Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (49196)	6/16/2004 2:03:51 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

The Arctic-Our Global Thermostat by Maggie Villiger June 15 , 2004 — As Alan Alda traveled around the state of Alaska, he saw the effects of climate change happening right now. Lots of scientists told him that the Arctic is the proverbial canary in the coal mine when it comes to global warming. Here's why.. - - - - - - - - - - - - The Ice-Albedo Effect The Arctic is a unique landscape, covered by snow and ice for much of the year. And paradoxical as it may seem, it's precisely this frozen quality that helps make it more susceptible to warming. Snow and ice are white and very reflective. They have what scientists call a very high albedo - that's a measure of how much light a surface reflects. Between 70 and 80 percent of the sun's rays that hit this kind of frozen surface are bounced right back out into space. So the land or water beneath the snowy blanket doesn't get a chance to absorb much of that solar radiation. The white snow and ice are very reflective, whereas the darker sea water and land readily absorb the sunlight. Now imagine that a little bit of heat is added to the system. That's exactly what is happening in the real world; scientists say that the average temperature in Alaska has risen 4 degrees Fahrenheit since the 1950s. With warmer temperatures, some of the snow and ice melts, exposing the darker land or water underneath. These surfaces have much lower albedos - open water reflects less than 10 percent of the solar energy that hits it, for example. So more heat is absorbed by the landscape. Then a feedback loop kicks in. More heat is absorbed by the darker surface, so more snow and ice melt. More of the darker surface is exposed, leading to the absorption of even more heat, more snow and ice melt, and so on. Just a small temperature rise can set this feedback cycle into motion. The opposite effect is possible too; a small temperature decrease would lead to more snow and ice, would lead to more solar radiation being bounced back to space, would lead to colder temperatures, would lead to more snow and ice, and so on. Scientists describe the onset of past ice ages in this way. The more the snow and ice melts, the darker the landscape becomes, and therefore the more sunlight is absorbed. The very fact that the Arctic is frozen a good part of the year makes it fragile and easy to be drastically affected by global warming. Adding freshwater to the oceans as it melts from glaciers on the land surface will change the salinity of the seas, which can affect global ocean circulation patterns. Ecosystems are very different when frozen or thawed. Current conditions in many parts of the Arctic are fairly waterlogged, with water held close to the surface of the land. That's because just below ground level lies frozen soil, the so-called permafrost layer. But as permafrost thaws, water drains more easily and the landscape becomes more productive. The treeline migrates northward. As temperatures warm, the undecomposed peat in the landscape will begin to breakdown and emit the carbon that has been locked in the ground for millennia. It's another feedback system; warming will lead to increased levels of carbon dioxide reaching the atmosphere where it can act as a greenhouse gas and lead to more warming. The cycle is complex, though, and scientists aren't sure how the variety of factors involved will interact. Arctic Meltdown, Earth Meltdown? Scientists say the Arctic is changing right now. They point to rises in temperatures, decreases in the extent of annual snow and ice cover, thinning of glaciers and sea ice. That's too bad for the Arctic, but does it really affect the majority of us who live at lower latitudes and may never see the land of the midnight sun? In a word, yes. Polar regions play a major role in the climate of the entire planet. A global temperature gradient causes atmospheric circulation, with heat flowing from the equatorial regions toward the poles. This circualtion drives our weather patterns. On average, the north and south poles receive less solar radiation than areas near the equator. Because of the tilt of our spherical planet's axis, the sun's rays hit the poles at a more oblique angle than they do in the tropics. And because of albedo, the icy polar regions are also reflecting more of whatever solar radiation reaches them back to space than are equatorial regions. There's more solar radiation leaving the atmosphere in the arctic than there is entering. So the atmosphere at the Earth's surface in the Arctic will be colder, on average, than it is at lower latitudes. This global temperature gradient causes atmospheric circulation, with heat flowing from the equatorial regions toward the poles. The atmosphere strives for equilibrium, that is, for all areas on the globe to be about the same temperature. Warm ocean currents also carry heat to the higher latitudes. Basically all of the earth's weather is caused by these circulation patterns. And they're driven by the fact that the poles are currently heat sinks. If the Arctic warms up, the temperature gradient from the equator to the North Pole would get weaker, and that would cause weaker circulation patterns. The weather is notoriously hard to predict - just think about your local five-day forecast - so it's impossible to say what a future with weaker atmospheric circulation will look like. But it will definitely be different than the world we live in now. pbs.org

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (49196)	6/16/2004 12:50:34 PM
From: XBrit	Respond to of 89467

O'Reilly seems to think walking out of an event is a mature way to make a statement. He did the same thing when Terri Gross interviewed him on public radio a few months ago. The New York Post had the best report on the Moore incident: Heated exchange at 'Fahrenheit'? Give Fox News Channel star Bill O'Reilly credit for even attending Monday night's lefty celeb-glutted premiere of Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" - even if he walked out of the 110-minute Bush-bashing movie halfway through. Only last week on his syndicated radio show, O'Reilly likened Moore to Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels - author of the "Big Lie" theory of political communication. As O'Reilly explained to his radio audience, "Joseph Goebbels was the minister of propaganda for the Nazi regime and whose very famous quote was, 'If you tell a lie long enough, it becomes the truth.'" So it was a tad awkward when O'Reilly, trying to sneak out of the Ziegfeld Theater and almost at the exit, came jowl to jowl with Moore himself. Busted! "Don't you want to stay and watch the whole film?" the director demanded. A Lowdown spy reports that O'Reilly blushed, shook Moore's hand and muttered something about having to "tape something," and then slunk off into the night. But "The O'Reilly Factor" tapes in the afternoon, hours before it airs at 8 and 11 p.m. - and well before Monday night's premiere. Moore - who didn't return Lowdown's call for comment - was apparently skeptical. When his wife, Kathleen Glynn, came inside the theater a moment later, the filmmaker excitedly repeated O'Reilly's alibi in a scoffing tone. Yesterday, a Fox News spokesman explained: "The movie started 40 minutes late, and Bill had a previous commitment to go to." The flack added that O'Reilly was simply confirming Moore's booking on his Fox News show next week and that O'Reilly had already asked "Fahrenheit 9/11" producer Harvey Weinstein's office for a screener. Again, problematic: A source close to the movie says no videotapes are being given out to anyone under any circumstances. Surely not a little white lie! nydailynews.com