As a consequence of global warming, Antarctic ice shelf on the brink of breaking up.
As a consequence of global warming, Antarctic ice shelf on the brink of breaking up.
An ice bridge linking a shelf of ice to two islands in Antarctica has shattered “and may herald a wider collapse caused by global warming.” Scientists say the collapse could mean the Wilkins Ice Shelf — which is about the size of Connecticut — is on the brink of breaking up. It would be the largest slab of ice so far to disintegrate and retreat in the Antarctic. “The rapid retreat of glaciers there demonstrates once again the profound effects our planet is already experiencing — more rapidly than previously known — as a consequence of climate change,” Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said in a statement. An international meeting of Antarctic and Arctic scientists will report in Baltimore tomorrow that “up to one-third of all Antarctic sea ice is likely to melt by the end of the century, seriously contributing to dangerous sea level rises.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
guns, gays, and climate change. Damn it is looking like it is gonna be a fine freakshow of a day…
April 5th, 2009 at 10:52 amBy the way, if you look at the Arctic on Google Earth at the moment, it simply isn’t there!
April 5th, 2009 at 10:53 amIs it time to buy beachfront property in Nevada yet?
April 5th, 2009 at 11:02 amThe Freakshow of the Republican Osterich meme.
April 5th, 2009 at 11:03 amIndeed, dbadass. Is TP looking to attract them for some reason?
‘Cause this is like stinky fish guts for raccoons.
April 5th, 2009 at 11:07 amIt is refreshingly shocking to read what Secretary Salazar said about global warming/climate change. I am retired from 31 years with an agency of Salazar’s Department of the Interior. During the 8 disgustingly long years of the Bush Abomination we were banned from mentioning “global warming” “climate change” or anything else that reflected climate reality. If you wanted to find yourself instantly reassigned as a GS-5 clerical assistant in Barrow, Alaska, just defy the Bushies and their ban on science reality.
Now Ken Salazar comes out and states the obvious – from the same Interior Building where witch hunts used to originate. Damn. I retired too soon. It would be fun to be back there now when adults are in charge again.
April 5th, 2009 at 11:12 amAnother one of George Bush’s many crimes…
April 5th, 2009 at 11:15 amNow Ken Salazar comes out and states the obvious – from the same Interior Building where witch hunts used to originate. Damn. I retired too soon. It would be fun to be back there now when adults are in charge again.
April 5th, 2009 at 11:12 am
Salazar talks about ‘climate change,’ indeed, but skips over the whole “antrhopogenic” part, the part that sets heads exploding because it implicates our profligacy and the need to REDUCE carbon consumption…
April 5th, 2009 at 11:17 amUm, sea ice, formed from ocean water, most of which floats and therefore does not contribute to sea level rise. However the sea ice acts as a dam preventing glaciers from sliding into the ocean.
April 5th, 2009 at 11:17 amIce shelf collapse also does not contribute the sea level rise.
Because there are folks who rabidly deny global warming, it’s important to be accurate.
“up to one-third of all Antarctic sea ice is likely to melt by the end of the century, seriously contributing to dangerous sea level rises.
– - The GOP will suggest we preemptively chip off that ice into cubes and use it in our booze. Of course, the Ice Cube Industry will then require a bailout.
April 5th, 2009 at 11:18 amBut the wingnuts say that every time it snows or goes below freezing, that it proof that global warming is a hoax?
Geeee… they were right about the outcome of 2000 & 2004 elections, 9/11, wmd in Iraq, the economy, international relations, katrina, social security, and so much more…
April 5th, 2009 at 11:21 amGeorge Will would like you to know that it was really, really hot in 1988.
http://www.pufferfishblog.com/
April 5th, 2009 at 11:28 amYou know the Right will go directly from denying global warming to blaming Bill Clinton for it.
Xe
April 5th, 2009 at 11:28 amAnother Joe, if the Ice shelf towers thousands of feet above the sea, it will, in fact, raise the ocean level.
April 5th, 2009 at 11:38 amThink about it: that ice has been effectively separated from the ocean every bit as effectively as if it were on land.
This is all a hoax by Obama to take away our glacier rights. We must have the right to have glaciers to protect us from an evil government.
/snark off. Global warming is the modern equivalent of the 1350’s plague. It amazes me how the deniers can twist the facts even when the authors of those facts call them on it.
April 5th, 2009 at 11:45 amDoes anybody know if scientists are working on ways to capture the water in all of that floating ice and transfering it to places that need it? I seem to remember that many years ago there were theories being expounded about wrapping icebergs in plastic and towing them to places that would break them apart and transport them to places like the sub-Sahara. Or, was I just hallucinating?
April 5th, 2009 at 11:45 amThe disturbing part is the accleration in melting we’ve seen over the past ten years or so. If you recall, in Clintons admin. we were warned of the caps melting but that we wouldn’t see an effect for 100 years. Then it was fifty years, now, we’ve seen Iceland is actually made of three seperate islands – not one land mass because of it’s permafrost melt. Then, the glaciers in Montana are oh, 95% gone, now the Matterhorn has lost it’s snow so the neighboring countrys have to redraw their boundries. Has anyone seen a photo of Mt. Fuji lately?
