Privacy Policy

Privacy Policy for http://theglobalwarminge.blogspot.com/

If you require any more information or have any questions about our privacy policy, please feel free to contact us by email at ahmadsitta@gmail.com.

At http://theglobalwarminge.blogspot.com/, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us. This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by http://theglobalwarminge.blogspot.com/ and how it is used.

Log Files
Like many other Web sites, http://theglobalwarminge.blogspot.com/ makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol ( IP ) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider ( ISP ), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user’s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.

Cookies and Web Beacons
http://theglobalwarminge.blogspot.com/ does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.

DoubleClick DART Cookie
.:: Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on http://theglobalwarminge.blogspot.com/.
.:: Google's use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to http://theglobalwarminge.blogspot.com/ and other sites on the Internet.
.:: Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html

Some of our advertising partners may use cookies and web beacons on our site. Our advertising partners include ....
Google Adsense


These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on http://theglobalwarminge.blogspot.com/ send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.

http://theglobalwarminge.blogspot.com/ has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.

You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. http://theglobalwarminge.blogspot.com/'s privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.

If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browsers' respective websites.

Harriet Martineau

Harriet Martineau was born in Norwich, England, 1802. Harriet grew up into a large middle class family. She also grew up as a Unitarian because her mother and father believed in this. Her father was a Textile Manufacturer and her mothers family were sugar refiners. Both her parents though, had held progressive views on girls' education and Harriet and her three sisters received the same education as their three brothers had. Their brothers were sent to a University and the girls were made to stay at home. Harriet thought this was not fair at all, and this is were she started writing and publishing articles in the Unitarian magazine and started writing Religious books.

She was one of the first female British Sociologists and well known English social theorist. Whom studied the social customs of Britain and the United States. Martineau was also very discipline to sociology and even translated various writings of Auguste Comte. She started analyzing the consequences of industrialization and capitalism. She even wrote her own Book, "Society in America" where she explained her examinations of religion, politics, child rearing, slavery, and immigration that happened in the U.S. She believed that society would greater improve when all men and women were treated equally amongst everything. She wanted to see cooperation amongst all social classes no matter the situation.

She began studying our country when she first came to the U.S in 1834. In her two studies she started Society in America. In this specific study, she talks about comparing moral principles and social patterns and this became her well known work of Sociologists in the United States. Harriet was known for believing and one thing she did believe was an analysis of some society should require an understanding of a women's life. Harriet Martineau changed sociological opinions on issues that was ignored like marriage, children, religious life and race relations.

Harriet Martineau died of bronchitis in 1876. She will always be remembered as the first female sociologist who changed the sociologist perspective on treating every man and woman equally.

William Edward Burghardt Du Bois

One of the rare African American sociologists was William Edward Burghardt Du Bois. I like the way he admired the human nature. He had one the greatest perspectives on the American Culture. He also spoke the truth no matter the risk was. He had so much faith and trust in the African American culture.

William Edward Burghardt Du Bois was born in 1868 during the painful period of reconstruction; Du Bois was graduated from Fisk University in 1888 and went on to earn a Ph.D. from Harvard in 1895 before entering the worlds of academe and activism. Using Atlanta University as his base from 1897-1910, he opposed Booker T. Washington's educational views as too limiting, preferring to organize young black intellectuals in the Niagara Movement. In 1909 he founded the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and in 1910 launched its historic magazine, the Crisis. During this period he also published his classic treatise, The Souls of Black Folk (1903), the best known of many passionate and well-argued philosophical and sociological studies of his race, which also included the Philadelphia Negro, John Brown, The Gift of Black Folk, Black Reconstruction, and Color and Democracy: Colonies and Peace.


The Negro speaks rivers to Du Bois, through the N.A.A.C.P. Du Bois was also instrumental in creating opportunities for intellectual and artistic advancement for blacks and ways of rewarding and encouraging excellence, notably his collaboration with the Spingarn’s in creating the prestigious medals which bear that family's name till today. He published a novel, DARK PRINCESS, in 1928, and he continued to edit THE CRISIS from 1910-1934 until he began to reject the conservatism of the N.A.A.C.P.'s political views.

Du Bois' gradual radicalization paralleled that of a number of other black intellectuals and artists, Langston Hughes and Paul Robeson prominently among them. He embraced leftist ideology, was awarded the Lenin Peace Prize in 1958 and formally joined the Communist Party in 1961. In the last year of his life he moved to Ghana and took citizenship in that nation. His memoirs, DUSK OF DAWN, written in 1940, and his posthumously published three volumes of CORRESPONDENCE constitute not only a personal history but also the autobiography of a race in their proud ascent from slavery to freedom and in their courageous quest for equality—a struggle which Du Bois had once described as an unending battle against the forces of hell.

According to

Emile Durkheim's Thoughts

* Social Facts
Generally the most fundamental assumption underlying the Durkheim's approach to sociology is that social phenomena are real and affect the consciousness of other individuals. Social facts can not be reduced to individual facts, but rather have an independent existence at the social level. Durkheim rejected ynag opinions about the social facts on the view that excessive individualism. View of the excessive individualism of social facts has reduced social phenomena only on individual behavior, while in fact, social fact is more than just a collection or summation of individual behavior because a behavior can be called a social fact the perpetrator. In addition, Durkheim also explains that sociology is scientific, therefore, must be studied objectively and causally explained.
Social facts have three characteristics:

   1. Social facts are external to the individual, because since the beginning idividu feel confronts himself with the social facts and assume that the social fact be an a fact that comes from outside himself.
   2. Individual coercive social facts, because an individual is guided, it is believed and encouraged or influenced by the social facts that make them complete.
   3. General social facts, spread in a society, because social facts that are not the sum of several individual facts but rather a collective of more than just the sum of the individual facts.

    * Social Solidarity
Social solidarity is the relationship between individuals and or groups based on the level of intimacy, moral commitment and trust is strengthened by shared emotional experience. Social solidarity at least rely on the level of consensus on the moral principles underlying the relationship. Durkheim distinguishes two forms of solidarity, namely:
a. Solidarity Mekani
Based on the collective consciousness (colletive consiousnes / conscience) which refers to the totality of shared beliefs that exist in that same community. Solidraitas mechanics depends on the individuals who have the same properties and normative patterns of belief and the same.

   1. Organic Solidarity
Arise because of the division of labor increase. Organic Solidraitas didsarkan on timgkat high interdependence. Interdependence that grew as a result of the increased specialization in the division of labor that allows increasing differences among individuals.

    * Suicide (Suicide)
Basic proposition that is affected in a suicide is that suicide rates vary by level of social integration. Durkheim identifies three types of suicide that reflects three types of relationships vary. Three types of suicide:

   1. Egoistic suicide
Egoistic suicide is the result of an excessive pressure on individualism or lack of adequate social ties with social groups.

   1. Altruistic suicide
Altruistic suicide, concerned sedemikain unite themselves with the values of his group and so integrated that aside until he had no identity. Altruistic suicide is the result of some degree of social integration is too strong.

