global warming

Global Warming’s Imprint on New York City

2006-12-24T12:27:00.000+05:30

As global mean temperatures continue to rise moving the Earth into its warmest period in 10 million years, New York City has begun to feel an immediate impact. While rising ocean levels have not inundated and converted the metropolis into a new Atlantis, precipitation levels have increased and winter temperatures have risen, an early indicator of global warming.
While heat waves and periods of unusually warm weather, ocean warming, arctic warming, melting glaciers and shrinking ice caps, gradual rises in the sea-level, and even the historic hurricane season of 2005 have received significant publicity, “harbingers” such as spreading disease, earlier thaws, acceleration of evolution including adaptations seen in some insect and plant species, coral reef bleaching, along with an increase in extreme weather have only begun receiving press coverage. Yet two symptoms of global warming have quietly been present in New York City since 1971 and 1950.

Since 1971, fueled by a rising number of severe downpours and heavy snowfalls, New York City has undergone a shift in precipitation patterns. Since official record keeping began in 1869 through 1970, a 102-year period, New York City had 12 years in which 50 or more inches of precipitation had fallen. From 1971 through 2006, even though the year is not finished yet, New York City has already experienced 15 years with 50 inches or more of precipitation. Accordingly if one extrapolated the 36-year period from 1971-2006 over 102 years, it would result in an astonishing 42.5 years of 50 inches or more of precipitation versus the 12 year figure for the period ending in 1970.

Not surprisingly, the period from 1971-2005 has a mean precipitation figure that is 7.22 inches or 16.8% higher than the mean precipitation figure from 1869-1970. It is likely to rise even higher when 2006, which has already seen more than 55 inches of precipitation through November 21st is factored in.

Likewise, considering the higher precipitation figures since 1971, it is also not surprising that nine out of the 12 monthly precipitation records have occurred subsequent to the transition to wetter weather as illustrated by the below table:

New York City Monthly Precipitation Records
January: 10.52 Inches 1979
February: 6.87 Inches 1869
March: 10.54 Inches 1983
April: 14.01 Inches 1983
May: 10.24 Inches 1989
June: 10.27 Inches 2003
July: 11.89 Inches 1889
August: 12.36 Inches 1990
September: 16.85 Inches 1882
October: 16.73 Inches 2005
November: 12.41 Inches 1972
December: 9.98 Inches 1973

