Global Warming Underestimated by up to 50%

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Global Warming Underestimated by up to 50%

South Atlantic Ocean

New research suggests that the amount of heat added to the world's oceans over the last 35 years has been underestimated by 24-58 percent. The oceans house more than 90 percent of the heat associated with greenhouse-gas-attributed global warming.

Oceanographers from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory have published a new study suggesting that past research on upper-ocean warming has been underestimating the amount of warming taking place - by a significant margin.

The evolution of ocean heat has been studied since the 1950s. The Earth's oceans store more than 90 percent of the heat associated with greenhouse-gas-attributed global warming, making it a critical factor in climate change discussions. By using new satellite analysis techniques and various climate models, the LLNL researchers have refined old, conservative estimates from 1970-2004 and found a significant underestimation in the Southern Hemisphere. The Southern Hemisphere's oceans have actually increased in temperature by 48-166 percent more than previously believed, leading to an overall ocean temperature increase that is 24-58 percent higher than established estimates.

Why the great discrepancy? The researchers attributed the underestimations to limitations in past analysis methods, as well as a paucity of solid data on the Southern Hemisphere's oceans.

Back in May, a new government report summarized the present and future impacts of climate change on the U.S. and confirmed that some changes are happening faster than predicted.

Source: Nature Climate Change, via Neomatica

Permalink

Wesa gunna die! /JarJar

Slightly more seriously: This doesn't surprise me in the least. It's disappointing, but not surprising. Here's to hoping somebody figures out a way to check this shit before it tips over the edge.

If they predicted a temperature increase of 0.01 degrees Kelvin/Celsius, and it turns out to have increased by a whole 0.02 degrees, that's a 100% underestimation! Better write an article about it!

Jokes aside, relative numbers have a tendency to be abused by several media outlets. It makes me not take the article seriously even if the subject is rather important. Also, apparently we're back to GLOBAL WARMING instead of Climate Change, because that has a better ring to it I assume.

This comic feels relevant:
http://xkcd.com/1102/

I do love how people(oil companies, their shills/senators) will continue to deny that this could have an effect on weather. It's like if I took a blowtorch to a teddy bear and said it'd be fine. Ok, maybe not quite that extreme, but adding significantly more energy to anything will change it.

WEATHER FORECAST GETS IT WRONG

FILM AT ELEVEN (AFTER WEATHER FORECAST)

Yeah, this is why I don't take global warmingism seriously. "Nobody's talking about us at the moment, let's announce some even more ridiculous numbers".

Kinitawowi:
WEATHER FORECAST GETS IT WRONG

They are dealing with climate, not weather.

Yeah, this is why I don't take global warmingism seriously. "Nobody's talking about us at the moment, let's announce some even more ridiculous numbers".

You don't believe them because they constantly update their numbers thanks to better analysis methods and larger sets of data?

RA92:
You don't believe them because they constantly update their numbers thanks to better analysis methods and larger sets of data?

Well, sure! Millenia-old contradictory writings are clearly the gold standard of Truth. The Truth doesn't change, and neither does scripture, ergo scripture must be exactly correct!

Maybe if we ignore it, it will go away. Or we'll go away. One of those anyway.

RA92:
You don't believe them because they constantly update their numbers thanks to better analysis methods and larger sets of data?

He doesn't believe them because the media isn't taking climate change seriously. That's how brainwashing works. And people are completely unaware of it. But I guess if they were aware that they're being brainwashed they wouldn't be brainwashed.

Agayek:
Slightly more seriously: This doesn't surprise me in the least. It's disappointing, but not surprising. Here's to hoping somebody figures out a way to check this shit before it tips over the edge.

That ship has sailed. The best we can do is try not to make it worse. People are just too fuckin' dumb. They don't realize that we're seeing effects of climate change right now. It's not something that's gonna happen some day in the future. It's here now. And it ain't going anywhere. Most people seem to think that it just means that it's warmer in the summer. They don't take into account how it affects the rest of animal kingdom or the plants. You know, the things we eat. When they go to the store and see a sudden spike in lemon prices (for example) they don't ever stop to consider that maybe climate change had something to do with it. And it did. It does. The impact is global and it's only going to get worse as years go by and we do nothing. We're going to have less of everything, it's going to be of worse quality and it's going to be more expensive. But not for the top 1% of oil company executives. They're going to be fine, so it's alright.

