Destruction of mangrove forests in Burma left coastal areas exposed to the devastating force of the weekend's cyclone, a top politician suggests.
ASEAN secretary-general Surin Pitsuwan said coastal developments had resulted in mangroves, which act as a natural defence against storms, being lost.
BBC News website: Mangrove loss 'left Burma exposed'
Former vice president tells NPR's 'Fresh Air' cyclone is example of 'consequences that scientists have long predicted might be associated with continued global warming.'
Business and Media Institute: Al Gore Calls Myanmar Cyclone a 'Consequence' of Global Warming
Sheesh, you people are missing the lesson for this entirely.
The real lesson that should be taken from each of these cyclone disasters is that the unconstrained and careless conversion of natural ecosystems to economic uses (such as in this case the clearance of mangroves for shrimp and fish farming) eliminates or compromises the ecological services that they provide, and this can have very unpleasant consequences.
In this case the storm buffer that the mangroves previously provided was not valued appropriately because it was something that everyone got for free, and the potential or likely negative consequences were some theoretical future threat. On the other hand the profit to be made by clearing the mangroves could be pocketed by individuals, and declining natural capital could (in the short term) be ignored by those making the profits.
Many of these profiteers (the currupt dictatorship and army) did not have to worry about potential negative consequences because they are insulated from them by their wealth and privilege.
The local farmers were probably willing to ignore future consequences because they were focussed on the immediate benefits to themselves and their families, and preferred not to recognize the inconvenient truth about the longer term implications of their mangrove clearance practices.
You can imagine the junta, their cronies and their think-tanks treating with disdain the locals with environmental concerns- "your alarmist propaganda is a western plot to undermine the Burmese economy", "you are people hating doom-sayers who want to rob the people of their prosperity", "you have no proof that the mangroves are really declining or that they are important anyway", "your predictions are just theories", "the system is too complex for you to be able to create useful models predicting what might happen", "the changes to tidal amplitudes that you are reporting are just part of a natural cycle, "compared to the king tide of 1998 the trend in tidal amplitude is negative", "it's caused by the sun", blah blah blah.
"SJT, when Gore promotes your argument it is reasonable to lump you all together.
I'm pleased you reject him as an embarrassment.
You may even yet replace him with polite scepticism."
No, Gore is Gore, and he is in the same position as me, a layman trying to interpret the science. But he doesn't speak for me, I leave that to the scientists.
I don't reject him, either, since he is just what he is, an interested layman. As that court case demonstrated, he made a few mistakes, but the summary concluded he was mostly correct, out of about a hundred claims he makes, only nine are open to dispute.
I don't accept what Gore says just because he is Gore, and I haven't seen his film because there are better sources of information out there.
Anyway - LOL and after that unfortunate diversion. Let's look at the imputed cloudiness from rainfall intensity obscuring any SST measurements.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NewImages/images.php3?img_id=18021
Luke,
You forgot bull in your moniker.
Sunset is Tommy Come Lately hey
"What a bunch of whining hypocritical toads. You never whinged when Denialist Scum started it did you. No problem when Motty did it."
Look fella.I was commenting on what Paul wrote.
That was all.
It is interesting that by your rant.That Paul was correct.
You could have used the same name with ANY computer.You have no valid excuse.
Buy hey your new name is more appropriate.Now I can call you a creep and there is nothing you can do about it.It certaintly will not be considered namecalling since that IS your name!
LOL.
Oh look
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/sstday/navy-anom-b-20080427.gif
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/sstday/navy-anom-b-20080430.gif
Moves about a bit hey....
Yea - got the transcribed dates wrong way around
0205 should have been 0502
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/sstday/navy-anom-b-20080502.gif
and the energy would be removed causing cooling along the track e.g
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/sstday/navy-anom-b-20080504.gif
Bet you're now sorry you went to daily data eh? 🙂
My friends say that too.
That's better back on topic now. The daily SST info is worth diddly squat. Clouds! Warm seas set up gradients - significant in this case - and other weather phenomena - ridging and troughs noted in the most excellent (as usual) Wiki-better-and-more uptodate-than-Britannica article. Look at the track. Get real Mark - it's pretty basic !!
Lucy,
You're pathetic! What's your point?! Looking at your own info:
- So what if there were warmer areas at the north end of the Bay of Bengal - that was nowhere near the storm track!
- What's with the Feb. 5th data? Your own wikipravda reference states a late April genesis date. Besides, even the Feb. data shows no warming anomaly in the track area.
Stop wasting our time!
What a bunch of whining hypocritical toads. You never whinged when Denialist Scum started it did you. No problem when Motty did it.
In any case my email that Paul sees is the same. So it's pretty obvious to him isn't it. The tone is the same. There is no attempt to sock puppetry.
And I had (Luke) after AC for some time. But maybe you can't read.
Given I use multiple computers I hadn't changed all ID saves.
Are you guys that sour and bereft of any humour. In any case from hereon pls refer to me as "Lucy". I've decided to become a girl.
And are you that thick that it wasn't obvious.
BTW any science comment - of course not. Just the usual denialist attempts to silence dissent. Time for an Al Gore or Hansen rant isn't it guys? Surely.
You hypocrites.