With the elevated precipitation levels fueled by an increase in severe downpours that often leave in excess of 2 inches of rain and heavy snowfalls, it is not surprising that the 59 year-old snowfall record fell earlier this year when New York City received a record 26.9 inches of snow from February 11-12 versus the old record of 26.4 inches that had fallen during the Blizzard of 1947 from December 26-27. In addition, New York City has seen two 20+ inch snowstorms in the last 11 years (20.2 inches in 1996 and 26.9 inches in 2006) versus the 59 years it took for the last two (21.1 inches in 1888 and 26.4 inches in 1947). Furthermore three out of New York City’s top five snowstorms since record keeping, have occurred since 1996: 26.9 inches (2006), 20.2 inches (1996, which also saw a record 75.6 inches of snow for 1995-96 winter since modern record keeping, eclipsing the 63.2 1947-48 mark) and 19.8 inches (2003) and five out of the City’s top ten have occurred since 1978.
New York City’s Top 10 Snowstorms[1]
26.9 Inches – February 11-12, 2006
26.4 Inches – December 26-27, 1947
21.0 Inches – March 12-14, 1888
20.2 Inches – January 7-8, 1996
19.8 Inches – February 16-17, 2003
18.1 Inches – March 7-8, 1941
18.0 Inches – December 26, 1872
17.7 Inches – February 5-7, 1978
17.6 Inches – February 11-12, 1983
17.5 Inches – February 4-7, 1920
Even more astonishing, since 2000 there have been five snowstorms that have dumped at least a foot of snow on New York City. Aside from the two listed in the above table, 14.0 inches fell from December 5-6, 2003, 13.8 inches from January 22-23, 2005, and 12.0 inches on December 30, 2000.
Consistent with New York City’s snowfall records, seven out of the top ten annual precipitation records have also occurred since 1971:
New York City’s Top 10 Yearly Precipitation Totals80.56 Inches – 198367.03 Inches – 197265.11 Inches – 198961.21 Inches – 197560.92 Inches – 1990 58.56 Inches – 200358.32 Inches – 1903 58.00 Inches – 191357.23 Inches – 197357.16 Inches – 1889
Last, prior to 1971, the record of consecutive years for 50 or more inches of precipitation was two, which occurred twice (1888 and 1889 with 53.32 inches and 57.16 inches, respectively and 1902 and 1903 with 52.77 inches and 58.32 inches, respectively). Since 1971, the record is currently four consecutive years (2003-2006 with 58.56, 51.97, 55.90 and 55.83 inches through November 21, 2006) followed by three consecutive that had been set from 1971-1973 when 56.77, 67.03, and 57.23 inches, respectively had fallen. Not coincidentally, with the increased precipitation totals, New York City is currently experiencing a record four consecutive years with 40 or more inches of snowfall (Winter 2002-03 through Winter 2005-06).
Aside from increased precipitation, New York City has also experienced a dramatic decline in extreme cold sub-zero Fahrenheit temperatures. Since 1950, New York City has seen the temperature drop below zero with a low of -2° Fahrenheit on only a handful of occasions, a far cry from the early years (1869-1949) when readings fell far deeper below zero including -15° Fahrenheit in 1934. Below is a comparative table of extreme sub-zero readings as measured in Central Park from 1869-1949 and 1950-2006:
New York City Below Zero Temperature Readings1869-1949:-15° Fahrenheit – February 9, 1934-13° Fahrenheit – December 30, 1917
-8° Fahrenheit – February 15, 1943
-7° Fahrenheit – December 31, 1917 and February 8, 1934
-6° Fahrenheit – December 30, 1880, January 24, 1882, February 10, 1899, December 29, 1917, February 5, 1918, and December 30, 1933
-5° Fahrenheit – February 17, 1896 and January 14, 1914
1950-2006:
-2° Fahrenheit – February 2, 1961, February 8, 1963, January 17, 1977, January 21, 1985, and January 19, 1994
-1° Fahrenheit – January 9, 1968, January 23, 1976, and December 25, 1980

Since the start of the 21st century, the mercury has yet to fall below zero in New York City. With the “Big Apple’s” growth and expanding “heat-island” effect, it is possible that until global warming is effectively addressed, New York City may have seen its last sub-zero reading for decades and even centuries to come.