The Blind Cookie:

Also, apparently we're back to GLOBAL WARMING instead of Climate Change, because that has a better ring to it I assume.

I believe that's just generally considered the more sensible term as global warming is the type of climate change that is happening. It's just more specific.

No warming in almost 2 decades. Ocean heat content flat since 2005. Sounds like a reason to panic to me.

Britpoint:

The Blind Cookie:

Also, apparently we're back to GLOBAL WARMING instead of Climate Change, because that has a better ring to it I assume.

I believe that's just generally considered the more sensible term as global warming is the type of climate change that is happening. It's just more specific.

Exactly. We're specifically talking about the WARMING of the GLOBAL ocean.

Kinitawowi:

Yeah, this is why I don't take global warmingism seriously. "Nobody's talking about us at the moment, let's announce some even more ridiculous numbers".

Yes, when you falsely ascribe motives to someone, it's very easy to dismiss them.

Plunkies:
No warming in almost 2 decades. Ocean heat content flat since 2005. Sounds like a reason to panic to me.

According to....

Zachary Amaranth:

Plunkies:
No warming in almost 2 decades. Ocean heat content flat since 2005. Sounds like a reason to panic to me.

According to....

I dunno. Some stupid blog called "nasa" or something.

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=4321

Seriously, whenever I see one of these clickbait articles posted on global warming there's always something easily found that contradicts it. It's just alarmism.

Plunkies:

Zachary Amaranth:

Plunkies:
No warming in almost 2 decades. Ocean heat content flat since 2005. Sounds like a reason to panic to me.

According to....

I dunno. Some stupid blog called "nasa" or something.

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=4321

Seriously, whenever I see one of these clickbait articles posted on global warming there's always something easily found that contradicts it. It's just alarmism.

"The cold waters of Earth's deep ocean have not warmed measurably since 2005"

Also from the article YOU posted: "Study coauthor Josh Willis of JPL said these findings do not throw suspicion on climate change itself."

Deep ocean =/= entire ocean and global warming didn't start in 2005. The dynamics of currents create a barrier between deep and shallow ocean and on top of that most warming is disproportionately felt around the arctic and antarctic.

Laymen misinterpreting scientific studies is a huge part of the problem.

Plunkies:

Zachary Amaranth:

Plunkies:
No warming in almost 2 decades. Ocean heat content flat since 2005. Sounds like a reason to panic to me.

According to....

I dunno. Some stupid blog called "nasa" or something.

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=4321

Seriously, whenever I see one of these clickbait articles posted on global warming there's always something easily found that contradicts it. It's just alarmism.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the NASA article state that the temperature of the ocean below 1.24 miles has stayed flat, while this study is dealing with upper ocean temperatures (with the NASA article confirming the the ocean has been warming up up to a depth of 0.4 miles)? In fact, direct quote: "Using satellite measurements and climate simulations of sea level changes around the world, the new study found the global ocean absorbed far more heat in those 35 years than previously thought -- a whopping 24 to 58 percent more than early estimates." Exactly what this study said.

Read your own sources, man.

Climate change is happening. We can do all we want about it, but if China refuses to do anything about their emissions then it won't have much of an effect. Also, driving electric cars doesn't solve the problem. That electricity had to come from somewhere, and the vast majority of it comes from burning coal. So really, it falls on researchers to come up with a new, renewable source of energy. Or, you know, just build nuclear power plants, but that wont happen because ermagerd it's nuclear we all gonna die in a ball of fire!!!11!1 Also, the radioactive waste thing....so yea we're basically fucked because we can't do anything that won't cause problems/panic.

Johnson McGee:

Plunkies:

Zachary Amaranth:

According to....

I dunno. Some stupid blog called "nasa" or something.

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=4321

Seriously, whenever I see one of these clickbait articles posted on global warming there's always something easily found that contradicts it. It's just alarmism.

"The cold waters of Earth's deep ocean have not warmed measurably since 2005"

Also from the article YOU posted: "Study coauthor Josh Willis of JPL said these findings do not throw suspicion on climate change itself."