I don’t know what the equation is for a snowball rolling down hill, but the melting is increasing at an exponential rate. Does anyone really care to guess how much ice will be left in ten years – let alone a century?
April 5th, 2009 at 11:47 amWhen all of the rightwingnut politicians and talking heads in the media start losing their beachfront homes due to rising sea levels, then what are they going to say caused it.
April 5th, 2009 at 12:06 pmI think they will invent something to blame us liberals.
fergus Says:
No you weren’t hallucinating, I remember an article in Popular Science or Popular Mechanics (1950’s era) about towing icebergs to different regions to be used as drinking water.
April 5th, 2009 at 12:07 pmFergus, Sta Augistine….
In WWII before the US joined in, the British looked at buiiding an aircraft carrier—out of ICE!
April 5th, 2009 at 12:24 pmSounds pretty insane, but they found that straw mixed into the ice stopped it from shattering.
The ice carrier would be solid so it couldn’t be sunk.
This is part of the 6 billion year cycle of the earth. Its has nothing to do with global warming. There is no global warming. In 1912 the Titanic was sunk by an iceberg formed over 5K years ago.
Stop believing everything you here come out of Al Gores mouth. He’s made millions off this scam.
April 5th, 2009 at 12:34 pmmikehunt Says:
Stop believing everything you here (sic) come out of [right wing nutcase radio]. [They've] made millions off this scam.
April 5th, 2009 at 12:50 pmApril 5th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
Um, sea ice, formed from ocean water, most of which floats and therefore does not contribute to sea level rise.
Then again, sea ice, being white, reflects more sunlight than open water. Thus the exposed ocean becomes a new heat trap. Increase the temperature of the ocean, and you increase the temperture of the surrounding air, and eventually you melt the ice on land.
I’ve heard that some say we’ve already passed the point of being able to prevent a cascading effect – the loss of permafrost is releasing methane, which will become the largest contributor to greenhouse gases.
Before we finish paying for Bush’s Wars and bailing out the bankrupt banking industry, we’re going to be asked to bail out beachfront resorts.
April 5th, 2009 at 12:52 pmMike,
You have zero credibility. How come, of all of the people of the earth, every nation around the world, there is only one little population that doesn’t believe in global warming?
Why do they seem to belong to the right wing evangelical christian republican minority? O.k. maybe you don’t fit into that group, then why do you believe such absurdity?
Thank god we now have a president that believes in science. Now the rest of the world doesn’t have to look at us as a bunch of back water uneducated ignorant buffons.
April 5th, 2009 at 12:55 pmmikehunt
April 5th, 2009 at 12:56 pmAre you afraid to just say My C unt? Anyway, why do your government has select committees dedicated to a topic you think exists not? Why is you military planning contingencies related to an issue you feel is unreal? Either you are a really smart mutherf ucker or you are a serious dumbass. Have you noticed that the insurance industry is basing policies on sealevl rise models?
Pay no attention to those polar ice caps! The mean temperture of the climate has been this way since God created this Earth 6,000 years ago!
Besides, Jeesus is coming in on a cloud and the true believers are going to vanish in a twinkling of an eye. The rest of you suckers are going to burn in a lake of fire! THAT’S global warming, Armageddon Style!
snark
April 5th, 2009 at 12:56 pm#24 Rich H How come, of all of the people of the earth, every nation around the world, there is only one little population that doesn’t believe in global warming?
You mean scientists?
Under the heading, “With all due respect Mr. President, that is not true…” more than 100 scientists have gone on the record quite publicly to correct his misunderstanding.
The scientific community – including many current and former UN IPCC reviewers who have reversed their previous views of manmade warming – are letting the president know.
April 5th, 2009 at 1:01 pmmike is a geophysicist, and climatologist.
wheredja’ get your PhD’s Mike?
April 5th, 2009 at 1:03 pmlet’s see some links to the work you’ve published on the matter, mike?
April 5th, 2009 at 1:03 pmThere was recently a conference of holocaust deniers. PhD’s and scientists were among the attendees.
There were “over 100″ of them, too.
Does that mean we should doubt there was a holocaust?
April 5th, 2009 at 1:06 pmMarwick, #27
You mean the opposition to reality found 100 scientists!!
Keep dreaming dude, your living in an alternate universe where the laws of physics don’t apply.
April 5th, 2009 at 1:09 pmGlobal warming is an activist movement driven by economists and government workers. The scientists have left the building.
The James Dobson of the global warming movement, Al Gore, is publishing a new book this year with the warmists own version of an End Times story. LMAO
Just wait another 10 years when we’re supposed to be either cooked or drowning and that doesn’t come to pass either. Of course, by then Al Gore will be much richer, having capitalized on the more impressionable among us, and having generated record amounts of CO2 by jetting around the world to warn us of impending doom.