Another sign of New York City’s warming is the absence of annual snowfall records since 1950 despite the rise in precipitation. While the 1971-2005 mean precipitation totals for November, December, January, and March run 30.3%, 16.7%, 24.6%, and 21.3% higher, respectively than the 1869-1970 figures (February is an exception in which the 1971-2005 mean actually runs 6.8% lower than the 1869-1970 figure), only three winters from that period rank in the top eleven as far as snowiest seasons go. Below is a table of the eleven snowiest seasons:
Top 11 Snowiest Seasons:
1. 75.6, 1995-962. 63.2, 1947-483. 60.4, 1922-234. 60.3, 1872-735. 55.9, 1898-996. 54.7, 1960-617. 53.4, 1993-948. 53.2, 1906-079. 52.0, 1933-3410. 51.5, 1966-6711. 50.7, 1915-16, 1916-17, 1977-78
However, despite the adversity of warmer weather and wetter winter precipitation, the 1971 transition has had an impact when it comes to consecutive winters with 40 or more inches of snow. The old record of two consecutive winters set on four different occasions has been broken as illustrated below:
Consecutive 40 or More Inch Snowfall Seasons:
1882-83: 44.0 Inches1883-84: 43.1 Inches
1895-96: 46.3 Inches1896-97: 43.6 Inches
1915-16: 50.7 Inches1916-17: 50.7 Inches
1947-48: 63.2 Inches1948-49: 46.6 Inches
2002-03: 49.3 Inches2003-04: 42.6 Inches2004-05: 41.0 Inches2005-06: 40.0 Inches
Based on New York City’s transition to a wetter climate starting in 1971 and to a warmer winter commencing in 1950, the imprint of global warming is already present from a microcosmic meteorological standpoint. Thus global warming is not a theory. It is a scientifically proven fact that must be dealt with. Until carbon-based fuels are replaced with clean alternatives such as hydrogen or a catastrophic natural event such as a significant or even super volcanic eruption occurs, the latter which can be equally as devastating, the Earth’s warming will continue threatening not only the mild repercussions that New York City has seen to date, but significant climactic changes that will not only adversely affect the global economy through famine, disease and increased storm-related damage to such a level that it “could devastate [it] on a scale of the two world wars and the depression of the 1930s,”[2] but also to accelerating mutations and the extinction of rising numbers of species that cannot adapt to the changing conditions or fall prey to other migrating species originally alien to their habitats as competition for food and other scarce resources heightens.

Soaring global warming can't be ruled out

2006-12-24T12:24:00.000+05:30

The Earth may be much more sensitive to global warming than previously thought, according to the first results from a massive distributed-computing project.

The project tested thousands of climate models and found that some produced a world that warmed by a huge 11.5°C when atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations reached the levels expected to be seen later this century.

This extreme result is surprising because it lies far outside the 1.4°C to 4.5°C range predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for the same CO2-level increase - a doubling of CO2 concentration from pre-industrial times. But it is possible the IPCC range was wrong because its estimate is based on just a handful of different computer models.
"We have anecdotal evidence that people tend to tune their models to be similar to other people's," says David Stainforth, from the University of Oxford, UK. "Nobody wants to have a model that's terribly different, particularly when there are only 8 or 10 in the world," he explains.

Stainforth and his colleagues set up www.climateprediction.net to see what happened when models were not tuned in this way. They start with a climate model that divides the Earth's surface into boxes hundreds of kilometres square and then change some of the 29 or so parameters that govern aspects of the atmosphere and weather.
These tweaked models are farmed out to volunteers who run them on their home computers via a screensaver. Models that accurately simulate today's climate are then dosed with carbon dioxide, to give double pre-industrial levels, and projected forward 45 years to see how the climate responds.

"Quite scary"

Since the project launched in 2003 more than 95,000 people from over 150 countries have donated spare computing time. The results have now come back from 60,000 simulations and the team have analysed around 2000 of these, focussing on six parameters.

While most of the models showed the global mean temperature rising by between 3°C and 4°C, some experienced much stronger heating. "When you see large areas of the northern hemisphere at 11°C above pre-industrial levels, you think this is quite scary," says Stainforth.
Geological data shows the Earth's climate has been much warmer in the past. Temperatures were around 6°C higher during the Cretaceous period, for example, when dinosaurs roamed the Earth. But Bob Spicer, an expert in the palaeoclimate at the Open University in Milton Keynes, UK, says there is no evidence that temperatures have ever been as high as in some of the climateprediction.net simulations.

Missing factors

Some iterations of the models showed the climate cooling after an injection of CO2, but these were discarded after close examination because the temperature fall resulted from an unrealistic physical mechanism, says Stainforth. In these scenarios, cold water welling up in the tropics could not be carried away by ocean currents because these were missing from the models.

There are no obvious problems with the high temperature models, he says. The climateprediction.net team were left with a range of 1.9°C to 11.5°C. "The uncertainty at the upper end has exploded," says team-member Myles Allen.
Clouds, which climate scientists have already recognised as the Achilles' heel of climate prediction, were the main cause of the variability in the high temperature models. The two most sensitive parameters governed the humidity at which clouds form and convection in the tropics. More observations of these critical processes could now help to narrow the uncertainty in the climate models' prediction.

