Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 27 to 39 of 57
  1. #27
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Atlanta area
    Posts
    6,637
    Post Likes
    Thread Starter
    Our groundwater use is destroying freshwater ecosystems
    .
    Huge numbers of people depend on water drawn from the ground, especially in drier regions, but these water resources are being steadily depleted. Less water in the ground doesn't just mean less water for us—it also means less water to flow into the rivers and streams that support freshwater ecosystems.

    These dwindling supplies are set to have a devastating impact. A paper in Nature this week takes a close look at the use of groundwater around the world, estimating the point at which it becomes unsustainable. The news is dire: in many places, we're already there, and for many more, the limit will be hit within the next thirty years.
    A delicate balance

    Groundwater "is the world's largest freshwater resource," write hydrologist Inge de Graaf and her colleagues. It's used heavily in agriculture, which means it's important for food security, and it plays a particularly crucial role for people in arid areas or during droughts.

    People lean on it so heavily that we're pumping it out of the ground faster than it can be replenished. As groundwater levels drop, so does the amount of water that naturally leaves the ground, flowing into the rivers, lakes, and wetlands that make up freshwater ecosystems.

    The flow from groundwater into streams can even stop completely, or reverse direction; the land can draw in water from above ground when the groundwater resources are depleted. The result, write de Graaf and her team, "is a slow dessication of the landscape." Because this dessication tracks rainfall—it's worse during droughts, because that's when people are leaning on groundwater the most—it's pretty much invisible. And just the tiniest decrease in groundwater level can have a substantial change on streamflow, so the situation is delicate.

    Read the rest:
    https://arstechnica.com/science/2019...er-ecosystems/
    Vacuum Technology:
    CRUD = Contamination Resulting in Undesirable Deposits.
    CRAPP = Contamination Resulting in Additional Partial Pressure.

    Change your vacuum pump oil now.

    Test. Testing, 1,2,3.

  2. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Southeastern Pa
    Posts
    31,712
    Post Likes
    About the author:

    "Cathleen is Ars Technica's contributing science reporter. She has a Master's degree in evolutionary linguistics from the University of Edinburgh, and her interests lie at the intersection of cognitive science, human evolution, and linguistics. Thinking constantly about the evolution of language has caused her to forget how to look at humans as anything other than another species of ape. Originally from South Africa, she now lives in Scotland, where she occasionally remembers to turn off the computer and go for a run."

    There is too much lack of specificity about who has studied water levels, and where, and more importantly, in order to support which agenda?

    Since she can no longer see God;s creation as anything other than another species of ape, she can only trust in herself, which is foolish indeed. Romans, 1:22.

    Cathleen is not a geological scientist, and I know of no such scientist that has identified this ground water issue as a trend. In the article, the assumptions being made are guesses, and yes...they have folded in assumptions of drought based on you guessed it...global warming. No particular places are cited...BECAUSE IT HAS NOT HAPPENED.

    On the contrary, I support drilling wells for tribal peoples in Africa, and every time they sink a new well, it has abundant fresh water.

    By the way, Mars is getting warmer, too. Unfortunately, that does not fit the anti-capitalist agenda.

    So...who paid the people referenced in the article, and what do they believe?
    [Avatar photo from a Florida training accident. Everyone walked away.]
    2 Tim 3:16-17

    RSES CMS, HVAC Electrical Specialist
    Member, IAEI

    AOP Forum Rules:







  3. #29
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Atlanta area
    Posts
    6,637
    Post Likes
    Thread Starter
    Quote Originally Posted by timebuilder View Post
    About the author:

    "Cathleen is Ars Technica's contributing science reporter. She has a Master's degree in evolutionary linguistics from the University of Edinburgh, and her interests lie at the intersection of cognitive science, human evolution, and linguistics. Thinking constantly about the evolution of language has caused her to forget how to look at humans as anything other than another species of ape. Originally from South Africa, she now lives in Scotland, where she occasionally remembers to turn off the computer and go for a run."

