| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Signs, Portents, and the Weather- |
| Report: Global warming will melt Himalayas |
| 2007-04-03 |
| Posted by:mrp |
| #14 The REAL cause of climate change. |
| Posted by: DMFD 2007-04-03 22:39 |
| #13 Strangely enough, one person who has actually spent years studying Himalayan Glaciers has another take... Some experts have questioned the alarmists theory on global warming leading to shrinkage of Himalayan glaciers. VK Raina, a leading glaciologist and former ADG of GSI is one among them. He feels that the research on Indian glaciers is negligible. Nothing but the remote sensing data forms the basis of these alarmists observations and not on the spot research. Raina told the Hindustan Times that out of 9,575 glaciers in India, till date, research has been conducted only on about 50. Nearly 200 years data has shown that nothing abnormal has occurred in any of these glaciers. It is simple. The issue of glacial retreat is being sensationalised by a few individuals, the septuagenarian Raina claimed. Throwing a gauntlet to the alarmist, he said the issue should be debated threadbare before drawing a conclusion. However, Dr RK Pachouri, Chairman, Inter-Governmental Panel of Climatic Change said itÂ’s recently released fourth assessment report has recorded increased glacier retreat since the 1980s. This he said was due to the fact that the carbon dioxide radioactive forcing has increased by 20 per cent particularly after 1995. And also that 11 of the last 12 years were among the warmest 12 years recorded so far. Surprisingly, Raina, who has been associated with the research and data collection in over 25 glaciers in India and abroad, debunked the theory that Gangotri glacier is retreating alarmingly. Maintaining that the glaciers are undergoing natural changes, witnessed periodically, he said recent studies in the Gangotri and Zanskar areas (Drung- Drung, Kagriz glaciers) have not shown any evidence of major retreat. "Claims of global warming causing glacial melt in the Himalayas are based on wrong assumptions," Raina, a trained mountaineer and skiing expert said. He rued that not much is being done by the Government to create a bank of trained geologists for an in-depth study of glaciers. |
| Posted by: John Frum 2007-04-03 21:11 |
| #12 no mo uro - ever fish Lahontan or Pyramid outside Fallon, NV? - great cutthroat fishing. My grandparents lived in Fallon, so when we visited in summer - that was a "must do" |
| Posted by: Frank G 2007-04-03 17:56 |
| #11 You are SO right about this, Procopius. Best example in the U.S. is the cutthroat trout, which has been subdivided into about a dozen different "species" in order to: 1. Allow the government to restrict human activity in certain areas. 2. Keep the grant money flowing in for scientists studying these "species". I'm an avid fisherman and if that's all I cared about, I'd be very happy indeed to let these "scientists", ecoextremists, and big-government types have their way and save every last trout in every stream so that I could fish for them. But as a grownup with concerns outside one of my hobbies, I realize that this practice is bad and dishonest science, and may be used for nefarious purposes. The fact is, ALL of these various cutthroat races can reproduce with each other and make fully functional offspring. If two individuals can reproduce and make viable, reproductively functioning offspring, they are of the same species, period. That is, and should remain, the defining characteristic. |
| Posted by: no mo uro 2007-04-03 17:12 |
| #10 And when that happens, it can be awful hard to remember why it was you were there to drain the swamp fer in the first place. |
| Posted by: eLarson 2007-04-03 16:08 |
| #9 90% of all species that ever existed are extinct. Damn good thing, too. We'd be up to our asses in T-rex's and such like, otherwise. |
| Posted by: Albemarle Glulet4077 2007-04-03 15:56 |
| #8 Name them Won't be hard, they make the stuff up. Back in my old days in school, a species was defined pretty much by the ability to reproduce viable off springs, that which could in turn reproduce. Today they make up new species because it has a different coloring or bone structure variance even though it can mate and make viable off springs within its community. Now if they applied the same definition today to humans they now apply to other creatures on this rock, we wouldn't have "races", we'd have separate species. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2007-04-03 09:26 |
| #7 All those poor Shirpas that will be put out of work when they have to flee the melting granite! Woman and children will be most effected, of course. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2007-04-03 09:19 |
| #6 Parmesan really grates on Me. |
| Posted by: Jackal 2007-04-03 08:14 |
| #5 t least 70 species have become extinct so far because of global warming, Parmesan said in a telephone conference with reporters. How cheesy of Parmesan. |
| Posted by: doc 2007-04-03 08:07 |
| #4 |
| Posted by: doc 2007-04-03 08:06 |
| #3 Besides.... extinction is a perfectly natural process. |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2007-04-03 07:38 |
| #2 At least 70 species have become extinct so far because of global warming, Parmesan said in a telephone conference with reporters. Name them. |
| Posted by: Rob Crawford 2007-04-03 07:37 |
| #1 Damn, that's hot! Granite melts at 3100 F. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2007-04-03 07:16 |