   1. Anomic suicide
Anomic suicide arise from the absence of a statement of goals and aspirations of individuals. Durkheim showed that sudden changes in society, such as a severe economic crisis or periods of economic expansion and prosperity are not uncommon, usually associated with high rates of suicide.

Theory Emile Durkheim

  
1. A. LIVING HISTORY Emile Durkheim

Emile Durkheim (15 April 1858 - November 15, 1917) is known as one of the founder of modern sociology. He founded the first sociology faculty at a university of Europe in 1895, and published one of the first journal devoted to social science, L'Annee Sociologique in 1896. Durkheim is a precocious student. He entered the Ecole Normale Supérieure in 1879. Angkatannya is one of the most brilliant in the 19th century and many of her classmates, such as Jean Jaurès and Henri Bergson later became major figures in French intellectual life. In ENS Durkheim studied under Fustel de Coulanges, an expert on classical science, social scientific outlook. At the same time, he read the works of Auguste Comte and Herbert Spencer. Thus, Durkheim was interested in the scientific approach to society since the beginning of his career. This is the first conflict from many other conflicts with the French academic system, which has no social science curriculum at the time. Durkheim felt human sciences do not attract. He graduated with the second ranked last in angkatannya when he agregation exams - the requirement for a teaching position in the general teaching - the science of philosophy in 1882.

Durkheim's interest in social phenomena was also driven by politics. France's defeat in the Franco-Prussian War had created a backlash against secular, republican rule. Many people think the Catholic approach, and very nationalistic as the only way to revive France's fading power on the continent. Durkheim, a Jew and socialist, was in the political minority, a situation which galvanized him politically. The Dreyfus affair in 1894 only strengthened his activist stance.

A person who holds such as Durkheim is not possible to obtain the necessary academic appointment in Paris, and so after a year studying sociology in Germany, he went to Bordeaux in 1887, which had just opened the first teacher's training center in France. There he taught pedagogy and social sciences (a new position in France). From this position Durkheim reformed the French school system and introduced the study of social sciences in its curriculum. Again, his tendency to reduce morality and religion into a mere social fact makes it much criticized.

In the 1890s was a time of creative Durkheim. In 1893 he published the "Division of Labour in Society", dasariahnya statement about the nature of human society and its development. In 1895 he published "Rules of Sociological Method, a manifesto stating what sociology was and how it should be done. He also founded the first European Department of Sociology at the University of Bordeaux. In 1896 he published the journal L'Annee Sociologique to issue and publish the writings of an increasing group of students and colleagues (this is the term used for groups of students who developed his sociological program). And finally, in 1897, he published Suicide, a case study that gives examples of how the sociological monograph.

In 1902 Durkheim finally achieved the goal to obtain a respectable position in Paris when he became a professor at the Sorbonne. Because French universities are technically institutions to train teachers for secondary schools, this position provides Durkheim considerable influence - his lectures shall be taken by all students. Whatever people's opinions, in the aftermath of The Dreyfus affair, to get a political appointment, Durkheim strengthen its institutional power in 1912 when he was granted permanent seats and changed his name to the chair of education and sociology. In the same year he published his last major work "Elementary Forms of Religious Life."

Global warming

Global warming is the process of increasing the average temperature of the atmosphere, oceans and the Earth's land.
Global average temperature at Earth's surface has risen 0.74 ° C ± 0:18 (1:33 ± 0:32 ° F) during the last hundred years. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concluded that "most of the increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century most likely caused by increased concentrations of greenhouse gases due to human activities" [1] via the greenhouse effect. These basic conclusions have been advanced by at least 30 scientific and academic bodies, including all the national science academies of the G8 nations. However, there are still some scientists who disagree with some conclusions that the IPCC noted.
Climate models referenced by the IPCC projects show global surface temperature will rise 1.1 to 6.4 ° C (2.0 to 11.5 ° F) between 1990 and 2100. [1] The difference in estimates was caused by the use of different scenarios of greenhouse gas emissions greenhouse gases in the future, as well as models of different climate sensitivities. Although most studies have focused on the period up to 2100, warming and sea level rise is expected to continue for more than a thousand years even if greenhouse gas emission levels have been stable. [1] This reflects the large heat capacity of the oceans.
Increasing global temperatures are expected to lead to other changes such as rising sea levels, increased intensity of extreme weather phenomena, [2] and changes in the number and pattern of precipitation. Consequences of global warming is another character of agricultural output, loss of glaciers, and the extinction of various animal species.
Some of the things that scientists are still doubtful about the amount of warming predicted to occur in the future, and how warming and the changes that occur will vary from one region to another. Until now, there are still political and public debate in the world about what, if any, action should be taken to reduce or reverse further warming or to adapt to the consequences that exist. Most of the governments of the world's countries have signed and ratified the Kyoto Protocol, which leads to reduction of emissions of greenhouse gases.

You and the global warming debate

And 'concern is not the proper way to active scientific argument on global warming. This application is based on best practices of science, scientific data and evaluation of evidence. In the short term in a context of science, the presence of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere creates a greenhouse effect which helps to keep warm. This is acknowledged by all scientists. Global warming scenario arises because we have a lot of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere for our activities - such as burning coal. The more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere can lead to abnormally warm temperatures, with potentially devastating consequences. Scientists have spent years trying to find out if this scenario is correct. Environmentalists say that yes, skeptics say no. Among scientists, the majority say 'yes', but a small and vocal minority crying, no! What about this?

The way of working scientists is as follows. We Are Scientists, and I'm one of them, a number of hypotheses, some ideas that we want to control. We make observations and experiments, often supported by calculations. What we are looking for a number of tests, which can, in principle, to show that we are wrong, that we want evidence that potentially can be shown that Our assumption is wrong. It 'important that such evidence exists. If you can get without testing can be done in principle able to demonstrate that your idea is not correct, scientists turn away from you. This may at first seem a bit 'strange, but this is the way we work. What are you doing this to show that neither you nor anyone else can prove that you're so wrong, maybe you're right! Remember, the finding that corresponds to your hypothesis by itself does not prove that your hypothesis is true, because who can say that some other assumptions may not fit the observations?

For example, when they met two competing ideas. A classic example is the Copernican system against the old Ptolemaic system of the Sun and planets. Copernican system, with the sun at the center was not accepted by both scientific and religious op gronden was a time when this vastgesteld Ptolemaic "system works equally well - indeed beter in a way. There was no obvious way to demonstrate whether the system is, at that time.

Another recent example is the problem of the ozone hole in 1980 and 1990. Hypothesis (a) that emissions of chemicals used in refrigerators and hair sprays, etc., can cause destruction of the ozone layer is over the upper atmosphere. Test to prove that the error may be the following. If we take the concentration of ozone in the upper atmosphere for a period of time, and I think it has not fallen, it falsifies the hypothesis That human activity caused the destruction of the ozone layer - because there is nothing to explain. Note that the position in front of the depletion of ozone observation does not prove that human activities are causing the destruction of the ozone layer. Something, but not necessarily of human activity.

Positive feedback is exhausted and then open the question of natural or human activities. All we can do for some is to falsify the hypothesis that human activity has caused the destruction of the ozone layer. What actually happened was the discovery of the ozone layer over the Antarctic ozone hole's mass, with significant ozone depletion. Combined with a healthy observational data of any kind, for which the Nobel Prize, the ozone hole would swift and decisive action in the international form of the Montreal Protocol. Thus, although initially only to distort the situation, a great weight of evidence can be very convincing in the truth of hypotheses. The risk that we are causing the ozone hole was very large.

The same scientific method is not applicable in the case of debate global warming. In fact, this method can not, in my view, be applied. However, discussions are mainly represented as scientific debate, with political and economic consequences that follow relied on the results of objective scientific discussion. I maintain that no objective scientific debate, simply because the rules of science are not met. Instead, I propose that this discussion assumes the risk. What is the risk of climate skeptics wrong? What is the risk to the environment (if it is) that he would not? Instead of continuing in this dry, I justify my position, telling an imaginary conversation between two physicists, Horace, and Twinkle.

Before you begin, remember, there are two kinds of skeptics of climate skeptics who deny the absolute existence of global warming at all, and skeptics of climate relative who agrees that there is global warming but is not blame our introduction of additional carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, which is not our fault. Rather, the observed warming is only part of the natural cycle of the earth. Horace is somewhere in between, mostly relatives, but with a touch of absolute.

Enter Horatio and Twinkle, sitting with his coffee in the dining room on the seventh floor of a well-known Department of Physics, who will remain nameless. Dining room overlooking the harbor, and you can change the path to the hills on a day to see clearly how the present. But this is not the position that they are interested. This is an old argument, that focus. Horace is a climate skeptic. Twinkle, his friend, believes that humans cause global warming, and that "something must be done.

"This climate of the Copenhagen meeting began," says Twinkle to get the ball rolling.

"Yes," replies Horatio. "Let's see if a good case for this time to come, rather than simply repeat the catechism faithful defenders of the environment!

And now, "murmurs Twinkle, sipping coffee.

"Well, you know what I mean, says Horace." You can see that these emails from the University of East Anglia say. It 's a bit increased.

"I've read them. I guess I should respond Twinkle. But it is a normal story. Sceptics say that e-mail to change everything, and great people say that nothing will change. You have heard that the Saudi representative to the meeting in Copenhagen. Talk your interests.

"Yes, but you can! Climate change over time, changing a lot. How do we know that, as a result of human activities?

"Look, we know something. Outset weather people tell us that the temperature is rising so fast that it must be unnatural. And all models show that if we have more CO2 in the atmosphere cause temperature rise. We created the CO2 'atmosphere. The temperature is rising. of course!

"Yes, you are basically good. I agree that more or less. I'm not so sure the temperature is increased. But this is not the point.

"What's the point then? Twinkle adds pauses, as Horace with a cup of coffee.

Horace takes her hand.

"You know, like me that the model .....' begins.

"Can I come with you? Socrates, the new professor of Greek, put the tray on the table beside them.

"Yes, yes, of course, says Twinkle." We just talked about the climate in Copenhagen.

"Yes, I'm just saying that climate models are really bad" Horace again. Socrates Horatio nods and continues. 'Biosphere is not bound up, and worst of all, from a physical point of view, the treatment of clouds just totally unrealistic. We simply can not predict the amount of temperature increase due to the presence of a certain amount of CO2' atmosphere.

"These models are really that bad? Socrates asks.

"Clouds are the key, says Horace.

"Then you do not trust any predictions of the model?" Asks Socrates.

"In addition to the overall result of the introduction of CO2 in the atmosphere caused the earth - Horace agree," introduces Twinkle.

"Yes, but like the earth?" Said Horace. "I do not think people came out with figures. There is very little influence. Maybe it does not matter what people Have done. Perhaps the most important changes are very natural. Models proves nothing!

"Oh, God!" Twinkle says. It is unclear whether this is a common expression of anxiety or attention with his friend and colleague of Horace. Three sat in silence a few minutes, drinking coffee. The silence is broken Socrates.

"Can I ask you, Horatio?

"Of course!

'If I ask you, that no evidence would have changed his mind and said it was wrong, what you reply''

"You mean that the observational data?

"If you want answers to Socrates.

"Well, 'says Horace. And then there is a silence, as he reflects on the question." This is an interesting question.

"He wanted to see the growth temperature of 10 degrees, and he knows that he is mistaken," Twinkle introduces cunning.

"I never said that!" Horace said, smiling at his friend.

"Well, we are waiting. What would convince you're wrong? Requests Twinkle.

"Maybe I can ask the same question, Twinkle? Said Socrates. What would convince the skeptics were right all the time?

"The fall of 10 degrees temperature! Horace says, laughing.

There is silence. But this time it's different kinds of silence. Horace and thought Twinkle.

'Well, of course, Twinkle, says over time, "when we went to introduce the current rate of atmospheric CO2 and temperature rise, and then ..... say in the next 50 years .. .. "

"What are you, Horace?" Socrates asked how to stop fading.

I'm not sure that there is one thing to prove to me that people give answers that significant global warming Horace. Maybe a lot of factors, "he adds.

Horace and Twinkle look and frowned. Both know that the theory is a theory, as it is objectionable in principle in an experiment or observation - or at least decent call "thought experiment. Socrates crystallizes their concerns.

"I wonder if you could say that global warming is not so much a theory about how you feel?" It gives you an embarrassed chuckle.

"Well, there are things that can prove one way or another. Want me to say that this is far from proven, says Horace.

"Yes." But asked what would be our position to refute! Twinkle Bulb. In addition, all experiments that do not consider the experiments that we are willing to risk to do, right? How can I do nothing and wait 50 years! This is the problem!

Horace pulls a wry face, but are not actively agree.

"We can not refer to the question of perceived risks? Asks Socrates. It stops time." As global warming seems compelling, "he added.

"You say that with great risk? - I was right, and it is not, and vice versa? Requests Twinkle

"Hey, wait, I. ..." Horace said, see the issue.

"Well, it must be admitted, because none of us are acceptable evidence, or Rather, a refutation, is down on the risks, is not it? Interrupt Twinkle.

"You mean the more serious consequences if the skeptics are wrong? Socrates asked Twinkle.

"I must say, Twinkle says," is not it? "

"Look, it's crazy." Horace is a bit 'crazy. "Therefore, nobody could have predicted the end of the world, but because we can not disprove, we need to place ITS head. This is not science, it's anarchy!

"Yes, this is a good philosophy," says Twinkle. " I totally agree with you that if I have a crazy theory, this is for me to try to prove that is not for you to refute. But there are two things. First, we agree that global warming can not be proved or disproved in a way that satisfies us. Secondly, the theory is not crazy .... in reality, not just a theory, Socrates turned to us. But this is a good qualitative basis, although not quantitative, agree. I think, Socrates asked the right question. Comments that convince you that you're wrong? I have no answer. You do not understand. The risk we are talking about, not worthy of rigorous science. The risk of error is worse, Horatio, than risk my mistakes. "

Horace grumble, but retains his world.

What follows from this conclusion? I suspect most people will look at Twinkle. Adverse effects of environmental misconduct, of course, because we are many resources, human and natural, very effective in combating a nonexistent problem to use. Perhaps global economic growth will be slower than usual. However, as Horace wrong, and we do little or nothing in his opinion, no single package of bank's survival, advertisements, chairman of the Federal Reserve System of wisdom from any source, to save us from a series of disasters, the least that can be major problems. Most people, almost all countries at the meeting in Copenhagen, the defender of the "precautionary principle. They are divided on the side of Twinkle. Precautions should be taken.

Parts of the above vision is a bit 'different from the global warming debate. This is a relief, because the way the discussion tends to believe that it is absolutely impossible for a layman to understand that scientists believe, even when the disputes between environmentalists alone. It is said that sea level rise of 3 feet, others say six feet! How to know who is right? You can not make your mind from the effects of global warming, climate scientists to listen to dissent, that the better the general pattern of atmospheric circulation on Earth! In my opinion, the above is that the global warming debate is not based on science, because the correct application of standard scientific arguments are not sufficient. Thus, the non-scientist simply make their own choices based on how they see the danger, not realizing that their lack of experience prevent them from holding opinions.

See Through Solar Panels

This is interesting though I would like to see more detail.  The use of organics asks more questions than it answers.  That it can out perform thin film by an order of magnitude implies converting over a much broader spectrum.  So far so good.  Can it be sustained?

This is a new entrant and the claims are at least promising.  Even if the production is nort particularly impressive, it will still have a market merely to make use of a passive resource.  Recall windows must be specially made to begin with, and it will be no trick at all folding this into the supply chain.

Of course, if they can establish sustainable high yield at a low effective cost base, every office building will soon convert and so will everyone else.  Recall how we all use double pane windows these days.

World's First-of-Its-Kind See-Thru Glass SolarWindow Capable Of Generating Electricity

by Staff Writers

Burtonsville MD (SPX) Jul 27, 2010

http://www.solardaily.com/reports/World_First_of_Its_Kind_See_Thru_Glass_SolarWindow_Capable_Of_Generating_Electricity_999.html

Researchers Apply Coating to Commercial Glass, Demonstrating Transparency of New Energy's SolarWindow Capable of Generating Electricity, Currently Under Development. Source: New Energy Technologies, Inc.

http://www.spacedaily.com/images-lg/new-energy-technologies-solarwindow-pv-lg.jpg

New Energy Technologies is pleased to announce that researchers developing its proprietary SolarWindow technology have achieved major scientific and technical breakthroughs, allowing the Company to unveil a working prototype of the world's first-ever glass window capable of generating electricity in the upcoming weeks.

Until now, solar panels have remained opaque, with the prospect of creating a see-thru glass window capable of generating electricity limited by the use of metals and various expensive processes which block visibility and prevent light from passing through glass surfaces.

New Energy's ability to generate electricity on see-thru glass is made possible by making use of the world's smallest working organic solar cells, developed by Dr. Xiaomei Jiang at the University of South Florida. Unlike conventional solar systems, New Energy's solar cells generate electricity from both natural and artificial light sources, outperforming today's commercial solar and thin-film technologies by as much as 10-fold.

New Energy's SolarWindow technology is under development for potential application in the estimated 5 million commercial buildings in America (Energy Information Administration) and more than 80 million single detached homes.

"We're always keen to see innovations in our laboratories turn into meaningful commercial products," stated Valerie McDevitt, Assistant Vice President for Research, Division of Patents and Licensing, University of South Florida. "We very much look forward to the commercial development of New Energy's SolarWindow technology, which, if successful, could literally transform the way in which we view the use of solar energy for our homes, offices, and commercial buildings."

The University of South Florida Research Foundation has licensed Dr. Xiaomei Jiang's groundbreaking discovery and important commercial processes and applications to New Energy Solar Corporation, a wholly-owned subsidiary of New Energy Technologies, Inc.

"It's very exciting to see that our ongoing research has led to several significant breakthroughs with transparency and the production of electricity on see-thru glass," explained Mr. Meetesh V. Patel, President and CEO of New Energy Technologies, Inc. "For the first time ever, these advances have allowed us to develop an early-scale working prototype of the technology, which I very much look forward to unveiling in the upcoming weeks."

The GLobal and Forest Warming Politics

The Global Warming Politics have involved many different political debate, policy designs, and legislation involving the science of global warming and the response to global warming. The war of political words has involved many different governmental bodies, scientific organizations, and special interests groups. Most English speaking countries have supported the action to help limit global warming. The predicted effects of global warming are way too much to pass by which is why the governments of many countries have combined forces to help stop global warming. The war on global warming is an endless battle. The possible outcomes are frightening so we as people must help as much as possible.

The most noticeable change because of global warming politics occurred on December 11th 1997 with the creation of the Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto Protocol is a protocol from the international Framework Convention on Climate Chance that intends to help reduce greenhouse gases that causes change in climate. The Kyoto Protocol became into effect on February 16th 2005. Since late 2007 one hundred and seventy five parties have ratified the protocol. However, only thirty six developed countries are actually required to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions to the levels required for each country in the treaty. There are three other countries that are predicted to participate soon.

While the global warming politics have made major improvements in the war against global warming there is still much more to do. The Labor party in Australia has ratified the Kyoto Protocol however it just went into effect in March of 2008. The Liberal Party government of Canada has ratified the protocol. New Zealand's Labour government of Helen Clark ratified the Kyoto Protocol. The Labour Party of the United Kingdom has also ratified the Kyoto Protocol. In the United States Bill Clinton's Democratic Administration has signed the Kyoto Protocol. Many democrats have support a number of the bills that mitigate emissions. However, The Democratic Congress has never voted on whether or not the United States is bound to the treaty.

The global warming politics have long debated whether or not global warming is really all that dangerous. Many countries are fighting to take strong action against global warming. Others have disputed the scientific consensus on global warming or simply refuse action to mitigate global warming. In February of 2007 surveys discovered that ninety five percent of the forty one Congressional Democrats agreed that Earth's surface is warming because of man made problems while only thirteen percent of the thirty one Republicans who were surveyed agreed. Skepticism about global warming includes many newspapers in the United Kingdom and a few in Canada.

The global warming politics battle on to determine what to do to stop carbon emissions. While the United States has never officially agreed to be required to reduce emissions one hundred and ninety five cities in the United States have committed to reducing carbon emissions to seven percentages below the levels of 1990. That is over fifty million Americans committing to the cause. California, the world's sixth largest economy, committed in 2005 to reducing the emissions of 2000 levels by the year 2010. It is estimated that by 2020 if California's automotive standards were implemented nationwide drivers should save up to twenty six billion dollars a year.

The global warming politics are always debating and trying to implement new methods of stopping global warming. The nasty after effects of global warming almost always end with death and destruction. If it is true that we as humans are the cause of global warming we must do all we can to help the governments stop or at least delay global warming. We must take action before it is too late. Many skeptics believe that the effects of global warming will one day lead to the end of the world. Whether or not that is true nobody really knows. However, with such a shocking statement being said we must work hard along side the politics to prevent that from ever happening.

Stopping Global and Forest Warming

Global Warming is a word that you will come across on any news channel or newspaper or magazine these days. Global warming simply means the presence of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere beyond the permissible limits. The overabundance of carbon dioxide that is present in the atmosphere will capture the heat from the rays of the sun and form a blanket that is warming our planet Earth.

The main source that is contributing this abundant carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is the humans living on this planet. The carbon emissions from cars, polluting factories and industries and the non renewable power plants are all responsible for giving out greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogen dioxide etc into the atmosphere. All of the above things that we rely on are a source for making this Earth a less environment friendly for the humans.

One must know that every action, every decision or every purchase he or she makes is going to either help or hurt the future of life on this planet. In fact, all the people in the world have by now know the ill effects of global warming on our planet. So, all of us will be only more than willing to help stop global warming and to make this Earth a better place to live in. A small bit of help from each and everyone living in this planet will make this world a healthier planet for our children, grand children and great grandchildren to live in.

The major source for this rising global warming situation is the human beings living in this planet and it is up to us humans to concentrate on the features that will help to reduce the effect of global warming or will alleviate the occurrence of global warming on our planet. The combating of this dilemma called global warming can be carried out by concentrating on these few points:

• The major step in preventing the occurrence of global warming is to conserve energy. There are so many ways in which you can conserve energy and the following will give you an idea on the regular day to day activities that you can follow to save energy and thereby reduce the effects of global warming: turning off appliances that are not in use; pooling of cars to go for office or function; using energy efficient lamps; not using appliances that release chlorofluorocarbons(CFC); planting more trees etc.

• Cut on the work hours in your profession that will help save energy and if this is practiced by all the working professionals all over the world, then millions of energy can be saved, which will lead to stopping global warming.

• Using of recycled products and recommended plastic carry bags than those with fewer microns which will help in the increase of pollution that will lead to increase in the global warming.

• Using of environment friendly fuels and vehicles which may be a bit expensive, but will not contribute to polluting the environment.

• Using of solar energy, wind power or water energy to generate electricity for your homes and offices.

With the collective efforts of each and everyone living in the planet, and with everyone caring a little bit for our Mother Earth, it will be easy to reduce the effect of global warming on this planet and make this world a happy place to live in.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Carl_Ganser 

Warning on global warming the gullible

It is not surprising that with all the talk about global warming (GW), which we
was only one of its coldest winter we have had for a long time? Of 2007
Farmers' Almanac, which provides forecasts are accurate to 85%
cold temperatures, up to 20 degrees below seasonal norms (and
almost 40 degrees colder than last winter), in Montana, the Dakotas and parts of Wyoming. For the Gulf Coast through New England,
unusually cold shower, "the conditions are to be expected. Snow,
much of it is also for the belly of the nation, part of the new forecast
England and the mountains of the northwestern Pacific. "The Great Lakes

and Ohio River Valley is the only area to be spared the extreme cold,
Shows Sandi Duncan, editor in chief, "but that does not mean that this area
not without significant snowfall and cold periods. "

Wonder why they did not get the message!

Recently we had a 11-year-old who literally in tears
to discuss progress for the GW fear in the school. The
Child argues that "If the world ends, why worry about something
but sat with my family? "

Any natural disaster takes place these days, the GW is due.
Many world leaders to accept as GW, the truth of the Gospel. A recent survey
showed that 33% of Americans see GW as a real threat to our
exist. TV shows such as Discovery "Planet Earth" are strong,
large pieces of propaganda for the agenda of GW.

A question of faith

Recently read news item: "Global Warming is not on human health
Contribution of carbon dioxide. "Dr. Tim Ball is the Chairman of the
Natural Resources Stewardship Project, a Victoria-based
Environmental consultant and former professor of climatology at the
University of Winnipeg. 02/05/2007 In an article entitled "Global
Warming: The cold, hard facts? "Ball writes:" Global Warming, as
We think we do not know. And I'm not alone in trying to
to open our eyes to the truth ... see only a few listen, despite the fact
the fact that I am one of the first Canadian Ph.Ds. was in the climatology and
I have extensive experience in climatology, especially the
Reconstruction of past climate and the effects of climate change on
human history and human existence. to hear soon, even if I
a Ph.D. (Doctor of Science), University of London, England
and was a professor of climatology at the University of Winnipeg. For
For some reason (actually for many), not the world is listening. Here is
why.

"... What happen, if we'd been told tomorrow that the earth is flat?

It was probably the most important news in the media
and it would be much discussed. So why is it that when scientists
Who said studying the phenomenon of global warming for years
People are not the cause nobody listens?

"Believe it or not, global warming is not due to human contribution
Carbon dioxide (CO2). In fact, this is the greatest deception in the
History of science. We waste time, energy and trillions of dollars
Creating fear and terror for a problem with
no scientific justification. For example, Environment Canada
about 3.7 billion dollars in U.S. spending in the last five years dealing with climate
almost all on propaganda trying to defend, change an indefensible
scientific position while at the same time closing weather stations
and not achieving the objectives of pollution established by law.

"... To seek the truth, we are lost as individuals and as
Society ... There is no evidence that we are, or ever cause global
Climate change ... How has the world to believe that something
is wrong?

"Perhaps for the same reason we believed 30 years ago, and the world
Cooling was the biggest threat: a matter of faith. "It's a cold fact: the
Global Cooling presents humankind with the most important social
political, and the challenge of adjustment that we have employs ten
thousand years. Their participation in decisions that we on
is extremely important for the survival of ourselves, our children, our
Species, "wrote Lowell Ponte in 1976.

"I was against the threat of impending doom global cooling
Because when I look at the threats to global warming ... Are
to deny the phenomenon has occurred. The world has warmed
Since 1680, the nadir of a cool period called the Little Ice Age that
usually continue until the present. These climatic changes are well
within the natural variability and explained quite easily by changes
Sun, but it's nothing special happened. "

Truth Or ... something else?

GW is a fact? Yes indeed. As Dr. Klaus Töpfer, Executive Director
the United Nations Environment Programme, said: "Always
more people around the world are aware that there is climate change.
No one is in doubt. "

But do not buy, any advice from Hollywood "scientists" is generated
such as Alec Baldwin, Leonardo, Tom Hanks, Will Farrell movies like
"The Day After Tomorrow". They took offered by Bate
All ex-Veep-time favorite movie maker and Al Gore
Global warming crusade. More about him coming (be warned).

