Welcome, Prof. Hulbe! I do agree with eRiposte that global warming is our most critical problem. It will be excellent to have you helping educate us on what is really happening.
Posted by Mary at January 7, 2007 11:27 PMWelcome neighbor (I live a few blocks from PSU, near the waterfront)!
I wasn't aware that Portland State had active research and teaching on global warming issues, but I'm not surprised given the increasing influence of the university - and its positive impact on Portland and Oregon especially.
(Most folks don't know that Portland State enrolls more students than Oregon State Univ. or the University of Oregon - and that its campus is right in the center of the downtown area of the city - so it really isn't any kind of ivory tower remote from the real world.)
Posted by JimPortlandOR at January 8, 2007 12:06 AMWelcome, thanks for coming, Professor.
Posted by iamcoyote at January 8, 2007 05:29 AMPt Rbrtsn hs lrdy dzzld s wth hs prphtc vsn f mss dstrctn. S d shck nd w s wth gd clmt prn fntsy... clmt sbjct t chng wtht ntc... xtrm wthr my b hzrds...
[Editor: ignore=off]The real reason for invading Iraq is about to be confirmed. The Iraqis are passing a law giving Big Oil 30 year contracts where they get 70 percent of the oil revenue. We'll never get out of Iraq.
Posted by JohnT at January 8, 2007 05:37 AMWelcome Professor Christina Hulbe!
Posted by Seven of Six at January 8, 2007 05:49 AMDon't mind the bendito, Prof. Hulbe. It washes off with a little water and soap.
Posted by idiosynchronic at January 8, 2007 06:25 AMWelcome Dr. Hulbe,
I was recently in a conversation with friends about global warming. I understand the dynamics of global glacial meltdown and the rising ocean water levels that would flood all of our coastal areas. I'm more curious about the "heat exchange" that goes on in the Gulf Stream Current.
How would the addition of millions of gallons of glacial melt/fresh water from the Greenland glaciers to the northern leg of the Gulf Stream cause an ice age in Europe? Would the rest of the Gulf Stream remain cold and with a higher salt level? Would this destroy what little remains of commercial fishing along the coasts? Would this also effect rain and snow patterns along the Atlantic coasts?
Thanks,
Domino49
Posted by Domino49 at January 8, 2007 06:45 AMWelcome to TLC Pro. Hulbe. I know very little about global warming, and look forward to learning from a professional on the subject. I also hope that those who do not believe in global warming, if they open their minds, will be persuaded.
OT: I don't know if PBS is airing this film again, but if you have a chance to view this story, or can get a copy of the film, I would strongly suggest watching it. One line in the film from an American reporter struck me as not only true, but a warning. "Your going to give away your Democracy if you don't take responsibility for the decisons being made in your name."
PBS Independent Lens:
"Democracy on Deadline: The Global Struggle for an Independent Press"
Journalists and others in Afghanistan, Israel, Mexico, Nigeria, Russia, Sierra Leone and the U.S. work to make and keep societies free.
Welcome Prof. Hulbe and thanks to TLC for making this happen!
So many questions, so many opportunities on this topic. Last night I was reading from the "Polar News" site - always interesting to get a peek at the first-hand effort which often seems to get pushed outside the talking points. Looking forward to your visit.
Posted by mainsailset at January 8, 2007 06:50 AMGlobal warming & climate change.
So it turns out Al Gore was correct after all?
Let's hope he runs for president in '08 and leads the nation and the world on this critically important issue.
Posted by Christopher at January 8, 2007 06:55 AMI look forward to your posts. I cover global warming on my blog smallblueplanet.org, will probably link to and comment on your articles here over there, if you follow. I have no readership at smallblueplanet.org, but I often post simultaneously at olyblog.net where I get read occasionally. TLC is welcome to link to my site or repost my stuff here.
Very important to get out the word and force public policy change to address the problem.
Posted by angel at January 8, 2007 07:01 AMWelcome Prof. Hulbe. I'm looking forward to your global climate change posts.
