Visit the Cellar!

The Cellar Image of the Day is just a section of a larger web community: bright folks talking about everything. The Cellar is the original coffeeshop with no coffee and no shop. Founded in 1990, The Cellar is one of the oldest communities on the net. Join us at the table if you like!

 
What's IotD?

The interesting, amazing, or mind-boggling images of our days.

IotD Stuff

ARCHIVES - over 13 years of IotD!
About IotD
RSS2
XML

Permalink Latest Image

June 25th, 2017: Zero Milestone

Recent Images

June 24th, 2017: North American Food
June 23rd, 2017: Moist Towelettes
June 22nd, 2017: Doodling
June 21st, 2017: Octopus’s Garden
June 20th, 2017: Money Slang
June 19th, 2017: French Phony
June 18th, 2017: A B C… J K L… U V War…

The CELLAR Tip Mug
Some folks who have noticed IotD

Neatorama
Worth1000
Mental Floss
Boing Boing
Switched
W3streams
GruntDoc's Blog
No Quarters
Making Light
darrenbarefoot.com
GromBlog
b3ta
Church of the Whale Penis
UniqueDaily.com
Sailor Coruscant
Projectionist

Link to us and we will try to find you after many months!

Common image haunts

Astro Pic of the Day
Earth Sci Pic of the Day
We Make Money Not Art
Spluch
ochevidec.net
Strange New Products
Geisha Asobi Blog
Cute animals blog (in Russian)
20minutos.es
Yahoo Most Emailed

Please avoid copyrighted images (or get permission) when posting!

Advertising

Philadelphia Pawn Shop
The best real estate agent in Montgomery County
The best T.38 Fax provider
Epps Beverages and Beer, Limerick, PA
Sal's Pizza, Elkins Park
Burholme Auto Body, Philadelphia
Coles Tobacco, Pottstown
ERM Auto Service, Glenside
Glenside Collision
Moorehead Catering, Trappe
Salon 153, Bala
Dominicks Auto Body, Phoenixville

   Undertoad  Thursday Dec 7 08:56 AM

December 7, 2006: Bad skiing in Alps



Well this is one of those I's of the D that just strike me, in a strange way. I don't know if it'll strike you too. There's nothing immediately mind-boggling about it, but it tells a very large story that gets larger the longer you think about it.

What you're looking at there is the bottom of a ski run in Val Gardena, Italy. Officials are trying to figure out whether to cancel World Cup races that are scheduled to be held there. There have already been several races cancelled this year.

In one sense, it's fascinating to see snow making and snow management reach the point where they could concentrate all of it on one particular run. Fascinating to see what they'll do to try to put on the event.

In another sense, it's evidence of a larger story, because the Alps are experiencing their warmest period in 1300 years.

Of course, you don't want to connect the picture to the global warming theories, because it's only evidence of one area during one particular month. And you don't want to specifically look for evidence of global warming, because if you look for it, you'll find it. Psychologists call it Confirmation bias, a tendency to search for or interpret information in a way that confirms one's preconceptions. If it's freezing cold, you don't put it into your pile of evidence; if it's warm, you do.

(At this point, I believe there is roughly 99% scientific consensus that warming is occurring, two-thirds consensus about man's role in it and no consensus whatsoever about what should be done.)



Sheldonrs  Thursday Dec 7 09:27 AM

Global Warming Critic: "Move along people, nothing to see here". "Just a natural phenomenon".



kelso  Thursday Dec 7 09:42 AM

When I lived in a ski village in Switzerland this is what we kept a pair of rock skis for, usually at the beginning and end of the winter season.



Emrikol  Thursday Dec 7 10:00 AM

Duh. Simple answer: Nuclear Winter



Bromskloss  Thursday Dec 7 10:22 AM

Consensus

Quote:
(At this point, I believe there is roughly 99% scientific consensus that warming is occurring, two-thirds consensus about man's role in it and no consensus whatsoever about what should be done.
Really? Where did you get that from? I can absolutetly not say I'm sure myself, but I definitely have gotten another picture. Let me split it up:
  1. Is warming occuring?
  2. If yes, is it caused by man?
  3. If yes again, what should be done?
  1. I don't know what is asked for here, really. Seems like a matter of how you define "warming".
  2. This is a better question, IMO, but I sure would think there are more than 2/3 answering "yes".
  3. Aren't there some obvious answers to this one? Such as "do not let out CO_2 and similar"?

(How do you write subscripts, btw?)


dar512  Thursday Dec 7 10:25 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bromskloss
Aren't there some obvious answers to this one? Such as "do not let out CO_2 and similar"?
That's a lot easier said than done...




Have you seen the fart thread?


9th Engineer  Thursday Dec 7 10:43 AM

Right, our brilliant and well educated CEO's and other MBA's can't seem to figure out how to reduce emissions without threatening to fire half the workforce. Does anyone have any idea how depressing it is to listen to these people talk about partying 4-5 nights a week while only carrying a basic credit load, and then realize that we're going to rely on them in situations like these? Perhaps we should follow China's example and place engineers in top government and corporate positions!



Happy Monkey  Thursday Dec 7 10:44 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bromskloss
I don't know what is asked for here, really. Seems like a matter of how you define "warming".
What are the options?


garren_bagley  Thursday Dec 7 10:56 AM

If it were too warm.....

....then the artificial snow would melt. What we have here is a lack of precipitation.



Undertoad  Thursday Dec 7 10:57 AM

on (2) I would love to post a cite, but it's almost impossible to find anything not written by hand-wringers on either side. Last year I saw a set of poll numbers of scientists -- I think, maybe even climate scientists -- that showed an increasing trends in belief in climate change.



Bromskloss  Thursday Dec 7 11:05 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by dar512
That's a lot easier said than done...




Have you seen the fart thread?
Haha. Don't try for too long or you'll turn .


Bromskloss  Thursday Dec 7 11:12 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Monkey
What are the options?
The average temperature, over some period of time, rising above some specific value, mabye. What I intended to say is that I'd like to see a more specific question than "are we having a global warming".

But actually, I might have changed my mind right now. Perhaps there is no obvious definition. This would enable one scientist to say "Look, the temperature has gone awry!" while another responds "Kind of looks like the normal noisy curve to me.".


bhaemolytic  Thursday Dec 7 11:34 AM

As for the scientific consensus on global warming, here it is, published in Science (a peer-reviewed and arguably one the most respected scientific publications in the world.)

"BEYOND THE IVORY TOWER: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change" by Naolmi Oreskes. Published in Science 3 December 2004:
Vol. 306. no. 5702, p. 1686

As the author states, "The scientific consensus might, of course, be wrong. If the history of science teaches anything, it is humility, and no one can be faulted for failing to act on what is not known. But our grandchildren will surely blame us if they find that we understood the reality of anthropogenic climate change and failed to do anything about it.

Many details about climate interactions are not well understood, and there are ample grounds for continued research to provide a better basis for understanding climate dynamics. The question of what to do about climate change is also still open. But there is a scientific consensus on the reality of anthropogenic climate change. Climate scientists have repeatedly tried to make this clear. It is time for the rest of us to listen."



Undertoad  Thursday Dec 7 11:41 AM

I've read Oreskes, and I found it to be crap. here it is, judge for yourself

I've also read posts by climatologists whose published articles were mysteriously ignored by Oreskes although they should have been in her dataset.

I'm not a denier; I just want the science to be right.



Undertoad  Thursday Dec 7 11:46 AM

I might add that the article is not a part of the peer-reviewed section of Science.



officer_purple  Thursday Dec 7 04:35 PM

I have a horribly nasty feeling I've been there.... Either that or all the ski resorts in Italy look the same.



SydneyBoy  Thursday Dec 7 05:41 PM

The fart thread? Haven't seen it but it brings to mind the following:

* Methane is a greenhouse gas
* We all fart methane
* Most of the energy produced is by methods that produce large amounts of greenhouse gases
* Therefore, why not strap some sort of balloon device to everyone's bums, collect the methane and use it in gas power plants?

And we don't need to stop at people - livestock such as cows and sheep (chickens?) could also have their own balloons. Dolphins?? The possibilities are endless!

Anyone with me on this one?



xoxoxoBruce  Thursday Dec 7 06:17 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by bhaemolytic
As for the scientific consensus on global warming, here it is, published in Science (a peer-reviewed and arguably one the most respected scientific publications in the world.)
"BEYOND THE IVORY TOWER: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change" by Naolmi Oreskes. Published in Science 3 December 2004:
Vol. 306. no. 5702, p. 1686
Well, if you want to get into the nitty gritty, check out this thread. It'll keep you entertained for a while.

Welcome to the Cellar, bhaemolytic, garren bagley and officer purple.

Parts of the Italian Alps had blizzards right up until June this year, record snowfalls, and I saw pictures of a 12" snowfall in August. The seasons seem to be shifting some.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 9th Engineer
Perhaps we should follow China's example and place engineers in top government and corporate positions!
Considering the rate that China is polluting the environment with coal burning and cement production........um, maybe not.


SPUCK  Friday Dec 8 06:52 AM

It always bugs me that Global Warming is all OUR fault. Why does no one seem to ever mention natures contributions?

We had Mount St Helens back in 1980. I mean just as an example; it felled all the trees in a 212 square mile area. Using 'volcanic gases' it hoisted 1.5 cubic miles of rocks, soil, and ash, 15 miles into the air! I mean think about the millions of tons of gases that were involved! (That's tons of gas!!) The lateral column of gas left at 1,100km/hr at 600F!! Then we had huge Pinatubo blow. Right now there are 98 active volcanoes erupting. Any one of them in a spasm can dump out more greenhouse gas in a day than man can generate in a year.

Image Credit: Armando Alvarez Sanchez, Cruz Roja Ecuatoriana.
Attachment 10851

As an example here's a quote about Mt. Ruapehu NZ: "The amount of sulfur dioxide released by the volcano is about 1000 tons per day, well down from the highs which have exceeded 10,000 tons per day."

Add to this things like fires. Two or three years ago they had fires burning in Asia or Indonesia that were insanely huge - thousands, and thousands, of square miles burned for months bringing life to a near standstill in the area.

Anyway, since I can easily believe volcanoes and such don't all agree to emit just so much each year, that we could have an "overdose" for several years that ultimately effects our planet's temperature in following years. But I never hear anything about that! Just, "We humans (and especially evile USA humans)", are causing global warming and "The sky is falling, the sky is falling!"

The sky may be falling and humanity may not be helping to prop it back up but I'm not even vaguely convinced that it's all our fault.

BTW: You might enjoy this link:
http://volcano.und.nodak.edu/vwdocs/...s/current.html



milkfish  Friday Dec 8 08:38 AM

Right, but ten thousand years ago (or whenever), volcanoes were going off and forests were burning too, I think, and the carbon they contributed to the atmosphere is reflected in the fossil record. It's the change over the last couple of hundred years (not just the last couple of decades) that's of concern, and there is no notion that the natural sources are solely responsible.

Regarding "millions of tons of greenhouse gases": consider that a mid-sized 30 mpg car driving 12,000 miles/year will create about 3.55 tons of CO2/year, multiply by the number of cars on the road, and I think we can take on a few volcano's-worth of emissions ourselves.



xoxoxoBruce  Friday Dec 8 12:43 PM

The 20th century was the least volcanic ever.



Happy Monkey  Friday Dec 8 12:48 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by SPUCK
It always bugs me that Global Warming is all OUR fault. Why does no one seem to ever mention natures contributions?
People mention that constantly. It's factored in.


nephtes  Friday Dec 8 04:47 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bromskloss
  1. Is warming occuring?
  2. If yes, is it caused by man?
  3. If yes again, what should be done?
You know, I've always thought that #2 is a bit irrelevant to #3. If warming is in fact taking place, to a point that threatens the biosphere and/or us, then it seems like we should figure out what can be done regardless of whether or not it's caused by human activity or not. If greenhouse gases are in fact part of the cause, then indicates a certain set of potential solutions, but not whether or not a solution is needed.


xoxoxoBruce  Friday Dec 8 06:09 PM

You skipped a step;

1 - Is warming occuring?
1a - Is it a problem?
1b - If so how much?
2 - If yes, is it caused by man?
3 - If yes again, what should be done?

answers;
1 - yes
1a - We don't know
1b - We know some changes and their expected result, but since we don't know how warm it will get, we don't know the whole story. Plus there is bound to be things happening that nobody expected.
2 - Caused, no. Contributed to, yes. Disagreement on how much.
3 - That depends on 1a & 1b, change is not inherently bad.

That's not even it, in a nut shell. Way more complicated than that.



floatingk  Saturday Dec 9 11:53 AM

Another view may include that human are just another part of the whole of nature. And though we think we can make changes to better our "pristine environment", the whole of nature is going to do whatever changes are necessary to balance out.

From a Neomalthusian perspective, it doesnt matter. Its probably too late.



Beestie  Saturday Dec 9 12:04 PM

Never ceases to amaze me that anyone can even entertain the idea that its possible to stabilize the earth's climate. Its never been stable and it never will be stable. North America will again be covered in a miles-thick sheet of ice. The only question is when.



busterb  Saturday Dec 9 02:11 PM

Damn I best get up more wood.



Sundae  Sunday Dec 10 07:38 AM

This may help NSFW
http://www.cellar.org/showpost.php?p...8&postcount=81



Katkeeper  Saturday Dec 16 06:47 AM

Apparently they made enough snow at Val Gardena to hold the World Cup races. And Bode Miller won by a large margin!



Your reply here?

The Cellar Image of the Day is just a section of a larger web community: a bunch of interesting folks talking about everything. Add your two cents to IotD by joining the Cellar.