Barafu la Mlima Kilimanjaro lakauka, mlima mweupeee

[Iselamagazi]

Haya mzizimkavu umesoma
mwenyewe, 90% ya waliopost wanakupinga, tena wao wanaishi karibu na
mlima au wameona hivi karibuni.. we umekaa chumbani na laptop unadownload picha halafu unalazimisha watu waikubali, tena wanaojua
ukweli.. Bora umekimbia jukwaa!

My advice tena: acha tabia ya kupakua picha kwenye mitandao mbalimbali
na kuzibandika hapa kwa GREAT THINKERS. Mbaya zaidi unapakua picha
halafu unajifanya wewe ndo umepiga..!! Au unaweka picha za assets
mbalimbali unatuambia za kwako uko 'ulaya'..

This is too childish broo..!!

Tho its ur style, no one denies, but u put the true source..

Hapa hata ukijisifia vipi, but ni anonymous sio verified, so haitasaidia
kitu!!

Badilika mkuu.. Au la bandika thread zako kwenye 'chit chat'

Wadau kama namzungumza vibaya huyu jamaa, someni thread zake za nyuma!

MWISHO: LETS TAKE COLLECTIVE RESPONSBILITIES TO PRESERVE AND PROTECT OUR
NATURAL RESOURCES, FOR THE BENEFIT OF CURRENT AND FUTURE
CREATURES!

Te te te! I can't stop laughing!
Hapo kwenye red.

 

[Gwangambo]

Taswira ya Mlima Kilimanjaro inavyoonekana kwa sasa baada ya kuyeyuka Barafu yote, ikiwa imebakia sehemu kidogo tu juu ya Kilele cha Mlima huo, ni kutokana na Mabadiliko ya Tabianchi na uhalibifu wa Mazingira uliokithiri

Mkuu Mzizi Mkavu, mimi naona baada ya barafu kutoka umekuwa mweusiiii, sio mweupeeee!!!!!!

 

[Money Stunna]

Haya mzizimkavu umesoma mwenyewe, 90% ya waliopost wanakupinga, tena wao wanaishi karibu na mlima au wameona hivi karibuni.. we umekaa chumbani na laptop unadownload picha halafu unalazimisha watu waikubali, tena wanaojua ukweli.. Bora umekimbia jukwaa!

My advice tena: acha tabia ya kupakua picha kwenye mitandao mbalimbali na kuzibandika hapa kwa GREAT THINKERS. Mbaya zaidi unapakua picha halafu unajifanya wewe ndo umepiga..!! Au unaweka picha za assets mbalimbali unatuambia za kwako uko 'ulaya'..

This is too childish broo..!!

Tho its ur style, no one denies, but u put the true source..

Hapa hata ukijisifia vipi, but ni anonymous sio verified, so haitasaidia kitu!!

Badilika mkuu.. Au la bandika thread zako kwenye 'chit chat'

Wadau kama namzungumza vibaya huyu jamaa, someni thread zake za nyuma!

MWISHO: LETS TAKE COLLECTIVE RESPONSBILITIES TO PRESERVE AND PROTECT OUR NATURAL RESOURCES, FOR THE BENEFIT OF CURRENT AND FUTURE CREATURES!

ujumbe umemfikia popote alipo

 

[Ubumuntu]

Barafu ikikauka maana yake mito inayopata maji kutokana na barafu ya mlima nayo itakauka.

Siyo lazima iwe hivyo.......

Kwani kwa ikolojia ya Mlima KLM, barafu hiyo haina uhusiano wa moja kwa moja na mito.....

Mito iliyo katika ikolojia hiyo, inategemea sana uwepo wa misitu ya kanda ya juu (montane forest) katika mlima....

Misitu hiyo utengeneza kitu kinachoitwa 'cloud forest', ambayo ndiyo chanzo kikuu cha maji katika mito iliyomo katika ikolojia ya Mlima KLM.....

Mcheki mtafiti mmoja aitwaye Andreas Hemp, ambaye amefanya sana tafiti katika hilo pale Mlima KLM....

 

[Ubumuntu]

barafu kukauka maana yake mito inakuwa na maji mengi...

