
Cold War-Era Spy Satellite Images Reveal Possible Effects of Climate Change - privong
https://www.news.virginia.edu/content/cold-war-era-spy-satellite-images-reveal-possible-effects-climate-change
======
nonbel
Isn't this directly measuring "climate change" rather than "effects of climate
change"?

------
frogpelt
Is a warmer planet a bad planet? Increased vegetation is good right?

Sure, it's bad for coastal cities but those are man-made intrusions upon
nature.

~~~
jkn
If you consider Nature in general, nothing is good or bad. Colder is better
for organisms that prefer cold, warmer for those that prefer warm. No life at
all might be best for the geological (or should I say areological) wonders on
Mars.

Ethically speaking, I think most climate change "alarmists" (what is the
equivalent word with positive connotation?) are either worried for the species
that will go extinct, or the poorer humans that will suffer the most from it.

~~~
whytaka
I think people are more worried about irregularities in the weather system
we've come to rely upon. Our agriculture depends on it.

------
jbmorgado
I totally regard global warming and that it is caused by man as true from
evidence presented by scientific research.

But trying to give _single images_ as proof is actually a disservice to the
all thing. It just helps science deniers to actually nitpick their way out of
this.

EDIT: Grammar in _single images_.

~~~
M_Grey
It's really hard to see how it matters at this point. Just as the debate is
really getting started we've ensured another 4+ years of not only stasis, but
reversal. This, when we already have permafrost melting and releasing methane,
and a system with 20+ year delays on inputs. The deniers have "won" in a
broadly suicidal sense, barring some kind of technological or literal miracle.

~~~
thinkmilitant
Take heart, the world is larger than America and much of the good we've
already done will continue to ripple forward.

Adopting the attitude that we've already lost gives a sense of closure to a
topic that still requires effort and attention.

~~~
mirimir
For sure, "never say die" is great advice, and all.

But arguably, it really is too late, to avoid major disruptions for human
civilization. So hey, now we can all agree that anthropogenic warming is
happening. And dispute about how bad it will be. What we'll find, I suspect,
is that exponentials are full of surprises.

------
unit91
TL;DR: A couple dudes at UVA want grant money after looking at a some pictures
from 1966.

 _“We’re starting to find a browning of the tundra in the last few years,”
[Epstein] said. “The progression of growth may be reversing. We’re not sure
yet why, but it’s clear that vegetation dynamics are more complex across
tundra than previously thought. We still have a lot of work to do to
understand Arctic changes and how this affects and is affected by changes to
the global climate.”_

Also, there's this strange statement:

 _As the shrubbery increases its distribution, it creates its own warming
effect by absorbing heat, rather than reflecting heat as snow does, leading to
additional warming and perpetuating the effect._

What am I supposed to take away from this? Start a campaign for tundra
deforestation? That can't be right. It must be that more research is needed.

ETA:

Well, from the replies, it looks like I communicated my point poorly. I wasn't
arguing the merits of the case for (or against) AGW, rather I was saying these
researchers are _really_ stretching it, it my opinion. They don't have much
more (at least as reported here) than "look, these pictures show very
different vegetation patterns", and from there we (they) need more research
(dollars). I think this is just an academic form of a submarine article: VERY
preliminary speculation reported as news by a university with a vested
interest in securing funding.

~~~
nobodyorother
> What am I supposed to take away from this? Start a campaign for tundra
> deforestation?

They're just calling out the positive feedback loop where "things that aren't
white like snow absorb more heat than white snow would."

The obvious solution is to cover the entire world in powdered soap or talcum
powder, since we're pretty much out of snow and glaciers.

~~~
24gttghh
Would something reflective on the Earth's surface even help cool the planet
when the reflected energy just gets trapped anyways by CO2 in the atmosphere?
I can understand localized albedo effects, but not their overall effect on
climate.

~~~
Jtsummers
All that heat wouldn't be trapped by CO2. You'd also experience reduced energy
load in the developed world, as buildings with black roofs are objectively
_harder_ to keep cool than those with white roofs. Which would have a positive
impact on CO2 levels (positive from our perspective, meaning reduced).

