Member of the Month

KilaTsunami
October, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Is Global Warming real?

profile picture
Turd.Ferguson
Posts: 1437 - Karma: 2,713
Since our shared sport almost exclusively depends on the weather, I thought this would be a decent conversation to have. CO2 Levels in our atmosphere are at levels never before seen on this planet. If I could take a wild swing at the issue I would think it would have something to do with human interference.

Below is a graph displaying Co2 Levels in our atmosphere dating back to as far as we can measure (long long time) to now.
If we could keep this thread mildly civil I think it could help people understand why we lost a big player in the summer ski game (COC) or if someone has solid evidence to the contrary please put in on the table.
POLL
Edit Poll
Votes:

Take care when editing a poll; Options should be similar to maintain vote integrity.

More options will be added automatically as you type. You must supply a question and at least two options. No HTML is allowed.

Sep 4 2017 2:35PM
3 0
profile picture
BeefiestExpert
Posts: 2804 - Karma: 3,277
Nothing is going to take us back. We are going to have to invest in ways to adapt or mitigate the repercussions.
Sep 4 2017 2:50PM
5 2
profile picture
qazwsxedc34
Posts: 2955 - Karma: 2,135
BeefiestExpertNothing is going to take us back. We are going to have to invest in ways to adapt or mitigate the repercussions.


I think climate change is real, global warming is a little more dubious. Lots of think tank consensus meetings where scientists refuse to show data on global warming, as well as the manipulation of input data. I havn't really looked into it but saving the planet would involve either the human race adapting or bye bye humans. The earth has seen far worse than what human presence has done. It will do fine without us. I do think CO2 and global warming fear mongering is a means to control and tax the hell out of the public, i.e. carbon tax.
Sep 4 2017 3:14PM
4 4
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61603 - Karma: 123,068
The term "Global Warming" needs to be abolished.


Climate Change is real, it's a huge problem, we need to do everything we can to help. We need to focus on changing where we get our energy from, we need to cut out fossil fuels and then prioritize recycling. We can recycle all we want now, but it's still being processed with fossil fuels, counteracting any effort made to help.
Sep 4 2017 3:50PM
9 1
profile picture
ALMIGHTYSOSA
Posts: 2800 - Karma: 2,102
eheathThe term "Global Warming" needs to be abolished.


Climate Change is real, it's a huge problem, we need to do everything we can to help. We need to focus on changing where we get our energy from, we need to cut out fossil fuels and then prioritize recycling. We can recycle all we want now, but it's still being processed with fossil fuels, counteracting any effort made to help.


Probably the worst thing we to do for the climate is fly, literally It will be very hard to make any significant improvement until we completely make the transportation industry sustainable and efficient.
Sep 4 2017 4:07PM
0 1
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61603 - Karma: 123,068
Lieutenant_DanProbably the worst thing we to do for the climate is fly, literally It will be very hard to make any significant improvement until we completely make the transportation industry sustainable and efficient.


Yeah thats 100% true, i was actually thinking about that when I was posting. If planes were the only vehicles using fossil fuels, it would be huge though.

"The global aviation industry produces around 2% of all human-induced carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions."
http://www.atag.org/facts-and-figures.html

If we cut 98% of fossil fuels, that'd be huge. We just need a hyperloop to make it 100% haha
Sep 4 2017 4:11PM
0 0
profile picture
Turd.Ferguson
Posts: 1437 - Karma: 2,713
eheathThe term "Global Warming" needs to be abolished.


Sorry, it was wrong of me to term it like that, Climate Change would be the appropriate nomenclature, but since I'm here, Wouldn't a heavy buildup of carbon in our atmosphere eventually cause the temperature to rise?
Sep 4 2017 5:36PM
1 0
profile picture
profa_212
Posts: 8893 - Karma: 35,828
Turd.FergusonSorry, it was wrong of me to term it like that, Climate Change would be the appropriate nomenclature, but since I'm here, Wouldn't a heavy buildup of carbon in our atmosphere eventually cause the temperature to rise?


not all climates will become warmer. Climate change will cause shifts in all climates, and wont only cause a warming in all places. some will get colder, some will get more precipitation while others will get less precipitation. etc etc etc.

itll start causing some weird shit
Sep 4 2017 7:48PM
1 0
profile picture
iced
Posts: 3070 - Karma: 17,965
try climate change
Sep 4 2017 8:04PM
1 0
profile picture
.Hugo.
Posts: 17360 - Karma: 28,485
my dong is community property
Sep 4 2017 8:07PM
5 0
profile picture
Dddsz
Posts: 3042 - Karma: 7,324
Kind of a bummer that those fuckwit dinosaurs even provided us with fossil fuels in the first place. Interesting to think of what the world would be like without that sludge.
Sep 4 2017 8:27PM
7 1
profile picture
JAHpow
Posts: 7282 - Karma: 17,176
Turd.FergusonI thought this would be a decent conversation to have.


Oh boy
Sep 4 2017 9:49PM
0 0
profile picture
TheDoughAbides
Posts: 1319 - Karma: 4,036
Profahoben_212some will get more precipitation while others will get less precipitation. etc etc etc.

also important to note that precipitation will change forms as well. less snow and more rain in places like the cascades. we could also see an ice age if the thermohaline circulation through all of the oceans shuts down completely (it has decreased 30% since 1950).
Sep 6 2017 12:47AM
0 0
profile picture
.frenchy
Posts: 18221 - Karma: 12,323
al gore is aids
Sep 6 2017 10:38AM
3 7
profile picture
K-Dot.
Posts: 3739 - Karma: 7,737
This isn't even about skiing, it's just about life on earth.
Major changes that need to happen are:
- Renewable energy (or at least fully nuclear in the U.S. case)
- Talks on limits on number of children
- Less meat consumption
- Less flying, better ground infrastructure

A carbon tax on all of those things would do wonders
Sep 6 2017 11:08AM
2 0
profile picture
Casey
Posts: 7847 - Karma: 24,309
The main impact I worry about in terms of skiing is the low elevation coastal ski areas that are currently on the brink of being too warm to sustain a snowpack. In my adult life Snoqualmie Pass has had two winters that they just couldn't operate because it was too warm and they just muddled through January with like a 20" base until they gave up and said better luck next year.

There are reasons outside of Climate Change for those freakishly warm winter's, but I am going to be really bummed if that becomes the new normal for winter's out here.
Sep 6 2017 11:30AM
0 0
profile picture
270on420out
Posts: 7508 - Karma: 51,054
Climate change is real and anyone who denies it is a complete fucking moron.

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

This isn't a debate, it's objective science.
Sep 6 2017 12:03PM
4 2
profile picture
milk_man
Posts: 5252 - Karma: 5,983
Look at the scale of the co2 graph. There's a certain concentration of co2 in the air that plants thrive the most with, and I believe it's somewhere around 600-700 ppm. So, the more co2, the better off plants do, which eventually brings the co2 levels back down.

Yeah there's a correlation between our high co2 now and the warmer temps, but with all those cyclical co2 jumps in the past were there warmer temps? What caused those jumps? It wasnt humans
Sep 13 2017 9:28AM
1 5
profile picture
milk_man
Posts: 5252 - Karma: 5,983
eheathThe term "Global Warming" needs to be abolished.


Climate Change is real, it's a huge problem, we need to do everything we can to help. We need to focus on changing where we get our energy from, we need to cut out fossil fuels and then prioritize recycling. We can recycle all we want now, but it's still being processed with fossil fuels, counteracting any effort made to help.

How does recycling effect global warming? Besides the fact that we would need less petroleum for plastic. But I agree with recycling more than changing our energy consumption. Landfills make me mad
Sep 13 2017 9:31AM
0 1
profile picture
.lencon
Posts: 6753 - Karma: 17,183
eheathYeah thats 100% true, i was actually thinking about that when I was posting. If planes were the only vehicles using fossil fuels, it would be huge though.

"The global aviation industry produces around 2% of all human-induced carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions."
http://www.atag.org/facts-and-figures.html

If we cut 98% of fossil fuels, that'd be huge. We just need a hyperloop to make it 100% haha


Wait a minute... I remember threads where you were against or didn't believe in climate change/global warming. What changed your mind??

Turd.FergusonSorry, it was wrong of me to term it like that, Climate Change would be the appropriate nomenclature, but since I'm here, Wouldn't a heavy buildup of carbon in our atmosphere eventually cause the temperature to rise?


In some cases, yes.
Profahoben_212not all climates will become warmer. Climate change will cause shifts in all climates, and wont only cause a warming in all places. some will get colder, some will get more precipitation while others will get less precipitation. etc etc etc.

itll start causing some weird shit


What I think will happen.. at least for the near future. So maybe for the next 10-20 years, is that we will see just extreme seasons like we have been seeing. Winters will be extreme like last year (yay for skiers, up to a certain point), summers will be hot and dry like this summer, lots of fires (good if you're a firefighter cause you'll make money, up to a certain point), hurricanes will be consistently stronger, same with other storms and what not.

That's just my prediction. If we keep fucking shit up tho, things are gonna get real caddy wampus. We are headed in the right direction, but everybody needs to jump on board.
Sep 13 2017 11:27AM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61603 - Karma: 123,068
.lenconWait a minute... I remember threads where you were against


Nah man, not me.
Sep 13 2017 12:16PM
0 0
profile picture
.lencon
Posts: 6753 - Karma: 17,183
eheathNah man, not me.


Really? I swear I remember a thread where you were against it. It was a few years ago.. hmm maybe I am going crazy. Ill try to find the thread.
Sep 13 2017 12:20PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61603 - Karma: 123,068
.lenconReally? I swear I remember a thread where you were against it. It was a few years ago.. hmm maybe I am going crazy. Ill try to find the thread.


There was some thread from like 2005 i made, i deleted it haha.
Sep 13 2017 12:21PM
0 0
profile picture
.lencon
Posts: 6753 - Karma: 17,183
eheathThere was some thread from like 2005 i made, i deleted it haha.


The thread I'm thinking about was within the last few years or so I thought. Maybe I'm just trippin
Sep 13 2017 12:23PM
0 0
profile picture
theabortionator
Posts: 51642 - Karma: 162,212
Turd.FergusonI thought this would be a decent conversation to have


lolz
Sep 13 2017 12:51PM
0 0
profile picture
Turd.Ferguson
Posts: 1437 - Karma: 2,713
milk_manLook at the scale of the co2 graph. There's a certain concentration of co2 in the air that plants thrive the most with, and I believe it's somewhere around 600-700 ppm. So, the more co2, the better off plants do, which eventually brings the co2 levels back down.

Yeah there's a correlation between our high co2 now and the warmer temps, but with all those cyclical co2 jumps in the past were there warmer temps? What caused those jumps? It wasnt humans



Dude the "cycle" has never gone over 300 ppm until 1950 when it literally started going straight up with no chance of letting off.
Sep 13 2017 12:54PM
0 0
profile picture
270on420out
Posts: 7508 - Karma: 51,054
milk_manLook at the scale of the co2 graph. There's a certain concentration of co2 in the air that plants thrive the most with, and I believe it's somewhere around 600-700 ppm. So, the more co2, the better off plants do, which eventually brings the co2 levels back down.

Yeah there's a correlation between our high co2 now and the warmer temps, but with all those cyclical co2 jumps in the past were there warmer temps? What caused those jumps? It wasnt humans


The scientific consensus is that the Earth's climate system is unequivocally warming, and that it is extremely likely (meaning 95% probability or higher) that this warming is predominantly caused by humans. It is likely that this mainly arises from increased concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, primarily from the burning of fossil fuels, partially offset by human-caused and volcanic aerosols; natural change has had little effect.
Sep 13 2017 12:58PM
2 0
profile picture
milk_man
Posts: 5252 - Karma: 5,983
DIRTYBUBBLEThe scientific consensus is that the Earth's climate system is unequivocally warming, and that it is extremely likely (meaning 95% probability or higher) that this warming is predominantly caused by humans. It is likely that this mainly arises from increased concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, primarily from the burning of fossil fuels, partially offset by human-caused and volcanic aerosols; natural change has had little effect.


So my question is what caused the jumps in the past, before we were burning fossil fuels
Sep 13 2017 12:59PM
0 2
profile picture
r._ed
Posts: 234 - Karma: 855
The problem is that this is still such a misunderstood issue.