GW is our fault? No, it is not. Although the European Parliament
called for trade sanctions against the United States if it agrees with
to reduce CO2 emissions, the scientists always talk
For those who say mankind is to blame. Pat climatologist
Michaels of the Cato Institute, said: "Climate change, but hey ...
the climate in the past without people changed with some
to do ... "

When we embrace what environmentalists say, we all believe
Polar ice caps melt and America's coasts will be flooded
shortly. Do not start building an ark yet. When you consider that the North
Pole is a huge block of ice floating in the ocean, because it melts at Summer's
End, this does not mean sea level. Antarctica is the largest ice
the mass of the planet. Experts say that losing the ice.

The temperature of our planet, ranging from a minimum
Invention of the thermometer. They say it was warmer 1000 years ago
If this is the case, but has started cooling. Colonial America was taken over
the last days of the Little Ice Age, some of the deepest snow
and the coldest temperature recorded in the history of North America. Remember
Valley Forge? Jefferson wrote about life in this climate queue
to change. In his book "Notes on Virginia," he wrote, "the snow
used to lie on the ground for months at a time, so now not only
Weeks or days ... "

It was not until 1800. 1816 known as the "year without summer."
Today, some climatologists are worried about other Ice Age
global warming. CBN News reported that "experts
stifled by a worldwide movement to make global warming
Skeptics as evil, even comparing with people, to deny the existence
Holocaust. "

CBN continues: "At least part of the hatred of the left parties in Europe
George Bush is his refusal to the Kyoto Protocol (KP) to sign
Agreement between the industrialized nations to lower carbon dioxide
Emissions as a way to combat global warming. But not all
President Bush's fault - under President Clinton, killed the Senate
Treaty 95 to nothing. But at the 2005 G-8 summit in Scotland, United Kingdom
Prime Minister Tony Blair has called on U.S. President Bush to finally join the
to combat global warming.

Although it was signed symbolically, Bush declared, "America's
should embrace restraint with a bad contract does not read our
Friends and allies as any abdication of responsibility. In contrast,
My government is to provide a leadership role in the question of the committed
Climate change ... Our approach must be consistent with the long-term
Objective of stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere. "

It has been said that the reason that the U.S. has not ratified, the agreement is that
In contrast to Europe, we recognize that the Kyoto Protocol to do nothing
measurable global warming. In other words: "G. Dubya 'is not
decreased for the entire GW. According to one estimate, would be a
Difference of only seven hundredths of a degree Celsius, according to a
50 years - an amount too small to measure. The European response
seems to be doing, "At least something!"

Yes, they do something. The Bush Administration
Perspective, they are wasting money that you can use it to invest in
Future technologies, throws himself on solar energy and windmills. This
noted that the biggest proponents of the framework in developed countries
World have the worst economy, most with unemployment in double digits
(The United States is only 4.4%, by the way). Critics say the signing of the Kyoto
Year would take billions of our gross domestic product. New
Technology will replace fossil fuels, unless
Cripple their economies first concepts such as the Kyoto Protocol.

CBN relations, Stephen Milloy, who runs JunkScience.com, says
Companies to pressure from environmental activists yielding.
He said: "Global warming pushers go to companies
As a management company to support both the Kyoto Protocol or other
GW provisions. Finally, the development of sufficient political
support companies that start businesses, bold
GW lobbying for restrictions in the U.S. "

An absurd TRICK

"Scientists have an independent obligation to respect and submit
Truth as they see it, "Al Gore calls his film" An Inconvenient Truth. "
Verissimo asks Al to them: "What do world climate experts actually
Thoughts about the science of the film? "

Professor Bob Carter Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James
Cook University, says: "indirect Gore's arguments are so weak
are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film,
Commander of the public attention. "

Carter is to be sure what part of the Gore-sites like small paintings
"Climate change skeptics" who do not agree with the majority
Scientists. "Y'think? In fact, according to Tom Harris, Executive
Natural Resources Stewardship Project Director, is a Carter
Hundreds of highly qualified non-governmental, non-industry, non-lobby
Group climate experts who are against the hypothesis that human emissions
CO2 climate change causing significant overall. By
Harris, "Climate experts" is the operative word here. Why? "Why
What Gore's "majority of scientists" think is immaterial when only a
very small fraction of them actually work in the field of climate change. "

While scientists focus their research on global change everything
Polar bears on Poison Ivy, which are not all as climate
Experts change.

Carter writes: "We used to hear most scientists, the real data
try to understand what nature actually tell us something about the causes and
Extent of global climate change. In this relatively small community,
There is no consensus, regardless of what Gore and others suggest. "
He gives an example of the debate we almost never GW
listen

Carleton University paleoclimatologist Professor Tim Patterson - "There is
is no significant correlation between CO2 and global temperature
About this [time] geology. In fact, when CO2 levels were over ten
times higher than they are now, about 450 million years ago, the planet
was in the bottom of the absolute coldest period in the second half billion
Years ... How can you still believe that the recent relatively small
increased CO2 emissions would be the main cause of the last century
modest warming? "

"Patterson concluded his testimony by explaining what his research and
"Hundreds of other studies show: on all time scales, it is very good
Correlation between the Earth's temperature and natural celestial phenomena
such as changes in the brightness of the sun ... Antarctica has survived
warm and cold events over millions of years. A merger is not easy
a realistic scenario in the near future, "said Carter.

Gore says in the film, since 1970 there was a steep
drop-off in the quantity and the size and thickness of Arctic ice cap. "
This is misleading, according to Ball: "The survey that Gore cites was
a transect of the Arctic basin in the month
In October 1960, when we were in the middle of the cooling system
Period. In the year 1990 is done in the warmer months of September,
with a completely different technology. "

A document in 2003 from the University of Alaska professor Igor published
Polyakov shows that the Arctic, where temperature increases
supposedly endangering polar bears showed fluctuations since 1940 but
no global warming.

Dr. Wibjorn Karlen, emeritus professor, Department of Physical Geography
And Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Sweden - "For a number of
published documents is a decline in the last 50 years "

Carter added: "What Gore's view of the world
Warming ... In addition to the northwest in the areas of the mass cooling
Cooling are in North and South Pacific, all of
Valley of the Amazon, on the north coast of South America and the Caribbean;
Eastern Mediterranean, Black Sea, Caucasus and Red Sea, New
New Zealand and even the Ganges Valley in India. ... "

"Gore's point that 200 cities and towns in the American West all the time to
High temperature records is also misleading, "says Carter.
Dr. Roy Spencer, Principal Research Scientist at the University of
Huntsville, Alabama - "There are for some locations, the unusual
Thousands of towns and villages in the United States, has broken all records, "said
says. "The facts also show that the temperatures in the past
U.S. were not unusual. "

Carter added: "He [Gore] is an embarrassment to U.S. science and its
many good doctors, many of whom know (but I do not feel
publicly) that his propaganda crusade is mainly due to junk science. "
How is this criticism? Hollywood, the film has an Oscar
Best Documentary - that speaks volumes to me - and Gore
was nominated for the Nobel Prize in October for its wide
efforts to attract the attention of the world to the dangers of global warming.

Deception is everywhere at all times.

