Melting Mountains
How Climate Change is Destroying the World's Most Spectacular Landscapes........
A huge mass of rock(2 millions Cubic Meters) on the East face of Eiger is about to collapse.

(snip)

The geologist say that although this is a natural process for the Alps, it seams that these phenomenons had accelerated in the last years probably because of the over heating of the air on the planet.

The article went on to state that mountains falling down are perfectly normal, then glossed over it with 'but its speeding up!'

Anyone who persists in believing global warming is not a reality and a grim one is either a fool, an imbecile or a Republican.

Anyone who persists in believing global warming is not a reality and a grim one is either a fool, an imbecile or a Republican.

One thing to remember is that IT HAS BEEN HAPPENING FOR MORE THAN 10'S OF THOUSANDS OF YEARS (in this last cycle).

Most scientists agree that humans are affecting the rate of warming now, but historically, these warming and cooling periods were natural. It's hard to say how much of the damage we are causing, and how much is natural. I don't think scientists can even be sure because the time period we've had for study is tiny in comparison to the time required for the earth's cycles.

However, there's no need to jump on someone for raising the point that some warming or cooling of the earth is natural, without calling them a Republican.

interesting fact: The North Pole is liquid ocean right now. Yup, amazing but true - time to change those globes in the schoolrooms to get rid of the big white part on top!

Do you happen to know if there's been any work done on Arctic ice core samples that would show whether there's ever been this level of melting in the Arctic? How old is the current ice cap over the North Pole (what's left of it)? 10k years? 50k? 100k?

gunkiemike Posted: Wed Jul 12, 2006 9:19 am Post subject: Re: East face of Eiger collapsing!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

the_climber wrote:
One thing to remember is that IT HAS BEEN HAPPENING FOR MORE THAN 10'S OF THOUSANDS OF YEARS (in this last cycle).


Correct/forgive me if I'm putting words into your mouth...but your comment sounds to me like typical denial behavior: "this is just part of the climatic cycling that's been going on for eons". Anyone who believes this is an accurate characterization owes it to themselves to read (or see) Inconvenient Truth. The current global heating is far, far beyond historical patterns.

Hey, Nowhere did I deny humans have no effect on 'greenhouse gasses' in my post. I even said "Not saying burning fossil fuels and such is good for anything". I was suggesting we should look at other reasons as well.
Ans as for seeing "Inconvenient Truths"... I have a strong academic backround and have reviewed 1000's of accademic journals on climate chenge with a specific focus on various glacial and inter glacial periods throughout Earth history. As well as attending many symposiums on the subject, I have had many enlightening discussion with many Professors at various Universities across North America. There are many interesting facts that can be learned with a little research. Such as the average climate in the Canadian Tundra be up to 10degrees C hight prior to the last major Pliestocene glacial advance, and the regional temerature in the great lake region being at least 4 to 6 degrees C higher 14 to 16 years ago.
Other tidbits, far more greenhouse gasses are emitted by volcanic erruptions than are produced by humans. Ocean currents and their effect on climate is a poorly understood science and many experts in that field believe we are as likely if not more likely to enter into another period of glacial advance as we are the have even wider spread deglaciation (For example, the gulf stream moderates much of eastern Europes climate, however, it is uncertain how much cold melt water is needed to disrupt it and what hte effect of that are.)

I consider myself well read on the subject and am simple stating that both sides need keep an open mind on the subject. The medea is the poorest source for information on the subject. I prefer to get my information from academic sources, 'typically' less bull s--- there.

Hey, it's just some ideas. Take it for what you take it for. It's a debate best done at the local pub with a fine single malt scotch after a getting back from a great day of climbing. 8^)

There will always be uncertainty in understanding a system
as complex as the world’s climate. However there is now
strong evidence that significant global warming is
occurring1. The evidence comes from direct measurements
of rising surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean
temperatures and from phenomena such as increases in
average global sea levels, retreating glaciers, and changes
to many physical and biological systems. It is likely that
most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed
to human activities (IPCC 2001)2. This warming has already
led to changes in the Earth's climate.
The existence of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is
vital to life on Earth – in their absence average
temperatures would be about 30 centigrade degrees lower
than they are today. But human activities are now causing
atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases –
including carbon dioxide, methane, tropospheric ozone,
and nitrous oxide – to rise well above pre-industrial levels.
Carbon dioxide levels have increased from 280 ppm in
1750 to over 375 ppm today – higher than any previous
levels that can be reliably measured (i.e. in the last 420,000
years). Increasing greenhouse gases are causing
temperatures to rise; the Earth’s surface warmed by
approximately 0.6 centigrade degrees over the twentieth
century. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) projected that the average global surface
temperatures will continue to increase to between 1.4
centigrade degrees and 5.8 centigrade degrees above 1990
levels, by 2100.

The scientific understanding of climate change is now
sufficiently clear to justify nations taking prompt action. It
is vital that all nations identify cost-effective steps that they
can take now, to contribute to substantial and long-term
reduction in net global greenhouse gas emissions.
Action taken now to reduce significantly the build-up of
greenhouse gases in the atmosphere will lessen the
magnitude and rate of climate change. As the United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC) recognises, a lack of full scientific certainty
about some aspects of climate change is not a reason for
delaying an immediate response that will, at a reasonable
cost, prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with
the climate system.

Any action taken now will likely be too little, too late, and possibly irrelevant. Which is not to say we shouldn't try.

Anyone who persists in believing global warming is not a reality and a grim one is either a fool, an imbecile or a Republican.

But there's nothing to indicate that unusually warm weather is specifically responsible for this collapse on the Eiger. And geologists are at pains to point out that such rockfalls are a natural part of the process by which mountains rise and ultimately fall. "This is just part of the mountain cycle — it would have happened anyway," says Christopher Kilburn of University College London, who studies landslides at the university's Benfield Hazard Research Centre.

"Mountains are fundamentally unstable, otherwise they would just get taller and taller," Goudie explains. "The point does come where they get too tall for their own good."

Hey, it's the nature of the beast :wink:
A couple of notes on climate change.... (Just something to keep in mind)
Yes, (though I hate to use the catch phrase :? ) 'Global Warming' is happening, and things are changing. Classic Ice lines are fading into climbing history, others are being discovered. Permafrost depths are adjusting, creating increases in rockfall hazard in some areas and in some cases large scale mass wasting.
One thing to remember is that IT HAS BEEN HAPPENING FOR MORE THAN 10'S OF THOUSANDS OF YEARS (in this last cycle). 20000 to 15000years ago there was a km of ice (or more) over much of central Canada extending to the U.S. boarder. And Glaciers in Europe would dwarf current Alaskan glaciers. By 11000 years ago at least half to 2 thirds of that Ice volume was gone, and that's a heluvalot of ice to melt; I don't think Cro Magnon were burning that many fossil fuels then :lol:
Just food for thought, Not saying burning fossil fuels and such is good for anything, just that in some ways warming was slowed for a while and maybe isn't so much anymore.
It is an inevitable shame that it is happening on such a historic mountain. But, it's happening... Hey maybe we can get some green peace freaks to "try" and hold up the slide.... Ooooh, that was supposed to be internal monologue :twisted:

Finally another person who understands facts and history (see quote below). I've been citing these same facts for years. It's great to find someone else who can think.

The earth's climate is in a constant state of flux, and we have far from enough accurate historical data available to state we know what's happening to the climate, let alone why the climate is changing. If we are to look at more recent climate fluctuations, let's look at the period of cooling commonly known as the "Little Ice Age." During the period around 1550-1850 the Northern Hemisphere went through a period of cooling. There was even a period of cooler temperatures in the '60's. For God's sake people, you don't have the data to jump the the insane conclusion that people are causing global warming. I'd prefer to just sit back and let you wackos make utter fools of yourself, but when the results of your hair-brained ideas effect me, like forcing me to have a catalytic converter on my car, I need to say something.
:::Sigh:::
When the next ice age rolls around, I have no doubt you environmentalists will blame that on humans. You guys are just like Chicken Little. If your views weren't so dangerous I'd just laugh and let you keep crying, "The sky is falling!"

but when the results of your hair-brained ideas effect me, like forcing me to have a catalytic converter on my car, I need to say something.

Your a f---ing moron. And you call others hair brained. Get a f---ing clue.

