Global warming- the end of the world as we know it?

I guess nobody here cares about how we are destroying Allaah (swt)'s world then. Or how my generation will probably have to live as impoverished asylum seekers in the US.

I don't think a lot of people understand the severity of the danger global warming poses, to be honest. I think they might get mental images of some sort of global radiator and just start giggling.

format_quote Originally Posted by Keltoi

The main danger is an increase in natural disasters. I'm sure human interference has affected the chemical makeup of the Earth's atmosphere, but I'm still not totally convinced this phenomenon is totally man made. I think we are also seeing a natural change in Earth environment.

The geological history indicates that this is nothing new and is part of a normal cycle. true we may have sped the process up a bit, but so far there is no indication of anything that has not occured in the past.

format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow

The geological history indicates that this is nothing new and is part of a normal cycle. true we may have sped the process up a bit, but so far there is no indication of anything that has not occured in the past.

I've been keeping on top of this research, from the satellite imagery of the collapse of the Larsen ice shelf (antarctic) to the magnetic shifts in the northern pole. Alaska will lose their beloved "Northern Lights" which are now on route to Siberia. Archealogical evidence from research teams in the arctic territory indicate that the region used to be tropical at one time.

Call it a growing pain, and the changes will be radical, but it's just the nature of the world. No need to go all doomsday over it. Just put your seat-belts on and be sure your trays are locked in the upright position. We're going to go for a wild ride.

Some interesting links that discuss these subjects are:

http://www.livescience.com/forcesofn...ole_shift.html

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2005/s2384.htm

http://nsidc.org/iceshelves/larsenb2002/

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5034026.stm

Ninth Scribe

format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow

The geological history indicates that this is nothing new and is part of a normal cycle. true we may have sped the process up a bit, but so far there is no indication of anything that has not occured in the past.

When were these massive temperature changes in the past? Natural climate change takes much longer than 50 years.

That rise at the end is much larger than the natural ups and downs at the other.

its all part of Allahs decree, who knows mayb the whole sky cracking and day of judgement cud come about when global warming takes its full toll



^^ THATS A VERY DODGY GESS BTW, i DONT REALLY BELIEVE IN THAT AT ALL !!!

format_quote Originally Posted by fishdude

Why do we concentrate on the illegal US wars? llegal US oil firms may cause many more Muslims to die or have their lives destroyed. Bangladesh, Malaysia, Indonesia, Egypt, the UAE, Kuwait, Iraq, Bahrain and the Maldives will all be severly affected by global warming, but where are all the Islamic protests?

we v already caused a lot o 'mayhem' protestin against certain fings...do u fink it wud b appropriate to protest against dat too??...der r much mor bigger fings dan global warming...de ummahs lakin trus n blief...in dis case wt do u fink wud b much mor appropriate?...tryin ta xtinguish de borders o fire between de muslim ummah or to protest against global warming

format_quote Originally Posted by Fishman

When were these massive temperature changes in the past? Natural climate change takes much longer than 50 years.

To quote the experts (and this is verbatum):

"Basically, it looks like the Earth released a gigantic fart of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere - and globally the Earth warmed by about 5C (9F). This event is already widely studied over the whole planet - but the one big exception was the Arctic Ocean." The core revealed that before 55 million years ago, the surface waters of the Arctic Ocean were ice-free and as warm as 18C (64F). But the sudden increase in greenhouse gases boosted them to a balmy 24C (75F) and the waters suddenly filled with a tropical algae, Apectodinium."

And there you have it. The report continues to say that it was the introduction of this algae that cooled the temps down. The link to the full report is on my post above this one.

Ninth Scribe

format_quote Originally Posted by Ninth_Scribe

To quote the experts (and this is verbatum):

"This event is already widely studied over the whole planet - but the one big exception was the Arctic Ocean."

The core revealed that before 55 million years ago, the surface waters of the Arctic Ocean were ice-free and as warm as 18C (64F).

But the sudden increase in greenhouse gases boosted them to a balmy 24C (75F) and the waters suddenly filled with a tropical algae, Apectodinium."
[/i]

And there you have it. The link to the full report is on my post above this one.

Ninth Scribe

Basically, it looks like the Earth released a gigantic fart of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere - and globally the Earth warmed by about 5C (9F).

There has been no 'methane fart' recently. what there has been a huge release of is CO2.

The core revealed that before 55 million years ago, the surface waters of the Arctic Ocean were ice-free and as warm as 18C (64F).