Siyo kweli. Kwani maji kwenye mito iliyopo katika ikolojia ya mlima kwa kiwango kikubwa yanategemea uwepo wa misitu ya ukanda wa juu katika mlima. Misitu hiyo ndiyo utengeneza upatikanaji wa maji katika ikolojia ya mlima.

Ila ni ukweli husiopingika kwamba ongezeko la joto duniani, kumepelekea ongezeko la mioto ya asili katika misitu hiyo, hivyo kupelekea kupungua kwa kiwango kikubwa uzalishaji wa maji usababishwao na misitu hiyo.

By the way huu mlima huwa unakuwa na barafu nyingi na kidogo pia kutegemea na msimu. Juzi juzi tu nimeuopiga picha ukiwa na barafu tele hadi nikashangaa!

Tafiti iliyofanywa na Prof. Lonnie Thompson na wenzake (kutoka Ohio State University) kuanzia mwaka 2000 hadi 2002 ulidhiirisha kwamba kati ya mwaka 1912 hadi 2000, eneo lililo na barafu katika Mlima KLM limepungua kwa asilimia 80 kutoka 12 km[SUP]2[/SUP] hadi 2.6 km[SUP]2

Hivyo kuhusu kupungua kwa eneo lenye barafu hapo mlimani, hilo siyo mjadala tena. [/SUP]

 

[Kiranga]

barafu kukauka maana yake mito inakuwa na maji mengi... By the way huu mlima huwa unakuwa na barafu nyingi na kidogo pia kutegemea na msimu. Juzi juzi tu nimeuopiga picha ukiwa na barafu tele hadi nikashangaa!

Tofautisha kuyeyuka na kukauka. Kuyeyuka maana yake barafu inageuka kuwa maji, maji yanatiririka kwenda mitoni. Kuyeyuka kunahitajika ili mito ipate maji.Kuyeyuka huku si lazima kuwe kukauka na maana yake hili ni kwamba kuna barafu nyingine inayobaki na kujijenga ili kuyeyuka zaidi katika mzunguko huo.

Kukauka ni kutoweka, maana yake barafu inayeyuka bila ya kuongezeka mpaka inaisha kabisa.

Ni wazi barafu ikikauka na hivyo kwisha, mito inayopata maji kutoka hiyo barafu itakauka.

Tunaweza kujadiliana kuhusu nini kinasababisha barafu kuelekea kukauka, au kama inakauka, lakini ikikauka mito inayotegemea maji yanayotokana na barafu hii kuyeyuka itakosa maji.

 

[Kiranga]

Siyo lazima iwe hivyo.......

Kwani kwa ikolojia ya Mlima KLM, barafu hiyo haina uhusiano wa moja kwa moja na mito.....

Mito iliyo katika ikolojia hiyo, inategemea sana uwepo wa misitu ya kanda ya juu (montane forest) katika mlima....

Misitu hiyo utengeneza kitu kinachoitwa 'cloud forest', ambayo ndiyo chanzo kikuu cha maji katika mito iliyomo katika ikolojia ya Mlima KLM.....

Mcheki mtafiti mmoja aitwaye Andreas Hemp, ambaye amefanya sana tafiti katika hilo pale Mlima KLM....

Unaongelea kitu kingine tofauti.

Unaongelea mito inayotegemea misitu, wakati mimi naongelea mito inayotegemea barafu.

Halafu hata hiyo misitu nayo inategemea mvua na unyevunyevu ambao unastawishwa na kuyeyuka kwa barafu hiyo.

Barafu ikikauka, kutapungua sana unyevunyevu unaotokana na barafu kuyeyuka, na hata hiyo misitu itapungua katika "a vicious cycle of lack of hydration".

Misitu ikipungua kutokana na barafu kupungua hata hiyo mito inayotegemea "cloud forest" itapungua na hata kutoweka.

You cannot take away an ecologically significant factor such as the snowcap of Kilimanjaro and expect the ecosystem to sustain itself without a tailspinning impact.

 

[LexAid]

Acha ubishi nenda mwenyewe Kilimanjaro ukajionee Usilete Ubishi wa Simba na Yanga hapa.

Hii ni upande wa Kenya mkuu!

 

[chilubi]

Mimi nataka niende kuupanda, naombeni mnijuze cost ya kupanda huu mlima kwa locals.

 

[Ubumuntu]

Unaongelea kitu kingine tofauti.

Unaongelea mito inayotegemea misitu, wakati mimi naongelea mito inayotegemea barafu.

Hapa sote tunaongelea suala moja, ila katika engo tofauti. Wewe unaongea kwamba kuyeyuka kwa barafu mlimani kunapelekea athari katika upatikanaji wa maji.

Mimi nikakwambia kwamba tafiti zimeshaonyesha kuwa barafu katika mlima huo hazina mchango mkubwa katika upatikanaji wa maji katika ikolojia ya mlima. Misitu katika ukanda wa juu inayotengeneza 'cloud forest' ndiyo inachangia kwa kiwango kikubwa upatikanaji wa maji katika ikolojia hiyo.

Hivyo tafiti zimejumuisha kwamba uyeyukaji wa barafu katika Mlima KLM hauna madhara katika mfumo wa maji kama ilivyo kwa uharibifu wa misitu hiyo ya kanda za juu, utokanao na ongezeko la mioto ya asili, itokanayo na kuongezeka kwa maeneo meusi katika milima, kutokanako na kuyeyuka kwa barafu iliyo nyeupe na yenye tabia ya kuakisi miale ya jua tofauti na eneo nyeusi.

Halafu hata hiyo misitu nayo inategemea mvua na unyevunyevu ambao unastawishwa na kuyeyuka kwa barafu hiyo.

Tafiti zimeonyesha kwamba, kuyeyuka kwa barafu pale mlimani kwa kiwango kikubwa hakupelekei barafu hiyo kwenda kwenye hali ya ukimiminika, ila kunaenda katika hali ya gesi. Hivyo sentensi yako hapo juu haileti maana yoyote.

Ila ni ukweli uliopatikana kwamba kuyeyuka kwa barafu hiyo na kwenda kwenye hali ya gesi, kumepelekea maeneo meusi ya mlima kuonekana na hivyo kumeza zaidi miale ya juu badala ya kuakisi kama ilivyo tabia ya theluji yenye rangi nyeupe. Hali hii imeathiri sana misitu ya ukanda wa juu hapo mlimani.

Chifu, kwa mtazamo wako huo, na wewe ni kati ya wale wanaamini kwamba kuyeyuka kwa glaciers kule Arctic kunapelekea ongezeko la maji katika bahari?

Barafu ikikauka, kutapungua sana unyevunyevu unaotokana na barafu kuyeyuka, na hata hiyo misitu itapungua katika "a vicious cycle of lack of hydration".

Tukiongelea suala la Mlima KLM, misitu inapungua kutokana na ongezeko la mioto ya asili isababishwayo na ongezeko la joto katika ikolojia ya mlima kwa sababu ya ongezeko la maeneo meusi yenye kumeza miale ya jua badala ya kuakisi.

You cannot take away an ecologically significant factor such as the snowcap of Kilimanjaro and expect the ecosystem to sustain itself without a tailspinning impact.

Yes.

But, when you say something like this, "Barafu ikikauka maana yake mito inayopata maji kutokana na barafu ya mlima nayo itakauka", you shoot yourself on the foot; ecause, of what I have explained previously.

However, if you are talking about impacts on the broader mountain's ecosystem, then, I definitely agree.

 

[Inside10]

Hebu tembelea hapa bonyeza Barafu la Mlima Kilimanjaro lakauka Mlima mweupeee. ~ LUCY PATRICK WATZ

sasa wewe hivyo viblog ndio reliable source!?
hebu tuulize tuliohapa kwenyewe.. to be honest mlima haujafikia hali hiyo

 

[Inside10]

Piga picha uweke hapa tuone si kusema pasipo kuwa na ushahidi wowote ule.

Kwahio wewe hii picha uliipiga?

 

[Inside10]

cc FaizaFoxy

 

[Kiranga]

Hapa sote tunaongelea suala moja, ila katika engo tofauti. Wewe unaongea kwamba kuyeyuka kwa barafu mlimani kunapelekea athari katika upatikanaji wa maji.

Mimi nikakwambia kwamba tafiti zimeshaonyesha kuwa barafu katika mlima huo hazina mchango mkubwa katika upatikanaji wa maji katika ikolojia ya mlima. Misitu katika ukanda wa juu inayotengeneza 'cloud forest' ndiyo inachangia kwa kiwango kikubwa upatikanaji wa maji katika ikolojia hiyo.

Hivyo tafiti zimejumuisha kwamba uyeyukaji wa barafu katika Mlima KLM hauna madhara katika mfumo wa maji kama ilivyo kwa uharibifu wa misitu hiyo ya kanda za juu, utokanao na ongezeko la mioto ya asili, itokanayo na kuongezeka kwa maeneo meusi katika milima, kutokanako na kuyeyuka kwa barafu iliyo nyeupe na yenye tabia ya kuakisi miale ya jua tofauti na eneo nyeusi.



Tafiti zimeonyesha kwamba, kuyeyuka kwa barafu pale mlimani kwa kiwango kikubwa hakupelekei barafu hiyo kwenda kwenye hali ya ukimiminika, ila kunaenda katika hali ya gesi. Hivyo sentensi yako hapo juu haileti maana yoyote.

Ila ni ukweli uliopatikana kwamba kuyeyuka kwa barafu hiyo na kwenda kwenye hali ya gesi, kumepelekea maeneo meusi ya mlima kuonekana na hivyo kumeza zaidi miale ya juu badala ya kuakisi kama ilivyo tabia ya theluji yenye rangi nyeupe. Hali hii imeathiri sana misitu ya ukanda wa juu hapo mlimani.

Chifu, kwa mtazamo wako huo, na wewe ni kati ya wale wanaamini kwamba kuyeyuka kwa glaciers kule Arctic kunapelekea ongezeko la maji katika bahari?



Tukiongelea suala la Mlima KLM, misitu inapungua kutokana na ongezeko la mioto ya asili isababishwayo na ongezeko la joto katika ikolojia ya mlima kwa sababu ya ongezeko la maeneo meusi yenye kumeza miale ya jua badala ya kuakisi.



Yes.

But, when you say something like this, "Barafu ikikauka maana yake mito inayopata maji kutokana na barafu ya mlima nayo itakauka", you shoot yourself on the foot; ecause, of what I have explained previously.

However, if you are talking about impacts on the broader mountain's ecosystem, then, I definitely agree.

Basically unacho argue hapa ni kwamba hakuna mto unaopata maji yake kutokana na theluji ya mlima Kilimanjaro.

Which is absurd however you spin it. Since this is a worldwide phenomenon that happens even in temperate climes, and even if this effect may not be as pronounced in tropical climes, due to sublimation taking primacy over melting, one would expect an acknowledgement of this modest contribution since in ecology it is not unheard of to have a tailspinning "butterfly effect".

You are tossing aside the entire notion.

http://www.ce.utexas.edu/prof/mckinney/ce397/Topics/Glaciers/Glaciers_2010.pdf

The Shrinking Glaciers of Kilimanjaro: Can Global Warming Be Blamed? » American Scientist

Whether the ice is melting or sublimating is a technical distinction without a difference in the end results, since the end result is removal of H20 from the immediate hydrology of the mountain.

As for glaciers melting causing sea levels to rise, the density of ice about is 0.9167 g/cm3 while that of water is about 1g/ cm3. That means the same cm3 would contain one gram of water as it would 0.9167 grams of ice. You can pack more H2O matter in a cm3 in the form of ice than you can pack in the form of water. That means if you have a cup filled with ice to the brim, and you let it melt into water, the cup will overflow, because there will be an increase of matter in volume by a factor of 0.0833 for every cm3.


This is rather elementary, unless you have another expert study to counter this basic fact with another distinction without a difference.

Who is shooting himself in the foot now?

Are you denying basic physics?

Melting ice a 'sleeping giant' that will push sea levels higher, scientist says

John Roach NBC News

• Facebook Share on Facebook
• Twitter
• LinkedIn
• GooglePlus
• Email

Dec. 13, 2013 at 3:18 PM ET


Melting ice a 'sleeping giant' that will push sea levels higher, scientist says - NBC News.com

By the time today's preschoolers are babysitting their grandkids, global sea levels are likely to be pushing 2 feet higher than they are now and on the way to topping 8 feet above current levels by the year 2200, according to a new study.
The finding stems from geologic evidence that allowed scientists to tease apart a natural background pattern of how fast and how high sea levels rose as ice ages came and went over the past 2 million years.

Today's pace of sea level rise is about twice as fast compared to historical standards, the team concluded. Going forward, seas will be pushed higher as rising temperatures force the great ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica to disintegrate, glaciers around the world to retreat toward mountaintops, and warming ocean waters to expand, the study notes.

"We have awoken a sleeping giant," Eelco Rohling, a climate scientist at the Australian National University in Canberra, told NBC News in an email. "He is now here to stay." To stand a chance at halting the rise and preserving today's coastal cities, he added, "We must virtually immediately take measures of carbon reduction."

Sleeping giant
The sleeping giant is the loss of ice in Greenland and Antarctica, a process that is slow to start and slow to stop. "We cannot expect that, once moving, big ice masses will screech to a halt," he explained. "So we better get used to sea level rising, and rising increasingly quickly."

Endelea hapa

Melting ice a 'sleeping giant' that will push sea levels higher, scientist says - NBC News.com

 

[Luluka]

Mzizi Mkavu kwa hili umepotoka..mlima bado upo vizuri na barafu kwa sasa inaongezeka..miaka ya hapo nyuma barafu ilipungua kutokana na uharibifu wa mazingira.Ila kwa sasa waliouona mlima siku za karibuni watakubaliana na mimi kuwa picha yako haina uhalisia kabisa.

 

[Remsi]

Kuna picha nilikua najaribu kuZipachika hapa ila hazikubali, moja nilipiga wiki ilopita nikiwa west kilimanjaro na ingine nimepiga leo asubuhi. Mlima una barafu ya kutosha hata kama imepungua ila si kiasi kama ilivyooneshwa katika picha.

 

[mzaziaged]

hiyo imekaa kaa kama photoshop

Atakauka yeye barafu itadumu,, ulishafika hata

 

[Ubumuntu]

Basically unacho argue hapa ni kwamba hakuna mto unaopata maji yake kutokana na theluji ya mlima Kilimanjaro.

Hapo unanilisha maneno chifu.

Ninachokisema (kwa msaada wa tafiti zilizofanyika Mlima KLM), ni kwamba, mchango wa theluji katika mfumo wa maji kwenye hiyo ikolojia ni 'almost scientifically insignificant'. Sababu zilizotolewa nimeshakwambia: theluji kubwa uisha kwa kwenda kwenye hali ya ugesi na ile ya mchango wa 'cloud forest' kutoka kwenye montane forest zone.

Mimi hadi nimekutajia mtu mwenye 'authority' katika hilo, bwana Andreas Hemp.

Sasa kama wewe una ushahidi wa mchango wa theluji katika mito, basi onyesha hapa.

Since this is a worldwide phenomenon that happens even in temperate climes, and even if this effect may not be as pronounced in tropical climes, due to sublimation taking primacy over melting, one would expect an acknowledgement of this modest contribution since in ecology it is not unheard of to have a tailspinning "butterfly effect".

If it's about acknowledging such kind of modest contribution, there is no problem with me and the scientific world.

My only problem is with this kind of statement, "Barafu ikikauka maana yake mito inayopata maji kutokana na barafu ya mlima nayo itakauka", which is completely ridiculous in the context of melting glaciers in Mt. KLM.

You are tossing aside the entire notion.

http://www.ce.utexas.edu/prof/mckinney/ce397/Topics/Glaciers/Glaciers_2010.pdf

The Shrinking Glaciers of Kilimanjaro: Can Global Warming Be Blamed? » American Scientist

Whether the ice is melting or sublimating is a technical distinction without a difference in the end results, since the end result is removal of H20 from the immediate hydrology of the mountain.

As for glaciers melting causing sea levels to rise, the density of ice about is 0.9167 g/cm3 while that of water is about 1g/ cm3. That means the same cm3 would contain one gram of water as it would 0.9167 grams of ice. You can pack more H2O matter in a cm3 in the form of ice than you can pack in the form of water. That means if you have a cup filled with ice to the brim, and you let it melt into water, the cup will overflow, because there will be an increase of matter in volume by a factor of 0.0833 for every cm3.


This is rather elementary, unless you have another expert study to counter this basic fact with another distinction without a difference.

Who is shooting himself in the foot now?

Ok. Here is the counter argument.

The forests of Kilimanjaro above 1300m a.s.l. receive nearly 1600 million cubic meters water annually, 95% by rainfall and ca. 5% by fog interception. About 500 million cubic meters of water (31%) percolate into the groundwater or into streams. If one assumes that fog precipitation is close to zero once the forest is destroyed, the loss of 150km2 of subalpine forests since 1976 corresponds to an estimated loss of 20 million cubic meters of fogwater deposition per year. This is more than a quarter of the estimated annual fogwater yield of the whole forest belt or equivalent to the annual water demand of the 1 million inhabitants on Kilimanjaro (according to numbers given by United Republic of Tanzania and CES, 2002). In contrast, the average annual water output of the 2.6km2 of glaciers can be estimated at only 1 million cubic meters (5%).

Cloud forests are of great importance for watersheds in East Africa (Pocs, 1976). In addition to the function of filtering and storing water, the upper montane and subalpine cloud forests have a high potential of collecting cloud water (cp. e.g. Cavelier & Goldstein, 1989; Juvik & Nullet, 1993; Cavelier et al., 1996; Bruijnzeel, 2001). Fog interception increases with altitude, and so does its contribution to water yielding. Thus, the loss of cloud forests because of climate-induced fires as well as the loss of montane forest because of clearing causes a considerable reduction and enhanced variability of water yields of the Kilimanjaro catchments, affecting over 1 million people living on the mountain, by far exceeding the hydrological consequences of the loss of the glaciers.

Compared with these landscape changes, the hydrological significance of the melting of the glaciers is almost negligible. However, the disappearance of the glaciers is an alarming indicator of the substantial changes in the Kilimanjaro environment. At current rates of incidence, fires will have made most of Kilimanjaro's high-altitude forests extinct within the next few years, and with this, the mountain will have lost its most effective water source in the fog interception
zone. With its glaciers, Kilimanjaro will lose a part of its beauty and an important archive of paleoclimatic records (Thompson, 2000); with its forests, it loses its major ecosystem service to a water-demanding society.

Source: Hemp, 2005. Climate change-driven forest fires marginalize the impact of ice cap wasting on Kilimanjaro. Global Change Biology 11: 1013-1023.

Are you denying basic physics?

Melting ice a 'sleeping giant' that will push sea levels higher, scientist says

John Roach NBC News

• Facebook Share on Facebook
• Twitter
• LinkedIn
• GooglePlus
• Email

Dec. 13, 2013 at 3:18 PM ET


Melting ice a 'sleeping giant' that will push sea levels higher, scientist says - NBC News.com

Endelea hapa

Melting ice a 'sleeping giant' that will push sea levels higher, scientist says - NBC News.com

That has been highly politicised, neglecting scientific facts about melting ice at the Arctic/Greenland and sea level rising.

What I am trying to say is, it is very true that melting ice does lead to sea level rising, but when compared to thermal expansion of ocean water as a result of increased global temperature, its contribution isn't significant.

Check out this:

One effect of global warming that everyone has heard about is a rise in sea levels. About half of this rise is due to thermal expansion: Ocean temperatures are rising, and as water warms it expands. Put a nearly full cup of water in a microwave and heat it, and the water will spill over the cup.........and of course the actual sea level would be much higher due to thermal expansion of the world's oceans as they warm.

Source: Thompson, L. 2010. Climate change: The evidence and our options. The Behavior Analyst 33(2): 153-170.

 

[Window7]

www.sufianmafoto.com

 

[FaizaFoxy]

@MziziMkavu, soma kichwa cha habari yako. Muunguja gani wewe Kiswahili kinakupiga chenga?

Barafu huyeyuka au huganda, haikauki. Isitoshe, kama ulimaanisha inayeyuka, mlima utakuwaje "mweupee"? Huo weupe utatoka wapi?