20 Deadliest Effects of Global Warming

Regarding the fourth item about the icecaps melting, specifically: "If the ice caps melt, the only reflector is the ocean. Darker colors absorb sunlight, further warming the Earth."

This is fairly inaccurate. I must point out that while the icecaps are responsible for a substantial portion of the earth's albedo cloud cover is in fact responsible for more. While the albedo-temperature effect is well known in colder regions, because of snow falls, it is actually considerably stronger in tropical regions due to consistently more sunlight.

"On any given day, about half of Earth is covered by clouds, which reflect more sunlight than land and water. Clouds keep Earth cool by reflecting sunlight, but they can also serve as blankets to trap warmth." (Tetzlaff, G. (1983). Albedo of the Sahara, pp. 60-63)

Very interesting point jagwire. My take on it is that, what the author wrote about the ice caps was probably the least important aspect of it, as it was mentioned last. It was also part of a larger point about the disappearance of the icecaps and that it could accellerate the process of global warming.

Jagwire:

Thanks for the comment. Although cloud cover may play a more important role than does ice (I'm not sure, but it sounds likely), the Arctic's ice does play a relatively (as in relative to the situation) significant role.

global warming is killing the cute koala bears

Man this really helped a lot on my geohraphy project

global warming is going to have a very heavy impact impact on Earth much faster than we would have thought. actually its effects are partly being camouflaged by 'global dimming', an effect which protects us from the real power of the sun rays. much more is yet to come in the coming years and it will be beyond our control if we don't act now and take necessary measures to secure our future. my contribution to global warming may seem very negligible but still since our planet is in peril, its my duty on humanitarian grounds to warn others about their actions.
so friends, do not pollute our environment and instead try to protect it. poor people and vulnerable animals are most prone to the effects of global warming rather than those causing it.

why doesn't the melted ice evaporate??
like...
it has to evaporate in a few days because of the sun you know...
so like...
yeah...
it won't be like 230 ft. of water
maybe 229.9

Were All Gona Dieeeeeeeeee !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If all this is true about global warming then why isnt the goverment and the economy doing anything about it.
Dosent anyone care about next generations that will suffer.Are we really that selfish.

i wish people would take this situation seriously.

Take the situation seriously?? The entire concept is based on 'junk' science and burried deep in the muck of politics. Here is a different, more common sense point of view: http://earthpro.info/global-warming-is-a-total-scam

Let me reiterate one point. The polar ice caps melt which desalinizes the water, which messes up ocean currents, which causes parts of the world (northeast N. America and W. Europe) to cool off. Doesn't this sound like a natural system balancing itself out?

BOTH sides of the global warming camp are utterly corrupt. As for this article, it's simplistic garbage with scary pictures. I am on neither side. There are so many unanswered questions. Neither side is producing compelling evidence without it being mired in BS. I mean just one of the many MANY questions... How do they know we're not coming out of a period of global cooling? That this is the tail end of the last Ice Age? Or is, heaven forfend, NORMAL. We keep getting this predictions of doom and despair, but they never come to pass, and if you stop and analyze the cold hard numbers of weather events etc, and trace it back. There are always spikes and aberrations. The sad thing is, if one year generates more hurricanes, that fact will now be latched onto as "evidence", despite wider evidence showing the contrary is happening and numbers are dropping. It's the scientific equivalent of me holding up my mouse here and saying it gets rid of elephants. After all, there are none here. It's evidence that computer mice keep elephants away. Why is it evidence? Because I have one, and there's no elephants here. It's evidence because I say it's evidence.

Samantha: I think people would take things seriously, if the people putting forward the evidence could be trusted.

Now all those thinking the cutting edge of scientific investigation, we look back now on when medicine believed rotting flesh spontaneously generated maggots (for example) and laugh. Science these days will appear no more evolved in 200 years than the maggots do today.

The effects of Global Warming need to be updated: A recent study from a Global Warming friendly institution reported last month that there have been less hurricanes since the commencement of Global Warming; Antarctica is the thickest it has ever been since humans have been able to measure its density; Economic data shows that global warming has had no change on the amount of money countries spend on natural disaster and disease control. This article is poorly written and appears to be more of a scare tactic than science.

Let's not forget that the warming is resulting in the thawing of the permafrost in sub-arctic regions, which is expected to release thousands of years of stored CO2, which in turn will likely serve to just speed up the warming process even further. Scary.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - February 21, 2008*** NEWS FROM NOAA ***
NATIONAL OCEANIC & ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE WASHINGTON, DC
Contact: Dennis Feltgen, NOAA 305-229-4404Increased Hurricane Losses Due to More People,
Wealth Along Coastlines, Not Stronger Storms, New Study Says

A team of scientists have found that the economic damages from hurricanes have increased in the U.S. over time due to greater population, infrastructure, and wealth on the U.S. coastlines, and not to any spike in the number or intensity of hurricanes.

“We found that although some decades were quieter and less damaging in the U.S. and others had more land-falling hurricanes and more damage, the economic costs of land-falling hurricanes have steadily increased over time,” said Chris Landsea, one of the researchers as well as the science and operations officer at NOAA’s National Hurricane Center in Miami. “There is nothing in the U.S. hurricane damage record that indicates global warming has caused a significant increase in destruction along our coasts.”

http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/02/21/noaa-hurricane-frequency-and-global-warming-not-the-cause-of-increased-destruction/

Will the authors of this article now remove it as FUD

What are your source for all of this?

I'm not saying that global warming isn't a reality -- it's real -- but its degree and effects are certainly debated. History shows us that even scientists have a pretty poor record of predicting what is going to happen in the future.

Science without sources or data to back it up, isn't science. Citing a single newspaper article that features the opinion of one science isn't proof. This is no different than the "junk science" that the right wing and industry-backed lobbyists spew. Is environmentalism becoming it's own type of ideology-based "religion?" This piece would be evidence that it is.

AAAAAHHHHH! crap! I hope I make it past my 18th birthday! actually I agree with aesculapias we all should help even if it means less computer,tv and air conditioning, we can all help. AND IT IS N-O-T NOT A SCAM!!!!!!!!!

Take the situation seriously?? The entire concept is based on ‘junk’ science and burried deep in the muck of politics. Here is a different, more common sense point of view: http://earthpro.info/global-warming-is-a-total-scam

Earth Pro, you should read this, the article you pointed to is a perfect example.
Ad Hominem
I would realy like to read a valid argument for the non-reality of global warming. That article you pointed to isn't it, maybe you should do some research into critical thinking.

Now onto this article. I submit that the deadliest effect of dramatic climate change, regardless of the cause, is the damage to food production. If climate deviate from what our food crops have been optimized for then crop yields will be comprimised. Food prices will go up and more people will go without and face starvation.

More importantly those people will have face their children and other family members going without, which brings up the related consequence of dramatic climate change. Conflict. People without food will try to get it, as pressure to survive increases people will get desperate and the result will increaces in population movement, general violence, terrorism, and war.

I also have some questions, what are the risks involved with the different positions and actions regarding the issue of global warming?
If we take action against anthropogenic global warming and it isn't real, what are the consequences?
What if we don't take action it does turn out to be real?

Global Warming... it's not just science, it's Political Science.

Not only is malaria not a warm weather disease (http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/press_r/reiter_pr.htm) but the amount spent on what little global warming is anthropogenic could be spent combatting it and saving innumerable lives. Ridiculous.

I have a theory about global warming; Global Warming looks like a global scam.
It appears that the earth and planets in our solar have all warmed about 2 degrees during the past 100 years. If this is due to solar activity, why are we wasting valuable time, money and effort on something we have absolutely no control over.
Whatever happened to AIDS, Hunger, Housing, Health Care these are things we really can solve if we wanted to.

Responses to all the comments were covered in a proposal to use the Millennium Dome London as a centre of excellence in global environmental management. This was the proposal the UK Government's own consultants wanted to back and was shortlisted.

http://millenniumprojecttwo.blogspot.com/2007/01/millennium-dome-2001-proposal.html

The facts are accepted but it would be seen as a commercial endorsement for the UK Government to support it.

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/ecodome/

The UNEP IPCC 3rd assessment, 2001 which was part of the business model, gave economic cost of climate change as $200 billion per year. The consultants accepted that this would rise. They also accepted that for a full environmental management centre, it would also cover pollution, species extinction, population dynamics, ecplogical life support systeme collapse etc. Not just an approach from a climate change perspective. Based on the projections of all these factors it was accepted that true economic cost that needed to be addressed could be $1000 billion per year, just over £500 billion.

If the project only addressed 10% of the global dynamic then it would have a 'positioned' magnitude of £50 billion per year.

The comment by Jim B on the cost of hurricane damage was covered in 2001 and a central point. The consultants had a large real estate portfolio and were aware of such assessments. This provided an option for funding. If selected a project team would appraoch the large reinsurers with a proposal to limit their liabilities in return for financing to set up the project.

It appears it was a political decision not to have an environmental centre at the Dome as detailed analysis and response to the competition criteria would suggest the environmental management centre should have won.

The project would have provided a globally authoritative source for all questions and comments raised here. As well as implemtation of sustainable strategies.

Utter bull$%£. I can't believe that that you treehuggers still harp on about this. This planet is still coming out of the last ice age, of course it's going to get bloody warmer. Know why Greenland got it's name? Because when it was discovered, it was green and not covered in ice. You eco freaks just like shouting about something and scaremongering. Global warming is a natural thing. You are out of your minds if you think we can alter it. Idiots.

Global warming is really threat to the society.

Some preventive measures are,

1. Plant trees and stop deforestation
2. Minimise industrilisation
3. Stop using of gas, petrol, desiel like petrolium products/hydro carbons.

STOP THE WORLD- I WANNA GET OFF!!

AAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!

The real danger is feedback responses to warming, especially those that release more gases, and a runaway scenario that reaches equilibrium only after Earth more resembles Venus, after the oceans have boiled away, and all but the most hearty microbes perish.

Man! Why do I read this stuff first thing in the morning? It's as if
I don't have enough to worry about on a daily basis.I guess I'll have to
add this to my list now...

One was left out. The economic devastation and starvation that will come upon all nations that take up and try to do something about this fraud!

We must kill our pets ASAP in order to save the planet !

According to the Waltham Centre for Pet Nutrition, a moderately active 80-pound dog requires 1,955 calories a day — the energy requirement of a 120-pound woman. A lactating dog of that weight requires between 3,900 and 7,800 calories daily.

Smaller dogs of, say, 20 pounds consume energy disproportionate to their weight compared to large dogs. Translated, that means two miniature poodles consume more than a German shepherd on the small side. So, when calculating one's carbon footprint, dog owners should add an extra individual, or two or three, to their household size.

While it is true that some of the carbon dioxide released into the environment as a result of the metabolism of pet food is renewable, the energetics required to produce this food fare — the factories, the delivery trucks, the metal for the cans — are often nonrenewable or renewable more in principle than in practice.

"Tin" cans, for instance, made of iron, require about half a pound of carbon, in the form of coke, per pound to manufacture. After use they go to the city dump, where they may or may not be recycled. Even the best metal-recycling systems recover only a fraction of the metal, while using huge amounts of nonrenewable energy in their operation.

People who purchase organic pet food would hardly be so cruel as to leave Fido in a warm apartment in the summer months without air conditioning. Besides eight hours of cool air, don't forget to factor in the TV to keep him company, or the electric lights when he is home alone in the evening. In very round numbers, a single 6,000 British Thermal Unit air conditioner run for eight hours has the carbon footprint of .15 gallons of gas, which will drive a car for about 3 miles. Over its 10-year life span, a dog enjoying the benefits of air conditioning will consume about 150 gallons of fossil fuel — and that's assuming the system is operating at 100% efficiency.
And don't get me started on cats, which compete with humans in annually consuming millions of tons of various fish varieties from overfished seas.

Ben It doesn't matter whether climate change is a natural process or induced by the actions of man.

A rise in temp moves the dynamic equilibrium points as described by Oh crap. Primary productivity decreases so biodiversity decreases, food production decreases.

With high population and resource pressures global ecological life support systemes collapse billions die. See ecology on this site Reindeer.

Just because you as yet have not got a full understanding of planetary proceses as you are capable of achieving, please don't call people idiots who have.

Of course it is possible to alter global systems. Even if it is a natural process intervention will be required. Ask your self the question. If you were told you were going to die next week. Would you be happier that it would be of natural causes or if somebody killed you?

u guys are all science f%$"

Global Worming is FICTIONAL! Anybody that would even consider believing people that present arguments on the warming of this enormous planet that is over 4 Billion Years old is out of their mind. The people conducting these studies only have a few hundred years of data and to compare that to all relative data since the dawn of this planet is simply naive. I don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist or anything, but I find it odd that people go out of their way to point out the extremities but never the consistencies.

Just the other day, I was outside of Chicago's Union Station, and I got stopped by a group of people that wanted to discuss global warming with me. The temperature on that lovely day was about 12 degrees. Are they out of their minds? Are they trying to get laughed at? I mean come on! If they want to be taken seriously they should at least wait for a day in the summer when it's like 105 degrees out, oh wait, that hasn't happen for I can't even remember how long...Don't buy into this garbage.

There were major malaria epidemics in Poland and Russia in the 1920s. Archangel, Russia had some of the worst outbreaks, and is on two degrees south of the arctic circle.

It will be interesting to see what everyone will be saying by 2012, when it becomes very obvious that we are now cooling down.

Global Warming? BAH!!!

1998 was the hottest year on record since 1934.

I'll pause a moment to let you see the obvious logic flaw in the man-made global warming hysteria...

Still don't get it? Read the last two words in that statement: since 1934. What does that tell you?

OK, let me help you: it was WARMER in 1934 than it is now.

How can that possibly be? The industrial revolution was in its infancy. Aerosol cans weren't introduced until 1941. Air conditioning with Freon (CFCs) didn't really take off until after WWII. Mankind didn't start actively pumping greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere until the 1940s. So how could it have possibly been warmer in 1934!!

And OMG it gets worse!! Did you know that when the dinosaurs roamed the earth the WHOLE GLOBE was a giant tropical paradise? Man didn't even EXIST then. In fact, there weren't even COWS back then to pollute the atmosphere with their evil methane toxin. So how could the earth have POSSIBLY been warmer THEN than it is NOW?

But let's just forget about all of that. WE'RE DEALING WITH A CRISIS NOW! OUR POLAR ICE CAPS ARE MELTING!! AND IT'S ALL BECAUSE WE'RE POLLUTING OUR PLANET WITH NOXIOUS GASES!!

If that's true, then they must be really, REALLY bad gases, because they're melting the polar ice caps on MARS TOO! That's right! The polar ice maps on MARS are shrinking too. And it's all because we can't get people to buy more compact fluorescent light bulbs! Or use less toilet paper! Come on people -- CAN'T YOU SEE THAT YOUR SHINY CLEAN ANUS IS DESTROYING MARS?

Let's try to put it all together, MmmK? It was warmer in 1934 when we weren't spewing pollutants. It was warmer when the dinosaurs were here and WE WEREN'T. So from all of that, we can conclude...

IT DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH MAN! THE EARTH GETS WARMER. THE EARTH GETS COOLER. AND IT'S BEEN DOING THAT FOR MILLIONS OF YEARS -- ALL BY ITSELF!! IT'S NOT A CRISIS (unless you're Al Gore and you spent millions getting your books and DVDs produced and now they're just taking up warehouse space and well, it's not like you can just take them all to the landfill -- no that would be BAAAAAAD and you certainly can't burn them -- no that would be WOOOOOOORSE!)

So do yourself a favor. Start investing in PARKAs, cause it's going to get COLD again, just like back in the 70's when you were all panicking over the coming ice age!

Global Worming is FICTIONAL! Anybody that would even consider believing people that present arguments on the warming of this enormous planet that is over 4 Billion Years old is out of their mind. The people conducting these studies only have a few hundred years of data and to compare that to all relative data since the dawn of this planet is simply naive. I don’t want to sound like a conspiracy theorist or anything, but I find it odd that people go out of their way to point out the extremities but never the consistencies.
Just the other day, I was outside of Chicago’s Union Station, and I got stopped by a group of people that wanted to discuss global warming with me. The temperature on that lovely day was about 12 degrees. Are they out of their minds? Are they trying to get laughed at? I mean come on! If they want to be taken seriously they should at least wait for a day in the summer when it’s like 105 degrees out, oh wait, that hasn’t happen for I can’t even remember how long…Don’t buy into this garbage.

And then there are those idiots who say the Earth is a sphere!! If that was the case those poor sods in Australia would need to glue themselves on it, to avoid falling off... :(
Fortunately for us, the Earth is flat, and sits on the back of four elephants which are carried by giant turtle. And only 6000 years old. Everybody knows that.

(Btw I loved this sentence: "global warming could snowball with the ice caps gone")

Guys their would be no such thing as global warming if they had a solution for it correct? Well they do, my chemistry professor worked for NASA and they have a blimp ready to enter the atmosphere and release the molecule, ozone, into the atmosphere which counters the process of global warming. For those of you who are just knowing this, i bet your asking why don't we take action right away. Heres why, we are spending billions of dollars in iraq and we can't even fund projects in our own country to save OURSELVES.

