You are viewing the VeggieBoards archive.
To view the regular site or join please click here.


PDA

View Full Version : Katrina's Real Name


Pages : [1] 2

jbphburg
08-30-05, 06:04 PM
Katrina's Real Name
by Ross Gelbspan

The hurricane that struck Louisiana yesterday was nicknamed Katrina by the National Weather Service. Its real name is global warming.

When the year began with a two-foot snowfall in Los Angeles, the cause was global warming.

When 124-mile-an-hour winds shut down nuclear plants in Scandinavia and cut power to hundreds of thousands of people in Ireland and the United Kingdom, the driver was global warming.

When a severe drought in the Midwest dropped water levels in the Missouri River to their lowest on record earlier this summer, the reason was global warming.

In July, when the worst drought on record triggered wildfires in Spain and Portugal and left water levels in France at their lowest in 30 years, the explanation was global warming.

When a lethal heat wave in Arizona kept temperatures above 110 degrees and killed more than 20 people in one week, the culprit was global warming.

And when the Indian city of Bombay (Mumbai) received 37 inches of rain in one day -- killing 1,000 people and disrupting the lives of 20 million others -- the villain was global warming.

As the atmosphere warms, it generates longer droughts, more-intense downpours, more-frequent heat waves, and more-severe storms.

Although Katrina began as a relatively small hurricane that glanced off south Florida, it was supercharged with extraordinary intensity by the relatively blistering sea surface temperatures in the Gulf of Mexico.

The consequences are as heartbreaking as they are terrifying.

Unfortunately, very few people in America know the real name of Hurricane Katrina because the coal and oil industries have spent millions of dollars to keep the public in doubt about the issue.

The reason is simple: To allow the climate to stabilize requires humanity to cut its use of coal and oil by 70 percent. That, of course, threatens the survival of one of the largest commercial enterprises in history.

In 1995, public utility hearings in Minnesota found that the coal industry had paid more than $1 million to four scientists who were public dissenters on global warming. And ExxonMobil has spent more than $13 million since 1998 on an anti-global warming public relations and lobbying campaign.

In 2000, big oil and big coal scored their biggest electoral victory yet when President George W. Bush was elected president -- and subsequently took suggestions from the industry for his climate and energy policies.

As the pace of climate change accelerates, many researchers fear we have already entered a period of irreversible runaway climate change.

Against this background, the ignorance of the American public about global warming stands out as an indictment of the US media.

When the US press has bothered to cover the subject of global warming, it has focused almost exclusively on its political and diplomatic aspects and not on what the warming is doing to our agriculture, water supplies, plant and animal life, public health, and weather.

For years, the fossil fuel industry has lobbied the media to accord the same weight to a handful of global warming skeptics that it accords the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change -- more than 2,000 scientists from 100 countries reporting to the United Nations.

Today, with the science having become even more robust -- and the impacts as visible as the megastorm that covered much of the Gulf of Mexico -- the press bears a share of the guilt for our self-induced destruction with the oil and coal industries.

As a Bostonian, I am afraid that the coming winter will -- like last winter -- be unusually short and devastatingly severe. At the beginning of 2005, a deadly ice storm knocked out power to thousands of people in New England and dropped a record-setting 42.2 inches of snow on Boston.

The conventional name of the month was January. Its real name is global warming.

Ross Gelbspan is author of ''The Heat Is On" and ''Boiling Point."

© 2005 Boston Globe

Tame
08-30-05, 06:26 PM
Yup. No place ever had large hurricanes before global warming.

PS The TOS says to copy part of the article, but not all of it. And a link helps.

4 Life
08-30-05, 06:32 PM
I've told him that before with other articles (guess my post was invisible).

Well, the can of worms is opened. I've wondered when someone would turn this horrible natural disaster into something political. Next thing you know it'll be Bush's fault. :rolleyes:

bstutzma
08-30-05, 06:51 PM
There have been several scientific releases recently that have suggested that the number of these bad storms is increased by global warming.

Tame
08-30-05, 07:30 PM
Yes, and those are interesting theories. But to claim any individual storm, considering this is not the first of its magnitude, is due to global warming is silly.

Ludi
08-30-05, 07:44 PM
I think it's leaping to conclusions to say for certain this one storm is caused by global warming. You can't extrapolate from a set of one, in my opinion.

(Look! I'm agreeing with Tame!)

Susykat
09-01-05, 02:55 AM
Well yeah we can't say for certain, but globally, weather has become increasingly turbulent of late. It isn't really hard to believe that if the environment is constantly being assaulted by pollution, that it's going to react. It's not necessarily a "natural" disaster. I don't know why some people have to relegate global warming to some kind of a "conspiracy theory" that's political etc. etc. There is actually EVIDENCE. Yes, natural disasters happen, but they are happening on a much wider scale than ever before.

Ludi
09-01-05, 09:30 AM
Yes, I definitely agree weather is changing, with permafrost melting, etc. I think it's too early to tell if this particular storm was directly a result of global climate change, we'll have to see if there's a trend toward more powerful storms.

jbphburg
09-01-05, 12:03 PM
I don't know that it's a matter of storms being caused by global warming, but rather their magnitude being exacerbated by higher surface water temperatures.

MrsKey
09-01-05, 12:14 PM
Yes, and those are interesting theories. But to claim any individual storm, considering this is not the first of its magnitude, is due to global warming is silly.

And of course the magnitude of the damage and destruction in New Orleans can't have anything to do with the fact that the average elevation of New Orleans is 8 feet below sea level.

Nope that can't be it.

Global warming is a nice theory - but it has yet to be conclusively proven. But it has been proven that storms of this magnitude have happened before the so-called Global Warming.

MrsKey
09-01-05, 12:16 PM
Well yeah we can't say for certain, but globally, weather has become increasingly turbulent of late. It isn't really hard to believe that if the environment is constantly being assaulted by pollution, that it's going to react. It's not necessarily a "natural" disaster. I don't know why some people have to relegate global warming to some kind of a "conspiracy theory" that's political etc. etc. There is actually EVIDENCE. Yes, natural disasters happen, but they are happening on a much wider scale than ever before.

We also see these disasters in much more prevalent ways thanks to instant communication. Are these happening on a wider scale? Or are they being reported on a larger scale? Or a combination of the two?

kirkjobsluder
09-01-05, 01:16 PM
And of course the magnitude of the damage and destruction in New Orleans can't have anything to do with the fact that the average elevation of New Orleans is 8 feet below sea level.

Nope that can't be it.

Global warming is a nice theory - but it has yet to be conclusively proven. But it has been proven that storms of this magnitude have happened before the so-called Global Warming.

I guess the question is how much evidence is enough? There is more evidence for global warming linked to increased CO2 in the atmosphere than there is for large objects in our solar system beyond Pluto. There is more evidence for global warming than there is for many medical procedures performed on a daily basis. There is more evidence for global warming than supports the claim that the Yucatan impact crater killed the dinosaurs.

And yet, with every other issue in science, people just give a handwave and say, "yet to be conclusively proven."

jbphburg
09-01-05, 01:20 PM
I guess the best thing to do is wait and see if global warming is genuine, and if so to then get in a time machine and go back and correct it.

kirkjobsluder
09-01-05, 01:26 PM
It's baffling to me. People will pop a baby asprin every day, and then say that global warming is just a theory.

4 Life
09-01-05, 01:36 PM
The thing with the flooding in NO. Those levee's were built in the 70's. They've long known that they needed to be reinforced and improved. The budget to get it done was cut over and over again. This was put on the backburner and shouldn't have been.

Ludi
09-01-05, 02:37 PM
I guess the best thing to do is wait and see if global warming is genuine, and if so to then get in a time machine and go back and correct it.


Yeah, I think that's a prudent plan. After all, we wouldn't want to leap to any conclusions. Probably best to continue what we're doing, pumping CO2 into the air, cutting down all the forests, etc. It's not like those climatologists know what they're talking about or anything.

:whack:

MrsKey
09-01-05, 11:32 PM
Yeah, I think that's a prudent plan. After all, we wouldn't want to leap to any conclusions. Probably best to continue what we're doing, pumping CO2 into the air, cutting down all the forests, etc. It's not like those climatologists know what they're talking about or anything.

I'm not advocating making no changes or being more eco-minded.

But I'm also not willing to attribute this solely to global warming - which is a theory that is contested by as many scientists as it is promoted by. And I'm less willing to make it an issue of partisan politics.

kirkjobsluder
09-02-05, 01:11 AM
But I'm also not willing to attribute this solely to global warming - which is a theory that is contested by as many scientists as it is promoted by.

Not true, the overwhelming consensus of people who study the weather is that it's a theory with strong support. The naysayers are reduced to a handful of holdouts and corporate shills.

Hummus!
09-02-05, 01:52 AM
Rest assured, Mother Earth will fight back and win in the long run. I think that this hurricane has reinforced (at least for me) that nature will always hold the upper hand. Humanity tends to get a bit arrogant and deny that something exists until the proof is concrete, but hey, we are all growing souls and quite not perfect yet. Many people already know that the proof is in the pudding from what is mentioned above! The best thing to do is to educate! Talk about it. Even to people who don't seem to care. If they listen, great, if not then they WILL when another major hurricane or drought or storm hits their neighborhood and they don't have food or water at their disposal for however long. Another wonderful thing to do is to make changes in your own personal life. Are you close enough to work or store to ride a bike? Like Nike says...'Just Do It' :) Do you need to run an air conditioner when it's 85 degrees outside? Probably not. I think the single greatest thing any person can do is to adopt a vegetarian diet, which all of us already have.

I tend to be an optimist and I can see a very bright near future if we all do our parts. :) There really is a lot to be positive about too. Major change happens when the masses get jerked around with. I know a quite a few people who are cutting back on driving BECAUSE gas prices are so high. It takes something like this to make major change in the hearts of man.

Have a splendid day everyone!
John

Ludi
09-02-05, 11:25 AM
But I'm also not willing to attribute this solely to global warming - which is a theory that is contested by as many scientists as it is promoted by.


I'm sorry but this is nonsense.

epski
09-06-05, 05:06 AM
When we're all eating Soylent Green, we still won't have conclusive proof... :D

Life2k
09-06-05, 05:21 AM
I am old enough to remember worse or equal hurricans long before evidence of global warming. So that won't float.

I do agree that ignoring global warming will be the death of the planet.

jbphburg
09-06-05, 04:18 PM
Worse or equal? I believe it's the worst hurricane to hit the US, and there have been a bunch of them in recent years, but ultimately you'd probably need the perspective of a long passge of time to make an observational assessment of whether increased water temperatures and hurricanes go together, not something we can likely afford to do.

MollyGoat
09-06-05, 05:35 PM
global warming - which is a theory that is contested by as many scientists as it is promoted by.

Yup. Nonsense indeed.

The media spins the global warming issue so that we will believe this--always presenting one scientist to speak for the global warming "theory" and one to say it's bunk. The thing is, the scientist who poo-poos global warming is almost always the same man. There's a consensus among scientists that global warming is happening, and as a result of human activity. It's a tiny handful of fringe scientists, mostly in the pockets of the oil industry, who insist on saying otherwise.

Very few things have EVER gotten as much consensus in the scientific world as global warming. It's as proven as cause-and-effect ever really is.

Ludi
09-06-05, 05:48 PM
Read more about global climate change

http://www.whoi.edu/institutes/occi/currenttopics/ct_abruptclimate.htm:

http://www.acia.uaf.edu/

Article here from Woods Hole scientist about the role of ocean heating in climate change:

http://www.whoi.edu/institutes/occi/currenttopics/abruptclimate_schmitt_testim.html

"Policy makers would like climate scientists to produce firm predictions. However, they must always remember that science is the process of testing ideas against facts and access to quantitative data is essential to the process. The ocean is a crucial element of the climate system, yet its "subgrid-scale" processes are too poorly understood and its basic structure too poorly monitored, to provide much confidence in the details of present day predictions. The National Climate Assessment Report is a good faith effort to assess the effects of global warming on US climate; the regional disagreements of the two available models are to be expected, given our poor understanding of the ocean. Global warming due to the effect of greenhouse gases on the radiation balance is as certain as the law of gravity, but the issues of how rapidly heat is sequestered in the oceans, its impact on the water cycle, and the important regional variations in climate, remain very challenging research questions. "