If you ever decide to "mix it up a bit" with a post on how to get more than one person among the scores of RAs, PEs, EITs and other building construction professionals in a large architectural/engineering organization to turn off the freaking manually controlled exterior and atrium night lights in the morning, I'd be very grateful.
Oh, bendito? As I understand it, Steve, dj, eri, Mary, para and soccerdad were all sitting around one day and Mary said, "I don't like all these flies in here." So paradox said, "Well, pick out the ones you like and I'll get rid of the rest." One of the ones they kept was bendito.
Posted by Pvt. Keepout at January 8, 2007 07:08 AMHuh? I figured you tree huggers would like a little global warming. More room for your beloved dolphins.....
Posted by polo at January 8, 2007 07:12 AMThis is great, but I would suggest a rigorous thread policy so that the professor's posts (and hopefully her responses) are not shitted-up and ruined with the nonsense of "conservative" Christianist authoritarian psychopaths like bendodo et. al., whose goal is merely to infuriate.
The "intellects" of these members of Team Conservative are poisoned beyond reason, they (proudly) aren't open to new information, aren't reality-based, and there is no need to let them ruin the professor's threads with their predictable anti-science nonsense.
All they know is that Team Conservative opposes any attempt to combat global warming, and that's all they need to know. Their "minds" (so to speak) are made up, and all they want to do is bedevil the message.
TLC isn't obligated to give them a forum to air their prejudices, engage in their "conservative" water-carrying, or allow the utterly ignorant to waste space "debating" with an expert in the subject. So think about how to "handle" their inevitable pants-loads of smelly crap.
Posted by euzoius at January 8, 2007 07:23 AMIt's amazing how people can find reason to ignore the potential jeopardy for the planet simply because a position is aspoused by progressives and liberals.
Good luck Prof. Hulbe. You've got your work cut out for you.
And welcome.
Posted by snark at January 8, 2007 07:46 AMpolo, Another ignoramous.
The extinction of Marine life will happen with global warming, including Dolphins.
You know, sea tempertures will rise, pH balances will be off kilter, well, I don't expect you to understand all that.
Enjoy that tuna while you can.
And polo, global warming is also (right now!) releasing huge amounts of long permafrost-trapped Methane, which is a far worse green-house gas than CO2. Excess methane is thought to be responsible for enormous die-offs of marine life in eons past.
So global warming will also kill the dolphins, but as a right-wing "conservative" ignoramus, you couldn't be expected to know anything---you just oppose the views of people who are informed on the matter, like the world's scientists.
Posted by euzoius at January 8, 2007 08:01 AMI guess we're really thinking alot alike, 7o6!
Posted by euzoius at January 8, 2007 08:04 AMGot to admit euzoius, I have always loved that 'ignoramous' word you used a couple of days ago.
Posted by Seven of Six at January 8, 2007 08:11 AMSo we've got this big stink going on here in NYC today.
Maybe Mary could get Steve Soto on the line and ask him if he's got anything to do with it?
Sheeesh!
Posted by snark at January 8, 2007 08:45 AMYou guys really need to focus the bitching. Did I read that someone said that global warming is going to cause an Ice Age? And I'm sorry, I wouldn't poke fun if you guys really didn't believe that this is "this is the most serious problem facing our planet". That's just a load of horse shit.
Posted by polo at January 8, 2007 09:28 AMLet me correct myself. Global warming is not a load of horse shit but the phrase that its "the most serious problem" is a load.
Posted by polo at January 8, 2007 09:33 AMWelcome Professor Hulbe. I was just talking to a Navy man who spent some time near Greenland. I wanted to know how he kept warm. It sounded like he didn't. I admire people like you who study and spend time in the bitter cold for the good of the planet. I'm looking forward to learning about it.
Posted by Sharon at January 8, 2007 09:36 AMSo that means people should not dedicate themselves to correcting the problems that are causing it?
No need to correct yourself though. You came here to do nothing but ridicule. It's all we expect from you.
Posted by snark at January 8, 2007 09:39 AMAnd I'm sorry, I wouldn't poke fun if you guys really didn't believe that this is "this is the most serious problem facing our planet".
The most serious problem is rampant militarism, if you ask me. The next most pressing problem is dumping massive loads of carbon into the atmosphere.
But, why don't you wait unitl Dr. Hulbe discusses the science associated with global warming before you make a judgement. After all, if Dr. Hulbe is incorrect and we act on it we have spent a little money on renewable energy and making the environment clean. If Dr. Hulbe is correct and we don't act on it there is a possibility your grandchildren are dead or living miserable lives. But, as my neo-con brother says, "That's their problem", eh?
So do shock and awe us with a good climate porn fantasy...
I hope it is more expansive climate porn than your understanding of American social systems. So why am I not surprised that you can't formulate an effective argument against global warming?
extreme weather may be hazardous
It's only the extremes placed within the historical context that are the problem...but I take it history isn't your long-suit...along with so many other things...
Welcome Dr. Hulbe,
I hope you go beyond the current science and discuss some of the more radical solutions that have been proposed for addressing climate change -solar shields and reflective materials in the upper atmosphere come to mind. You'll have your hands full with the right-wingers and those who believe the earth to be no more than 6600 years-old. But beyond all, I hope you find your tenure here interesting and enjoyable.
Posted by phidipides at January 8, 2007 09:52 AMBeacause unchecked global warming will, almost without question, radically and substantially alter the 11,000 year old climatic living conditions of every creature on the planet, and very likely cause tidal inundations of the planet's most densely populated areas together with gross alterations of current seasonal rainfall patterns, and because once the "tipping point" of too much CO2 has been reached, scientists have no idea how to prevent the meltdown of the glaciated regions, thus ruining the planet for all future generations, global warming is almost certainly the most serious problem facing humanity (and all other planetary species) today.
Posted by euzoius at January 8, 2007 10:01 AMCool! Welcome Prof. Hulbe! I am very much looking forward to your posts.
It is going to be tough to keep the discussion focused and on topic and we all will have questions. But the important part will be the posts. Let "L33t T34m c0n"™ continue to expose themselves as the ignoramus' that they are.
releasing huge amounts of long permafrost-trapped Methane, which is a far worse green-house gas than CO2.
euzoius is correct, however RealClimate did have a mention the other day that:
Best actual good news:
Methane concentrations appear to have stabilised. Maybe they can even be coaxed downward....
I have no idea of the exchange mechanics or saturation issues that govern atomospheric methane, but seeing as how the permafrost is just getting rev'd up I don't see how stabilization is possible without, other damaging ramifications. I'm looking for reference and details about this issue.
"this is the most serious problem facing our planet". That's just a load of horse shit.
Really hate to reinforce your disillusionment Polo, but depending on the time frame you are referencing, it is the far and away the most serious issue facing us (frame ~>30 years). Even presently it is all about mitigation. There very well may be some science and technological prongs in the solution equation, but behaviors and attitudes must change first.... science is not going to save your kids this time around.
No worries though, the problem will get solved...eventually. If we don't do it, Mother Nature will simply remove remove the primary source of the problem. Though, admittedly, Mother Nature operates on a slightly different time scale than we do. *;^)
Posted by Simp at January 8, 2007 10:10 AMBecause...global warming is almost certainly the most serious problem facing humanity (and all other planetary species) today.
For me that puts it juuuuust behind preventing gays and lesbians from marrying each other.
Posted by snark at January 8, 2007 10:11 AMBeing an open thread and all:
JohnT said:
The Iraqis are passing a law giving Big Oil 30 year contracts where they get 70 percent of the oil revenue. We'll never get out of Iraq.
Link please? While I agree that we'll never get out of there (we were never intended to leave) and I know the 30 year deal is going through, I was curious about the "70 percent" figure. I found This report (it is over a year old) but it does seem to layout what the plan is:
Under the likely terms of the contracts, oil company rates of return from investing in Iraq would range from 42% to 162%, far in excess of usual industry minimum target of around 12% return on investment.
and
The policy allocates the majority of Iraq’s oilfields – accounting for at least 64% of the country’s oil reserves – for development by multinational oil companies.