I don't deny that global warming is happening, i do however disagree with what they are saying will happen with polar icecaps. One major thing people not seam to remember is that when water freezes it expands, so when the icecaps melt the water level wont raise nore will it lower it will stay the same. The full weight of the ice is already pushing down in the surrounding water and as the water pushes back it keeps it floating. So as it melts it shrinks.

Global warming is fictional.

If Al Gore was really concerned, he'd stop buzzing the country in his personal jet, pumping out all of that CO2, to tell us of this "crisis".

The earth has had HUGE variations in temerature for millions of years, both hotter and colder, even before man entered the picture.

It is easy to say global warming is a farce until you look into it. It is not as easy as understanding just one realm of geology, it is the combination of all the realms and when you experiment a little with unbalancing one part, another one fails with it, this is what is called feedback loops. We are just starting to hit the steep part of the curve, and anyone who disbelieves in the impact that man has will be proven wrong. Earth is old, yes, but she has never been through this. We have records of all the gasses and temperatures of the Earth going back 600,000 years plus, that is long enough to make sound scientific observations on what key gasses do to the atmosphere. Now, you here a lot of talk about CO2 because it is easy to understand, but it is not the only gas that will effect us, but lets take CO2. It has always coincided with Earths temperature, guiding it from Ice Age to warm periods. There are reasons for this that would take too long to explain, but the basic is every time CO2 has gotten to about 300ppm Earth plunged into an Ice Age. Currently we are at about 400ppm, which the last time it was that high is when the Earth was nothing more than a hot planet covered in volcanoes. But why aren't we falling into an Ice Age again? The answer is that Earth is doing something it has never done before, and the natural protection of a run-away heat wave, an Ice Age, is not happening because of the abruptness of this rise, the destruction of all the heat sinks, the melting of the poles, the toxification of the atmosphere, and the feedback loops that are pushing it faster and faster. The sun is not the answer, it has been dimming the last few decades, and still we see the years getting hotter and hotter.

What I have written here is one page of a thousand page book on the subject. It is not politi-science, it is not a religious thing, it is simply science. I am not an advocate of fear mongering, yes the Earth will survive, but we are making it so that we are destroying everything good about this planet, and we will be the ones to suffer. Once we are gone this planet can go back to being what it was, but to claim that man has no effect belittles the fact that we do.

Humans have not had that much effect on the planet, we have been here for 40000 years compared to 4.5 billion years, and weve only been producing these "harmful gases" for the past 50 or 60 years. Its all b*****t its another scam to rally votes for the dumbass candidates.

You want to REALLY stop global warming? Stop funding the research into it. But at the same time, start funding research into the effects of global COOLING. Wait 1 year and watch how many scientologi...er...I mean climatologists come out of the woodwork warning us of the coming ice age (again.)

Global warming may increase windshear which will reduce the formation of hurricanes. http://www.sarasotaspeaks.com/node/18674

OPEN YOUR EYES PEOPLE!!! i feel like global warming is like a religion i.e. jesus=gore/global warming=christianity. If stupid americans can believe a "story" made up by shepards 2008 years ago i think they can believe in global warming.Also who decided that gore was a scientist?

I'll believe these global warming nuts when they can answer one simple question. What is the "ideal" global temperature for our planet?

Hmmmmmm, I'm waiting.

How about the Earth's atmosphere made of 95% water vapor which gives us the CO2 factor. Also if global warming is happening how can El Nino affect the hurricanes? If the temps are up there and they cause the hurricanes why would nature counter act their theory. Plus everything Gore said has already been discredited.

I’ll believe these global warming nuts when they can answer one simple question. What is the “ideal” global temperature for our planet?
Hmmmmmm, I’m waiting.

Wrong question, it has absolutely nothing to do with the concern regarding global climate change. Your question is nothing more than an poor atempt to changing the subject.
A better question, one that I suspect many concerned with global climate change find interest in, is "What is the ideal range of global climate for humans?".

I’ll believe these global warming nuts when they can answer one simple question. What is the “ideal” global temperature for our planet?
Hmmmmmm, I’m waiting.

The answer was partly given in comment 34.

One answer would be the one that equates with the highest gross primary productivity (plant growth) globally without energy subsidy (eg fosil fuels in farming).

This supports the greatest amount of global community respiration which is related to bio-diversity which gives the greatest global ecosystem stability.

Conversely if we implement a planetary management system to gives the highest global ecosystem stability the temeperature you seek will evolve as a resultant of that. Everything is connected and dynamically inter related in non linear feed backs.

You are entering into the basics of applied planetary engineering.