"777thSector" wrote in
oups.com:


Hank Oredson wrote:
"777thSector" wrote in message
oups.com...
Months of well under-average rainfall continue to pass season after
season and year after year.
Drought months are not uncommon, even in late autumn and winter.
Hard rain and storms,even steady rain is disappearing.
Freezing low temps.are rare while 70 degree temps. and clear days
are
becoming the norm by early Spring.

Can continual ocean warming,if not cyclical and
reversible,eventually
result in arid desertification sometime in this century?


The view from my window refutes those ideas.

--

... Hank

http://horedson.home.att.net
http://w0rli.home.att.net

Don't know where your window is, but if it's in the mid-Willamette
valley of OR,you see no snow,ice,or wind,no hard or even steady
rain and no freezing temperature;and this is not an aberration but
a trend.
Ocean warming and its drying effect is no longer debatable.You may
rightly reject the idea of the possibility for desertification,but the
important arguments must deal with the solutions for the long term
effects of a growing population and water depletion.



what do you have in mind?

T-Cat robotryder at yahoo wrote:

The global cooling fear was anticipated to lead to a near-term ice
age. Fear was so strong among the experts that serious consideration
was given to trying to put a light layer of soot on the north pole to
increase energy absorbtion.



That was the Soviets. They wanted ice free ports. Idiots were also thinking
about damming the Lena, Petchura, Yenisei and Ob to create a great inland
lake. Fortunately cooler heads prevailed, or they'd have brought on their
own mini ice age.

Lobby Dosser wrote:

T-Cat robotryder at yahoo wrote:

The global cooling fear was anticipated to lead to a near-term ice
age. Fear was so strong among the experts that serious consideration
was given to trying to put a light layer of soot on the north pole to
increase energy absorbtion.



That was the Soviets. They wanted ice free ports. Idiots were also
thinking about damming the Lena, Petchura, Yenisei and Ob to create a
great inland lake. Fortunately cooler heads prevailed, or they'd have
brought on their own mini ice age.

It was also the USA who considered darkening the Arctic ice, because they
wanted to get their Navy close to the USSR Arctic coast. They ruled out the
idea of using soot as you only want one snowfall and you have to redo it.
They were thinking of finding something dark which would grow on the
surface of the ice, so that in the event of snow covering it up it would
grow through to the surface again. One reason for dropping the idea was the
fear of an ice-free Arctic triggering a new (non-mini) ice-age.

Graham

T-Cat robotryder at yahoo wrote:

"777thSector" sez:
Don't know where your window is, but if it's in the mid-Willamette
valley of OR,you see no snow,ice,or wind,no hard or even steady
rain and no freezing temperature;and this is not an aberration but
a trend.
Ocean warming and its drying effect is no longer debatable.You may
rightly reject the idea of the possibility for desertification,but the
important arguments must deal with the solutions for the long term
effects of a growing population and water depletion.

Your ignorance is, unfortunately, no longer debatable either.

Let's just for a moment step back to 1980. Please go study it. You will
realize we had two enormous fears about the Earth then:

1. Global Cooling (yes, cooling. Not warming.)

2. Overpopulation.

These warnings came from the "experts", the same people with our current
fears of global warming and shrinking populations.

The global cooling fear was anticipated to lead to a near-term ice age.
Fear was so strong among the experts that serious consideration was given
to trying to put a light layer of soot on the north pole to increase
energy absorbtion.

snip

In 1980 the main fear was global warming (yes, warming. Not cooling).
However, global cooling was thought to be a possible result of the melting
of the Arctic ice though I believe that computer models now say this is
unlikely.

Graham

Would I be completely off base in asking what this discussion had to do
with pdx.singles? Mayhaps it should have been in pdx.shingles? G


Talos

777thSector wrote:

Months of well under-average rainfall continue to pass season after
season and year after year.
Drought months are not uncommon, even in late autumn and winter.
Hard rain and storms,even steady rain is disappearing.
Freezing low temps.are rare while 70 degree temps. and clear days are
becoming the norm by early Spring.

Can continual ocean warming,if not cyclical and reversible,eventually
result in arid desertification sometime in this century?

T-Cat wrote:

r_obert wrote:

Ah yes, standard right wing charm.


Nobody whose known me for a while considers me right wing.
I have, in the last few weeks, been accused of being left
wing twice.


Too many people are quick with the labels based on
one or two issues while ignoring many others. That's
why so many dumb progressives and assorted left-wingers
think John McCain is a "maverick" kind of Republican,
ignoring the fact that he's more pro-military intervention
and more pro-life than people like Bush. Oh, never mind
about that! Or that Mark Hatfield was a "conservative"
because he was extremely pro-life, ignoring his generally
corrupt moderate fat cat record.

Generally I'm pretty moderate. Financially conservative,
socially liberal.


That doesn't define a "moderate". Not at all. If it does,
then that means that a moderate can also be one who is
financially liberal (progressive, rather), and socially
"conservative" (un-progressive I guess). Or one who
waits to see how a vote on a social or financial proposal
is going before casting his own vote "with the wind".

Bob T