But the climateprediction.net team stress that they are not saying we will see double-digit temperature rises if CO2 emissions go unchecked. "We're saying we can't rule it out," says Stainforth.

The next batch of climateprediction.net models will be making predictions of the timescales over which these changes might be seen, says Stainforth. "We need a lot more help, and we encourage people to continue getting involved."

Hurricanes Increasing?

2006-12-09T12:44:00.001+05:30

The year 2005 was a record-breaking one for Atlantic hurricanes, with the most named storms, the most hurricanes and the most Category-five hurricanes occurring—with New Orleans and the Mississippi Gulf Coast being nearly destroyed by Hurricane Katrina. In terms of barometric pressure, the Atlantic Basin also experienced its most intense hurricane ever that year, Hurricane Wilma.

Some studies reveal that tropical storms around the world are intensifying, with computer models suggesting a shift toward extreme intensity. A big question on many minds is, “Does the warming of the earth have a direct effect on the strength of hurricanes?” Opinions are varied.

Scientists caution that one must consider questions of climate change over decades, even centuries. A particularly rough hurricane season or two cannot be blamed on global warming.

Preliminary evidence suggests that, once hurricanes form, they will be stronger if the oceans are warmer. However, much uncertainty exists about whether hurricanes and other storms will become more frequent.

According to the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, which assesses natural climate variability, “The strongest hurricanes in the present climate may be upstaged by even more intense hurricanes over the next century as the earth’s climate is warmed by increasing levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Although we cannot say at present whether more or fewer hurricanes will occur in the future with global warming, the hurricanes that do occur near the end of the 21st century are expected to be stronger and have significantly more intense rainfall than under present day climate conditions.” This is based upon an anticipated increase of energy from higher sea surface temperatures.

A study published in the Journal of Climate indicates that an 80-year buildup of atmospheric CO2 at 1% per year (compounded) leads to roughly a one-half category increase in potential hurricane intensity on the Saffir-Simpson scale, and an 18% increase in precipitation near the hurricane’s core. Of course, if emissions of CO2, along with other greenhouse gases, were to be higher, then hurricanes could potentially become even stronger.

However, many other scientists are quick to point out that since the 1940s, there has been an overall decrease in hurricane activity. According to the United Nations Environment Program of the World Meteorological Organization, “Reliable data…since the 1940s indicate that the peak strength of the strongest hurricanes has not changed, and the mean maximum intensity of all hurricanes has decreased” (CNSNews).

In September 2004, in response to some labeling the busy hurricane season a byproduct of global warming, a group of climatologists, scientists, professors and other experts in climate change stated, “Computer simulations suggest that in a warmer world most of the warming would occur in the Polar Regions. Atmospheric circulation, which crucially affects storms, is driven primarily by the temperature difference, or gradient, between the tropics and the poles.

“Warmer polar regions would reduce this gradient and thus lessen the overall intensity or frequency or both of storms—not just tropical storms but mid-latitude winter storms as well (such as blizzards and northeasters).

“Again, longer periods of history bear this out. In the past, warmer periods have seen a decline in the number and severity of storms. This is well-documented in scientific journals for data extending back centuries or even millennia. If the surface temperature of the planet rises further in the future, it is likely that these declines will continue” (ibid.).

Some researchers believe other factors—including La Niña and other big weather systems—will overpower any effect global warming might have on hurricanes.

Certainty Does Exist
Global warming does in fact pose a real danger to mankind. Will human beings be able to find a solution? Or will it lead to cataclysmic events?

The Bible reveals that in the near future, there is coming a time of great distress upon the earth: “And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken” (Luke 21:25-26).