Of course, Al Gore will just “adjust” his scare theory. As Dr. John Brignell, Emeritus Engineering Professor at the University of Southampton in the UK has written: “The warmers are getting more and more like those traditional predictors of the end of the world who, when the event fails to happen on the due date, announce an error in their calculations and a new date.”
April 5th, 2009 at 1:14 pmMarwick,
About the statement signed by 100 scientists. Please tell me you’re not referring to the one that was so widely debunked due to the “scientists” not being scientists and many so-called signatories saying they blatantly disagree with the report.
TP reported on this a while back.
April 5th, 2009 at 1:17 pmMarwick,
About the statement signed by 100 scientists. Please tell me you’re not referring to the one that was so widely debunked due to the “scientists” not being scientists and many so-called signatories saying they blatantly disagree with the report.
TP reported on this a while back.
April 5th, 2009 at 1:17 pm(marwick can cut-and-past from ann coulter’s website….)
Good for you, little feller – you’ll be typing on your own and using formatting tools in no time!!
April 5th, 2009 at 1:22 pmThe money Gore makes goes to charities.
Rush is the guy getting rich off climate change,
by telling idiots that it’s a fraud.
Idiots will evidently just gobble up anything that comes off the radio.
Why do they do that?
April 5th, 2009 at 1:25 pmBut you have very few scientists agreeing with your views on global warming.
Let’s see. We’re being preached (and dictated) to by a group many of whose members aren’t expert, by a body that’s never even “seriously investigated” other explanations, about a tiny increase in a harmless gas, which has no proven cause-and-effect relationship with the dire consequences these people warm us of.
Global warming qualifies as a religion, not science.
April 5th, 2009 at 1:25 pmThen you really shouldn’t pick on it, marwick.
The US is the home of religious freedom, and I’m sure if you heard us bagging on Christians, you’d be all up in arms about how hateful and intolerant we are.
Pack it up and hit the road, homie. you’re gaining ZERO TRACTION here.
April 5th, 2009 at 1:33 pmmarwich:
Let’s see, since emphysema is “natural” does that make intelligent design a science?
Did you know that dragonflies are social insects?
April 5th, 2009 at 1:34 pmYou are an excellent cherry-picker though.
I have some kin in Eastern WA who could use your help in their orchards, but you’d have to pick all those cherries, not just the ones that fit into your conspiracy theories.
April 5th, 2009 at 1:35 pmMapleStreet,
I remember that being reported all over, except where marwick gets his news. What was it, 30%, 40% or higher didn’t actually sign on to that report?
And it’s almost comical. Think of how many people in the US graduate with science degrees, think of how many actually go on to be “scientists”, add in all the scientists from europe, asia, and africa, and the best they can come up with is a FRAUDULENT report signed on by 100 scientist.
Laughable.
April 5th, 2009 at 1:38 pmtombaker, I don’t have a problem with you believing in global warming, end times, a flat earth, or that the moon is made of cheese.
Just don’t pass laws, increase taxes, and stifle the economy to support your belief. Tithe on your own time. Buy a Prius or horse and buggy and shut off your heater/AC.
Global warming as Sharia law is a bad idea.
April 5th, 2009 at 1:38 pm#39 Pachydiplax St. Augustine Says:
Let’s see, since emphysema is “natural” does that make intelligent design a science?
Why don’t you ask government workers and economists? That’s who you’re relying on for global warming. Maybe they’ll answer that question for you.
April 5th, 2009 at 1:41 pmWhat is with the endless tax whining?
April 5th, 2009 at 1:46 pmMarwik,
Actually, doing something about global warming would increase our standard of living – not decrease it. It would create hundreds of thousands of new jobs and thus a higher tax revenue.
If we develop technologies first, instead of denying REALITY, we could export our technologies and become a world leader in the field which would increase our national wealth even more.
Investing in ways to defeat global warming, if it’s even possible after 8 years of Bush, is a sure fire way to bring prosperity to the US.
By the way, do you believe in the 500,000 square mile of trash floating in the Pacific? If so, was it man made or just a result of the earth going through geological cycles?
April 5th, 2009 at 1:52 pm#45 Rich H Actually, doing something about global warming would increase our standard of living – not decrease it. It would create hundreds of thousands of new jobs and thus a higher tax revenue.
You mean hundreds of thousands of new jobs overseas?
Investing in ways to defeat global warming, if it’s even possible after 8 years of Bush, is a sure fire way to bring prosperity to the US.
To defeat something that doesn’t exist?
And as mentioned before, there would be no prosperity boom in the US because of cap-and-trade and sending jobs overseas. Exactly the opposite would occur. Which of course, is what one would expect from the analysis of the government workers and economists behind the global warming movement. When have those folks been right about anything?
April 5th, 2009 at 2:00 pmThe industries that are financing the “global warming denial campaign” share the same unethical “profit at all costs” philosophy that has dominated the decision-making process of the tobacco industry as it repeatedly denied any health-related consequences of using their products.
Economic impact cannot be the sole factor in every regulatory policy of the U.S. government. Those that do not learn from their mistakes are doomed to repeat them. We can no longer afford to be so short-sighted when the long-term consequences of our inaction are so great.
