Are the North and South Poles getting Colder or Warmer?

  1. Speaking of "Polarization". . . .

    O. K. I am the FIRST to admit that the idea of space exploration fascinates me! Ask Spacenurse! She also holds a deep fascination with space ventures too! I really do not have a problem with have long-term goals to study the Moon and Mars and Saturn and Beyond! But NOT at the expense of studying the one planet that sustains us as we live and breath this very moment!

    The following is a 4/29/2005 New York Times article that briefly talks about this issue. I must say that I am impressed by New York Representative Sherwood Boehlert's comment. (By the way, check out Boehlert's Party Affiliation! There IS hope. . . .) Maybe cuts in "Earth Exploration" will NOT take place?!?!? Most certainly cuts SHOULD NOT take place.

    So. . . How cold or how warm are the North and South Poles getting?? We really do need to know the answer to this and many other similiar question. Such information is ultimately beneficial to you, me and everyone else on this dear planet we call "Earth".

    FYI - I like goose down coats. . . .

    ____________________________

    http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/29/politics/29nasa.html

    House Panel Examines Cuts in NASA Earth Studies

    By The New York Times


    Published: April 29, 2005


    WASHINGTON, April 28 - NASA's new quest to explore the Moon and Mars appears to be coming at the expense of studying a world closer at hand, scientists and lawmakers said Thursday.

    At a hearing of the House Science Committee, scientists and members of Congress said they were alarmed by recent cuts and delays in the Earth science program as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration shifted its focus to President Bush's ambitious plan to send astronauts back to the Moon and later to Mars.

    Representative Sherwood Boehlert, Republican of New York, who is chairman of the committee, said he was disturbed by NASA officials' statements that the agency's Earth studies were significant because they improved the ability to study other planets.

    "This is precisely backward," Mr. Boehlert said. "The planet that has to matter the most to us is the one we live on."

    The hearing focused on a report released Wednesday by an expert panel of the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences that concluded that recent and planned cuts in financing were crippling NASA's Earth-monitoring program. Under the program, satellites study a broad range of things, including short-term weather phenomena like hurricanes and monsoon rains, and longer-term issues like global warming and the amount of radiation Earth absorbs from space.
    Last edit by Ted on Apr 29, '05
    •  
  2. 8 Comments

  3. by   PennyLane
    I agree with you and Sherwood Boehlert, Ted. I read online yesterday that scientists have confirmed global warming by showing that the Earth is receiving more energy from the sun than it is emitting back to space. This is alarming! I would LOVE to see more expiditions to Mars, but at a time when 1. we can afford it, and 2. our technology has advanced to the point where equipment malfunctions will not be an issue. NASA is doing a decent job, but too much money is being wasted because we're simply not ready. I think they're biting off more than we can chew. It's unbelievably cool that we've sent expeditions to Mars, landed on the planet, and taken pictures. But how does that help us??
  4. by   SmilingBluEyes
    Ah you know that is all "junk science" don't you? What are a few trees really?

    Just being sarcastic as you know. I think until we "know" for sure, we need to err on the side of caution. Again, that "don't poop where you eat" adage comes up in my mind.

    I agree with Penny, we need to concentrate on learning about our dynamic Planet. We don't live on Mars or Venus, and likely won't fora long time. The only home we have is being slowly eaten away by our pollution and wasting of resources right here. We need to take care of things here at "home" first, before trying to visit other planets, I am thinking.
  5. by   Roy Fokker
    Ok, here's a question ::

    If there is an ozone hole at the South Pole because of greenhouse emissions, how come there isn't a bigger hole at the North Pole?

    The Northern Hemisphere outproduces the Southern hemisphere when it comes to emissions. Wind patterns donot support mass transference of atmospheric pollutants all the way from the north to the south. Besides, there's NO HOLE at the North.

    Why?
  6. by   Ted
    Those are very good questions, Roy. Unfortunately if funding continues to be cut for our national programs to help research such important questions, we will not know the answer in a timely matter.

    Still. . . there remains that annoying hole in the ozone layer in the South Pole. There's also a thinning layer over Australia as well (at least there used to be). These are two very significant regions that should not have a thinning ozone layer. In fact, I would not want any region of the world to have a thinning (or absent) layer of ozone. Among many other useful and protective purposes, this layer situated high in our atmosphere protects us from the Sun which without it can cause significant damage to. . . . us.

    And this is just ONE aspect of our planet that needs our attention and research. There's many, many more as well. The effects of the ocean currents on our weather systems is another issue that continue to need study.
    Last edit by Ted on Apr 29, '05
  7. by   pickledpepperRN
    I am certain that if our species survives someone will go live on the moon and other planets, explore nearby systems, and "go where no one has gone before".
    There will always be the curious explorers.
    Now we need to keep our spaceship Earth liveable.

    People are continuing to learn about this world.

    http://www.terradaily.com/2005/05042....4cn8rw9i.html

    Australian fly warms to climate change

    SYDNEY (AFP) Apr 29, 2005

    An Australian fruit fly has shown a surprising ability to adapt genetically to rising temperatures, indicating some endangered species may cope better than expected with global warming, researchers said Friday.

    The scientists from Melbourne's Latrobe and Monash universities published a study in the journal "Science" showing that the east coast fruit fly has adapted to rising temperatures in just two decades.

    One of the researchers, Ari Hoffman, said the species native to Sydney had evolved rapidly to resemble its tropical cousins.

    "The genotypes that were common in say Sydney, are now just as common in Melbourne," Hoffman told Australian Broadcasting Corporation radio.

    "We know from other data that these genes are adapting to climate, to both temperature and humidity," he said.

    The discovery could be positive news for some endangered species, he said.

    "This gives us a great handle on saying, 'Look these things can evolve very quickly, these are the genes involved now, let's look at the threatened ones and see what they are actually doing'," he said.
  8. by   pickledpepperRN
    http://www.terradaily.com/2005/05042....ari1gigk.html

    Greenhouse effect confirmed by new NASA ocean study

    WASHINGTON (AFP) Apr 28, 2005
    The Earth absorbs more solar energy than it emits back into space, causing a heat imbalance that confirms what researchers have long pointed to as the hothouse effect of atmospheric pollution, according to a study published Thursday.

    "This energy imbalance is the 'smoking gun' that we have been looking for," said James Hansen, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, and a lead author in research published online in Science Express.

    The accumulated energy is likely to bring with it an increase of 0.6 degree Celsius (one degree Fahrenheit) of the Earth's median temperature by the end of the century, the researchers said.

    An increase of one watt per square meter over 10,000 years would be enough to melt ice equivalent to one kilometer (0.6 mile) of ice cap.

    Researchers who used satellites, data from ocean buoys and computer models for oceanic study, calculated that the Earth is holding on to 0.85 watts of energy per square meter contributing to the imbalance.

    No immediate temperature increase is observed, but since the ocean stores heat in its depths, a delay occurs in human-induced, or anthropogenic, climate change.

    Consequences of the time lag include a likely one degree Fahrenheit increase globally that is "already in the pipeline," researchers said. Even if such human-induced increase of gases in the air was stalled, climate temperature would rise that much over the next 25 years, researchers say.

    The time lag also allows opportunities to take action that could reduce the scope of climate change before it is fully realized -- provided action is taken to reduce climate forcing agents.
  9. by   Thunderwolf
    I agree, exploration as to the damage to our Mother Earth is more crucial than exploring rocks in outer space. We become more concerned about finding life on a dead rock like Mars, yet ignore the extinction of species on our own living planet. But, that is how we waste our tax dollars. Sort of sad.
  10. by   ktwlpn
    Quote from SmilingBluEyes
    Ah you know that is all "junk science" don't you? What are a few trees really?
    Just being sarcastic as you know. I think until we "know" for sure, we need to err on the side of caution. Again, that "don't poop where you eat" adage comes up in my mind..
    :chuckle Well- I believe President Bush-there is NO gloabl warming....

close