26th Oct 09 - For urgent error, please post at our FaceBook group. Support platform will be back within 1-2 days.

La cosa es seria, según nuevo estudio.

Traemos este foro para comentar sobre el calentamiento global. Opine usted! Sera tan rapido y devastador su efecto en el clima como dicen algunos cientificos? o Como otros afirman, sus efectos serian a largo plazo y no tan severos. La frecuencia de los huracanes durante esta decada se debe a ciclos climaticos, y los glaciares no inundaran el planeta...Poner aqui datos e informacion sobre este fenomeno asi como noticias, y opiniones generales. OBSERVAR ALTURA Y MADURES PARA UN TEMA TAN DELICADO Y CONTROVERSIAL. MANTENGAMOS RESPETO Y CORDIALIDAD POR FAVOR.

La cosa es seria, según nuevo estudio.

Postby Vigilante on Wed May 14, 2008 4:41 pm

Científicos siguen advirtiendo efectos, actuales no proyecciones, del calentamiento global. Aquí un adelanto.

By Doyle Rice, USA TODAY
A landmark new climate study released today reports that global warming is already changing the life cycles of thousands of animals and plants — as well as hundreds of physical systems — worldwide.
It documents rapid glacier melts in North America, South America and Europe; trees and plants sprouting leaves much earlier in the spring in Europe, Asia and North America; permafrost melting in Asia; and changes in bird migration patterns across Europe, North America and Australia, all in response to rising global temperatures.

While previous studies have looked at single phenomena or smaller areas, this is a new analysis on a continental scale looking at data that had not been previously assembled together in one spot, says lead author Cynthia Rosenzweig, a scientist at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York.

By analyzing data from each of the Earth's seven continents and the oceans, the study paints a clear picture of a world that's been undergoing rapid transformation in just the past few decades due to climate change.

"Humans are influencing climate through increasing greenhouse gas emissions, and the warming world is causing impacts on physical and biological systems attributable at the global scale," Rosenzweig says. "These are things that are happening now, not projections of future changes."
User avatar
Vigilante
Moderador Global
Moderador Global
 
Posts: 2952
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 6:51 pm
Location: Toa Alta

Postby Vigilante on Wed May 14, 2008 5:50 pm

Aquí algunos cambios que están ocurriendo en este momento:
The study found that 95% of the observed physical changes, and 90% of the biological changes, are consistent with what would be expected from warming temperatures.

Some of the physical changes include:

•Melting glaciers on all continents, specifically in Alaska, Peru, and the Alps.

•Earlier break-up and thinning of river and lake ice in Mongolia.

•Declining mountain snowpack in western North America.

•Earlier spring runoff in North America.

Some of the observed effects on living things include:

•Movements of species to higher latitudes and altitudes throughout the Northern Hemisphere.

•Population of emperor penguins has declined by 50% on Antarctic Peninsula.

•Rapid advance of spring arrival of long-distance migratory birds in Europe.
User avatar
Vigilante
Moderador Global
Moderador Global
 
Posts: 2952
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 6:51 pm
Location: Toa Alta

Postby TheCyclomanPR on Wed May 14, 2008 10:07 pm

Mas evidencia y tambien controversia.


US lists polar bear as threatened species
By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer Posted Wed May 14, 2008 4:59pm PDT



WASHINGTON - The Interior Department declared the polar bear a threatened species Wednesday because of the loss of Arctic sea ice but also cautioned the decision should not be viewed as a path to address global warming.

Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne cited dramatic declines in sea ice over the last three decades and projections of continued losses, meaning, he said, that the polar bear is a species likely to be in danger of extinction in the near future.

But Kempthorne said it would be "wholly inappropriate" to use the protection of the bear to reduce greenhouse gases, or to broadly address climate change.

The Endangered Species Act "is not the right tool to set U.S. climate policy," said Kempthorne, reflecting a view recently expressed by President Bush.

The department outlined a set of administrative actions and limits to how it planned to protect the bear with its new status so that it would not have wide-ranging adverse impact on economic activities from building power plants to oil and gas exploration.

"This listing will not stop global climate change or prevent any sea ice from melting," said Kempthorne. He said he had consulted with the White House on the decision, but "at no time was there ever a suggestion that this was not my decision."

Kempthorne, at a news conference, was armed with slides and charts showing the dramatic decline in sea ice over the last 30 years and projections that the melting of ice — a key habitat for the bear — would continue and may even quicken.

He cited conclusions by department scientists that sea ice loss will likely result in two-thirds of the polar bears disappearing by mid-century. The bear population across the Arctic from Alaska to Greenland doubled from about 12,000 to 25,000 since 1960, but he noted that scientists now predict a significant population decline. Studies last year by the U.S. Geological Survey suggested 15,000 bears would be lost in coming decades with those in the western Hudson Bay area of Alaska and Canada under the greatest stress.

But when asked how the bear will be afforded greater protection, Dale Hall, director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, had difficulty coming up with examples.

Better management of bear habitat on shore and making sure bears aren't threatened by people including hunters, more studies on bear population trends and their feeding habits were among the areas mentioned. "I don't want to prejudge recommendations for (bear) management," said Hall whose agency administers the Endangered Species Act.

Environmentalists were already mapping out plans to file lawsuits challenging the restrictive measures outlined by Kempthorne.

"They're trying to make this a threatened listing in name only with no change in today's impacts and that's not going to fly," said Jamie Rappaport Clark of Defenders of Wildlife and a former U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service director.

Members of Congress also were skeptical.

The Bush administration "is forcing the polar bear to sink or swim," said Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., chairman of a House committee on global warming.

Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., called it "a lifeline for our last remaining polar bears" but said the bear's survival won't be assured without limits on oil development in the same Arctic waters where the bears are found.

Despite the new listing, the announcement underscores the need to approve climate legislation that would limit the release of greenhouse gases and avert the future effects on climate change, said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., chairwoman of the Environment Committee.

Scientists have blamed global warming for the disappearance of sea ice which is vital for the bear's survival.

Summer ice surrounding the North Pole declined an average of 10 percent per decade since 1979, with a loss of about 28,000 square miles per year, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center. Last year was the sharpest drop, as the amount of sea ice in September fell to 1.65 million square miles, or 23 percent below the previous low in 2005.

Kempthorne proposed 15 months ago to investigate whether the polar bear should be declared threatened under the Endangered Species Act. That triggered a year of studies into the threats facing the bear and its survival prospects.

A decision had been expected early this year, but the Interior Department said it needed more time to work out many of the details, prompting criticism from members of Congress and environmentalists. Environmentalists filed a lawsuit aimed at forcing a decision and a federal court on April 29 set a May 15 deadline for a decision.

A species is declared "threatened" under the Endangered Species Act if it is found to be at risk of becoming endangered in the foreseeable future. If it does not make progress toward recovery, it can be declared "endangered" meaning it is at risk of extinction and needs even greater protection.
The Cycloman PR
Administrador/Staff Member
The Cycloman PR Weather Forum
User avatar
TheCyclomanPR
Administrador
Administrador
 
Posts: 1256
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 4:11 pm

Postby dj_beat_1 on Fri May 16, 2008 1:52 am

:lol: Hola hermanito!!! :lol:

[smilie=a_doh.gif] Tal vez están esperando a que desaparezcan todos los pobres osos para decir que están en peligro de extinción y velarlos como manatíes...

[smilie=sweat2.gif] Pues como muy bien dijistes, la controversia continúa!!!

[smilie=a_huh.gif] Esta vez, el enfrentar económicamente la solución al problema, los mantiene en un círculo vicioso de nunca acabar. Y mientras sigue toda esta polémica, nuestro planeta sigue hacia atrás... Jamás entenderé esta actitud..... [smilie=rlp_smilie_178.gif]

DJ Beat

Javier
dj_beat_1
Moderador
Moderador
 
Posts: 762
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 6:38 am
Location: Carolina


Return to Calentamiento Global

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests



FREE phpBB Forum Hosting by GetPhpBB. Create your Free phpBB Forum Hosting now!
cron