And come on, do we have to call somebody a f...ing moron for bringing up an opinion? If you're opposed to his views, then refute them with facts of your own. At least some people in this forum show that they think for themselves rather than believing exactly what scientists say.

He's not a moron because he brought up that opinion; he's a moron for believing it in the first place. The facts refuting his opinion had already been posted... by me.

There is no right answer here. You can have your beliefs, but nobody knows for certain what is going on. Science has theories, you can believe them or not. Science is not always right. It's certainly happened before where the scientific community has held a belief, and had that disproven. The world really wasn't flat after all.

scrapedape, you did an excellent job of bringing your views in without calling someone a moron...until now.

There is no right answer here. You can have your beliefs, but nobody knows for certain what is going on. Science has theories, you can believe them or not. Science is not always right. It's certainly happened before where the scientific community has held a belief, and had that disproven. The world really wasn't flat after all.

I'm not saying that global warming is not occurring, or that humans play no role in its occurrence. I do give props to those who can take what David Suzuki's propaganda machine feeds them, and consider the issues with a little independant thought of their own.

I voted for Bush, but I agree that he hasn't done enough (or anything) on this matter. I voted for him because I knew he wouldn't forget 9/11 and I see terrorism to be a greater immediate threat (we can agree to disagree on that one), but I also agree global warming is a tremendous threat as well.

Finally another person who understands facts and history (see quote below). I've been citing these same facts for years. It's great to find someone else who can think.

The earth's climate is in a constant state of flux, and we have far from enough accurate historical data available to state we know what's happening to the climate, let alone why the climate is changing. If we are to look at more recent climate fluctuations, let's look at the period of cooling commonly known as the "Little Ice Age." During the period around 1550-1850 the Northern Hemisphere went through a period of cooling. There was even a period of cooler temperatures in the '60's. For God's sake people, you don't have the data to jump the the insane conclusion that people are causing global warming. I'd prefer to just sit back and let you wackos make utter fools of yourself, but when the results of your hair-brained ideas effect me, like forcing me to have a catalytic converter on my car, I need to say something.
:::Sigh:::
When the next ice age rolls around, I have no doubt you environmentalists will blame that on humans. You guys are just like Chicken Little. If your views weren't so dangerous I'd just laugh and let you keep crying, "The sky is falling!"

Well, in the same manner that you are against the political bend on science, I am against blind faith in science. For those who aren't scientific, any research can be taken as truth (the new bible?).

BTW, Global Warming doesn't start with pollution. It's been going on for EONS. Have a look at http://www.globalwarming.org, specifically here: http://www.globalwarming.org/article.php?uid=65

Competitive Enterprise Institute"]Among numerous recognitions, Greenpeace featured Mr. Ebell and three of his CEI colleagues in “A Field Guide to Climate Criminals” distributed at the UN climate meeting in Montreal in December 2005. Rolling Stone magazine in its November 17, 2005 issue named Mr. Ebell one of six “Misleaders” on global warming in a special feature, along with President Bush, Senator James Inhofe, and Michael Crichton. In November 2004 as a result of a BBC Radio interview, seven members of the British House of Commons from all three major parties introduced a motion to censure Mr. Ebell “in the strongest possible terms.” In its May 22, 2004 special Issues and Answers issue, National Journal profiled Mr. Ebell as one of ten people who would lead the global warming debate during the next presidential administration. The Clean Air Trust in March 2001 named Mr. Ebell its "Villain of the Month" for his role in convincing the Bush Administration not to regulate carbon dioxide emissions.

Source Watch"]Balling has acknowledged that he had received $408,000 in research funding from the fossil fuel industry over the last decade (of which his University takes 50% for overhead). Contributors include ExxonMobil, the British Coal Corporation, Cyprus Minerals and OPEC. [1]

Gawd you people are Fckn stooopid :roll: just look out the effing window, it don't take no rocket scientest to figuer out that we paved half the dam planet and that pavement is hotter than a half fcked fox in a forrest fire, Burning all that fossil fuel heats s--- up, ice melts weather patterns change and we are screwed :shock: We had 12in of rain here in vt thiss june. it's like freaking liveing in a rain forrest. it rained 3.5in on sat. There is some crazy s--- going on and burrying your head in the sand don't make it go away :roll: