decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Koch-funded climate change skeptic reverses course | 189 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Koch-funded climate change skeptic reverses course
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 30 2012 @ 03:50 AM EDT
Also this . This guy is all hat and no cattle.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Could the affect of Global Warming Cause EarthQuakes and Volcanic Activity
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 30 2012 @ 06:27 AM EDT

Question:


Will the ICE melting at the poles result in an increase in Plate Tectonics, resulting in more seismic activity, more earthquakes, and a lot more volcanic activity? If so, do we need to be concerned?


What if the actual affect of GLOBAL WARMING is a displacement of MASS on the earth's crust causing an increase in the shifting of the earth's Tectonic Plates due to less mass or weight on the crust in one place where the weight of that mass then gets shifted to other areas of the earth's crust.


The weight of ICE at the poles that melts WILL have an affect on the earth's crust at the polar regions. As the pole regions don't have that weight of the ice anymore, then the crust of the earth in that area will rise. The ICE that melts will turn into water that increases the amount of water AND WEIGHT of the oceans on the earth's crust in other places.


There is evidence where the ADDITIONAL weight caused by water when they build dams, where the weight of the water has an affect on the earth's crust where they have observed an increase in earthquakes as a result.


See: A Link Between Dams and Earthquakes?

http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/2009/0 2/a-link-between-da ms-and-earthquakes/


What affect will 1-2 feet or more of water in the oceans have on the earths crust. Will the overall weight of the water cause changes in the earth's crust? Will the power of tidal activity change due to the increased volume of water? What affect will the additional weight shifting of more MASSIVE tidal activity have on the earth's crust, if any?


This is not a wild thought, as there are those in the fields of science already writing about this (google for it, but below is a sample article).


See: Global Warming Might Spur Earthquakes and Volcanoes

http://www.livescience.com/7366- global-warming-spur-earthquakes-volcanoe s.html


There is a cause and affect.  For almost every action, there is a potential for an equal and opposite reaction (it's interesting where science is, vs belief).

Historical evidence is - that as the glaciers form, they press down on the earth's crust due to the huge amount of weight.  Then, when they melt, the earth's crust rebounds.  

We all know that as the earth's crust moves, there is a huge amount of friction, causing heat, melting rocks, and increased pressure due to the expansion of the melting rocks, that pressure, along with the melted rock has to go somewhere, so it finds a hole or a weak area to escape...).   But, we often don't understand all the factors about why the earth's crust is moving!  What causes earth crust movement, earthquakes, and volcanoes?

Weight of water, and/or ice, is only one potential factor.  When you add in the rest of the factors.... the sum total together (when we look at a few percent of a factor) then one part of that sum total, might be a "critical affect factor" that actually causes the event.  Where one factor of many might cause more in the end, than we first might think.
http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Post- glacial_rebound
Quotes:
-- "According to the  Mohr-Coulomb Theory< /U>  of rock failure, large glacial loads generally suppress earthquakes, but rapid deglaciation promotes earthquakes".
-- "One of the possible impacts of global warming-triggered rebound may be more volcanic activity in previously ice-capped areas such as Iceland".

The Adirondack Mountains are still rebounding (due to the melting of the ice during the last ice age).  Lake Champlain, and many other lakes, exist because of this rebounding.

A questions remains as to the affect of the water rise in the seas and the additional weight of those bodies of water on the crust.  Of course, the tides could become more powerful due to there being "more water" affected by the moon.  The tides weigh a lot, and when the tide comes in, there is more weight on the land under it, when the tides go out there is less weight.  Day after day after day this happens, and what is the long term affect of this?

Well, we do know that there is rebound in the earth's crust that affects the magnatude of tides... so, is there also an affect of the tides themselves on the earth's crust?

http://en.wikipedia.o rg/wiki/Tidal_acceleration
Quote:
--"In addition to the effect of the ocean tides, there is also a tidal acceleration due to flexing of the earth's crust, but this accounts for only about 4% of the total effect when expressed in terms of heat dissipation".

http://earthquake.usg s.gov/learn/faq/? faqID=109
Quote:
-- "There have also been some small but significant correlations reported between the semi-diurnal tides and the rate of occurrence of aftershocks in some volcanic regions, such asMammoth Lakes. (UC Berkeley) (Thanks to Gary Fuis for contributing content to this FAQ.)".

http://www.pl atetectonics.com/article.asp? a=37&c=14
Quotes:
-- "Few realize that the solid earth also exhibits tidal behavior, with bulges on opposite sides of the globe, also driven by the moon. At HVO, we can actually measure these tides with our tiltmeters and strainmeters".
-- "Who would have thought that the moon had that kind of power, not only to be able to cause the world's oceans to bulge, but also to squeeze terra firma twice a day? But it does, so it should not come as a complete shock that reputable scientists have suggested that these squeezings might influence whether a volcano will erupt or not".
-- "More than 25 years ago, a pair of earth scientists compared the records for 680 eruptions that occurred since 1900 and found that "the probability of an eruption is greatest at times of maximum tidal amplitude." In plainer language, volcanoes are more likely to erupt at the fortnightly (or 14-day) "high" tide".
-- "The correlation is more important as a clue to how volcanoes work. The effect of the tides suggests that a volcano can remain in a state of near eruption for a period of time before some threshold is exceeded and an eruption starts. There are probably many possible mechanisms for exceeding that threshold -- the lunar tides are but one".
So, for every action, there is the potential for an equal and opposite reaction. As we know, when the earth's crust shifts, it causes earthquakes and volcanism.


So, what would the affect be on the human population if this happens?


The below link is worth a couple of minutes to take a look at. Good science and well written with good illustrations. Volcano science sites regarding the origins of the Dark Ages (could this be more than a hypothesis, where it is actually what will happen in our future) ?


See this web page below(s) titled:

Were the Dark Ages Triggered by Volcano-Related Climate Changes in the 6th Century?

(If so, was Krakatau volcano the culprit?)

by Ken Wohletz

Los Alamos National Laboratory

http:// www.ees1.lanl.gov/W ohletz/Krakatau.htm

And see:

535 AD ‚€” The "Dark Ages" Begin ‚€“ Scientific Growth Stops !

http:/ /www.hbci.com/~weno nah/history/535ad.htm


Also see -

http://doctor.claudemariottini.com/2008/04/jose ph-and-seven-years-of- famine.html

(Was this story in the bible actually related to a eruption of a volcano on the other side of the world at that time???) Hmmm? Something happened to cause crops to fail for 7 years. What was it?


So, with the evidence of crops failing in Egypt during biblical times, and with evidence of about the same many years of crop failures around the times of the start dark ages (per the links), where both might have been caused by a volcano, ...until the sun came back to full strength again, then everyone on earth would need to be planning for such an event - if it were possible that it were to happen in our future (planning would need to be done on an ongoing basis for many years ahead of such a surprise).


The question might not be IF it will happen, as it is obvious that the question is WHEN it will happen again? AND is there anything that humans are doing now on earth to make it happen quicker?


The problem NOW is, that there a too many people in the world maybe to store 7 years of food for all to eat during such a time?


With the number of people on earth today to feed, if this type of world affecting disaster were to happen, then all the deer, rats, mice, cats, dogs, worms, etc ... all wild creatures would be eaten very quickly by a starving human population who would have guns that they didn't have in 525 AD. Would fish have a chance? Maybe? Depending on where they were. Fish in the ocean might, or might not, miss the slaughter due to the size of the ocean (might be too big to find them all). However, fish in lakes and rivers - would have a slim chance of survival (as they would not find it easy to escape the net, or avoid floating to the top after being exposed to oxygen deprived water due to chemicals being dumped into the water, or avoid feeling the shock of a stick of explosive or electric current).


One TV show I saw of the Dark Ages. The scientists showed evidence of bone of humans found in "campfire pits" that were carbon dated to this time, and the bones had evidence of tool damage. The conclusion is that some humans during this time, were eating other humans to survive (meaning that there was so little food due to the volcano clouds hiding the sun and causing crops to fail and that animals could not eat either, so humans had fewer animals to eat too). So, people could only eat, what they could eat, it might mean that they would start to eat other people?


It is my guess that the story of Hansel and Gretel came from the dark ages - Why from the dark ages?

See- http:/ /en.wikipedia.org/w iki/Hansel_and_Gretel - do you know this story.


I have a reason for thinking that it dates back to this in the dark ages. As it would have been obvious during this time, that parents did not want the children to wander away from them (easy to kill a child vs a full grown human). And so it is my guess that this story was told at the camp fire to all the children over and over again - then it was repeated and repeated by word of mouth even when food started to grow again. Anyway, it made it into print as it was a widely used story. I don't know this history is true (the story part) but it makes sense that when people are eating people, that the parents would have to tell the children some story.


Instead of fighting, the people of the world should be living in harmony and planning for a day when this volcano will happen again. And should we do anything about Global Warming? Or should we just imagine that we are ok, and that changes to the earth's crust are not important to consider at all?

The answer to the question, if we consider the facts (using the Socratic method) - is obvious.


Due to the potential for future changes in the earth's crust being an ever increasing dynamic with greater potentials going forward.. My guess is that it might be better odds that humans will see this type of "volcano eruption disaster" long before any meteor from space causes a catastrophe.


If either a rock from space that hits earth, or a volcano like in the links above happens, we could see the human crisis reach a point where you could see the human condition deteriorate very quickly after the end of one growing season with no food to feed people or the animals that we grow in meat factories. The situation would be like Katrina and the chaos in New Orleans, only everywhere in the entire world.


Science and medicine can not help if the sun goes away. Governments all over the world should be ready for such a day, as volcano eruptions are hard to predict. Many volcano eruptions happen by surprise, and storing several years of food away (like the Old Testament's Joseph and the 7 years of famine story).

AND - Power from the SUN would be a problem. Only way to survive is if we had an ability to power growing lights in massive indoor greenhouses to produce food. Can you imagine? Maybe we should start to build these green houses now?


Would a Noah's Ark for animals make any sense? We would need to have more than two breeding pairs to replace them. Africa would see instant wipe out of vast wild animal populations. Would be a big job after 7 years of crop failure to even start to repair the damage. Countries and civilization would crumble (like they did in 535 AD). So, putting everything back in order would be an almost unimaginable task. We have the larger brain that is needed to survive and thriveĚ most any future situation that nature and the universe can throw at us (not all, but most)...!


So, is Global warming an issue. Yes it is. WOULD it be wise to attack it now, not later?


Could Thorium as an Atomic Energy Source (for short term power, and maybe to power a massive number of Noah' green houses, ...and other GREEN Energy (SUN, wind, waves, etc) solve our problems better than anything else? Believe it or not, there would be an ECONOMY to all this too!

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Koch-funded climate change skeptic reverses course
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 30 2012 @ 08:50 AM EDT
I prefer skepticalscience, realclimate, deep climate, tamino, and Eli Rabett
among others. Watts is nothing but a denialist echo chamber.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

    Koch-funded climate change skeptic reverses course
    Authored by: eric76 on Monday, July 30 2012 @ 04:57 PM EDT
    Muller's bona fides as a one-time skeptic are seriously in doubt.

    He did an interview broadcast on UCTV two or three years ago. From watching that interview, the last thing I would have called Muller was a climate skeptic.

    He was skeptical bout the hockey stick graph and about some of the over the top claims made by many environmentalists, but that doesn't make him a climate skeptic.

    In any event, a warmer climate is a more productive climate. The real disaster would be cooling. If we want to have any chance of feeding the population of the Earth a century or two from now, Global Warming will likely be a necessity.

    There is no need to panic.

    [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

    Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
    All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
    Comments are owned by the individual posters.

    PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )