FRIHOSTFORUMSSEARCHFAQTOSBLOGSCOMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Will the world and with a new iceage?





gangstermo12
Leave a comment..

if u dont know what a ice age is check:
Quote:

An "ice age" or, more precisely, "glacial age" is a generic geological period of long-term reduction in the temperature of the Earth's surface and atmosphere, resulting in the presence or expansion of continental ice sheets, polar ice sheets and alpine glaciers. Within a long-term ice age, individual pulses of extra cold climate are termed "glacial periods" (or alternatively "glacials" or "glaciations" or colloquially as "Ice Age" ), and intermittent warm periods are called "interglacials". Glaciologically, ice age implies the presence of extensive ice sheets in the northern and southern hemispheres;[1] by this definition we are still in the ice age that began at the start of the Pleistocene (because the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets still exist).[2]

More colloquially, "the ice age" refers to the most recent colder period that peaked at the Last Glacial Maximum approximately 20,000 years ago, in which extensive ice sheets lay over large parts of the North American and Eurasian continents. This article will use the term ice age in the former, glaciological, sense: glacials for colder periods during ice ages and interglacials for the warmer periods.

thanks

Added quote tags. - ocalhoun
Ankhanu
Assuming you meant "end" rather than "and", no, I don't think the world will end in the next ice age. There's no reason to think it will end the world. If we're still around, it will cause a fair bit of trouble for our northern and southern cities... but that's very different from ending the world.

Also, you should put quoted text between quote tags. Even if you wrote the wiki article, you're still taking it from an outside source.
ocalhoun
Will there be another ice age?
Certainly. Just wait long enough, and one will come sooner or later.

Will the world end? Certainly not.
Did the world end during the last ice age?
Bikerman
ocalhoun wrote:
Will there be another ice age?
Certainly. Just wait long enough, and one will come sooner or later.

Will the world end? Certainly not.
Did the world end during the last ice age?

No, but there is gathering evidence that our species nearly did Smile
Ankhanu
Bikerman wrote:
No, but there is gathering evidence that our species nearly did Smile


True enough, but the world ending and our species ending are vastly different ideas. The world will likely do very well without us.
Cliffer
i think the ice age will come again in the very near future.
inuyasha
A new iceage? But it's believed that global warming affects the world and the average temperature goes up year by year. How come that the iceage, which indicates low global temperature, is coming? The two things contrasts with each other.
Bikerman
Ice ages are thought to result from a cycle in our orbit which means that every 26,000 years things get cold enough for an ice age.
It isn't going to happen anytime soon - we are about 8,000 years away from the next ice age - and it is possible that AGW has already killed-off this effect so that it won't actually happen.
Bluedoll
I think the world will go on has it has for a very long time. It does seem earth cycles do occur for a reason and do maintain a living planet. As I understand it, Mars lost its atmosphere as it did not have everything in place to support it. (a liquid core)

The word 'world' can also encompass not just the substance of rock, gas and water but what is on it in terms of plant, animal and human life. These cycles obviously affect life, sometimes very dramatically and visa versa. Does the latter really require more evidence?
Ankhanu
Bluedoll wrote:
It does seem earth cycles do occur for a reason and do maintain a living planet.


It does seem that way, but it isn't so. The cycles occur, but not for a "reason", and not to maintain life. The cycles are (largely) abiotic in nature, though life has altered how the planet system responds to changes in, for example, axial tilt and/or orbital path. There's no purpose to the cycles, they're natural properties of the system.

Bluedoll wrote:
As I understand it, Mars lost its atmosphere as it did not have everything in place to support it. (a liquid core)


You understand completely wrong; Mars has an atmosphere (~95% CO2). The Martian atmosphere is less dense/thinner than our own, and there is evidence that it may have once been thicker, but has been eroded by solar wind, EM fields and/or loss following impact.
An atmosphere >200km thick (where the exosphere starts), isn't exactly huge, but it's far from absent.

Bluedoll wrote:
These cycles obviously affect life, sometimes very dramatically and visa versa. Does the latter really require more evidence?


Not for those who actually look at the evidence and are willing to accept what it says. The sheer number of deniers, however, is kinda frightening.
Bluedoll
@ Ankhanu
My concern is waiting for the evidence to come in and then waiting for the debate to arrive at some conclusion will be all too late, compounded by the fact that when you do reach some kind of agreement on what is happening, new findings arrive – back to the drawing board. We should have listened in the beginning!

I thought earth did not suffer the same fate as Mars (poor little red martians) with loss of atmosphere. I thought it does not occur on earth because of earth qualities like having a molten liquid core which sets up a protective skin around the earth to help prevent bleed off. Amazing little creation is it not? I have to question just on how you know these natural systems so well as to not question how one system (cycle) might not effect another or influence why life exists on this planet? Perhaps, there are some things we still can discover and learn about that will explain just how this tiny blue planet does actually function? I tend to think things happen for a reason as opposed to random exercises. Ice storm, well it is a cool thing.
Wink
Bikerman
This is all based on misunderstanding and lack of basic knowledge - a great reason to study more science.
a) Apart from a couple of articles on a 'new ice age' that appeared in a slow news month back in the 1980s, the science opinion has been consistent - that the temperature is rising, and we are largely to blame.
b) The molten core of earth (it isn't actually molten - only the outer core is molten) is not responsible for holding on to the atmosphere. Gravity is what holds the atmosphere down. The molten outer-core has a more subtle influence, relating to the charged 'solar wind'.

I do remember seeing a graphic on some programme or other which seemed to indicate that without the molten core, and the resulting magnetic field, the solar wind could 'strip' the atmosphere. This is wrong, of course. The solar wind might strip a small fraction of the atmosphere at best - and even that is debatable.

The idea that this is 'created' is simply daft and does not belong in a science forum.

Quote:
Perhaps, there are some things we still can discover and learn about that will explain just how this tiny blue planet does actually function?
You could start by reading a few basic science texts. I can recommend a list if you like?
Ankhanu
Bluedoll wrote:
@ Ankhanu
My concern is waiting for the evidence to come in and then waiting for the debate to arrive at some conclusion will be all too late, compounded by the fact that when you do reach some kind of agreement on what is happening, new findings arrive – back to the drawing board. We should have listened in the beginning!


The thing is, the evidence is largely there. It's certainly there in vast enough quantity to be meaningful. The problem is that deniers don't care. Unfortunately, deniers have heavy sway in policy making, and no amount of evidence is going to change their mind. It's not that new findings send us back to the drawing board (it feeds into the overall picture, and a momentary hiccup doesn't tend to upset the whole thing), it's that those with agendas towards maintaining the status quo will latch on to any apparent inconsistency, which are inconsistencies usually only when taken out of context, to throw their weight around and protect their short-sighted interested.

The science is pretty solid... but not everyone gives a damn.

Bluedoll wrote:
I have to question just on how you know these natural systems so well as to not question how one system (cycle) might not effect another or influence why life exists on this planet? Perhaps, there are some things we still can discover and learn about that will explain just how this tiny blue planet does actually function?


This is a problem of communication. I was saying that the cycles and other factors (life included) affect and influence one another. The point was that they are not set up to foster life, nor do they exist to maintain the planet... they are extensions of the planet's circumstances, defined by its physical properties, not developed to create/maintain those properties.

There is absolutely much we have left to discover and learn about how all the systems active in and on our little planet interact and function. There's absolutely no question about that. The amount that we don't know seems near infinite.

Bluedoll wrote:
I tend to think things happen for a reason as opposed to random exercises.


I think things happen for a reason too... just not for a purpose. It sounds semantic, but they are pretty separate ideas. Everything has a reason, but purpose is something that is imposed. Almost everything that seems random can be explained with enough data and computational power to track each of the interacting elements Wink Some random seeming events are down right inevitable.
setfirework
To be clear, we are already currently in an ice age, the Quaternary period. It started 2.58 million years ago and continues to this day. It’s just that we are in the middle of an interglacial period (the Holocene). Over just the last 600,000 years there have been seven glacial periods and seven interglacials (counting the one we are in now).

It’s always possible, of course, that the last glacial period (ending around 11,000 years ago) was the last one of this ice age and we are heading back to a warm period. Possible but unlikely. Unless of course we keep going down the global warming path. That’s not really a good thing, mind you… since usually the climate changes over many thousands of years, not a couple of hundred like we’re trying to do.
milkshake01
We would probably have the technology to survive an ice age assuming it happens many centuries later.
But if it happens now, we might not be able to survive.
darthrevan
Out of religious view it would end with fire. The first earth ended with flood and next is fire.
Related topics
Favorite Songs
the best song is...
Peter Jennings has died
World of Warcraft
New Years Predictions for 2006
'Lost world' of untouched species found in New Guinea
Is Technology Good or Bad?
New World Order
New 7 wonders of the world?
The Screens Of The Future
NEW WORLD OF WARCRAFT TIPS SITE
Sword Of The New World: Granado Espada
How to learn vocabulary fast?
Latvija
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Science -> Earth

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.