Global Warming Will be the Death of Earth (1 Viewer)

[danarhea]

Yup, you read it right. No matter what we do, every living thing on the earth is going to die. Absolutely nothing we can do about it.

Why am I so sure? It has a lot to with the lifecycle of a star. As it burns up more of its fuel, it grows hotter. All of life on earth, from humans down to microbes, came about only in a small fraction of the life of our sun. And eventually it will all come to an end. Contrary to popular belief, the Earth is not going to live for another few billion years, but relax. We still have a few hundred million years before we all die.

The first stage will be what is called the wet greenhouse effect. During this period of time, the Earth's climate will grow much warmer. Because of this warming, more of our atmosphere is going to boil off into space. This is happening right now, but is on the order of about 1 cm per year. As the Earth warms, this rate of boiling off will increase, and the Earth will warm further, locked in an endless loop of boiling off and further heating.

In this first stage will be the end of the age of plants, as chloroplasts of plants break down, resulting in the death of all plant life. This will occur at about 700 million years from now. Soon after every living thing on the earth will die, except for some microbes, which will give the earth a pink color instead of the blue color it has now.

The second stage will be the dry greenhouse effect, in which the Earth will become hot, dry, and desolate, with no living thing remaining. This will occur about 1 billion years after the age of plants has ended. A few billion years after that, the sun will engulf the Earth, because as it has heated up, its chromosphere has expanded. This will happen before the sun even starts its red giant stage of life. When that happens, the sun will blow off a huge coronal mass that will scorch all planets in the solar system. At that time, our solar system will be dead, with no possibility of anything being able to live on any planet in the system.

My source for this was a seminar from the University of Washington which was broadcast on Dish Network. I found it so fascinating that I saved it on my DVR, then ran it off on a DVD.

So, now knowing that the Earth doesnt have as long to live as people might think, my question is why are we in such a hurry to speed the process up?

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Yup, you read it right. No matter what we do, every living thing on the earth is going to die. Absolutely nothing we can do about it.

Why am I so sure? It has a lot to with the lifecycle of a star. As it burns up more of its fuel, it grows hotter. All of life on earth, from humans down to microbes, came about only in a small fraction of the life of our sun. And eventually it will all come to an end. Contrary to popular belief, the Earth is not going to live for another few billion years, but relax. We still have a few hundred million years before we all die.

The first stage will be what is called the wet greenhouse effect. During this period of time, the Earth's climate will grow much warmer. Because of this warming, more of our atmosphere is going to boil off into space. This is happening right now, but is on the order of about 1 cm per year. As the Earth warms, this rate of boiling off will increase, and the Earth will warm further, locked in an endless loop of boiling off and further heating.

In this first stage will be the end of the age of plants, as chloroplasts of plants break down, resulting in the death of all plant life. This will occur at about 700 million years from now. Soon after every living thing on the earth will die, except for some microbes, which will give the earth a pink color instead of the blue color it has now.

The second stage will be the dry greenhouse effect, in which the Earth will become hot, dry, and desolate, with no living thing remaining. This will occur about 1 billion years after the age of plants has ended. A few billion years after that, the sun will engulf the Earth, because as it has heated up, its chromosphere has expanded. This will happen before the sun even starts its red giant stage of life. When that happens, the sun will blow off a huge coronal mass that will scorch all planets in the solar system. At that time, our solar system will be dead, with no possibility of anything being able to live on any planet in the system.

My source for this was a seminar from the University of Washington which was broadcast on Dish Network. I found it so fascinating that I saved it on my DVR, then ran it off on a DVD.

So, now knowing that the Earth doesnt have as long to live as people might think, my question is why are we in such a hurry to speed the process up?

Well we only have a few billion years and countless ice ages to go before we hit this unpleasant ending.

 

[Busta]

I think that either we will nuke ourselves out of the picture or the Earth will shake us off like flees before we could ever do the planet in.

 

[Napoleon's Nightingale]

Global Warming is a natural process which is followed by an ice age. Look up the Milankovitch Cycles and the Milankovitch Effect...they explain everything. It's not the armagedon it's been painted to be.

 

[Canuck]

does that mean we should racing to speed up the process

 

[Napoleon's Nightingale]

does that mean we should racing to speed up the process

Humans have had only a microscopic effect on the cycle. It's not going to speed up the proccess..we don't have the ability to change how the earth sits or rotates on it's axis.

 

[robin]

Global Warming is a natural process which is followed by an ice age. Look up the Milankovitch Cycles and the Milankovitch Effect...they explain everything. It's not the armagedon it's been painted to be.

So you think the fact global warming started at the same time as the industrial revolution, is a coincidence then ?

 

[Napoleon's Nightingale]

So you think the fact global warming started at the same time as the industrial revolution, is a coincidence then ?

Thats a myth. Global warming and cooling is a 20,000 year cycle depending on the tilt and rotation of the Earth on it's axis which is a fact displayed in all of the cycles and weather patterns in history. Global Warming and cooling had occured before the Industrial Revolution. There is also a direct connection between ice ages and the invariable plane in which our solar system rotates which would also explain the pattern of Global warming to an ice age to Global warming to an ice age etc. We are currently in a period of Global warming and the highest scientific measurements for the effect of the human population show that it has only effected this natural process by less than 0.6%

 

[Busta]

So you think the fact global warming started at the same time as the industrial revolution, is a coincidence then ?

I don't understand. If global warming started with the Industrial Revolution, then what stoped the last Ice-Age? Or are you saying that the Ice Age lasted up until the Industrial Revolution?

Also, any thoughts as to the Martian global worming?
http://backoffgov.blogspot.com/2005/08/martian-global-warming.html
http://mensnewsdaily.com/blog/2005/09/hey-liberals-better-save-mars-from.htm
Are our 2 rovers spewing out so much pollution that they are having a negative impact on the Martian climate (such as it is)?

 

[Napoleon's Nightingale]

So you think the fact global warming started at the same time as the industrial revolution, is a coincidence then ?

Oh and by the way, volcanos and fissures spew out more carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, fluorine, and chlorine in one belch than the entire human civilization has. Why are you so concerned about carbon dioxide anyway? We do have plants on this planet.

 

[robin]

I don't understand. If global warming started with the Industrial Revolution, then what stoped the last Ice-Age? Or are you saying that the Ice Age lasted up until the Industrial Revolution?

Also, any thoughts as to the Martian global worming?
http://backoffgov.blogspot.com/2005/08/martian-global-warming.html
http://mensnewsdaily.com/blog/2005/09/hey-liberals-better-save-mars-from.htm
Are our 2 rovers spewing out so much pollution that they are having a negative impact on the Martian climate (such as it is)?

"Are our 2 rovers spewing out so much pollution that they are having a negative impact on the Martian climate" :lol:
I would like to see data for solar radiation flux levels & solar temperature for the last century. Maybe warming is due to the sun, if as they say... Mars is warming also. Also can how another 0.5% of CO2 or however much, have a significant effect on earth temperature when the predominant greenhouse gas water vapour which is present & always has been & as a far higher proportion of the atmosphere.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

"Are our 2 rovers spewing out so much pollution that they are having a negative impact on the Martian climate" :lol:
I would like to see data for solar radiation flux levels & solar temperature for the last century. Maybe warming is due to the sun, if as they say... Mars is warming also. Also can how another 0.5% of CO2 or however much, have a significant effect on earth temperature when the predominant greenhouse gas water vapour which is present & always has been & as a far higher proportion of the atmosphere.

You deserve a cookie. You're the only other person I've ever seen to point out that significant fact.

And certainly a trend of warming could be coincident with the rise of industrial society. No reason why not. Periods warmer than today are recorded in history already.

 

[Canuck]

I don't see the logic behind polluting the earth and sending up green house gases

there is a corelation between warming trends and green house gases
although it is true that there is a natural cycle of warming and then cooling
we are shaving many years off the warming trend we are in
and indeed hastening it's effects
IT doesnt have to warm much to see the changes, indeed in the short time i have been here on earth I have noticed the changes myself.

other events in our past history have altered the cycles
the dying off of the dinosaurs was a sudden event and not one that took many years to achieve

they are finding tropical plant fosils that are associated with tropical climates
in the arctic under the ice

consequently there are some drastic events in our past that are both catasrophic in magnitude and sudden in nature

we clearly know little about ,greenhouse gases and the waming cycle .
and saying that green house gases dont contrbute TO GLOBAL WARMING
is a mistake that we cant afford not to dismiss

considering that the world turns on its axis which is due to both gravity and balance and its wobble is erratic
the melting of the polar ice caps ,could shift the balance because of the loss of millions of tons of ice ,so that the fluid earth now has the united states as the north pole for example.
and where the arctic once was in the tropical zone and now is around the south pole could one day be in the tropics again
indeed the north pole is shifting location each year
while the magnetic field shifts to inversion

 

[Napoleon's Nightingale]

I have just the thing to put a stop to this nonsense. These are charts of the Earth's climate over the past 40,000 years. Global Warming is a natural process. Period.

http://www.grida.no/climate/vital/02.htm

 

[Canuck]

I have just the thing to put a stop to this nonsense. These are charts of the Earth's climate over the past 40,000 years. Global Warming is a natural process. Period.

http://www.grida.no/climate/vital/02.htm

If you had cared to read my meanderings
you would have noticed
that global changes do exist, that we know very little of.
we don't need charts to tell us this
But the spewing up of greenhouse gases ,hastens the violent changes.
And anyone advocating that we should disregard this corelation
are not going to convince people that pollution is a good thing
perhaps when you need gas masks to breath you will concur
by then you may stand agape and scratch your head and exclaim but the charts say so

 

[Napoleon's Nightingale]

If you had cared to read my meanderings
you would have noticed
that global changes do exist, that we know very little of.
we don't need charts to tell us this
But the spewing up of greenhouse gases ,hastens the violent changes.
And anyone advocating that we should disregard this corelation
are not going to convince people that pollution is a good thing
perhaps when you need gas masks to breath you will concur
by then you may stand agape and scratch your head and exclaim but the charts say so

Hogwash. Humans have effected it but only in a minescule way..in fact even the highest scientific estimates are only at 0.6% and it doesn't hasten anything. I believe that we should be reverting to alternative fuel and power sources but not because of global warming. You are clearly exagerating. 0.6% doesn't justify regressing back to the stone age. As I said previously, volcanos and fissures spew out more carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, fluorine, and chlorine in one belch than the entire human civilization has.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

Hey. I've been looking all over for charts like that. Thanks.

 

[Napoleon's Nightingale]

Hey. I've been looking all over for charts like that. Thanks.

No problem, search through all of the graphs, tables, and charts. They're all very interesting and they proove without a doubt that humans haven't affected global warming all that much. It acctually says "Warming is evident in both sea surface and land-based surface air temperatures. Urbanization in general and desertification could have contributed only a small fraction of the overall global warming, although urbanization may have been an important influence in some regions. Indirect indicators such as borehole temperatures and glacier shrinkage provide independent support for the observed warming. It should also be noted that the warming has not been globally uniform. The recent warming has been greatest between 40°N and 70°N latitude, though some areas such as the North Atlantic Ocean have cooled in the recent decades." I was suprised to learn that Asia, South America, and Africa released more carbon dioxide than the U.S.

Heres a source from that same link: "http://www.grida.no/climate/vital/17.htm"

 

[OnionCollection]

Oh and by the way, volcanos and fissures spew out more carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, fluorine, and chlorine in one belch than the entire human civilization has. Why are you so concerned about carbon dioxide anyway? We do have plants on this planet.

Volcanoes annually emit about 1% of the carbon dioxide that humans emit annually. Hence why co2 levels in the atmosphere have sky rocketed since the beginning of the industrial revolution.

Take a look at the graph you posted of co2 levels over the last 200,000 years: http://www.grida.no/climate/vital/02.htm. It does seem cyclic, but note that the graph ends at 280ppm. Well the co2 in the atmosphere was 280ppm in the 1800's, and had been at that level for quite some time. But since then it has risen to 380ppm. Plot that on the graph and you will see that's a huge spike (it goes right off the top), which is completely out of character with the normal course of co2 changes on the graph. A better graph that displays this: http://www.environment.sa.gov.au/sustainability/images/c02_levels.jpg

The reason is that the co2 spike has been caused by man made co2 emissions. co2 is being added to the atmosphere far faster it can be removed.

 

[C.J.]

The reason is that the co2 spike has been caused by man made co2 emissions. co2 is being added to the atmosphere far faster it can be removed.

In this instance it's actually because a single year spike, a decade long spike and a hundred year spike or even a thousand year spike would not even appear on the graph. Each peak and valley on the chart you provided covers approximately 5000 years, except for the peak showing the "current" reading. In other words, the chart is misleading in that it is showing a relatively short term peak (Well less than a thousand years) in relation to averages of the past in approximate 5000 year increments.

 

[teacher]

The sun heats up 10% every billion years.

Strangely Billo gets 10% uglier every billion seconds.

NN has this topic well in hand. Oh champs....

 

[Technocratic_Utilitarian]

It is also interesting to note that many of the newer scientific reports that came out in the early part of this and late part of last year were showing that man DOES have an impact on global warming. The newest models are accurate representations of human influence in the process. It is not totally man's fault, but man is not helping; he's making it worse than it would be.

A change in a couple degrees out of normality could be quite devastating.

 

[Napoleon's Nightingale]

Volcanoes annually emit about 1% of the carbon dioxide that humans emit annually. Hence why co2 levels in the atmosphere have sky rocketed since the beginning of the industrial revolution.

Carbon dioxide is not the only greenhouse gas emitted by volcanos. You also have to take into account the fact that the Earth was much more volcanically active in the past and that volcanos are all interconnected. Either way you look at it, the amount of greenhouse gases released by humans has had only a minescule effect on global warming.

Take a look at the graph you posted of co2 levels over the last 200,000 years: http://www.grida.no/climate/vital/02.htm. It does seem cyclic, but note that the graph ends at 280ppm. Well the co2 in the atmosphere was 280ppm in the 1800's, and had been at that level for quite some time. But since then it has risen to 380ppm. Plot that on the graph and you will see that's a huge spike (it goes right off the top), which is completely out of character with the normal course of co2 changes on the graph. A better graph that displays this: http://www.environment.sa.gov.au/sustainability/images/c02_levels.jpg

We must also take into account the number of natural phenomena which have taken place in recent years which have had an impact on the earth's magnetic field and the earth's rate of rotation. Both of them affect the global warming process. Not to mention the increase in solar output and intensity of solar flares over the past 10 years.

The reason is that the co2 spike has been caused by man made co2 emissions. co2 is being added to the atmosphere far faster it can be removed.

Partially, yes.

 

[OnionCollection]

Carbon dioxide is not the only greenhouse gas emitted by volcanos. You also have to take into account the fact that the Earth was much more volcanically active in the past and that volcanos are all interconnected. Either way you look at it, the amount of greenhouse gases released by humans has had only a minescule effect on global warming.

Im not sure when you mean by earth being more volcanically active in the past, as the current co2 spike has occured pretty much in the present in the last 200 years. Volcanic activity during this time cannot explain that spike. Fossil fuel burning emits over 100 time more co2 into the atmosphere than volcanoes do.

We must also take into account the number of natural phenomena which have taken place in recent years which have had an impact on the earth's magnetic field and the earth's rate of rotation. Both of them affect the global warming process. Not to mention the increase in solar output and intensity of solar flares over the past 10 years.

I am not arguing for global warming at this time. I am showing that human emissions are the major cause of the co2 spike in the last 200 years. So the claim that is often heard that humans are too insignificant to compete with natural phenomenon is wrong. We are able to do just that and are currently out doing volcanoes at emitting co2.

"The reason is that the co2 spike has been caused by man made co2 emissions. co2 is being added to the atmosphere far faster it can be removed."

Partially, yes.

Just about all the extra co2 must be due to human emissions. This can be worked out just from the numbers.

First the burning of fossil fuels is adding about 26 billion tons of co2 into the atmosphere per year. This rate of emission is expected to rise to 37 billion tons of co2 per year by 2010 due to developing countries like China. Carbon sinks, such as forests and the oceans are only able to remove about half of this amount of co2 per year. This means the other half accumulates in the atmosphere each year which is the reason co2 content of the atmosphere has risen.

Second there are no natural co2 sources that have increased emission rate in the last 200 years that can also account for such a rate of accumulation in the atmosphere. Volcanic activity for example is insignificant to have any effect (emits about 200 million tons of co2 per year - which is less than 1% of the co2 that fossil fuel burning currently emits). The only source of co2 that has greatly increased emission rate in the last 200 years is human burning of fossil fuels (from approximately 0 tons of co2 per year to 26 billion tons per year)

Third the rate of increase of co2 levels in the atmosphere has itself been increasing since the 1800s, and follows the rate at which fossil fuel burning has slowly increased over time.

And fourth and last is the sheer coincidence that after the last 10,000 years of relative atmospheric co2 stability, a co2 spike would occur at exactly the time when we start emitting huge quantities of co2 into the atmosphere.

 

[tecoyah]

Likely....the emminent release of Methane from the melted permafrost in Siberia will have more effect on Global Warming than all the CO2 released my Mankind. We may very well be speeding this process up, I simply dont KNOW, and neither does anyone else. From what I have been able to gather, information wise on this issue, most of the change is part of a cyclical climate shift this planet goes thru periodically.