Did you know that a Wind Turbine has a bigger Carbon Footprint than its offset? If you take into account the manufacture, transportation and construction of these huge turbines, they actually never ever make up the difference in their lifetimes.
Source

The only way to stop climate change to to go back to a less connected age when everyone grew their own food, hunted and never left their local area. If we want to live a consumer lifestyle then there is no way to stop it. Anything we buy has to be manufactured, transported and disposed of. All of these steps involve a carbon footprint of some kind.

Want to stop GW? Lets take the world back to the middle ages. I love the idea of being self supported, but would I have time to ski as much? I don't know.

Just my opinion, I am not a scientist....
Sep 17 2017 3:22PM
2 2
profile picture
Mingg
Posts: 13976 - Karma: 49,279
eheathThe term "Global Warming" needs to be abolished.


My least favorite thing on this earth is when there is one cold day in august and my conservative AF uncle posts "55 DEGREES IN AUGUST? WHAT HAPPENED TO GLOBAL WARMING???" at 6 god damn in the morning on facebook. No Uncle Pat, fuck you and your dumb as fuck logic stupid facebook post bullshit.
Sep 17 2017 11:02PM
4 0
profile picture
milk_man
Posts: 5252 - Karma: 5,983
MinggMy least favorite thing on this earth is when there is one cold day in august and my conservative AF uncle posts "55 DEGREES IN AUGUST? WHAT HAPPENED TO GLOBAL WARMING???" at 6 god damn in the morning on facebook. No Uncle Pat, fuck you and your dumb as fuck logic stupid facebook post bullshit.


I'd like to see how this summer has been compared to average though, at least in Minnesota it hasn't been an overly warm one
Sep 18 2017 9:54AM
0 1
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61603 - Karma: 123,068
milk_manI'd like to see how this summer has been compared to average though, at least in Minnesota it hasn't been an overly warm one


SLC had the hottest summer to date, the most days over 100 in a summer and i believe they broke a record for most days in a row over 100.

You can't base any idea off where you live, its a global issue. The Climate is changing, it has been since the early 1900s.

**This post was edited on Sep 18th 2017 at 2:28:08pm
Sep 18 2017 2:26PM
0 0
profile picture
profa_212
Posts: 8893 - Karma: 35,828
The referenced post has been removed.


This and the massive amounts of deforestation etc limits the amount of plants that can actually absorb the CO2. Even though plants absorb CO2 they can in no way keep up.

One of the biggest problems is water. As the Global temperature raises, more water will enter the atmosphere, and water is the biggest greenhouse gas. CO2 makes more H20 gas, more H2O gas means higher temps and more water being turned to gas etc. Its one big ass shit loop that we started.
Sep 18 2017 2:30PM
4 0
profile picture
chris.goodhue
Posts: 946 - Karma: 6,209
We are speeding up the CO2 cycle, which in turn traps radiation coming into our atmosphere, decreasing albedo, warming the waters, creating a positive feedback loop that is definitely caused by humans.

Think of a natural CO2 cycle without humans??

Plants take in CO2 - photosynthesis - taking in Co2 converting to O2 - WE BREATHE THIS

Plants die and get lithified into rock (i.e. our fossil fuels) - traps CO2

Plants are eaten by animals - animal respiration - releases co2
forest fires - release CO2
VOLCANOES - release co2
decomposition of organic material - releases co2

So think about that process and how before humans the natural cycle is pretty slow. Then add all the shit we put into the atmosphere and the crazy rates, it's definitely human caused.

Now people argue that "well the earth is really old" which is true. And the earth has gone through ice ages and really warm stages. Even massive volcanoes could put that much CO2 into the atmosphere at once, but thats a hugely drastic event.

Are we drastically changing the earth to extreme never before seen levels??? I don't think so.

Are we changing to earth to levels / temperatures never seen before by humans, I think so. To say how this will change human life, idk..

The earth doesn't need us, we need it.
Sep 18 2017 4:47PM
4 0
profile picture
.lencon
Posts: 6753 - Karma: 17,183
chris.goodhueWe are speeding up the CO2 cycle, which in turn traps radiation coming into our atmosphere, decreasing albedo, warming the waters, creating a positive feedback loop that is definitely caused by humans.

Think of a natural CO2 cycle without humans??

Plants take in CO2 - photosynthesis - taking in Co2 converting to O2 - WE BREATHE THIS

Plants die and get lithified into rock (i.e. our fossil fuels) - traps CO2

Plants are eaten by animals - animal respiration - releases co2
forest fires - release CO2
VOLCANOES - release co2
decomposition of organic material - releases co2

So think about that process and how before humans the natural cycle is pretty slow. Then add all the shit we put into the atmosphere and the crazy rates, it's definitely human caused.

Now people argue that "well the earth is really old" which is true. And the earth has gone through ice ages and really warm stages. Even massive volcanoes could put that much CO2 into the atmosphere at once, but thats a hugely drastic event.

Are we drastically changing the earth to extreme never before seen levels??? I don't think so.

Are we changing to earth to levels / temperatures never seen before by humans, I think so. To say how this will change human life, idk..

The earth doesn't need us, we need it.


.
Sep 18 2017 4:55PM
2 0
profile picture
Session
Posts: 5379 - Karma: 22,163
R-EDThe problem is that this is still such a misunderstood issue.

Did you know that a Wind Turbine has a bigger Carbon Footprint than its offset? If you take into account the manufacture, transportation and construction of these huge turbines, they actually never ever make up the difference in their lifetimes.
Source

The only way to stop climate change to to go back to a less connected age when everyone grew their own food, hunted and never left their local area. If we want to live a consumer lifestyle then there is no way to stop it. Anything we buy has to be manufactured, transported and disposed of. All of these steps involve a carbon footprint of some kind.

Want to stop GW? Lets take the world back to the middle ages. I love the idea of being self supported, but would I have time to ski as much? I don't know.

Just my opinion, I am not a scientist....


Your source is an anti-wind website?
Sep 18 2017 8:09PM
0 0
profile picture
profa_212
Posts: 8893 - Karma: 35,828
SessionYour source is an anti-wind website?


Clearly it's unbiased and factual
Sep 18 2017 9:20PM
1 0
profile picture
profa_212
Posts: 8893 - Karma: 35,828
The referenced post has been removed.


geothermal is fucking terrible. The plant by rose puts off more emissions than the next three highest contributors in Reno combined.

nothing is "clean". Nothing will probably be clean in our lifetime. So it just comes down to whats cleaner...on that im not sure, i could see turbines taking a lot of oil to create and maintain.
Sep 18 2017 10:31PM
0 0
profile picture
.lencon
Posts: 6753 - Karma: 17,183
solar is looking good though.. i think by the time I'm able to build my own home tesla will have mastered the solar shingles and ill be sittin pretty
Sep 18 2017 10:49PM
0 0
profile picture
chris.goodhue
Posts: 946 - Karma: 6,209
Nothing is clean, but you can't just be like "ahhh wind energy has a huge carbon footprint so lets not do that"

Becoming sustainable is a process. We are in the infant stages right now where wind, geothermal, solar exct. is the best we have.

Trial and Error, hypothesizing, testing, retesting...it's gunna take time to get things dialed, especially when people can't seem to open their eyes to science because they hate the other political party. Compromise has to be made
Sep 18 2017 10:55PM
0 0
profile picture
itzki
Posts: 444 - Karma: 1,344
I'm just gonna leave this here


http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/07/climate-change-earth-too-hot-for-humans.html
Sep 18 2017 11:40PM
0 0
profile picture
r._ed
Posts: 234 - Karma: 855
chris.goodhueNothing is clean, but you can't just be like "ahhh wind energy has a huge carbon footprint so lets not do that"

Becoming sustainable is a process. We are in the infant stages right now where wind, geothermal, solar exct. is the best we have.

Trial and Error, hypothesizing, testing, retesting...it's gunna take time to get things dialed, especially when people can't seem to open their eyes to science because they hate the other political party. Compromise has to be made


This.

What I meant was essentially what has been said here. We still know so little about it all that its hard to 'know' what will work and what is the solution. The wind turbine was just an example of a failed attempt to solve these issues. If we hadn't tried it we wouldn't know whether it worked or not. All I'm saying is that there is no clear solution that allows us to continue living in a consumerist society.
Sep 18 2017 11:41PM
1 1
profile picture
r._ed
Posts: 234 - Karma: 855
SessionYour source is an anti-wind website?