As others have said, follow the money and those who
Cult to find out what really happened. Or Gore
Concept of "carbon offsets, which it would be the richest man in town
(By the way, he has made a firm * credits to buy
to help us in all our carbon footprint - a concept to reduce
to pay, make sure that we are used to license fees for the use of fossil fuels), or a proposal
CO2 tax would not solve a problem to reduce emissions
also shown that there is someone who elbows her money machine
This disaster required.

* The supplier offset invested his money in planting trees and projects
similar projects, the position of the environmental impact assessment under
Their emissions - cars, commercial air transport. One-off by an acquired
Non-profit organization for the conservation of the forest in the northwest, or carry
could with the restoration of the rainforest in Ecuador to help. This does not apply
It is literally a tree in the rainforest of Ecuador with your name
on. Unfortunately, customers do not get to decide how their donations
distributed. A possible place to go where your money because
Thus the project aims to reduce CO2 emissions at truck stops
would be that the driver to close in their trucks at night, rather than
Idle.

Be still and know that I am God

Environmentalists say that we do not continue to spew CO2 into the air. I agree
We are the best guardians of the planet that God has given us.
But I've also read that more air comes out of the kitchen
Chinese villages and burn the gas has left the company in the world that the animals
our cars and factories. Seriously!

The answer skeptical that the world is doomed. Such talk instills fear
People and the fear is the belief in the devil. As Christians, our faith FEEL
to be in God

Be anxious for nothing!

Fear not, the Lord is with you!

Extreme positions on both sides of the aisle are none of us have ever heard
About this issue. It seems to me that there is always something
We can all do more. But I can live healthier lives
People is known to eat well, exercise and avoiding cigarettes and alcohol, but
I was hit by a truck of beer at any time. We have also
Care of this beautiful country, but when we had our race, our race over.
Heaven and earth will pass away, but the word of God will never
Jesus said. The prophecy is fulfilled. Things get worse before
better.

Meanwhile, we, the church, have a great command
keep us busy. We will not change, debating this world through lobbying,
make propaganda films, with brief showers or carpool. Namely,
After all, that Jesus presents to do.

I love this planet. I really am, but we want to be sure to worship the Creator and
Not only was his creation.

Updating the Global Middle Class

This item is a fresh reminder of the shear power of the S curve.  Largely everyone on the Globe today is actually on the curve at some point or another. A huge mass of Chinesse are entering the full acceleration phase and will create a huge internal demand.  The same is also true for India and possibly now Brazil.

There is one practical effect.  The supply excess US currency denominated credit out there will be sponged up far faster than anticipated and the damage caused by the first global financial crisis will be quickly repaired outside the USA.

It is noteworthy that foreign investors are now focused on resources because of this.  The world needs a number of huge copper mines to be commissioned.  Little of that will also flow into the US because the states are mostly viewed unfriendly to mining at all.  To start with, most lands are still managed under the original 1877 mining law and is a huge problem.  The rest of the world has mostly learned to welcome major mining companies, not least because artisan miners pay no taxes and massively damage the environment.

An inevitable billion man middle class will need a ten fold increase in raw material availability.

Update on the Global Middle Class

AUGUST 11, 2010

http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/08/update-on-global-middle-class.html/

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjpSzybkFRd-4NfsmlKstAaUAfqRxWfDZnIC_QHfmIA1FxLIOd3Q1bMkW5vgYfR3oIePqTkWjTyPH_2Fczmo0I_AQgxigY70vAk9wBSycDP0imn6X-Uzy_HEqVNRm2RFDxdGSz0M7O_0sI/s320/globalmc2.jpg

The Emerging Middle Class in Developing Countries by Homi Kharas of the Brookings Institute Middle class definition used is those spending $10-100 per day. Some interesting things to notice is that the projection is for the world economy to get to 200 trillion in 2005 dollars by 2036 up from about 70 trillion now. Asia will be over half of the world economy. North America will go from about 26% now to about 12%, which will be the same as central and south America. By 2024-2030, the dominant share of the middle class economy from India and China and the rest of Asia will established according the Kharas forecast. It would then be a shift from the lower end of the middle class range to the upper part.

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOYZqlwJbiP7ZF1YPLVg1BFZAcPCDmZETGdbP8n8gtlCKcvpEoaQaTYstEG3W3xZxinzmLOWCVt-W2DMDOVo47tgik5vCa_29l2edLjgth3FcKxYTCX3IxAreIAL4TyywsDqg1e9aZDRM/s320/globalmc1.jpg

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTiCtKkikBovJEmzoAU9h-rPug7wnRrl7TrCv0e0znl73KGe-HEPaB4KLneBEia-mZpMIi7YeTyzzIygZ57k5e_iDcHu_8L0ALyrH_2ySacO5Mu55v_qCVqC_EAqGdnEkuLt-TH6TWLU0/s400/globalmc3.jpg

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizVGpD4pBl6xrhZ_5EKC4PfKFgZ-cgWKynKnDbH-MehGS39bhBD8gne5zwNskXsosVuSnrJ-KnAM_x5MY7YNWKDU6m3fTKsQI5HQ8jHwKOCZ8YgyEj-pg99gqGy5FqtphEqjUHii0BLtE/s320/globalmc4.jpg

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQJuAxHj2sDwR5R7sTwTDl72zIgzSPIPxHt3UDnUgfWvzguQaLiixFFTa83IZZgANsk6mzfn0smLohyphenhyphenmfwxdBG9n7UdE2ND7AxcAy259vaIXDxLeLVfx88jR5XT1h1Tdl8JHdTYMsAFKo/s400/globalmc5.jpg

Stephen Hawking's Call to Escape Earth

This is all good fun and it is stating the obvious.  However, we have plenty of good options.  As developed in this blog, simply terraforming Earth will make it full habitable for a population base well over fifty billion while sustaining a bio-rich ecology.  Our biggest stretch will be to deploy the Eden machine.

Then there is the little matter of Venus, nicely prepositioned for been terraformed by our selves.  It is merely a matter of diverting plenty of comets into the planet.  Once we have the MEV (magnetic exclusion vessel) available for space travel this will be straight forward engineering and may well have been fully underway for the past ten millennia.

After that we get to build space habitats that are a good mile across and are spun up to provide artificial gravity.   Any one perhaps can be designed to hold and support a 100 million in population in complete comfort. Ten thousand of those in the asteroid belt would still be lost and invisible to our scopes with minimum effort.

The point I am making is that we can place fifty billion on Earth, fifty billion of Venus and a hundred times that out in the Asteroid Belt long before we have to think about other stars.

The only thing technically needed yet is the MEV.  We have the know how to do it all now.  The MEV will take perhaps another twenty years or less.  I have already described the tech and the key benchmarks in earlier articles and posts.

 Stephen Hawking's Warning: Abandon Earth—Or Face Extinction

Andrew Dermont on August 6, 2010, 12:00 AM

http://bigthink.com/ideas/21570

Let's face it: The planet is heating up, Earth's population is expanding at an exponential rate, and the the natural resources vital to our survival are running out faster than we can replace them with sustainable alternatives. Even if the human race manages not to push itself to the brink of nuclear extinction, it is still a foregone conclusion that our aging sun will expand and swallow the Earth in roughly 7.6 billion years.

