Ice-capped roof of world turns to desert (glaciers melt, rivers dry up)

[Pirate Smile]

Ice-capped roof of world turns to desert
Scientists warn of ecological catastrophe across Asia as glaciers melt and continent's great rivers dry up

By Geoffrey Lean, Environment Editor
Published: 07 May 2006

Global warming is rapidly melting the ice-bound roof of the world, and turning it into desert, leading scientists have revealed.
The Chinese Academy of Sciences - the country's top scientific body - has announced that the glaciers of the Tibetan plateau are vanishing so fast that they will be reduced by 50 per cent every decade. Each year enough water permanently melts from them to fill the entire Yellow River.

-snip-
The glaciers have been receding over the past four decades, as the world has gradually warmed up, but the process has now accelerated alarmingly. Average temperatures in Tibet have risen by 2 degrees Fahrenheit over the past 20 years, causing the glaciers to shrink by 7 per cent a year, which means that they will halve every 10 years.

-snip-
He added: "The melting glaciers will ultimately trigger more droughts, expand desertification and increase sand storms." The water running off the plateau is increasing soil erosion and so allowing the deserts to spread.

-snip-
Perhaps worst of all, the melting threatens to disrupt water supplies over much of Asia. Many of the continent's greatest rivers - including the Yangtze, the Indus, the Ganges, the Brahmaputra, the Mekong and the Yellow River - rise on the plateau.

http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article362549.ece

[alfredo]

1. At times like this I am glad I am in my sixties, not my

twenties. I do not envy those who will have to deal with the consequences of those who came before. My attempts at leaving as little impact on the environment was more than negated by the actions of billions of others who consumed without out care for the future. My talks at simple living conferences were a pitiful attempt at slowing down the inevitable shake out.

I knew it was over for us (the human race) when the Chinese went capitalist.

[Zorra]

2. Aw, it's just commie propaganda to make Bu*h look bad. Move

along now folks, nothing to see here.

[skooooo]

5. I'm with ya brother...

Not quite your age yet, but getting there.

[alfredo]

8. this might sound cruel, but we need a pandemic that kills

billions of humans. Over population is at the root of our problems. The earth can handle a couple billion burning fossil fuels and pissing in the river, but 6 billion is just too many.

[Boomer]

10. Not cruel compared to the alternative

Losing a few billion to an illness that kills you in a week or two will seem like a mercy compared to massive starvation and the violence of resource wars.

[alfredo]

12. Exactly. Many great civilizations died because their environment

couldn't handle their numbers. Be it starvation or disease, nature will cull the herd. The sooner it happens, the better. Without birth control and negative population growth, disaster will find us.

[Kailassa]

13. If you really believe that, you're free to set an example

by making a bit more space on earth yourself.

People arguing that we need something to kill a large part of the population make me laugh, as it's never themselves or their loved ones they envisage dying. It's also a very irresponsible notion to spread, as many countries have supplies of infectious material that could achieve your goal, and the means to propagate it. All it takes in for one group of madmen with access to that stuff to decide they need to "save the Earth" in that manner, and billions of people will be murdered. And all for nothing, it won't help.

You know, people can learn to stop burning fossil fuels and pissing in the river.

And education has long been proved to be a very effective method of lowering womens' reproductive rates.

One reason for high birth rates in many countries is that there is no government support for the elderly, and parents know that if they do not have children to support them in their old age, they will be left on the street. Couple this with a high infant mortality, and a large number of children are needed as a superannuation plan.

But when women are educated and can get decent jobs, they don't want to have many children, and can learn about contraception. Add pensions for the elderly, and they no longer have the need to, either.

If any country is hit by something that causes a large enough death-rate to significantly lower its population, then that country's economy will be left in ruins. A ruined economy cannot finance education, birth control or pensions. So the people left will have nothing to do but propagate like mad, quickly bringing the population in their devastated country to a higher figure than it was before.