Yes. I doubt if a pro wind website would publish an article about the negative effects of wind......

Did you actually read the article or just see the page and make a judgment based on nothing at all?
Sep 18 2017 11:44PM
0 0
profile picture
Session
Posts: 5379 - Karma: 22,163
R-EDYes. I doubt if a pro wind website would publish an article about the negative effects of wind......

Did you actually read the article or just see the page and make a judgment based on nothing at all?


Of course I read it. It's the typical uninformed, incorrect and inflamatory statements about an industry that the vast majority of people are clueless about. Or at the very least about 15-20 years behind on their actual knowledge of.
Sep 18 2017 11:48PM
0 1
profile picture
r._ed
Posts: 234 - Karma: 855
SessionOf course I read it. It's the typical uninformed, incorrect and inflamatory statements about an industry that the vast majority of people are clueless about. Or at the very least about 15-20 years behind on their actual knowledge of.

It is informed by 3rd party surveys of emissions in the concrete and metal industries, namely in their manufacture. What is your argument for the contrary?You can't just say that this is bull without presenting an alternative answer. And I'm assuming that you are not clueless about this industry due to your statement, where did you study this?

**This post was edited on Sep 18th 2017 at 11:54:11pm
Sep 18 2017 11:53PM
0 0
profile picture
r._ed
Posts: 234 - Karma: 855
SessionOf course I read it. It's the typical uninformed, incorrect and inflamatory statements about an industry that the vast majority of people are clueless about. Or at the very least about 15-20 years behind on their actual knowledge of.


Here is another reputable source: https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/wind-turbines-are-neither-clean-nor-green-and-they-provide-zero-global-energy/
Sep 18 2017 11:58PM
0 0
profile picture
TheDoughAbides
Posts: 1319 - Karma: 4,036
I have to agree with R-ED. The best, and possibly only, way to fix this shitstorm is by consuming less energy. All of the energy we consume inevitably messes with the global energy balance no matter how we make it. It fucking sucks but its the truth for now.
Sep 19 2017 12:16AM
0 0
profile picture
profa_212
Posts: 8893 - Karma: 35,828
R-EDIt is informed by 3rd party surveys of emissions in the concrete and metal industries, namely in their manufacture. What is your argument for the contrary?You can't just say that this is bull without presenting an alternative answer. And I'm assuming that you are not clueless about this industry due to your statement, where did you study this?

**This post was edited on Sep 18th 2017 at 11:54:11pm


R-EDHere is another reputable source: https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/wind-turbines-are-neither-clean-nor-green-and-they-provide-zero-global-energy/


yeah i cant really find a single scientific article that supports your case. All that i have found are saying the exact opposite.

http://iopscience.iop.org.unr.idm.oclc.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/6/4/045102/meta;jsessionid=4FB668237BA804C840106026240F6D32.c1.iopscience.cld.iop.org

That link might not work for you because its to a journal through my universities library. But i mean, the abstract says it all.

"In the BLUE Map scenario, construction of new capacity contributes 64%, and repowering of existing capacity 38%, to total cumulative greenhouse gas emissions. The total emissions of wind electricity range between 4% and 14% of the direct emissions of the replaced fossil-fueled power plants. For all impact categories, the indirect emissions of displaced fossil power are larger than the total emissions caused by wind power."

This is also talking about the possible expansion of wind power to 22% of total power, and it is still much cleaner.
Sep 19 2017 12:22AM
1 0
profile picture
roddy116
Posts: 10627 - Karma: 7,423
yeah there is proof of it, but a lot of people who even believe climate change/ global warming is real dont actually know what it entails.
it ticks me the hell off that people love to blame every natural weather phenomena on global warming. like it just snowed 6 inches in the bridgers and its predicted to be a cold and wet winter, and a few years ago there was barely 200 inches of snow all season and only one week of consecutive sub zero temps. Mostly because of the jet streams and stuff, maybe it makes it more volatile, but it has alot more to do with the jet stream and ocean temps.
its a lot more complicated then just drought and rising ocean waters and melting glaciers.
Sep 19 2017 12:50AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)