Deep ocean =/= entire ocean and global warming didn't start in 2005. The dynamics of currents create a barrier between deep and shallow ocean and on top of that most warming is disproportionately felt around the arctic and antarctic.

Laymen misinterpreting scientific studies is a huge part of the problem.

Oh you're right, it did say upper ocean temperatures. The excuse for the "pause" is usually that the deep ocean is absorbing all of this heat despite the fact that global warming was never about the ocean getting warmer but the climate getting warmer. They "discovered" the climate getting warmer while the ocean wasn't stopping it then, but now it is for reasons unexplained.

I have to laugh at you saying "laymen misinterpreting scientific studies" while defending an article that states "Global Warming Underestimated by up to 50%"

The study says ocean heat over a 35 year period has been underestimated. Not global warming. The article is alarmist click bait. Hell, considering how absurdly overestimated global warming was, we'd have to be melting to actually be able to consider it underestimated.

In any case, they have to move away from global warming representing something as silly as the temperature measurably increasing, so now they have to find all these excuses and hidden stashes of heat so that they're not shown to be completely wrong about everything.

What is it with news outlets announcing that stuff's been underestimated today?

WHO announced that the current ebola outbreak was underestimated, then apparently the US underestimated the potential of ISIS... I think the problem is that people aren't really bothering to estimate sh*t to begin with.

the doom cannon:
Climate change is happening. We can do all we want about it, but if China refuses to do anything about their emissions then it won't have much of an effect. Also, driving electric cars doesn't solve the problem. That electricity had to come from somewhere, and the vast majority of it comes from burning coal. So really, it falls on researchers to come up with a new, renewable source of energy. Or, you know, just build nuclear power plants, but that wont happen because ermagerd it's nuclear we all gonna die in a ball of fire!!!11!1 Also, the radioactive waste thing....so yea we're basically fucked because we can't do anything that won't cause problems/panic.

Woah there, are you saying human beings are a plague on this earth? No way man, I always recycle my milk bottles.

Plunkies:
The excuse for the "pause" is usually that the deep ocean is absorbing all of this heat despite the fact that global warming was never about the ocean getting warmer but the climate getting warmer.

The "pause" does not need an excuse. A more exact explanation would be great, which is why lots of people are pursuing one. There have been repeated pauses before, and the rate of warming from, say, '86 to '88, was not remotely sustainable. But here's the thing: It's not going back down, either. It's not a temperature spike that's we're recovering from. It went up, it plateau'd, it went up again, it plateau'd again, it went up again, it plateau'd again, and it went up again, now it's plateau'd. What happens next? The data looks like a staircase, not a jaggy and not a flat line.

The most you can argue from that position is that Global Warming has happened and isn't going away (and the ice is still melting), but there's very little reason in the data to suspect that the ballyhooed pause is anything but temporary.

Plunkies:
The study says ocean heat over a 35 year period has been underestimated. Not global warming.

Scientists do a lot of analysis, which means breaking things down and looking at the individual parts.

Man, this kind of stuff makes me really sad that I can't really do anything to change it. While driving an electric car might alleviate some of your guilt it aint gonna help change the situation. Unfortunately the people who actually have the power to change the situation, our lunkhead presidents and CEO's, are ignoring the issue, instead wasting their money on frivolous wars and cheap & quick formulas for mass production.

Pyrian:

Plunkies:
The excuse for the "pause" is usually that the deep ocean is absorbing all of this heat despite the fact that global warming was never about the ocean getting warmer but the climate getting warmer.

The "pause" does not need an excuse. A more exact explanation would be great, which is why lots of people are pursuing one. There have been repeated pauses before, and the rate of warming from, say, '86 to '88, was not remotely sustainable. But here's the thing: It's not going back down, either. It's not a temperature spike that's we're recovering from. It went up, it plateau'd, it went up again, it plateau'd again, it went up again, it plateau'd again, and it went up again, now it's plateau'd. What happens next? The data looks like a staircase, not a jaggy and not a flat line.

Apparently it does need an excuse because it flies in the face of every single climate model that we have relied upon to make sweeping economic changes and public policy decisions. The global average temperature, according to multiple different satellite data sets, shows a flat line since 1997. Sitting at the same temperature for nearly 20 years is not a "spike" as you call it. There was only one spike, and it was caused by El Nino. But some people will just continue to call anything global warming by moving the goal posts whenever the facts don't fit their conclusions.

Speaking of goal posts, I love how you note that temperature isn't going down. I suppose anything short of reentering another little ice age won't convince you otherwise. Of course, then we'd just go back to the whole Global Cooling scare of the 1970s.

The most you can argue from that position is that Global Warming has happened and isn't going away (and the ice is still melting), but there's very little reason in the data to suspect that the ballyhooed pause is anything but temporary.

Yeah the ice is still melting...except when Antarctic sea ice is hitting 35 year highs. Funny which things matter and which don't. Those individual parts, as you say....

Plunkies:
The study says ocean heat over a 35 year period has been underestimated. Not global warming.

Scientists do a lot of analysis, which means breaking things down and looking at the individual parts.

Yes, and then people decide whether those individual parts indicate PANIC GLOBAL WARMING. Of course, the parts that don't support global warming are largely ignored because they don't fit the narrative. Almost like the whole thing is political and there's a massive confirmation bias going on.

The problem with the article is that no units of measurement are given, only percentages. If it's a difference between 5 degrees C and 10 degrees C, that's alarming. But if it's the difference between .05 and .1 degrees, good luck making the argument to the general public. The ocean absorbs the greater amount of heat for 2 reasons - 1)71% of the Earth is covered by water, and 2) Liquids retain heat better than solids, due to the energy being transferred more easily throughout, rather than just a thin surface layer. It is simultaneously dense enough to retain energy while thin enough to allow it to pass through.

I truly believe we are ruining our planet and it will take an event of such enormity that it will have global implications for years to come in order to force us to change our path. But vague articles like this, where no units are given, nor the effects that this discovery may have, do not help the dialogue they are trying to present.

Plunkies:

Yeah the ice is still melting...except when Antarctic sea ice is hitting 35 year highs. Funny which things matter and which don't. Those individual parts, as you say....

This again? The western ocean of Antarctica has record high Ice. Arctic and eastern part of Antarctica is melting like butter in the oven. the overall ice mass in the world is decreasing. its called global warming because on average worldwide its getting warmer, not because its getting warmer in all places equally.

Remus:
The problem with the article is that no units of measurement are given, only percentages. If it's a difference between 5 degrees C and 10 degrees C, that's alarming. But if it's the difference between .05 and .1 degrees, good luck making the argument to the general public.

Sadly true. what general public will miss is that entire species of plants and animals will go extinct by as little as 0,1C change. If you really want to scare them - chinas deserts are expanding. arable land retreating. this will lead to china starving. 1,7 billion hungry people looking to conquer arable land - not a good thing.

So the real question in all this is something that no one is touching on, but how is this going to play into the new season of keeping up with the Kardashians? Are we talking about some new exotic beach for Kim to sun bath on? Perhaps they'll be a lot of inter family tension because they have to sell one of their hummers? Is Kanye going to get super mad that they don't make a black leather Hummer that runs on electricity? (and yes that means the outside of the car would be black leather instead of paint) When people explain to Kanye that this is impossible; that you would never be able to drive this car in the rain or in the sun, how many people will Kanye scream at before he gets his way? Will his out burst be at an award show?

C'mon CJ, these are the global warming questions I'm interested in. Where are my answers?

Also where can I buy that black leather exterior electric hummer that I made up? C'mon people! We're never going to get this climate crisis solved if we can't figure out these most basic problems.

kat-pottz:
Man, this kind of stuff makes me really sad that I can't really do anything to change it. While driving an electric car might alleviate some of your guilt it aint gonna help change the situation. Unfortunately the people who actually have the power to change the situation, our lunkhead presidents and CEO's, are ignoring the issue, instead wasting their money on frivolous wars and cheap & quick formulas for mass production.

It's so easy to say oh but I'm just a common man who can't do anything, but yet if every common man took drastic changes to his everyday approach, we WOULD see results. But everyone is just looking at the next guy and ultimately don't give a shit. Us humans are basically too selfish to ever take the necessary steps to save the planet as we know it. There's plenty of things we can do that would make an impact; travel less, eat less meat, opting for more environmental friendly options, although it will cost more... I mean there's loads. But that means less comfort, less fun, so ultimately we don't do it.

And in the end the root to all our problems is a topic no politician is willing to touch; overpopulation. It would be the greatest thing ever for this planet if the human race would decrease drastically. But where is this going to happen? Not in the western world that's for sure. Our capitalist society won't allow that.

Plunkies:

Pyrian:

Plunkies:
The excuse for the "pause" is usually that the deep ocean is absorbing all of this heat despite the fact that global warming was never about the ocean getting warmer but the climate getting warmer.

The "pause" does not need an excuse. A more exact explanation would be great, which is why lots of people are pursuing one. There have been repeated pauses before, and the rate of warming from, say, '86 to '88, was not remotely sustainable. But here's the thing: It's not going back down, either. It's not a temperature spike that's we're recovering from. It went up, it plateau'd, it went up again, it plateau'd again, it went up again, it plateau'd again, and it went up again, now it's plateau'd. What happens next? The data looks like a staircase, not a jaggy and not a flat line.

Apparently it does need an excuse because it flies in the face of every single climate model that we have relied upon to make sweeping economic changes and public policy decisions. The global average temperature, according to multiple different satellite data sets, shows a flat line since 1997. Sitting at the same temperature for nearly 20 years is not a "spike" as you call it. There was only one spike, and it was caused by El Nino. But some people will just continue to call anything global warming by moving the goal posts whenever the facts don't fit their conclusions.

Speaking of goal posts, I love how you note that temperature isn't going down. I suppose anything short of reentering another little ice age won't convince you otherwise. Of course, then we'd just go back to the whole Global Cooling scare of the 1970s.

The most you can argue from that position is that Global Warming has happened and isn't going away (and the ice is still melting), but there's very little reason in the data to suspect that the ballyhooed pause is anything but temporary.

Yeah the ice is still melting...except when Antarctic sea ice is hitting 35 year highs. Funny which things matter and which don't. Those individual parts, as you say....

The ice mass is shrinking.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/aug/24/incredible-polar-ice-loss-cryosat-antarctica-greenland

Your figure is based on the area covered by the ice sheet. It is like saying you have more ice cream, because it has begun to melt and now covers more of the bottom of the bowl.

We got another warning about climate change. You may start to panic now:
image

On a serious side, can someone remember when we stopped calling "IT" climate warming and started using the words climate change? In addition how is climate change always bad? And why is bad when the climate overall on the planet is warmer? There have been periods on this planet when the average temperature on this planet has been higher and that wasn't to long ago (500 years). Oh and please show me real prove that the current climate change is caused by humanity. Please keep in mind that the climate is always changing....

Also why again was greenland called greenland? Because it was full of ice when it was named, right?

So many questions and yet so many possible answers. Let me direct one advice at the people working at the escapist. Please stay away from these kinds of news topics. It'll only heat up your forums.

Kinitawowi:
WEATHER FORECAST GETS IT WRONG

FILM AT ELEVEN (AFTER WEATHER FORECAST)

Yeah, this is why I don't take global warmingism seriously. "Nobody's talking about us at the moment, let's announce some even more ridiculous numbers".

It's not even an announcement, but it's true that climate change isn't taken seriously because it's basically high level weather forecasting and apocalypse hysteria that would embarrass the Mayan theorists.

Here's the thing though: this is the process of science, going back with modern technology to better understand and finding out that there's more going on than previously thought. What's interesting to me is how climate science has exploded in recent years, the technology and information, but there's no connection being made between it as a maturing field and our understanding of earth's climate, which is directly influenced by our science. Basically, if you're still learning the science behind something, you don't have the conclusion yet, but for some reason we've gone ahead and made the conclusion while the science is still catching up.

Kinitawowi:
WEATHER FORECAST GETS IT WRONG

FILM AT ELEVEN (AFTER WEATHER FORECAST)

Yeah, this is why I don't take global warmingism seriously. "Nobody's talking about us at the moment, let's announce some even more ridiculous numbers".