In the book of Matthew, Jesus Christ reveals more, stating that this time will be unlike any other in history: “For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved [meaning mankind would become extinct]” (24:21-22).

This time of epic destruction—worse than any other in the history of mankind—is certain to come. Undoubtedly, the effects of global warming will play a role in these events; to what degree remains to be seen.

But beyond the bad news lies the good news—global warming will not result in the extinction of mankind. Human beings will continue to exist, although the earth as we know it will be entirely different! Find out how in our book Tomorrow’s Wonderful World – An Inside View!

06/29/06
RT-4-4-3

Future Warming Uncertain

2006-12-09T12:43:00.001+05:30

It is not easy to decipher to what extent this human-induced accumulation of greenhouse gases is responsible for the global warming trend. Other factors—natural climatic variations, changes in the sun’s energy, and the cooling effects of pollutant aerosols—affect our planet’s temperature, and understanding in these areas is incomplete.

Nevertheless, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) stated there is a “discernible” human influence on climate. The observed warming trend is “unlikely to be entirely natural in origin.” In another report, the IPCC wrote, “There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities” (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency).

While scientists estimate that average global temperatures will continue to increase as levels of greenhouse gases rise, how much and how quickly remains uncertain. The IPCC projects that the planet will warm by an additional 2.2 to 10°F in the next 100 years. This large range is due to various uncertainties, such as future greenhouse gas emission rates, the possible cooling effects of atmospheric particles such as sulfates, and the climate’s response to changes in the atmosphere.

Even the low end of this warming projection “would probably be greater than any seen in the last 10,000 years, but the actual annual to decadal changes would include considerable natural variability” (ibid.).

The computer models used to forecast global climate change are still unable to accurately simulate how things may change at smaller scales. As a result, scientists generally feel more certain about large-scale projections (global temperature and precipitation change, average sea level rise) than small-scale ones (local temperature and precipitation changes, altered weather patterns, soil moisture changes).

As with perhaps all fields of scientific study, uncertainties associated with the science of global warming exist. Some aspects of this science are based on well-known laws and documented trends, while others range from “near certainty” to “big unknowns.”

Melting Ice
The Arctic, one of the most forbidding environments in the world, is home to the polar bear. During the summer, these animals roam this region on large chunks of floating ice, drifting for hundreds of miles. This is how they find mates and hunt for seals, fattening themselves to prepare for the severe winter. If these palettes of ice did not exist, the polar bear would not survive.

Within the past three decades, more than one million square miles of sea ice—an area the size of Norway, Denmark and Sweden combined—has vanished. Presently, ice at the southern Arctic region of the polar bear’s range is melting about three weeks sooner than has previously been the case. This affords the bears less time to hunt, eat and store fat. Due to this early melting, the Hudson Bay polar bear population has declined by 14% during the past ten years.

Some climate models predict that 50 to 60% of this vital summer sea ice will disappear by the end of this century; others predict that by just 2070, the Arctic will be completely ice-free in the summer. If this does indeed occur, the world’s largest bear could become extinct.

Meanwhile, glaciers in Greenland are receding at alarming rates. Within the last five years, those along the eastern and western coasts have receded about 300 miles each. Although a total meltdown is highly unlikely, with more than one-fifth of the population living less than two feet above sea level, not much melting is required to cause significant damage.

Permafrost in the Arctic region is diminishing as well. According to a report in the Geophysical Research Letters, it could shrink by 60 to 90% by 2100. A National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration climate scientist states that this will increase freshwater runoff into the Arctic Ocean by 28%, lead to the release of large quantities of greenhouse gases from the soil, and upset ecosystems within a wide area

Greenhouse Gases

2006-12-09T12:39:00.001+05:30

The earth’s climate and weather is driven by energy from the sun. This energy heats the planet, which in turn radiates that heat back into space. However, much of this heat is retained by various greenhouse gases in our atmosphere, such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane and nitrous oxide—and this is a good thing. Without such gases contributing to this natural greenhouse effect, life as we know it would not exist. Temperatures would be similar to our airless moon, ranging wildly from 225°F during the day to negative 243°F at night. Obviously, this would not be an environment conducive for life.

