get us to change our ways?

Do you think humans will still be around after 500 years? Martin Rees finds reason to ask if this is our final century. It's an 18 minute video, and a compelling one - worth the time to watch.

Wewt!!

Methane makes a great fuel source.. I say we build some pipelines and start pumping that stuff down here..


And if people 500 years in the future could travel back in time to get us to change our ways, why aren't they here?? Or been here all along?? Or is Obama really from the future?? That would be cool.. If he says that in a debate I'll vote for him!!!

Originally Posted by andrei155

Let x = amount of greenhouses gases.

If the world was already releasing 20x, would it make a difference if we released x?

Genius. I'm guessing Julien regrets posting this article. Assuming the following are all true:

1) greenhouse gases are causing the global warming
2) gas being released by the glaciers is 20 the volume being produced by humans

Then it doesn't matter how we got here, the wheels set in motion are self fueling and will continue to roll to whatever end regardless of what we do. At some point, it makes sense to stop stacking sandbags at the edge of the levy, and get the hell out of New Orleans and head for Houston or Dallas. Your sand bags have the potency of a fart in a tornado.

Sure its gonna p*ss off Al Gore, but we need to shut down the carbon credit market. We need to take a step back from the wreckless pursuit of "green" technology at any cost, and properly test and analyze the environmental impact some of these solutions will have. Finally, its absolutely crucial that those who dont want the coming ice age to impact their lives in a severe way buy property in Central America as soon as possible.

Originally Posted by cbwm

Genius. I'm guessing Julien regrets posting this article. Assuming the following are all true:

1) greenhouse gases are causing the global warming
2) gas being released by the glaciers is 20 the volume being produced by humans

I thought I already answered that point us being 6.7 billions on earth. Since then is it okay for those people to pollute because there is something worse somewhere? It's not because there are people rapping and killing other people that's it's okay to still a purse.

But I guess some of us call stilling a purse "Genius"

Sorry Julien,

The problem is, you cant equate stealing a purse, or anything else to the type of "pollution" you are referring to. It would be like saying a soccer mom driving her kids to the game in her carbon emitting, gas guzzling SUV is the same as someone robbing or stealing, when in reality the two don't even come close to equating. If we all truly want to stop polluting and have a truly zero footprint, we need to all stop breathing. I'm sure you will find that solution as unwelcome as I do.

The properly stated goal is to reduce our footprint within the boundaries of reason. When you point out that reducing our carbon footprint will have a negligible effect on the production of greenhouse gases, it just seems like common sense to focus our efforts on surviving the ice age your article makes clear is inevitable and soon to arrive. I'm not advocating ramping up our CO2 output, but it would make sense to not stop breathing in the meantime in an effort to avoid the unavoidable. If you really want to address the problem at its core, we dont need to go back in time 500 years. We need to reduce world population to what it was 500 years ago, and our carbon footprint will unquestionably reduce to something similar, even if every last one of us drives a smokey car with no catalytic converter.