April 5th, 2009 at 2:01 pmmarwick Says:
You must be thinking of my cousin, Sympetrum striolatum, she believes in global warming. I’m more of a climate change fellow myself.
Were you aware that in the nymph stage, dragonflies spend their time in the water, really. We have gills in our anuses so we can breath while we feed with our heads above water.
Republiscums must spend a lot of time in the water too since they’re usually all wet when they come here. Adult republiscums have even evolved to talk out of their anuses while their heads are under water.
April 5th, 2009 at 2:04 pmPachydiplax St. Augustine Says:
We have gills in our anuses so we can breath while we feed with our heads above water.
_______________
And I think it’s safe to say Republicans typically have heads in their anuses…
April 5th, 2009 at 2:11 pmmarwick Says:
The Wall Street Journal, March 30, 2009
___________
Ah yes… the Wall Street Journal… Rupert Murdoch’s $5BILLION dollar, about-to-go bankrupt, impeccably impartial source of financial information…
April 5th, 2009 at 2:13 pmmarwick Says:
But you have very few scientists agreeing with your views on global warming.
_____________
Gee, marwick, any reason you DIDN’T post the author’s name – Paul Driessen -
w/ the quote from his article? Let’s see who Mr. Driessen is…
Paul Driessen’s Biography
Paul Driessen is senior policy advisor for the Congress of Racial Equality and Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise, two groups that have received some ExxonMobil support…
Dang… ExxonMobil… imagine that…
April 5th, 2009 at 2:17 pmMarwick:
Don’t forget this part from the link you posted:
“When the climate kicks back out of this state, we’ll have explosive warming,” Swanson said. “Thirty years of greenhouse gas radiative forcing will still be there and then bang, the warming will return and be very aggressive.”
Also, perhaps you didn’t realize that Europe is already doing cap and trade for greenhouse gas emissions. Are they losing all their industry to foreign companies?
And what government employees are you referring to? Government scientists?
April 5th, 2009 at 2:21 pm…still spinnin in the mud, bud.
easy, or you’ll fry your clutch.
April 5th, 2009 at 2:21 pmMarwik,
I notice you didn’t answer the question about the trash island. Is it real, is it myth? Is it man made or a just a geologic cycle?
I’m wondering how you could say the trash island is man made (which you haven’t done yet) and all the trash (pollutants) we spew into the air have no effect.
Let’s see, we can see the trash island therefore it exists. I can’t see the pollutants so I can deny them. But actually you can see the pollutants and even taste them in the air.
Well then, I can touch the trash island therefore it exists, I can’t touch the pollutants in the air therefore they don’t.
What exactly is your reasoning other than your just a denier? Really, any report you can point to is just published by an industry lacky.
And, by the way, doing something about global warming here would create jobs here. Would increase our tax revenue here. We could be first in this field, and believe it or not China is beating us to it. How would you like the US to end up buying new technologies from the Chinese instead of developing them here?
Please Tom, you deal with this. I can’t stand stupid.
April 5th, 2009 at 2:27 pmWe cannot deny that we are each partly responsible for this situation. Every time we drive our cars, consume goods that used fuel in their creation, and treat (heat/cool) our airspace, we contribute to this disaster.
April 5th, 2009 at 2:33 pmMike,
April 5th, 2009 at 2:45 pmYour basis is entirely wrong, a jump from .03% to .04% represents a 33.33 % rise in the quantity of CO2 in the atmosphere. That’s like adding a third more insulation to your home. The insulation is only a small fraction of the total weight of a home, but it is very effective in keeping heat inside during winter. Adding an extra 1/3rd, almost doubles the effectiveness.
Here we go again.
1. Atmospheric CO2 and average global temperature are directly proportional.
2. Atmospheric CO2 is at it’s highest point in 150,000 to 800,000 years.
3. Atmospheric CO2 has rising in direct proportion to measured human emissions since the start of the industrial revolution.
4. Average global temperatures are rising at an alarming rate.
5. Glaciers are melting at a far faster rate than the most dire predictions of two decades ago. At the current rate about a billion people will lose their fresh water supply by 2030.
6. Migration patterns are changing.
7. Temperate animals are moving their ranges towards the poles as temperatures increase.
8. Every single “scientist” who still denies global warming, and mankind’s role in it, falls into one or more of the following groups; a. Energy industry employees b. “scientists” who got their degrees from religious “schools” c. “scientists” with degrees unrelated to climatology d. religious fundamentalists who believe God controls everything.
April 5th, 2009 at 2:52 pmsomething “good” must be back on Fox – they’ve all kind of blown out of here at about the same time…
thank God there’s something out there to distract them.
too bad there isn’t a 24-7 nascar network or something – then we’d never have troll visitors.
April 5th, 2009 at 2:58 pmBTW. I haven’t seen Al Gore’s movie or read his book. I have enough scientific background to read the data and reach my conclusions without the interpretation of someone who “popularizes” a scientific discussion. I go straight to the source.
In fact, I think it was a tragedy that Al Gore, despite his good intentions, put himself forward as the face of the movement. He should have known that about 30% of our country will automatically reject anything he says and use their political prejudices and ignorance to thwart the efforts of the best minds on the planet. And, indeed, that’s what has happened.
The greedy are exploiting the ignorance of the masses to score political points while we waste precious time trying, in vain, to make stupid people realize they are being lied too.
April 5th, 2009 at 3:00 pmMarwick, there was a time when scientists were Republicans. It was about the time when the colleges seemed to be overrun with hippies. Engineers proudly standing up to these touchy-feely folks who were against research, atomic energy, chemical research because of napalm, and computers because they didn’r want to be folded, spindled or mutilated.
And scientists were part of the mythological alliance–powerful military and triumphant big business, as well as good solid Republicans, that made America great in that Eisenhower golden age.
And you’re throwing that all away. You’ve completely lost the scientific community, instead allying yourselves with crackpot creationists and global warming ostriches. The Bush administration slapped gag rules on scientists, had their work rewritten by college dropout political correctness bureaucrats, and Glenn Beck gets on national TV calling them eugenicist Nazis.
You’re the filthy hippies now, marwick. You’re the ones accusing them wholesale of corruption and faking their results for the sake of government contracts. You’re the ones dressing up in funny clothes and screaming outside hospices because you didn’t want to believe Terry Schiavo was a vegetable.
You come here and post your arguments here–why? One reason is that you can’t conduct an argument with the scientists you accuse of criminal fraud–because you don’t have the numbers. Not lists of scientists, but research results, data, and papers in peer-reviewed journals. You scream about Al Gore as if he were a researcher or a theoretician. You don’t have the numbers, you don’t have the scientific chops, you don’t have the mathematics skills or the logical skills to conduct a scientific debate. In short, you’re stupid, incompetent, and too lazy to learn the disciplines involved, and you grab your arguments from other stupid, incompetent and lazy right-wingers–and post them here.
You’ve placed yourself right up with the UFOlogists and the copper-bracelet and pyramid-energy crowd marwick. It fits right in with Joe the Plumber, Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck.
Hope you like it on the fringe, hippie. The thing is, our hippies had better music, better drugs and better sex than you seem to have.
April 5th, 2009 at 3:06 pmI kind of agree with your point about Gore, but I think it is good to remember that Gore’s book, movie, and talks have reached people all over the globe. So, it is not just in the US where he is trying to raise awareness.
Also, I am not sure who else could deliver the message. Obviously the same folks won’t pay attention to scientists. They certainly won’t pay attention to a celebrity. So, I am not sure that they would respond more positively to any messenger. And I am not sure another messenger would have the impact that Gore has around the world.
As sad as it is, I don’t think anything will convince the right wing about climate change. They want proof. Science can’t deliver proof. We don’t have statistical replication and controls for this experiment. All we can do is draw correlations and apply sound reasoning. That will never be enough for most people. In my own experience, I think a lot of people are convinced that it is impossible for humans to affect something as “vast” as the atmosphere. Until they see the symptoms in front of their face, they will not be convinced climate change is happening. And even then, they will say it is natural and we had nothing to do with it.
April 5th, 2009 at 3:11 pmmarwick:
How old is Earth?
April 5th, 2009 at 3:37 pmThe government said its just a little cough. The church said if you pray and are holy, it will pass you by.
The Black Death did worse than decimate populations throughout the world. Decimate originally meant one in ten died. Back then, 1 in 10 lived.
Good news is it severely impacted both political and religious power back then and brought on the Age of Enlightenment, ending the Dark Ages.
I think we should suggest the ‘true believers’ move to the coastal plains.
April 5th, 2009 at 3:40 pmI was having dinner with my parents last night, and they said they now both doubt there really is such a thing as global warming. I believe the way that global warming has been disputed on cable news has led them to doubt its veracity. However, I don’t think they would be willing to watch a documentary longer than 10 minutes or so. Can anyone recommend a short 1-2 page article or short web video that would help convince them that global warming is real?
April 5th, 2009 at 3:47 pm#54 Rich H And, by the way, doing something about global warming here would create jobs here.
Consider Kollo Holding’s (a silicon carbide maker) factory in the Netherlands:
You want to eliminate American jobs and create more jobs in China?
#57 Pete: Average global temperatures are rising at an alarming rate.
You’re not paying attention to current events. Temperatures have decline the past 10 years.
#60 You come here and post your arguments here–why?
Not my arguments. What I have posted and linked to is from scientists. Not from James Dobson or Al Gore. Scientists.
#64 Irv was having dinner with my parents last night, and they said they now both doubt there really is such a thing as global warming.
That’s the good news.
Phew, folks are getting educated. Finaly. Education is the death to snake oil salesmen. Sorry, Al Gore.
#64 Irv Can anyone recommend a short 1-2 page article or short web video that would help convince them that global warming is real?
Once they’re educated Irv, it’ll be hard to convince them that global warming is real. You’ll have a better chance with children:
Shame on you. A war on climate change based on lies. How is that different than a war in Iraq based on lies?
April 5th, 2009 at 4:10 pmHi irv.
Not knowing your parents, it’s hard to say what would be best. The articles linked to on this post are pretty good.
However, one of the best sources I’ve seen is the Wikipedia entry I’ve linked here. Good luck!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
April 5th, 2009 at 4:12 pmmarwick says:
You’re not paying attention to current events. Temperatures have decline the past 10 years.
Yes. I have been following recent events.
No. Global average temperature has not declined in the last ten years.
1998 was the warmest year because of an unusually powerful el Nino and assorted other factors. The years since then have been cooler, though still include 6 of the warmest years since accurate measurement has been possible, but the twenty year trend is still upwards and accelerating.
Also, as heat melts ice, temperatures can actually fall. Melting ice is the most compelling evidence for global warming. If you understand how an ice cream churn, or air conditioner, work? This is obvious. If not? Take a science class or read up on it.
April 5th, 2009 at 4:21 pmRich H, #17, you said : “now, we’ve seen Iceland is actually made of three seperate islands – not one land mass because of it’s permafrost melt.”
(this is not a personal attack!) Where the hell did you see this ??? I’ve not read a single line on this, nor found anything the last hour googling these words. Can you please provide a link ?
TIA, Fred
April 5th, 2009 at 4:32 pmMarwick, Great Cooling Follower, speaking about current events : did you even notice the current topic you’re writing in ??
The Wilkins Ice Shelf has been here for thousands years, and now it’s going away – just as did the Larsen A and B Ice shelfs some years ago. Another “current event proving global cooling”, isn’t it ?
Serious people usually recognize they were wrong – but i’m confident you won’t even recognize your “errors” when the Artic will melt in a near summer.
April 5th, 2009 at 4:39 pm#69 FredT34 did you even notice the current topic you’re writing in ??.
Another End Times prediction? As I quoted earlier:
So what’s your new date? Will talking apes take over the planet and blow up the Statue of Liberty? C’mon, give me your prophecies and put some dates on them!
April 5th, 2009 at 5:31 pm#67 Pete
You may want to buy a “Science for Dummies” book on Amazon. Just to get up to speed on some of the basics so you don’t sound like a fish out of water.
Fact is, 2008 was the coldest year on record over the past four decades … the planet actually cooled one half of one degree F. I don’t believe Mr. Obama has told you this yet. Many of the scientists who originally signed on to global warming have deserted that theory and are presently at their computers researching what a new ‘mini’ ice age might do to the planet’s future survival.
April 5th, 2009 at 5:45 pmFred,
It’s not a personal attack, then
“(this is not a personal attack!) Where the hell did you see this ??? I’ve not read a single line on this, nor found anything the last hour googling these words. Can you please provide a link ?”
See if you can find (I don’t mak stuff up). It’s from the L.A. Times (where I happen to live – I imagine it was carried elsewhere) aprox. 2006.
April 5th, 2009 at 5:54 pmThat is a lie and you have no creditable source to back up you statement. Prove it or STFU.
Do you like butterflies?
April 5th, 2009 at 5:54 pmHmmm… guess this means that the water level in the Potomac will rise which will present a problem “within the Beltway”.
April 5th, 2009 at 5:55 pmIf you think about it, everyday tons of greenhouse gasses are released into our atmosphere how can that not hurt our planet,
April 5th, 2009 at 6:08 pmor every living thing on the planet.
It takes many years for these gasses to disappear.
So Marwick by your logic you can pull your car into your garage with the engine running and the door shut, and keep blogging about how global warming is not real.
Sweetdreams.
Actually, 2008 was the 9th WARMEST year since 1880. The ten WARMEST years fall within the 12 years 1997-2008.
Stop getting your data fro FAUX and ReichRadio.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2008/
April 5th, 2009 at 6:29 pmOhhh, Marwick – did you study science in “Science for dummies” ?
Bad luck… it’s just another stupid thing from you. This book doesn’t exist, check http://www.dummies.com/WileyCDA//store-search.html?query=science .
I you can read book which don’t exist, I’m not surprised you can’t read temperatures…
Or will you provide your source / graph ?
April 5th, 2009 at 6:53 pmMarwick needs to read “Science for RepubliCon Stooges”!
April 5th, 2009 at 6:59 pm(Rich H, #17 : sorry, i’ve googled this, and explored LA Times’ search engine, but didn’t find anything. Being an Iceland lover, i’d really like to get such info ! perhaps it was just a film critic ?)
April 5th, 2009 at 7:22 pmSpeaking of beachfront property, there may be an interesting dynamic between higher beachfront prices as we get less and less shoreline on the planet, and falling shoreline prices until the shoreline resession ends, if it ends.
April 5th, 2009 at 7:59 pmFred.
My first reply I took out a rather nasty remark (on my behalf). I thought I’d check to see if you were a troll or not, and the very next post I was surprised to see your take on global warming. I was glad I did not include my snarky comment.
However, I clearly remember it. It was on page 28 (amazing how I remember these things) of the first section of the paper. I googled all over as well and couldn’t find it either. I don’t know if you need lexus nexus or something like that. My poor self only knows how to google.
It was in the science section that used to be one of my favorite parts of the paper. Usually a page or less and it covered the latest scientific news. And it was always in the front page section.
It wasn’t in the film section. Perhaps you can find someone who can locate it for you.
April 5th, 2009 at 8:12 pm…”may mean that the Wilkins Ice shelf around the size of Connecticut is on the brink of breaking up”…. A couple of years ago it was a chunk the size of Rhode Island, in the next year can we expect another expotential expansion in the size of the chunks breaking away? I would guess so, but only if you believe your lying eyes.
April 5th, 2009 at 10:01 pmSorry,
April 5th, 2009 at 11:08 pm100 scientists from at least a dozen countries have sent Mr. Obama a letter telling him that he is incorrect about global warming. They said that the studies show that global warming is grossly overstated. It has not changed in the last decade and is not getting worse.
Just in an effort to state the truth. Some of the signatories are Nobel prize winners.
Sarafina, you really should read this well cited Wiki article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change#Statements_by_concurring_organizations
Or, if you prefer raw data:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2008/
Among the findings is data that shows the 10 warmest years since 1880 are all within the twelve year span of 1997-2008.
I think it would be safe to say that none of those Nobel Prize winners are climatologists and 100 disenters is hardly compelling. Here’s one of the studies from the Wiki article:
A poll performed by Peter Doran and Maggie Kendall Zimmerman at Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago received replies from 3,146 of the 10,257 polled Earth scientists. Results were analyzed globally and by specialization. 96.2% of climatologists who are active in climate research believe that mean global temperatures have risen compared to pre-1800s levels, and 97.4% believe that human activity is a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures. Among all respondents, 90% agreed that temperatures have risen compared to pre-1800 levels, and 80% agreed that humans significantly influence the global temperature. Petroleum geologists and meteorologists were among the biggest doubters, with only 47 percent and 64 percent, respectively, believing in human involvement. A summary from the survey states that:
“It seems that the debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific basis of long-term climate processes.
April 5th, 2009 at 11:20 pmBTW. About the only source I could find for the claim that warming has slowed, or even stopped, over the last ten years is George Will’s thoroughly debunked opinion piece and a couple articles by energy industry employees.
April 5th, 2009 at 11:23 pmIn fact. There is no dissent from the best minds in climatology. And, historically, when we ignore the best scientific minds? Bad things, like plagues and famines, happen.
April 5th, 2009 at 11:25 pmThe Earth is only 4.6 billion years old so I dont know what this 6 billion year cycle is, did Limbaugh tell you this? And if an iceberg is only 5k years old…then it must have been warmer 6k years ago, right?
April 6th, 2009 at 12:46 amGeorge Will is also pretty sure that compact fluorescent bulbs are dangerous and just don’t work. Despite the fact that many of us have been using them for years without any problems. And that they contain less mercury than the traditional fluorescent tubes which we all remember from school and every office building we’ve ever been in.
April 6th, 2009 at 12:46 amAs for the sea ice causing rising sea levels,,,no, the weight of the sea ice displaces the water, so the sea levels wont rise even though the ice may be thousands of feet above the surface
April 6th, 2009 at 12:55 ammay herald a wider collapse…
could mean the Wilkins Ice Shelf…
…up to one-third…
…likely to melt by the end of the century…
Could the writing possibly maybe sorta kinda be any more vague? More effective action verbs would support the panic-mongering better or are they afraid of taking a stand and being specifically scientific? So maybe in 91 years there might possibly be up to one whole third of one part of one frozen area of a larger frozen area that might possibly not be frozen anymore. Oh My God! Holy Re-fried Beans! We better change everything immediately!
April 6th, 2009 at 1:56 amstage coach Says:
Could you make any less sense? We dont know how much the temperature will rise nor how fast we dont know what the temeprature will be each day. This is the language of science when there are so many variables involved. That is pretty simple. If you dont understand that its because you are undereducated not a problem of the language
April 6th, 2009 at 2:48 amEugene says:
So now you’re an educated scientist? You and this article should report immediately to the weather channel.
April 6th, 2009 at 5:06 amThis is Sarah Palin’s fault.
April 6th, 2009 at 8:26 amSomebody’s looking for attention…
April 6th, 2009 at 8:46 amGlaciers have been receding and growing cyclically for hundreds of years. Recent glacier melting is a consequence of coming out of the very cool period of the Little Ice Age. Ice shelves have been breaking off for centuries. Scientists know of at least 33 periods of glaciers growing and then retreating. It’s normal. Besides, glacier’s health is dependent as much on precipitation as on temperature.Leftistas never tire of doomsday scenarios hence the global warming myth
April 6th, 2009 at 9:05 amOdd that so many scientists would disagree with you relative to what you term a “myth”. Might you share your credentials in climate science with us so as to add some credence to your thoughts? See the weird thing is that the vast majority of nations including the US, as well as the insurance industry, the scientific community and the US military think you are wrong is discounting the possibility that some thing is seriously wrong with the current trends realtive to climate changes. How do you explain this?
April 6th, 2009 at 9:32 amClimate is cyclical.
April 6th, 2009 at 1:05 pmDid anyone say it wasn’t?
April 6th, 2009 at 1:14 pmGood afternoon, dbadass.
Is it not odd how a troll, given the choice between hard evidence and a conspiracy theory, will go with the most nonsensical crap Reichradio has to offer? I can’t tell whether they are afraid to admit that humanity needs to clean up its act or they’re just so pig-ignorant that science is beyond their grasp.
April 6th, 2009 at 1:49 pmIf you believe climate is cyclical then how can you possibly come to the conclusion that 75 years out of a few billion has had a strong impact on the earth and it’s climate? Yes we should recycle and try to curb pollution, but when the federal government starts limiting freedoms and levying new taxes like cap and trade, that is when I and a whole lot of other people must call bullshit. The “science” of man made global warming is still a very debatable issue. Read both sides of the argument and make up your own mind.
Trees love carbon!
April 6th, 2009 at 2:08 pmwhen the federal government starts limiting freedoms
—
you mean like letting me marry who I please, choose to die with dignity, experiment with recreational drugs?
Anyway might you explain to me why the vast majority of people who actual study climate don’t agree with you? Might you also share with us your expertise on the topic?
April 6th, 2009 at 2:24 pmThanks…
afternoon pete…
April 6th, 2009 at 2:24 pmI have read both sides of the issue and I side with the @95% of the world’s scientists who are certain enough about global warming to have moved on to what we can do to fix it. I have rejected the biased “dissent” provided by energy industry shills, religious fanatics, and those who pitch a fit every time a “librul” makes a point.
And we’ve cut down too many trees for them to use the carbon we emit!
April 6th, 2009 at 2:26 pm“The “science” of man made global warming is still a very debatable issue. Read both sides of the argument and make up your own mind.”
NO IT IS NOT!
Perhaps you should take your own advice and actually read the scientific papers. Or, barring that look at how the planet is changing. Who are you going to believe? The deniers or your lying eyes?
April 6th, 2009 at 3:40 pmdbadass-
Just so you know the points you are making on gay marriage and drugs have nothing to do with the topic but I am libertarian possibly even one of those Constitutionalists.:0 So I agree.
Pete and Paladiea,
I’m not denying the science or fact that the climate changes, I don’t think anyone can and if you try you are moronic. The fact is that the earth is in a period of cooling right now (see link below). My argument is against man having a drastic effect on the climate.
http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/NASA_Climate_cooling/2008/05/01/92541.html
April 6th, 2009 at 7:02 pmRP2012,
I read your link. Are you familiar with “quote mining”? Are you familiar with the difference between “Pacific oscillation” and “Global average temperature”?
Here’s the NASA interpretation of the same data NewsMax used. Updated Jan. 13 2009. It tells a different story.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2008/
I’m afraid you’ll just have to take my word that I examine, and understand, raw data from peer reviewed sources and place little faith in the popular media.
April 6th, 2009 at 8:59 pmAgain, why is there a significant number of people in the US that deny man made glogal warming? What is it about our population that makes people extraordinarily stupid?
Really, this is such a basic issue. The only people who don’t believe are those who Don’t Want To Believe It.
There is a difference between studying the facts and coming up with an erroneous conclusion as oppossed to only looking at data that confirms your position.
Truely incredible.
April 6th, 2009 at 10:41 pm“Rich H Says:
..There is a difference between studying the facts and coming up with an erroneous conclusion as oppossed to only looking at data that confirms your position.
Truely incredible.”
Your like a self fulfilling prophecy.
Pete-
April 6th, 2009 at 11:40 pmI don’t claim to be an expert on the issue but I have read my far share of material and made my assessment on the issue. I can see your more enlightened on climate change than just seeing an Inconvenient Truth and standing on a soap box, I respect that. Like I was trying to say before there is a lot of respectable scientists on your side and mine. I will continue to recycle and drive my fuel efficient vehicle and be a skeptic. I guess time will tell.
RP2012:
1. If you aren’t alarmed? You don’t understand the implications the data suggests.
2. I haven’t seen An Inconvenient Truth. I was ahead of it, by about 15 years, and don’t put a lot of faith in politicians and “popular science”.
3.To be fair, and accurate: there are a lot of scientists on my side and a few on yours.
4. The problem with time is that it’s not on our side and it never stops. Every minute we waste in politically motivated debate makes the worst possible case more likely.
To be fair, it is possible that we are past the tipping point and we humans may be better served by planning to adapt to a new climate rather than preserving the one we have. The bad part is that new climates usually lead to mass extinctions and the collapse of ecosystems. Those occurrences usually hit the top of the food chain the hardest. We humans are the top of the food chain.
April 7th, 2009 at 12:57 amOK Pat obviously senile dementia has set in. Time to see the nice young men that will need to take care of you soon.burun estetigi rent a car arac kiralama
April 18th, 2009 at 6:01 amsac ekimi