    There is too much lack of specificity about who has studied water levels, and where, and more importantly, in order to support which agenda?

    Since she can no longer see God;s creation as anything other than another species of ape, she can only trust in herself, which is foolish indeed. Romans, 1:22.

    Cathleen is not a geological scientist, and I know of no such scientist that has identified this ground water issue as a trend. In the article, the assumptions being made are guesses, and yes...they have folded in assumptions of drought based on you guessed it...global warming. No particular places are cited...BECAUSE IT HAS NOT HAPPENED.

    On the contrary, I support drilling wells for tribal peoples in Africa, and every time they sink a new well, it has abundant fresh water.

    By the way, Mars is getting warmer, too. Unfortunately, that does not fit the anti-capitalist agenda.

    So...who paid the people referenced in the article, and what do they believe?


    Did you see her sources?

    Americans are drilling deeper groundwater wells
    https://sustainabilitycommunity.natu...undwater-wells

    Deeper well drilling an unsustainable stopgap to groundwater depletion
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-019-0325-z
    Vacuum Technology:
    CRUD = Contamination Resulting in Undesirable Deposits.
    CRAPP = Contamination Resulting in Additional Partial Pressure.

    Change your vacuum pump oil now.

    Test. Testing, 1,2,3.

  4. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Southeastern Pa
    Posts
    31,712
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by Space Racer View Post
    Did you see her sources?

    Americans are drilling deeper groundwater wells
    https://sustainabilitycommunity.natu...undwater-wells

    Deeper well drilling an unsustainable stopgap to groundwater depletion
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-019-0325-z
    I have some time, so I will try and give you a complete take on this movement. Let's ignore, for the moment, that its main proponents are anti-capitalist communists.

    You can't just have "sources."

    You need to have persuasive and unbiased sources. The first link is from a page called "sustainability.nature.com"

    Okay, I'll ask....

    Does that sound like an unbiased, scientific source, one that is not beholden to research grants given by groups who desperately want to see a very particular outcome from a study?

    The problem with these sources and interest groups is:

    1) They are looking for a reinforcement of predetermined conclusions.

    2) Their "researchers" use computer projections designed to provide those outcomes. For example,. the article cited above includes what is only a guess about drought, based on a global warming that is also a guess.

    Guesses are geometric, not arithmetic. So, it is "guess times guess." That is a large enough variance to reduce the likelihood of truth (accuracy) to a very small percentage.

    3) The truth is that these adherents are really engaged in a secular religious belief that is no more credible than the "flying spaghetti monster," an invention intended to make people turn away from their Creator by using sarcasm.

    Real science requires data, and sometimes, that data may not exist. If it does not exist, then you are guessing, and telling people that your guesses are very trustworthy, when in fact, the fervency of belief in a man-made causal variable detracts from the guesses as credible projections of likely outcomes.

    How would we know what level of ground water is the right level? Is it the one we have now, a higher one, or even a lower one? Is it just the one we prefer to have, or the one we can use to further a social-political agenda?

    No one knows, and to state that someone does "know" is an untruth. Lie may be too strong a word.
    [Avatar photo from a Florida training accident. Everyone walked away.]
    2 Tim 3:16-17

    RSES CMS, HVAC Electrical Specialist
    Member, IAEI

    AOP Forum Rules:







  5. #31
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Atlanta area
    Posts
    6,637
    Post Likes
    Thread Starter
    No, this isn't about climate models or AGW or MMCC, per se. True, just about every
    environment-related article published these days gives lip service to these hypotheses,
    but deep-well drilling is a fact. People are drilling deeper and deeper to find water.
    Aquifers are drying up. Lands above aquifers are collapsing.

    Also, the first article in post #29 is just a general discussion. It is in reference to the
    information provided in the second article, which is a research paper.

    Also, post #27 is provided as further support of info provided in my previous posts,
    which support my hypothesis that symptoms of AGW or MMCC have much more to do
    with ground water use than they do with the amount of carbon dioxide in the air.
    Vacuum Technology:
    CRUD = Contamination Resulting in Undesirable Deposits.
    CRAPP = Contamination Resulting in Additional Partial Pressure.

    Change your vacuum pump oil now.

    Test. Testing, 1,2,3.

  6. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Richmond, working under tarps
    Posts
    949
    Post Likes
    first it was ..........ozone holes

    second was........global warming

    third is ...............climate change


    what will be the next moniker?

  7. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    5,224
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by indy2000 View Post
    first it was ..........ozone holes

    second was........global warming

    third is ...............climate change


    what will be the next moniker?
    You talk as if they are supposed to be the same thing. Many people seem to confuse the latter two. All three terms are fine to use depending on what you are talking about.

    The ozone hole refers to a man made ozone hole or holes high up in the atmosphere. Ozone is a protective layer high up in the atmosphere protecting the earth from harmful UV rays. The ozone hole actually does impact climate in the southern hemisphere by affecting the winds, It is not the cause for global warming.

    Global warming refers to the warming of the planet.

    Climate change is a broader term also referring to changing precipitation patterns and increasing the risk of severe storms and droughts.
    Signature removed Violated rule #15

  8. #34
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Richmond, working under tarps
    Posts
    949
    Post Likes
    you give 'MAN' too much credit

    I will tell you, NO 'MAN' has any idea what is really going on

    Wanna know why?

    there is no CONTROL to compare to.

    ozone holes have been present before man has existed

    global warming has been present before man has existed

    climate change has been present before man has existed, during, and probably will after man has departed

    I know exactly as much as you, and the rest of humanity regarding these phenomena, which is NOTHING

  9. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Southeastern Pa
    Posts
    31,712
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by Space Racer View Post
    No, this isn't about climate models or AGW or MMCC, per se. True, just about every
    environment-related article published these days gives lip service to these hypotheses,
    but deep-well drilling is a fact. People are drilling deeper and deeper to find water.
    Aquifers are drying up. Lands above aquifers are collapsing.

    Also, the first article in post #29 is just a general discussion. It is in reference to the
    information provided in the second article, which is a research paper.

    Also, post #27 is provided as further support of info provided in my previous posts,
    which support my hypothesis that symptoms of AGW or MMCC have much more to do
    with ground water use than they do with the amount of carbon dioxide in the air.
    I am suggesting that we don't know at which level ground water should be found. Have we had too high a level for the past 1,000 years?

    Some areas of the planet are indeed trending toward a more arid climate, and without replenishing rainfall, those areas should logically have a lower aquifer.

    The use of these studies is designed to suggest that we need to limit human population, which of course, leads to the question of who gets to decide which sectors of the population will be subject to limitation. American families have gone from three or four children to one or two, for a host of social and political reasons. Will be be expected to go to a one child family?

    The result of these ideas is always political, which places a taint on their intention.
    [Avatar photo from a Florida training accident. Everyone walked away.]
    2 Tim 3:16-17

    RSES CMS, HVAC Electrical Specialist
    Member, IAEI

    AOP Forum Rules:







  10. #36
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    5,224
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by timebuilder View Post
    By the way, Mars is getting warmer, too. Unfortunately, that does not fit the anti-capitalist agenda.
    Mars getting warmer and it is a problem for science believing people?

    In another post in this thread you said "Real science requires data, and sometimes, that data may not exist. If it does not exist, then you are guessing..."
    I would suggest you read and abide by your own words. While many conservatives we don't have enough data here on Earth to say that global warming is happening you are saying it is happening on Mars? Scientists say there is not enough data from Mars to make that determination. Plus Mars is affected much more from outside sources because of their atmosphere, lack of oceans and have very little planet thermal inertia. Their dust storms seem to have impact on their weather and its albedo which some are using to say it may be warming. Mars' orbit fluctuated more than 5 times that of Earth's and impacts readings. Bottom line is that anything you say about Mars does not change what scientists are saying about climate change here on Earth.
    Signature removed Violated rule #15

  11. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    1,602
    Post Likes
    We do have some pretty decent sea level records and they show sea level is increasing by 0.2" per 100 years. Now there is speculation that sea level increases are more because of the land masses shrinking/sinking. My guess a little of both. But you are correct you would not be able to tell sea level changes in one persons life let alone in 25 years

    Our drinking water (ground water) is not like coal or oil, it is not of a limited supply, ground water comes from the rivers, lakes, oceans infiltrating through the soils under them and go back into the aquafers they are pumped from. Many times the infiltration rate is slower than the rate we remove the water

    Personally I think the MMCC folks have it backward they believe CO2 increase then the temperature goes up. I believe it to be just the other way around with an increase in sea water temperature we release more CO2. Sea water by far contains more CO2 than anything else. CO2 is a good thing it makes plant grow bigger and stronger which creates more O2 and food from the photosynthesis process.

    The reasons why the earths temperature is slightly increasing are many I've heard some claim there are over 100 reasons why temperature changes, but it is all part of the normal cycle that we have no control over. Does man have some influence over the outcome, I would be a fool to say no, just because logic tells me this. We now have something 8 billion people on the planet and for the most part we are concentrated in various location not spread out evenly. So if you add several billion of anything to one place wouldn't you think something might change. You would have increases and decreases across the board. I now it's warmer in the city than in the country, I know there is more trash created in the city than in the country and on , and on

  12. #38
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Tx
    Posts
    1,329
    Post Likes
    Today per morning news the North East is going to break 300+ record low temps
    for this date. Global warming is a moody beach isn't she.
    On the mars thing, Astronomers have reported an average temp increase of One degree throughout our solar system.

  13. #39
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    5,224
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by Answer-Man View Post
    We do have some pretty decent sea level records and they show sea level is increasing by 0.2" per 100 years. Now there is speculation that sea level increases are more because of the land masses shrinking/sinking. My guess a little of both. But you are correct you would not be able to tell sea level changes in one persons life let alone in 25 years

    Our drinking water (ground water) is not like coal or oil, it is not of a limited supply, ground water comes from the rivers, lakes, oceans infiltrating through the soils under them and go back into the aquafers they are pumped from. Many times the infiltration rate is slower than the rate we remove the water

    Personally I think the MMCC folks have it backward they believe CO2 increase then the temperature goes up. I believe it to be just the other way around with an increase in sea water temperature we release more CO2. Sea water by far contains more CO2 than anything else. CO2 is a good thing it makes plant grow bigger and stronger which creates more O2 and food from the photosynthesis process.

    The reasons why the earths temperature is slightly increasing are many I've heard some claim there are over 100 reasons why temperature changes, but it is all part of the normal cycle that we have no control over. Does man have some influence over the outcome, I would be a fool to say no, just because logic tells me this. We now have something 8 billion people on the planet and for the most part we are concentrated in various location not spread out evenly. So if you add several billion of anything to one place wouldn't you think something might change. You would have increases and decreases across the board. I now it's warmer in the city than in the country, I know there is more trash created in the city than in the country and on , and on
    Too much CO2 is not a good thing for plants or crop yields. That is a dangerous simplification about CO2.

    Increasing CO2 is both a cause and effect of global warming. There have been warming periods that started because of an orbital shift but even with that CO2 was responsible for 90% of the warming in those periods. We are clearly in a period where CO2 and other greenhouse gases are the cause. Again a simplistic view. Science is more than simple logic and common sense. If that was all there was to it we wouldn't have advanced past Aristotle.

    Your views on groundwater are as simplistic as the rest above and does not mention the problems associated with it. I will address that with more details.
    Signature removed Violated rule #15

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •