Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The pros and cons of global warming; i.e. GCC

  1. Mar 16, 2006 #1

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    It's going to be interesting to see how this all affects trade, politics, agriculture, navigation... and even travel.

    Talk about irony!
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-2034643,00.html
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2006
  2. jcsd
  3. Mar 16, 2006 #2
    There was a NASA scientist on the radio a couple of weeks ago. He was talking about the melting of the glaciers. He said scientists noticed a very significant increase the melting rates. He said the problem is that the melting rates are nonlinear, and we do not know at what point if any a runoff effect could occur. He was also speaking out against the administrations censorship of data.
     
  4. Mar 16, 2006 #3

    Art

    User Avatar

    It will bring a whole new meaning to 'fighting for the high ground' :biggrin:
     
  5. Mar 16, 2006 #4
    Just wait for the antarctica oil blitz.

    that place has been totaly unexplored as a continent, it is probably super rich in oil and minerals and precious metals.

    I can just imagine the war that will come to get control over that chunk of land.
     
  6. Mar 16, 2006 #5
    cyrus,

    yeah, non-linear melting is not a good thing. we could end up with a sudden shutdown of the gulf stream and other major ocean currents.

    that will be bad.
     
  7. Mar 16, 2006 #6
    Actually, if a country gets there first and sets up a strong defense, there won't be any war. The only type of war that would ensue would be if two countries got there first and the companies somehow started to escalate violence. I highly doubt there would be a full fledged war for it.
     
  8. Mar 16, 2006 #7
    This reminds me of when Seward got the US to buy Alaska. He was heavily criticized at the time for what would otherwise be just a worthless chunk of ice and rock from the Russians, but Alaska turns out to have large oil reserves and other materials.

    While more oil may be an advantage of global warming, the consequences may be far greater.
     
  9. Mar 17, 2006 #8

    loseyourname

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    The bigger upside for Republicans than more oil: getting rid of those damn liberal hotbeds Los Angeles and New York. Hollywood would survive as an archipelago.
     
  10. Mar 17, 2006 #9
    The great "North Country" oil may not be all that easy to recover. Most of the current oil infrastructure is built on top of permafrost.

    http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=7768
     
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2006
  11. Mar 18, 2006 #10
    right......................
     
  12. Mar 20, 2006 #11
    On 60 minutes yesterday (3/19/06), the second segment focused on global warming. A scientist who writes reports on GW for congress was interviewed. He told about this admin. is censoring and rewriting data and reports that are submitted that warns of the possible ramifications and consequences of GW. He showed the interviewer a report that was rewriten by a lawyer appointed by Bush. This lawyer was appointed from an energy industry company (I think an oil giant) and it was showed where he took out parts of the report that discussed the negative impact of GW.

    Here:http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/17/60minutes/main1415985.shtml

     
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2006
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: The pros and cons of global warming; i.e. GCC
  1. The Global Warming Hoax (Replies: 53)

Loading...