But due to greenhouse gases, the earth’s average temperature is a hospitable 60°F. However, problems arise when the concentration of these gases increase.

Huge amounts of carbon have been captured by plants and buried in the ground in the form of coal, oil and natural gas, called fossil fuels. (In contrast to human beings, plants take in CO2 and expel oxygen.) These fuels have accumulated over the course of perhaps millions of years. With the advent of the Industrial Revolution, mankind began extracting and burning earth’s vast reservoirs of these fuels. This released millions of tons of carbon, in the form of CO2, into the atmosphere, thus increasing the levels of greenhouse gases beyond what the earth can safely handle. Since then, atmospheric concentrations of CO2 have increased nearly 30%, methane concentrations have more than doubled, and nitrous oxide concentrations have risen roughly 15%. These increases have enhanced the heat-trapping capability of earth’s atmosphere, and will continue to do so for years to come.

Fossil fuels burned to power cars and trucks, heat homes and businesses, and power factories are responsible for about 98% of U.S. CO2 emissions, 24% of methane emissions and 18% of nitrous oxide emissions.

AT RISK: On the frozen Beaufort Sea outside the Inupiat village of Kaktovik, Alaska, a polar bear pauses from a meal of whale meat. The 3,800 polar bears along the Alaskan coast face an uncertain future as global warming melts more summer sea ice each year.

Photo: KRT
Also contributing a significant share of emissions are increased agriculture, deforestation, landfills, industrial production and mining. In 1997, the United States discharged roughly one-fifth of the world’s total greenhouse gases.

Estimating how much of these gases will be emitted in the future is difficult, as it depends on demographic, economic, technological, policy and institutional developments. Based on differing projections of these principal factors, several scenarios have been developed.

For example, in the absence of emissions control policies, by the year 2100, CO2 concentrations are projected to be 30 to 150% higher than today’s levels. However, even if human beings were to cease emitting heat-trapping gases into the atmosphere, the climate still would not stabilize for quite some time, as the gases that are already there will remain for decades, even centuries.

A Sea of Emotion

2006-12-09T12:31:00.000+05:30

Many of the most powerful human emotions are tied to the cessation of life. The end of life can bring families, communities, nations, and sometimes even the world, to a standstill. When a sudden or tragic death occurs, this becomes a time for contemplation.

SOBERING REALITY: For many—such as the woman above, who discovered that she was infected with HIV by her husband—facing the reality of one’s own death comes suddenly.

Photo: KRT
In the 9/11 World Trade Center attack, the entire world stopped in its tracks. People of every nation found themselves asking, “What if I had lost my family members?” Witnessing other people die on their television screens—in real time—was an emotionally overwhelming experience. What about all the victims of that tragic day? Do they have a future beyond death? Or are their lives over—forever?

Consider the destructive aftermaths of the earthquake in Pakistan in October 2005 and the December 2004 tsunami in Southeast Asia. The struggle for survival; thousands left homeless; stories of those who would never see their families again—all tugged at the heartstrings of the entire world and stirred a sea of emotions.

And then there is the personal grief one feels when a close family member or friend dies, which can almost seem unbearable. There are few things in life starker than facing the harsh reality that you will never again see that person in this life. All that remains are photographs and memories.

Is this all there is to life? Is there anything after death?

What Happens When You Die?

2006-12-09T12:30:00.001+05:30

From the smallest to the greatest, from the richest to the poorest, everyone eventually dies. But what happens after death? Can you know for sure?
BY KEVIN D. DENEE
Benjamin Franklin wrote, “In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.” Every minute on earth, 108 people die. Ultimately, everyone dies. It is not a matter of if, but when.

Photo: KRT
Sadly, and due to a wide variety of reasons and circumstances, some seek death, considering it the only solution. Others try to delay the inevitable through good health. Still others tragically lose their lives through time and chance. Sometimes disease or other illnesses bring a death sentence, leaving the person with nothing to do but wait for the end.

Many view the end of their lives with uneasiness. They ponder, “What’s next?”—“Will I live again?”—“Is this it?”—“Will I ever see my loved ones again?”—“Where am I going after this life?”

In contrast, others view death with fear of the unknown. Some fear the process and the suffering that may accompany death. Others, racked with guilt, have a different type of fear—fear that they will burn forever in “hell fire.”

Whatever the viewpoint, feelings or circumstances of one’s life—ultimately, life ends. Because of this unavoidable reality, every person at some point in his or her life thinks about the subject of death.

What about you? Have you ever considered where you are heading? Some live fast-paced lives, never stopping to consider such a large question.

Photo: KRT
On the other hand, most who are religious—including adherents of traditional Christianity—think they know what happens when one dies. Yet you may be surprised to learn that the religions of this world have deceived them about what occurs at death.

In the News…
The 1994 genocide in Rwanda; the civil war that has raged on and off in Liberia for the last two decades; the current atrocities in Sudan, where endless numbers of peasants are being slaughtered—news of people dying in wars and conflicts around the world hits the headlines almost on a daily basis. In many instances, horrifying footage and photographs of the dead and dying arise afterwards; much goes unreported.

And then there are natural disasters that end hundreds, even thousands, of lives in an instant. In just the last 18 months, we have seen a devastating tsunami, crushing earthquakes, several destructive hurricanes and cyclones, wildfires and floods. In a matter of hours, families were uprooted, children made orphans, parents made childless.

Then there are criminals who torture, rape, brutalize and murder. For example, in June 2006, a Florida man cut down his son with a machete in front of neighbors, and then killed his wife. For those two individuals, death came suddenly, unexpectedly. Every reasonable human being expresses great sorrow for the victims of such heinous crimes. But what is next for the little boy? Is there any future for him?

There is much controversy surrounding death. For instance, the legality and ethics involving capital punishment is a highly emotional and politicized debate. Also, there have been high-profile cases in the media in which medical patients remain in a persistent vegetative state as family members disagree on whether the person should continue to live. Then there is euthanasia, the question of whether a person should have the right to choose when and how he dies.

On an almost daily basis, we are confronted with the subject of death in various forms

GLOBAL WARMING

2006-12-09T12:25:00.000+05:30

According to some, humanity is sitting on a volatile time bomb—one that could send the entire planet into a tailspin of epic destruction, with detonation not far in the future. But is this a realistic scenario?
BY GABRIEL N. LISCHAK
The facts are in: The thermohaline ocean current—which moderates temperatures worldwide, preventing Europe from having a climate similar to Alaska—is slowing. Glaciers in Greenland, Alaska, the Himalayas and the Antarctic Peninsula are retreating. Sea ice in the Arctic Ocean during summer is disappearing. Permafrost (permanently frozen soil) in Canada, Alaska and Siberia is melting at an alarming rate. Hurricanes are becoming more numerous and more intense, and sea levels are rising.

MELTDOWN: According to scientists, global warming has caused the Columbia Glacier to retreat seven miles in the last 20 years, leaving calves of ice in Prince William Sound.

Photo: KRT
According to the National Academy of Sciences, the average surface temperature of the earth has risen by one degree Fahrenheit (°F) during the past 100 years, with accelerated warming occurring within the past 20 years. NASA climatologists state that 2005 was the warmest year in a century, with 1998, 2002, 2003 and 2004 next in line.

Few dispute that the earth is growing warmer and that there are signs identifying this. The debate lies in the seriousness of this warming trend, who or what is to blame, and whether there is a direct connection to hurricane frequency and intensity.

The term “global warming” is at the forefront of many minds, and for several reasons. Should we be concerned?