h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I eat a kiwi now and again, but you're right.



Nothing's really been proven yet, but something is definately happening, that we all can agree on.

Hi Wandawoman. You sound very positive and upbeat about the environmental situation. A couple of things bother me about your analysis though.

Volcanoes do throw a lot of stuff into the atmosphere, that's true and it definitely has a measurable effect on the global climate in the following few years. Now we're putting all our stuff into the atmosphere *in addition* to the stuff that volcanoes throw up aloft. Carbon dioxide that took millions of years to lock into 'fossil fuel' is being released very quickly - far more quickly than it can be locked up again.

You say we're moving into an ice age and scientists have proven without doubt that the planet is getting colder. Is that right? I'd like to have a look at your data. Can you let me know where you read that? I'm not doubting you but recent findings seem to be pointing firmly to a warming trend. Having said that, climate is a chaotic system - impossible to predict with any certainty - and small changes that we trigger, could result in a very destructive positive feedback loop taking earth's climate off in unexpected directions. For example, it's recently been suggested that both rise and fall in sea levels can lead to more volcanic activity. Sea level is currently rising according to the scientists I've been listening to, due to global warming. Warming of the oceans is also thought to be likely to cause methane hydrates that cover huge areas of the ocean floors to dissolve, bubble to the surface and evaporate into the atmosphere.

I'm not sure what you're getting at regarding the 'third world'. Are you implying there's some sort of conspiracy by environmentalists, scientists and rich countries to pretend there's a problem with global warming just to stop the developing countries from developing? If so, I think that's a conspiracy theory too far. If Bush hadn't pulled out of Kyoto, the developing countries would have had far more scope to chuck carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than the developed countries. They would also have been able to sell their carbon rights that they didn't want or have the capacity to use, to the developed countries. They would have benefited enormously - added to which, poor, low-lying countries like Bangladesh would have had some hope of escaping the prospect of rising sea levels.

Could you explain your points about 1) America supplying fertilisers and GM seed to third world countries and 2) America paying African ladies to be mutilated, please.

Which countries are they that are raising cattle in Africa? Because the last time I looked, the US had huge tracts of land suitable for nothing in particular, but very good for grazing cattle. The US has no need for imported beef.

There is NOT, I repeat, NOT a finite supply of food in the world. Developed countries produce more than they can eat. The US pays some farmers to NOT grow food, in order to keep prices down. They also buy and destroy some food. They also give it away to other nations. Africa has more natural resources than the US, and could outproduce it by a landslide, if they could just get their idiotic government situations solved.

>I'm not calling all Aussies (or Americans for that matter) fat.

yes well you did say Oceana or something and I have to tell you its just us that are fat, not our lovely neighbours

>Take, for instance, your jeans. To produce them in Aus would cost (I'm estimating here) $30 per pair, then you buy them for $70. If a 12 year old child makes your jeans in a third world sweatshop, they would probably cost $2 dollars to make. You probably pay $50. A good deal for you, but that 12 year old is subsidising your purchase with their labour.

one, I don't wear jeans
two, $70? that is a little under-estimated
three, in aust, we're particularly harsh on this type of thing because we have something (you may have heard of them) called unions, and they don't like it when jobs are lost to developing nations, so all prices are pretty much equal.

>It's the same with food: people in Somalia go hungry because you want cheap meat

again, I don't eat meat, it gives you bowel cancer. Furthermore, we do not import meat, ever, especially since the british disease fiasco. And, our beef prices have actually risen, so that WE can supply YOU, and your demand in Europe, so I don't think YOU are making people in Somalia go hungry either.

and why not call us fat? we are, but I reject the claim that fat=selfishness, thats all.

Unions, unfortunately, are a dying breed in the UK, and I'm not sure they're powerful enough elsewhere to stop Nike or Nestle producing stuff using labour in developing nations.
When I said 'you', I don't mean you personally. How would I know if you wear jeans, eat pigs or grow crops in your window box. It was used as a collective term. Also, what I know about Aust currency comes from Neighbours, and I haven't seen that in over a year.
I'd be surprised in you didn't import *any* meat, and how do you know where (collective) your McD****d's beef burger originates.

sorry I'v not been around much this week; can I urge you all to check out the 'Utopia' link near the top of my h2g2 user page.

I'd like to second Andy's statement about imported beef. The US does NOT produce enough beef to make the greasy patties of cardiac arrest known as the Quarter Pounder or the Whopper. No country does. That beef comes largely from the Third World or developing countries, where they're chopping down their forests as fast as they can to convert it to pasture. All to satisfy our craving for a hamburger. This, as are most environmental problems, market driven.

Okay, well, I'm not totally sure, because I only *just* passed economics, but, aust must only import an insignificant amount of meat, because it isn't expressely mentioned in our Current Account, whereas the amount of meat we export is significant to us because it is expressely mentioned in our Current Account (in the credits for goods and services it has - 'Meat and meat preparations' (in the balance of payments) whereas for debits it has the rather general -'Food and beverages, mainly for consumption')

BUT, I know everyone is right, its just once I start playing the devils advocate, its hard to stop (and patriotism gets in the way too)

I've just watched this programme about the oceanic conveyor and thought I'd tell any intrested parties about it, while it's fresh in my mind. It's a sort of river that flows through the world's oceans. It starts with the ice in the Arctic drawing warmer water towards it to replace cold, saline water that's sinking at a rate of about 2 million tonnes per second. As the warmer water being drawn north cools, and becomes more saline, it sinks thousands of meters and starts flowing south. It moves slowly along the American coasts and continues on until it meets a similar flow moving north from the Antarctic. Where they meet, they turn east, flow for thousand of miles and then finally south. They end up in the North Pacific. The journey takes 2,000 years. It's what keeps our planet's climate so temperate. It keeps the equatorial areas from getting too hot and the regions nearer the poles from getting too cold. If it stopped, we would (so the scientists say) have a sudden, rapid onset of an ice age.

The current global warming which scientific data certainly does indicate is happening, may well cause the slowing and eventual stopping of the oceanic conveyor. So even though we seem to be moving into a period of warming, it could ultimately result in an ice age.

Since the sinking of the Titanic by an iceberg, teams of Canadian scientists have been monitoring the rate icebergs float down towards their coast from the Arctic. Between the time they started gathering data and the 1970s, there were about 400 bergs per year. In the 1980s that increased to about 600 per year. Now it's about 1200 per year. The effect of this increased melting has been to make the water less cold and less saline so it isn't sinking so deep and less warm water is being drawn north to replace it. If this continues, the conveyor could stop all together. Countries like Britain, Greenland and Iceland, that benefit from the pleasant maritime climate brought about by the Gulf Stream will suddenly find themselves in the grip of very cold winters and cool summers. That will just be the beginning. According to this particular bunch of scientists, once it starts, the changes will happen very quickly.

Little changes in one direction can lead to catastrophic changes in another direction. We don't understand our climate. We should treat it with great respect. It could turn out to be balanced on a knife edge.

Whoops. I meant the flow finally turns north, not south, to end its journey in the north Pacific.

Ice Age:
Yes I think that is where wanda woman is getting her cold stats from.
The possible impending IceAge is due to the ice packs being melted.
Did you know that for the first time in millions of years there was no ice at the north pole! A russian Ice Breaker with international scientists discovered that the ice pack had floated towards Canada. Scientists in Greenland say that they have ice records from drilling that show this is unprecedented.

Fat Oceanian: By the way I would like to take responsibility for that quote.

US Beef is American: Yes, it comes from deforested South America.

Nestle Note: Nestle Give Free Charity Powdered milk to Africa. They give small sample packs designed to last a few weeks after which the mother has little or no ability to feed her baby naturaly. Later the children suffer because their mothers have to purchase powdered milk and ironically they are Lactose Intolerent.

I Pledge Alegence to the ...

Boycotting Nestle is something *everyone* can do to make a difference. If you type www and then follow that with a dot, then type babymilkaction and another dot then finally org, you'll find out lots more.

I'm not so sure that is what WWoman is getting her stats form PG. I've just had a read of her message and she's under the impression that the "Scientists have proven without doubt that our planet is getting colder" and goes on to suggest the possible solution "maybe we should pump more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere to keep the planet warm". If she has the scenario I've just related in mind, then her solution seems very ill considered. Rather than judge her to be a mad person, I think I'll wait for her to explain what she means, because I don't think she can be referring to this theory.

I hadn't heard that there was no ice at the North Pole. Are you sure about that? If it's true, that's extraordinary. You'd think it would be big news and all over the papers like a rash. When did it happen? Is it happening now?

I'll go and have a look at the baby milk site. I'd heard of that practice going on years ago. All the dangers to the babies and the population were known then. I can hardly believe it's still happening. What a disgrace!

There is ice over the north pole. (source: University of Washington's Polar Science dept).

The Earth's atmosphere is getting warmer not colder, it has risen by over a degree (celsius) in the last 100 years (source: United Nations).

News from NASA
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

Greenhouse gases are the main reason why the Northern Hemisphere is warming quicker during wintertime months than the rest of the world. New climate model results published by NASA scientists in the Journal of Geophysical Research show that greenhouse gases increase the strength of the polar winds that regulate northern hemisphere climate in winter.

Ice Pack at North Pole Melts
BBC:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_888000/888235.stm
[URL removed by moderator]

Try to search any international news network.
(Note: All The American ones tend to underplay the message)
A few even mention that it might open up the North West Passage and increase trade while simultaneously improving the agriculture of North America.

The article refers to the melting of parts of the Arctic Ice Pack, the Artic Ice Pack is a lot bigger than just the North Pole. The ice at the pole has not melted.

Thanks for that Proper Ganda. Very interesting!

The BBC News Online article dated August 2000 states: "An American scientist says a large expanse of ice-free water has opened up at the North Pole this year. Dr James McCarthy, an oceanographer, says he found a mile-wide (1.6 km) stretch of open ocean on a recent trip to the region. ... Another scientist on the cruise, palaeontologist Dr Malcolm C McKenna, said the ship was able to sail all the way to the North Pole through only a thin crust of ice, and arrived on the spot to discover no ice at all. "I don't know if anybody in history ever got to 90 degrees north to be greeted by water, not ice," Dr McKenna was quoted as saying. "Some folks who pooh-pooh global warming might wake up if shown that even the pole is beginning to melt at least sometimes." "

RARRGH Moderators!

Half the stuff was missing. (both North Pole Ice Pack and URLS)

Perhaps Mr Happy is a 1984 Orwellian mole sent by the Ministry of Happiness & Mr G W Bush.

Granted the whole Arctic ice pack has not yet completely melted, by that time Bangladesh and Holland will be underwater so it will be easy to notice (albeit too late to react). But the ice at the North Pole did melt in Aug 2000 there is no denying this.

One thing that I think you folks are overlooking, is that Bush is right to be concerned about the economy of the U.S.A. If the economy of America falters, then the entire world economy will falter. Look at what happened to the world economy not to long ago when Japan was experiencing their own recession. The whole world had to tighten its belt a little just to get through it. Now think what would happen to the world economy if America where to slip into a recession. Or heaven forbid another depression. The world have to do more than tighten it's belt. The world would have to go on a crash starvation diet.