Mussels Found Near North Pole: Global Warming Sign

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ivan Seeking
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the implications of mussels found near the North Pole as a potential indicator of climate change, with participants exploring various aspects of climate phenomena, including El Niño and La Niña, and the role of greenhouse gases in climate dynamics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants highlight the discovery of mussels near the North Pole as evidence of rapid climate change, citing expert opinions on molluscs as indicators of warming.
  • Others introduce the idea of cooling Pacific Ocean waters due to the La Niña phenomenon, suggesting it may influence storm patterns.
  • There is a discussion about the historical cycles of El Niño, with some participants questioning the length and frequency of these cycles.
  • One participant argues that the ENSO cycle historically had an 11-year cycle and suggests it may be shortening due to global warming.
  • Another participant expresses skepticism about attributing climate changes solely to CO2 emissions, questioning the extent of human impact on climate.
  • Concerns are raised about the lack of conclusive evidence supporting the greenhouse theory, with calls for scrutiny of claims made in the original article regarding climate change causes.
  • Some participants acknowledge that other factors besides CO2 could influence climate, although this was noted as somewhat off-topic.
  • A later reply references U.N. scientists' claims about the Arctic warming due to human emissions, framing it as a point of contention regarding the narrative around climate change.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of viewpoints, with some supporting the idea of human-induced climate change while others remain skeptical and question the evidence and narratives presented. The discussion does not reach a consensus on the causes of climate change or the implications of the findings regarding mussels.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexity of climate phenomena and the potential influence of various factors, including natural cycles and human activity, without resolving these complexities or agreeing on definitions.

Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
8,252
Reaction score
2,664
Mussels found near North Pole in global warming sign

...The climate is changing fast," said Geir Johnsen, a professor at the Norwegian University for Science and Technology who was among experts who found the bivalves. Molluscs were a "very good indicator that the climate is warming," he said [continued]

http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/27235/story.htm
 
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
Last edited by a moderator:
Why are these sorts of events unprecidented in recorded history? El Nino runs what...a 14 years cycle?
 
I thought the El Nino cycles were getting shorter?
Once every 4 years if I'm not mistaken.
 
The ENSO (El Nino/Southern oscillation) is a collective warming effect that spans the Southern Pacific from Australia to South America. The two names are what the local effects were called at the two ends of the span. Historically it had an 11 year cycle - some people compared that to the Sun's sunspot cycles of 22 years. It does seem to be shortening, and that may be one more result of global warming.
 
And there hasn't been any change in the sunspot cycles?
Or any change in the sun's activity/output for that matter?

I'm not a big fan of blaming all clamate changes on Co2 (and other gasses/dust) emissions.
I find the mere blieve that humans can affect the planet that much arrogant to say the least.
And since i haven't seen any conclusive evidence that supports the "greenhouse" theory, i remain sceptical.
 
Marijn said:
I'm not a big fan of blaming all clamate changes on Co2 (and other gasses/dust) emissions.
I find the mere blieve that humans can affect the planet that much arrogant to say the least.
And since i haven't seen any conclusive evidence that supports the "greenhouse" theory, i remain sceptical.

At what point does the posted article blame all climate change on CO2 or other gases? In fact, how much time does the article even spend on greenhouse gas emissions?
 
Ok i admit, it was a bit off topic.

I was continuing on the two line above it.
The fact that things other than Co2 can be involved is indeed off topic, admitted again.
 
It's not off topic

U.N. scientists say the Arctic is now warming faster than any other region because of human emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases released from burning fossil fuels in cars, factories and power plants/

So it's okay to ponder about the preposterous propaganda.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
Heh I missed that in the article. My bad Marijn.
 

Similar threads

Hurricane Season could Renew Global Warming Debate
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
'Weather Makers' Seeks to End Climate Debate
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
Greenland ice cap may be melting at triple speed
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Mathematica This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics (Week 231)
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Mathematica This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics (Week 231)
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K