[NNadir]

17. Well stated Kalissa. You are offering the ethical and rational approach

to population control.

However, I must say that I think the unethical approach to population control will prevail. It may not come by a quick plague, but I think we are going to see great tragedy. What is happening in Dafur - which is at the end of the day - a resource war translated by genocide is probably what is going to achieve the result of reduced population.

But you have a spot on vision of what should be done, and I only regret and wonder that what you propose will probably not be done.

[Kailassa]

21. Thank you.

So many people are already murdered each day by the policies of those who believe their comfort is a right, and another person's life is not. There have always been those who see themselves as the rightful masters of all others, and it is these smug bastards who will see to the decline in population. Never mind that some European countries are now proving that a population can shrink drastically without murder and mayhem. These bastards want the cheapest, fastest way, not a way that involves treating people with care and respect.

I fear much of the world is doomed. But, as you're quote so aptly states, fear has never been a good reason for not trying. Every word we speak is another butterfly's wing being flapped, and may do something to turn the tide.

[KingM34]

19. Exactly

I am frustrated by comments such as the above, advocating the horrible deaths of millions of people. History also shows that populations devastated by disease and war usually bounce back quickly. Far better is education and empowerment of women.

[phantom power]

20. Word. My reaction to that kind of philosophy is "you first."

[Gregorian]

7. It really does seem pathetic.

The car show with electric cars, around 1965, near where I lived. Turning out the lights carefully when we left the room. Not traveling. Buying a tiny Subaru in 1971. And we thought that was just the beginning of a new efficient world. Being frugal.

Well, at least I can feel better about all of the dread and worry I fretted over the last thirty years. Boy I had it hard. I just knew what was happening was wrong. The problem is, now I can't care. For my own health, I've had to completely avoid thinking about this subject. Which is not possible. But I can see that it's too late. All I can say is, I told you so. Which is no consolation prize. It sucks. So now we wait it out to see who makes the technological breakthroughs. But only for laughs. We cannot engineer our way out of this. The best we can do is stop breeding. Slow it down. But that is unspeakable. Anyone who dares to threaten that right is tantamount to a dictator.

Too bad this topic ended up in the caverns of DU, instead of breaking news. Turn out the light when you leave.

[Sal Minella]

9. When I read Garrett Hardin's "Population, Evolution and Birth Control"

I thought there, that book will solve the problem for us.....but just in the last few years, I've seen sentences like "Well, we used to worry about a 'population explosion,' but that didn't happen."

[Gregorian]

14. And here's why.

People who think in terms of me, versus thinking in terms of us. I'm going to have a child. It's only me. I'm going to build a house. It's only me. And a capitalist society depends upon the "me mentality". I am a special case. I did not have children. I feel I can speak without being hypocritical. But in a sense, even that isn't the case. Because in reality, there is no me. There is only us. It didn't seem that way when the population was small. Trees were huge. Spaces were wide. Air was clean. But over a very short time, that changed. And it's an insidious kind of change. It's what I call hit and run. Those who breed, never see the results. But now, and in an exponential kind of way, we are seeing everything change so that no one can do anything without affecting others. Even in my lifetime, I've seen massive change. Now, "me" translates into 7 billion "me's". Saying I want a two by four, means I want 7 billion two by fours. I don't think people get this yet. I've seen both sides of the fence. I used to think lumber came from a lumber store. But after trying to escape the cars, concrete, and noise, I moved to the country where I found that trees come from forests. I'm asking people to be responsible, and it's an unrealistic expectation. I grew up thinking responsibly. Boy, has this last few years been an eye opener. I never knew people weren't all on the same page.

But even Paul Ehrlich has stepped down from his mighty rhetoric. We naturally slowed our production rate down. It has not been as drastic as we at first predicted. And I assume that it will continue to decline. So this entire discussion may be moot. We can still do better. We've gone backwards in so many ways. I'm tired. I think I'll get away from this internet for a while.

[Boomer]

18. Decline in rate, not in numbers

Unfortunately, our population is not declining, just the rate of growth is declining. And when you have over 6 billion people, even a low rate of growth results in high numbers of people.

[OneBlueSky]

15. I was thinking the same the other day . . .

I consider myself fortunate to have been born at the perfect time -- able to marvel at the technological and sociological progress of the 20th century (not to mention the great music), yet old enough to be gone before it all collapses . . .

[peacetalksforall]

3. Do you think that ... could it be that ... they want global warming so

that they can have easier access to the oil? At the same time, they can get rid of a lot of the population by flooding and they could establish new waterfront luxury resorts and estates?

Sorry, I am bitter this morning. Our country has been messed with. How much more do we have to take? They call for winks as a policy against the melting.

[Delphinus]

16. Yes, higher class, it could very well be

what you stated.

After the debacle of the 2004 election, I had the tv off for a week or more. When I finally turned it back on, I was on C-Span and watched a panel of scientists talk about what was happening in the Arctic. Being almost two years ago, I can't remember who it was (although, if DU records and keeps every post, I remember it was one of my early ones), but they talked about the towns having to be moved because of the global climate change we are undergoing. When they opened it for Q&A, of course there was someone there saying, "oh, maybe we can exploit it. It will be easier to get to the oil with the ice gone." :(

My heart hurts for what we are doing and have done to this beautiful planet. All those so-called Christians who were given "dominion" over this place have really fallen down on their job.

[Judi Lynn]

4. It's sadder than one can express.

Idiots got us into this condition, and only revved up their programs when they learned how much trouble we're in, flatly refusing to accomodate conservation measures long, long ago.

They apparently feel they'll charge straight ahead, not giving an inch, grabbing all they can get with both grubby hands until they die peacefully in their sleep, leaving the world a ravaged, and barren waste.

Too bad something can't stop them.

[Gregorian]

6. Those damned lib'rul scientists!

I have a question for those who question the vality of global warming. When the cardiologist told Dick Cheney that he had coronary artery disease, did he question that? We are witnessing the death of our planet. And yet some pick and choose and reject the facts, in order to avoid taking responsibility. Now I know that we aren't going to change. I've seen men in hospital beds who have tracheotomies, and who had tubes inserted into them so they could still smoke their cigarettes. They refused to change. And in fact, even if we did change, it might not help. And I say that because a full quarter of the people on this planet are just engaging in the modern life that we have been enjoying. But at least if we accepted the truth, we might be a little closer to actually being able to accept responsibility. Because if we accepted responsibility, then maybe we could stop building bombs, and get together like reasonable people, and quickly begin to save what is left of this melting ball in space. One can only hope.



I was riding my bike through the forest yesterday. As I looked out over the area that was like a checkerboard of forest/deforestation, I remembered the email I got from the scientist in Switzerland, who said that 20% of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that was contributed by man made efforts, was due to deforestation.

The problem is, it's not just cars. It's not just generation of electricity. It's not just manufacturing. It's not just deforestation. It's all of these things. But even more, it's these things in these numbers. I mean seven billion. And until we address that, we will continue toward the end, faster than we might like.

[sam sarrha]

11. what is even worse is the loss of water shed grass lands, rivers will be

reduced to annual flash floods quickly filling the river beds leading to catastrophic wide spread flooding, followed by dry river beds.. aquifers will dry up and there will be massive relocation to the remaining areas where there is water.. which will quickly dry up those areas... in a domino reaction.. dislocating entire countries and leading to wars through out the world

grass land water sheds are all but destroyed in many areas, once the erosion starts it accelerates and total destruction results because it cant ever be fixed. the grasslands absorb the water and it leaches out slowly over the rest of the year resulting in annual full Rivers

the only thing that can fix the watersheds is another ice age which creates them when the ice age ends and they are created again.