I'm guessing that your 70% figure is coming from the percentage of oil reserves and not "70 percent of the revenue"
The returns are going to be outrageous and depriving Iraqis of their rightfully owned resources, but I'm not convinced on the 70% figure. If true, I would be shocked but not suprised.
Posted by Simp at January 8, 2007 10:32 AMSimp,
It's on Raw Story and TPM.
Posted by JohnT at January 8, 2007 10:38 AMSimp,
It actually says "up to 75 percent of the profits".
Posted by JohnT at January 8, 2007 10:53 AMThanks!
Jeebus, these people know no bounds. This is beyond disgusting.
Posted by Simp at January 8, 2007 10:57 AMWelcome Dr. Hulbe,
Well, you can see how fast a discussion can disintegrate around here. Please spend a little time looking at the dynamics of the back'N'forth. It cannot be cleaned up by deliverinf facts, because the other side doesn't believe in facts.
The most valuable service the people concerned with GW can do is deliver the meme to the middle ground. This means very simple stories or examples with almost NO science, just evertday examples.
For example, I have argued with Righties that say that the carbon buildup is natural. Cyclical. The world has done it before, and will do it again. I responded that so is a heavy rain period, but you do turn off the automatic sprinklers during that period. I have seen onlookers register with that point.
The Righties say CO2 is natural, not a pollutant. ( This is how they call coal "clean".) I respond, so is water, but when we get too mush at the same time and place, we call it a flood, and we respond. We also work to stop all that natural stuff from congregating like that again.
We have to correct the notion that the Liberals, or smarties, whatever ( see, we even need a name for us!) are saying that GW will end the world, wipe us out. No one is saying that - it's the righties overstating our message. Our world will be shook up, impoverished, denuded, cleaned out of all large wild mammals, but humanity and our pets, herds abd vermin will persevere. A much uglier and poorer world.
Back to the naming of sides ; it is amazing that the line between them is exactly the same as the line for abortion/guns/war/ all the ugliness. How do the righties lasso all the stupids without having to be correct?
... I digress ... We need a name to clarify those who are concerned with the realities of climate change that isn't part of any other division.
Oh yeah, I've had arguements where the rightie/wrongie states "... one volcano throws out more CO2 than we do ...". ... Riiiight. And your point is ... what?
I respond that that is true, but doesn't change anything. I usually pause to see if they can link their own points, but is's just to trip them, there's no linkage.
So I say that that is all the more reason to cut down on our output - are you (rightie/wrongie) suggesting that CO2 does warm the Earth? Are you suggesting that we just give up because we got a big dose? If you cleaned your house every Saturday, but one Friday you had a bigger mess than usual, you would give up and say why bother cleaning up? I doubt it. I use their copout as a rallying cry.
How about Coolers vs. Heaters?
Reasoners vs. Flat-Earthers?
Realists vs. Nay-Sayers?
Pragmatists vs. Head-in-the-Sanders?
Posted by euzoius at January 8, 2007 12:18 PMRealists vs. Chicken Littles?
This ought to be interesting. The grey-bearded environmentalists with their "The End is Nigh" global warming placards who are willing to show you their January tan lines as proof the end is near!
"And the Angel poured out the third vial upon the Earth, and temperatures rose and folks in bikinis crowded the beaches in the middle of winter. Whoa is man!"
Preach on, Professor!
Posted by muckdog at January 8, 2007 01:40 PM" thus ruining the planet for all future generations, global warming is almost certainly the most serious problem facing humanity (and all other planetary species) today."
Given the opportunity, the "other planetary species" would vote us off the island, and given our track record I wouldn't blame them one bit.
If General Schwartzkopf had not given Saddam's helicopters back to him in 1991, would Iraq have ironed itself out on its own?
Posted by TIKI AL at January 8, 2007 04:09 PMHad we thrown a fraction of the cash at Saddam that we've spent to see him swing from the gallows would he have played good little puppet dictator and made our prospects in the Middle East that much rosier?
Posted by snark at January 8, 2007 05:06 PMAbsnarklutely. He would have hunted down Senator Osama for us too.
Posted by TIKI AL at January 8, 2007 10:54 PM