I work in an environmental body, and we're literally watching the waters around Ireland heat up. Every year new warm water plants, animals and invertebrates arrive at the bottom of Ireland and steadily travel North every subsequent year.

In the 90s none of these creatures could have survived here. Now there are worries that some may become dangerously invasive species as they not only settle but thrive.

Every survey we do we find animals that wouldn't have survived in Ireland 20 years ago gradually traveling North, and the Salmon and Trout stocks are traveling further North/South in the Oceans depending on whether they prefer warm or cold water.

The climate is changing, there is no doubt about that.
Are humans the main cause? Can we stop it? Do solar panels and wind turbines cut carbon emission? I don't have a damn clue, but I'd prefer to try and do something.

nodlimax:

Also why again was greenland called greenland? Because it was full of ice when it was named, right?

Actually yes. Erik the Red named it Greenland in what is probably the first ever recorded case of blantant tourism propaganda in human history.

The place was a frozen block of ice back then, but the nice name encouraged settlers to say "Yeah, that sounds better than Iceland, let's move to Greenland." And it bloody worked

Some things never change.

Global warming worse than it used to be!
Ice Age ended 10.000 years ago!
Climate changes anyway!
Taxpayers need to pay more tax, because erm... (hold on, can we scare a little more money out of them, we had global warming, climate change, mightbe global cooling, an ozon hole that is on it's way to recovery, we recycle a lot of materials already) Sea temperatures on the surface are rising!

Ever since "The Day After Tomorrow" I hoped for a decent winter and wolves roaming my area, but noooo, no matter how much carbondioxide I produce, nothing like that happens, all I have to do is pay more tax and nothing else changes.

Wow, the sea ice better get melting then, it's supposed to be all gone by next year. It's already 2 years late to hit the old prediction.

Bruce:

The ice mass is shrinking.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/aug/24/incredible-polar-ice-loss-cryosat-antarctica-greenland

Your figure is based on the area covered by the ice sheet. It is like saying you have more ice cream, because it has begun to melt and now covers more of the bottom of the bowl.

Amazing. I love your objective article where everything is alarming and incredible. Of course, they never mention that at the rate of loss it would take over 2000 years to lose even 1% of its ice mass or their terrifying "doubling of sea-level" is smaller than the thickness of a human fingernail. But no, it's all very alarming. I appreciate the warning. I think I'll go build a boat in my backyard to prepare for waterworld.

Plunkies:

Bruce:

The ice mass is shrinking.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/aug/24/incredible-polar-ice-loss-cryosat-antarctica-greenland

Your figure is based on the area covered by the ice sheet. It is like saying you have more ice cream, because it has begun to melt and now covers more of the bottom of the bowl.

Amazing. I love your objective article where everything is alarming and incredible. Of course, they never mention that at the rate of loss it would take over 2000 years to lose even 1% of its ice mass or their terrifying "doubling of sea-level" is smaller than the thickness of a human fingernail. But no, it's all very alarming. I appreciate the warning. I think I'll go build a boat in my backyard to prepare for waterworld.

Here is the thing, that article was based on figures from people who actually do climate research. His source is the ESA.

Now I am going to trust people who actually do climate research when they reach a consensus. Why? Because they have looked at the evidence involved.

I am not going to trust you, because frankly you're on a level with anti-vaxxers, repeating discredited bullshit and misquoting research specifically to boost your case.

You need there to be a conspiracy among climate scientists. You actually have to form a conspiracy of over 90% of world scientists in relevant fields to have your ideas make the slightest bit of sense.

And that is just not going to happen, because climate change does not serve the economic interests of anybody.

In fact generally you denialists have this habit of linking to research and saying it says one thing, and when somebody checks they find it says something completely different.

As people pointed out you doing with that Nasa article.

You want to say rising sea levels aren't a problem, that is very easy for you to say because you don't live on the Kiribati islands.

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-25086963

This is not something that is happening in the future, this is happening right now. It is affecting people right now.

We can see it in fisheries right now - and somebody mentioned higher up in the thread, but you are going to plug your ears and yell "LALALALALA" at the evidence because you don't give a shit about evidence.

To you it is all politics and if we all agree hard enough, well reality will be bent to our will. Unfortunately reality doesn't actually work that way.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here