So, according to famed theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking, it's time to free ourselves from Mother Earth. "I believe that the long-term future of the human race must be in space," Hawking tells Big Think. "It will be difficult enough to avoid disaster on planet Earth in the next hundred years, let alone the next thousand, or million. The human race shouldn't have all its eggs in one basket, or on one planet. Let's hope we can avoid dropping the basket until we have spread the load."

Hawking says he is an optimist, but his outlook for the future of man's existence is fairly bleak. In the recent past, humankind's survival has been nothing short of "a question of touch and go" he says, citing the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1963 as just one example of how man has narrowly escaped extinction. According to the Federation of American Scientiststhere are still about 22,600 stockpiled nuclear weapons scattered around the planet, 7,770 of which are still operational. In light of the inability of nuclear states to commit to a global nuclear non-proliferation treaty, the threat of a nuclear holocaust has not subsided. 

In fact, "the frequency of such occasions is likely to increase in the future," says Hawking, "We shall need great care and judgment to negotiate them all successfully." 

Even if humans manage to avoid a nuclear stand-off over the next thousand years, our fate on this planet is still pretty much certain. University of Sussex astrophysicist Dr. Robert Smith says eventually the aging Sun will accelerate global warming to a point where all of Earth's water will simply evaporate.

"Life on Earth will have disappeared long before 7.6 billion years," says Smith, "Scientists have shown that the Sun's slow expansion will cause the temperature at the surface of the Earth to rise. Oceans will evaporate, and the atmosphere will become laden with water vapor, which (like carbon dioxide) is a very effective greenhouse gas. Eventually, the oceans will boil dry and the water vapor will escape into space. In a billion years from now the Earth will be a very hot, dry and uninhabitable ball."

Finally, between the next thousand years or so that Hawking says it will take man to make the planet uninhabitable and the billion years it will take for the sun to turn our planet into an arid wasteland, there is always the chance that a nearby supernova, an asteroid, or aquick and painless black hole could do us in. 

Takeaway One way or another, the life on Earth will likely become uninhabitable for mankind in the future. We need to start seriously thinking about how we will free ourselves from the constraints of this dying planet.

Why We Should Reject This Idea

Despite what Hawking describes as humankind's "selfish and aggressive instinct," there may be some biological impediments to finding another planet to inhabit.

"The nearest star [to Earth] is Proxima Centauri which is 4.2 light years away," saysUniversity of Michigan astrophysicist Katherine Freese, "That means that, if you were traveling at the speed of light the whole time, it would take 4.2 years to get there."

Unfortunately, at the moment we can only travel at about ten thousandth of light speed, which means if man were to use chemical fuel rockets similar to the those used during the Apollo mission to the moon, the journey would take about 50,000 years. Without the use of a science-fiction-like warp drive or cryogenic freezing technology, no human would live long enough to survive the journey. In addition, "the radiation you would encounter alone would kill you, even if you could get a rocket to go anywhere near that fast," says Freese.

On the upside, if man ever develops the technology to travel at the speed of light while remaining shielded from cosmic radiation, he could effectively travel into the future. "A five year trip at light speed could push an astronaut forward by 1000 earth years," says Freese, "If he wanted to see if any humans were still around by then."

The Mayan Terminal Period

What we are learning is that the medieval warming period was way more unique than we had expected, or at least it was uniquely strong.  Its impact was to drive weather systems further south treating the Yucatan Peninsula to the weather conditions of most of Mexico.  The high point appears to have lasted most of a century which is ample enough to depopulate anywhere.

It is also oddly stated that this was the worst dry period over 3000 years.  Unstated is the fact that 3000 years ago the Bronze Age optimum collapsed, I believe most likely due to human denudation of the Sahara.  Likely a different climate regime was in place before 3000 years.

Most interesting to us is that the medieval maximum was both a likely optimum but also possibly uniquely warmer than would have been projected.  Welcome to another interesting question.

Characterizing the Mayan Terminal Classic Period

---

http://www.co2science.org/articles/V13/N30/C1.php

Reference

Escobar, J., Curtis, J.H., Brenner, M., Hodell, D.A. and Holmes, J.A. 2010. Isotope measurements of single ostracod valves and gastropod shells for climate reconstruction: Evaluation of within-sample variability and determination of optimum sample size. Journal of Paleolimnology 43: 921-938.

What was done

In the words of the authors, "sediment cores from Lakes Punta Laguna, Chichancanab, and Peten Itza on the Yucatan Peninsula were used to (1) investigate 'within-horizon' stable isotope variability (δ¹⁸O and δ¹³C) measured on multiple, single ostracod valves and gastropod shells, (2) determine the optimum number of individuals required to infer low-frequency climate changes, and (3) evaluate the potential for using intra-sample δ¹⁸O variability in ostracod and gastropod shells as a proxy measure for high-frequency climate variability."

What was learned

The five researchers report that their results "allow calculation of mean isotope values and thus provide a rough estimate of the low-frequency variability over the entire sediment sequence," and these results indicated that "relatively dry periods were persistently dry [italics added], whereas relatively wet periods were composed of wet and dry times."

What it means

Escobar et al. state that their findings "confirm the interpretations of Hodell et al. (1995, 2007) and Curtis et al. (1996) that there were persistent dry climate episodes associated with the Terminal Classic Maya Period." In fact, they find that "the Terminal Classic Period from ca. AD 910 to 990 was not only the driest period in the last 3,000 years, but also a persistently dry period [italics added]." And in further support of this interpretation, they note that "the core section encompassing the Classic Maya collapse has the lowest sedimentation rate among all layers and the lowest oxygen isotope variability."

We additionally note, in this regard, that the AD 910 to 990 time period falls very close to the central section of the frequency plot of the time-of-occurrence of the Medieval Warm Period for many of the locations where it has been detected (to date) throughout the entire world, as may be seen from the Interactive Map and Time Domain Plot of ourMedieval Warm Period Project, which observation suggests that the climate of the Yucatan Peninsula during that time period likely was also persistently warm. And that "double whammy" of persistent warmth and persistent dryness

appears to have been just a bit too much for the Mayans of that trying time to endure.

References

Curtis, J.H., Hodell, D.A. and Brenner, M. 1996. Climate variability on the Yucatan Peninsula (Mexico) during the past 3,500 years, and implications for Maya cultural evolution. Quaternary Research 46: 37-47.

Hodell, D.A., Brenner, M. and Curtis, J.H. 2007. Climate and cultural history of the Northeastern Yucatan Peninsula, Quintana Roo, Mexico. Climatic Change 83: 215-240.

Hodell, D.A., Curtis, J.H. and Brenner, M. 1995. Possible role of climate in the collapse of classic Maya civilization.Nature 375: 391-394.

Reviewed 28 July 2010