That changed slowly, in matters of thousands of years.

format_quote Originally Posted by Fishman

There has been no 'methane fart' recently. what there has been a huge release of is CO2.

Not true. I take a sincere interest in the affairs of this world and am always on watch:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13969811/

http://www.breakingnews.ie/2006/09/20/story277612.html

Ninth Scribe

format_quote Originally Posted by Mazed

its all part of Allahs decree, who knows mayb the whole sky cracking and day of judgement cud come about when global warming takes its full toll

I have heard Christians make similar statements:
God will provide for us, and if this world comes to an end (even if due to human ignorance and selfishness), it is all His will.
A very simplistic view, if you ask me, and very handy if you want to absolve yourself from any responsibility for the planet and all of God's creation!

We are appointed as stewards to care for and protect the world God has given us! To ignore that responsibility would be terribly wrong and sinful!

It's why I was asking recently if there are Muslim groups involved in environmental issues. There are some Christian ones, although not as many as there should be!
Christians, Muslims and Jews should be at the forefront of lobbying and fighting for environmental concerns. I quite agree with Fishman on this!

Peace

format_quote Originally Posted by Ninth_Scribe

Not true. I take a sincere interest in the affairs of this world and am always on watch:

http://www.breakingnews.ie/2006/09/20/story277612.html

Ninth Scribe

That's not excactly a catastrophic release. A catastropic release would be like huge chunks of methane hydrates on the sea floor melting, or the Siberian permafrost thawing. A little leak in a coal mine is nothing compared to Clathrate gun hypothesis!

format_quote Originally Posted by Fishman

That's not excactly a catastrophic release. A catastropic release would be like huge chunks of methane hydrates on the sea floor melting, or the Siberian permafrost thawing. A little leak in a coal mine is nothing compared to Clathrate gun hypothesis!

Yes, I know that. I added the link to the sea floor report too, but not in time for your response. Sorry.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13969811/

Ninth Scribe

format_quote Originally Posted by Ninth_Scribe

Yes, I know that. I added the link to the sea floor report too, but not in time for your response. Sorry.

Ninth Scribe

The methane hydrates has not melted in large quantities in recent history anyway. It's a possible danger of global warming though, the largest ever mass extinction may have been caused by it!

There is what we are responsable for and that is the burning of hydrocarbons. Oil does belong in the ground and not in the air. That is something we do need to find an alternative for. Myself I favor solar energy.

Nuclear energy is a possibility but it does not seem to be very feasible with todays technology. I think we sort of jumped the gun on that and began promoting it, before we understood it. The current reactors are disasters looking for a place to happen.

format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow

There is what we are responsable for and that is the burning of hydrocarbons. Oil does belong in the ground and not in the air. That is something we do need to find an alternative for. Myself I favor solar energy.

Nuclear energy is a possibility but it does not seem to be very feasible with todays technology. I think we sort of jumped the gun on that and began promoting it, before we understood it. The current reactors are disasters looking for a place to happen.

My husband works for the National Energy Foundation here is the UK. He is a great supporter of renewable energies, especially solar and wind energy

I agree with your views on nuclear energy. Too risky, too much can go wrong - and go badly wrong!

format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow

There is what we are responsable for and that is the burning of hydrocarbons. Oil does belong in the ground and not in the air. That is something we do need to find an alternative for. Myself I favor solar energy.

There is what we are responsable for and that is the burning of hydrocarbons. Oil does belong in the ground and not in the air. That is something we do need to find an alternative for. Myself I favor solar energy.

I think biomass is probably the best thing to burn. Something like switchgrass, as suggested by Tim Flannery.

Nuclear energy is a possibility but it does not seem to be very feasible with todays technology. I think we sort of jumped the gun on that and began promoting it, before we understood it. The current reactors are disasters looking for a place to happen.

I think we need to build safe, working Jules Verne Launchers to bast the waste into space. But it's very risky though, if it fails there would be radioactive materials scattered all over the pace.
One problem with nuclear power is that whenever the word is mentioned people think of bombs, which puts them off.

format_quote Originally Posted by glo

My husband works for the National Energy Foundation here is the UK. He is a great supporter of renewable energies, especially solar and wind energy

According to my father who is a professor of geochemistry at BGS, wind power is not very useful as it generates much less energy than conventional power stations. A turbine being turned by wind is a lot slower than one being turned by hot steam.