Obama administration reveals evidence of global warming kept secret under Bush.
Obama administration reveals evidence of global warming kept secret under Bush.
The Obama administration has “released more than a thousand intelligence images of Arctic ice,” following a declassification request by the National Academy of Sciences. These high-resolution spy photos of rapid sea ice loss off the northern coast of Alaska, kept classified by the Bush administration, show “the devastating impact of global warming in the Arctic”:
The newly-declassified images also reveal the retreat of glaciers in Washington and Alaska. USGS scientist John Crowe tells ThinkProgress that “security issues” prevented the U.S. Geological Survey from launching the Global Fiducials Library website until now, saying he had been “working for some time to get this data to the public.” The same day the images were made public, NOAA anounced that the world’s ocean surface temperature in June 2009 was the warmest on record.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
This hard evidence of scientific research will do nothing to convince the holy rollers and the “birthers” of the current situation.
Those delusional crazies will claim that it is just more liberal lies.
The repiggies are beyond any sort of help. Don’t vote for them, not even for local office. They all need psychiatric help.
July 27th, 2009 at 1:33 pmUSGS scientist John Crowe tells ThinkProgress that “security issues” prevented the U.S. Geological Survey from launching the Global Fiducials Library website until now…
Those security issues being the “security” of the Bush adminsitration, and any profit to be gained in the fossil fuel industry.
July 27th, 2009 at 1:34 pmRe the above photos: OMFG
Explain to me again how global climate change is not real…
July 27th, 2009 at 1:35 pmJust a few bad apples… I mean glaciers.
Gore tried and Bush denied.
July 27th, 2009 at 1:35 pmTake ice water and put it on a burner. The temperature of the water barely rises until the ice melts, then it comes to a boil fast. Once our glaciers are gone, so are we.
http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/516/index.html
July 27th, 2009 at 1:40 pmMaybe they just really like Waterworld.
Didn’t the Ministry of Truth get to doctor this photo? Slacking!
July 27th, 2009 at 1:41 pmHowever, everyone knows that intelligence photos taken during the Bush administration have a liberal bias.
July 27th, 2009 at 1:41 pmThis is really going to ruin the day for people opposed to cap and trade and those who think climate warming is bogus. There is no legitimate reason why this should have been kept secret. This points out to Congress that there are deficiencies in the secrecy laws.
July 27th, 2009 at 1:41 pmIce not in bible
July 27th, 2009 at 1:42 pmBible word of man in sky
We not need ice then
Why were these photos classified?
Unless someones going to tell me Ice Station Zebra is real, then why were these photos of arctic ice classified?
Do we have covert polar bears operating out of the region?
Are there secret predator penguins hidden up there we didn’t want the commies to see?
Someone explain to me why these photos were classified.
July 27th, 2009 at 1:45 pmThis hard evidence of scientific research will do nothing to convince the holy rollers and the “birthers” of the current situation.
Those delusional crazies will claim that it is just more liberal lies.
Yes, they will deny until it becomes undeniable but too late to do anything about it.
July 27th, 2009 at 1:47 pmAugust 2001 – August 2007. Well, I’d have to say Mission Accomplished for keeping these pictures well hidden!
All BushCo had to do was tag everything they wanted kept secret as a “security” matter, and We the People were none the wiser.
I proposed we put Bush and Cheney on the remaining ice floats and see how long they last. It sure could save the taxpayers the cost of their Secret Service, too.
PEACE
July 27th, 2009 at 1:48 pmWAYNEBRO says:
Someone explain to me why these photos were classified.
July 27th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
Because they didn’t fit the Bush agenda.
July 27th, 2009 at 1:48 pmI saw this yesterday and I was really unnerved even more about the Bush administration that “kept it secret”…
They were like sinister keystone cops for nearly a decade.
July 27th, 2009 at 1:49 pmHoly Crap…
The global warming deniers will simply say the ice is melting because it’s summer (or some such drivel).
July 27th, 2009 at 1:51 pmActually, there’s a reasonable security reason to keep these classified (at least historically) — the ice-covered Arctic Ocean is dominated by US submarines. Knowledge of ice depth and extent plays a major role in naval security.
Of course, when the ice is gone, it’s a whole new ball game.
July 27th, 2009 at 1:52 pmThe sad thing is, we all lose here. Our children and our grandchildren. The sad fact is, our business elites will do anything for money. They will poison the very Earth they live on to make money. In fact, we are all to blame. We live in a wasteful society. Everything has to be bigger and better. Why wash dihes when you can use paper plates? Why carry a thermos, when we use stryfoam? Why buy an efficent house when we can buy a McMansion? The fact is we should have listened to Jimmy Carter and changed our ways long ago. Now, I’m afraid it is too late.
July 27th, 2009 at 1:52 pmWe have had some unseasonably cool days here this July, so OBVIOUSLY global warming is a lie.
And those photos…. well, there’s more ice there than you can see…. it’s black ice, so it doesn’t show up on the black background. If you were to drive on it, you’d be in trouble.
And some of that ice is underwater, like with the iceburg that hit the Titanic.
See? No problem.
July 27th, 2009 at 1:53 pmAnyone have any ice-9?
July 27th, 2009 at 1:53 pmBush is a WAR CRIMINAL – and much, much more.
July 27th, 2009 at 1:55 pmP.D. says:
Now, I’m afraid it is too late.
I agree. I am afraid that we already passed the critical mass point, and its just a matter of time. We may very well have already destroyed ourselves… the only question may be, “How long do we have?”
July 27th, 2009 at 1:56 pmJust another thing to prosecute Bush Co. for. Won’t change the mind of the crazies though.
July 27th, 2009 at 1:56 pmThis society has to figure out what to do about the sociopathic wingnuts or we’re all going to die. Mother Earth is sending a slow but deliberate message.
July 27th, 2009 at 1:57 pm@ Waynebro
USARAK is there (US Army Alaska), as well as a Marine base and a Navy base.
Not trying to defend the bushies here, just letting you know that they probably used this as a flimsy reason to classify the photos.
I was in Barrow, AK in the seventies while serving in the Navy–it was ice-locked then.
July 27th, 2009 at 1:57 pmCagey@18, My father tried to pull that sh*t on me last week. So it’s been cooler here in the North, Big deal! It’s not just warming, it is air quality and water supply. All ready Texas and the Western States are going through a drought. What more proof do these deniers want? Insects are dying, bats are dying, fish are dying or being wiped off the Earth because of over fishing. Invasive species are overrunning our native species. And yet the Righties want us to pray to make it better! Have they gone mad?
July 27th, 2009 at 2:00 pmEven though they hadn’t made the photos public, the administration was making claim to arctic territories that traditionally belong to Canada or Russia—with the hopes of laying claim to any oil that might be there.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:02 pmThis is so frightening. The Bush Crime Family has wreaked havoc on the whole world with this cover up. The stupid global warming deniers in Congress who vote against clean energy legislation want to continue in their footsteps.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:02 pmThis just made my day and year. From reports, when the ice does completly melt…..our coast lines will be underwater (20 TO 4O FEET)……YEA….FINALLY WALL STREET WILL BE DESTROYED!!!!!!ALL THOSE TRILLIONS WILL BE GONE…OH TO BAD SO SAD!!! ALL THOSE BMW, MERCEDES AND RANGE ROVERS WILL BE UNDER WATER…..OH SO SAD.
COCK A DO LOO, THE COCKS HAVE COME HOME TO ROOST!!!!!
Fu**en Fascist pigs and there money…..start swimming a-holes!!!
July 27th, 2009 at 2:03 pmBrad says:
Actually, there’s a reasonable security reason to keep these classified (at least historically) — the ice-covered Arctic Ocean is dominated by US submarines. Knowledge of ice depth and extent plays a major role in naval security.
The science and our bases in the Arctic are no secret to the Russians. The only secret was keeping it from Congress and the public.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:03 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
The Right will never admit that government is the only answer to the problems we created by treating government as the problem.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:05 pmI guess we need to begin thinking about building away from coasts and other adjustments because nothing is going to be done.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:05 pmOn Google Earth, all US Military bases are visible.
Shrub is a dipshit.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:06 pmDon’t like 70% of the worlds population live within 50 miles of the coast?
July 27th, 2009 at 2:06 pmBut now the info is on the web where any Glacier can just google it. The glaciers may use this to mount an invasion. (As if Russian satellites don’t exist to feed this info to enemy glaciers).
But they classified information to keep the facts from embarassing them. That is why classified information is supposed to have adequate review.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:07 pmThe global warming issue makes the sociopath wingnuts even nuttier.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:07 pmSlappyMoron why do you still bother? Your post will get flushed like all your posts do. There will be no pity. Begging us to pity you because you are so stupid and pathetic is passe. Your posts just disappear. There is nothing in it for you. Everyone knows that all you do is beg us for pity so no one will open your raptured idiot posts and read them. You waste your time. Its over. Just STFU
July 27th, 2009 at 2:08 pmThis was all about the Bush Administration and their cronies getting as much as they can today under the guise of ‘national security’ and saying to hell with the future. Now they can retire to their gated enclaves and live the life of kings, while our grandchildren pay the price….
July 27th, 2009 at 2:08 pmThe corporate capitalists who pulled the Bushies puppet strings dream of a new frontier to plunder for profit.
The opening of an Arctic sea route would enable an astronomical profit.
The perpetual effort to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is driven by the desire to have free rein to establish seaports on that coast.
Oil extraction and mining will quickly follow.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:09 pmDon’t like 70% of the worlds population live within 50 miles of the coast?
Yeah, and that’s why it’s prudent to begin something before they’re neck deep.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:09 pmSlappySmartass thinks this is funny.
Slappy, we believe you shop at Walmart; that’s not a surprise.
Speaking of tarps, maybe you could check with Hank ‘Chicken Little’ Paulson on how Goldman Sachs is doing with the tarp funds.
Oh, wait! They’re giving $770,000.00 bonuses to every employee, so they must have barely survived the financial fiasco that is proving to be the biggest swindle in history.
Wind farms are here to stay; get used to it.
You produce a lot of wind, too, but it can hardly be called energy.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:12 pmWell, I guess it is safe to say this won’t be on MSM anytime soon. Why talk about the collapse of our environment when we can talk about Michael Jackson and the Gates ‘Controversy’? I mean the truth is just SOOO depressing!
July 27th, 2009 at 2:12 pmTEN!
July 27th, 2009 at 2:13 pmThis is unfortunate and sad. We had a chance to reverse our course in the 70s, 80s and 90s. Now, it is most likely too late. More and more satisfied in my choice not to procreate. I feel terrible for those that will be left behind to try to adapt. Truly astonishing there is still a debate.
http://www.thehamandlegsshow.com
July 27th, 2009 at 2:13 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
For all the Rapture nutbags: from looking at these photos you may get your wish afterall. You know the O.T. story about ” from the tribe of Abraham 12,000, from the tribe of Daniel 12000, etc… If you’d had your way there’d only be about 140-150000 left by the time you got done with the silliness. Hopefully the Darwinists will now get their chance to debunk your junk.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:14 pmDude, didn’t your mama tell you that if you keep slappin’ the old bastinado like that you’ll go blind?
(Oh, and dip$hit…blue tarps would actually help accelerate the glacier melt rate…)
July 27th, 2009 at 2:15 pmThe global warming deniers admit to the loss of polar ice because they endorse drilling for oil up there (as in “global warming is a hoax, but we need to take advantage of the melting polar ice cap before the Russians do”). I’m assuming they rationalize this by claming that it just proves that God is only eliminating polar ice so we can drill in the Arctic. Nothing to be concerned about…it’s a sign from the divine that we should increase our use of fossil fuels.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:15 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
jham@44, I feel the same way. If we had listened to Carter in the 70s and changed our dependence on foriegn oil and tried renewable energy sources we would be better off today. What happened? Regan and the Conservative Movement. They have been trying to reverse the ‘New Deal’ since it’s inception. They have done a good job.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:18 pmOT, sort of…
I saw a particularly fine ursus americanus last week as it was going over the mountain.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:19 pmIt was black with cinnamon highlights, and blond hindquarters.
At first glance I mistook it for a very short, fat elk.
misscoleopteramolly says:
I’m assuming they rationalize this by claming that it just proves that God is only eliminating polar ice so we can drill in the Arctic.
And, if any consequences (hurricanes, et al.) come of it, they’ll lean on the old standby responses: Godly Areas We Like as Being Tested. Ungodly Regions we disdain are Being Punished.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:19 pmSlappy is proud of his stupidity. It’s the mark of a true Repub.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:21 pmnoseeum says: OT, sort of…
I saw a particularly fine ursus americanus last week as it was going over the mountain.
I saw a homophobe erectus on TV last week; James Inhofe.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:23 pmSlappy sociopath, I’m glad you and the others had it all figured out like the last 8 years. But you will always be abnormal but there is no making the rest of this society like you ever again.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:25 pmI wonder what Inhofe will make of these photos…
July 27th, 2009 at 2:26 pmoh, yeah, he’s busy with the birthers…
nevar mind…
Slappy, ya’ll didn’t ever prove you weren’t abnormal. Just the opposite. Awww…
July 27th, 2009 at 2:27 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
More evidence that BushitCo deliberately deceived the American people about pretty much everything possible.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:29 pmI looked at it again make that less ice in the period 2007-2008 with 2007 being the least ice and 2008 with a moderate increase.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:29 pmI’d ask b-cup what his point is, but I have to leave.
How long until the “global warming is a religion” ding dongs show up?
July 27th, 2009 at 2:30 pm“It doesn’t seem that these photos show a consistent decline in the ice extent over the time frame, but less ice in the years 2006-2008 with 2007 being by far the worst.”
One word, backup…
exponential
July 27th, 2009 at 2:30 pm51
July 27th, 2009 at 2:31 pmNice use of italics…
rather bold, wasn’t it?
July 27th, 2009 at 2:33 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
June 2009 ocean surface temperatures? Warmest on record?
No one could have predicted! No one! This is a complete shock–to James Inhofe and Roy Blunt, that is.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:37 pmSlappyMoron
Its just shows how deluded you are that you think you are clever. You are not clever. You will never BE clever. You are stupid and pathetic. You will always be stupid and pathetic. Clever requires higher brain function and you will NEVER have that ability. It will always be far beyond your wildest dreams. You foolishness will just get flushed which is all it deserves. Begging us to pity you wont work anymore. Your posts are raptured then only opened to drop another smackdown on it. You are pathetic just STFU
July 27th, 2009 at 2:40 pmbackup, when a tree dies and begins to decay, it doesn’t gradually begin to lean over and gradually hit the ground. It reaches a tipping point and comes to earth in a single crashing event.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:44 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Why all the fuss? I think there are plenty of unclassified satellite images available that show sea ice.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:52 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
If the variations are being caused by man made climate change, doesn’t it seem that the ice extents would show more of a consistent decline? Because man’s emissions have been consistently increasing?
You’re looking at glacial circumference? What about actual depth?
The circumference could remain roughly the same, yet the depth of the ice might be quite thin in spots, and not evenly spread over the whole glacier. That would affect melting levels in different areas of the same glacier, and mask what is happening inside the glacier
July 27th, 2009 at 2:53 pmAmazing. These wingnuts are against healthcare, one of their arguments is that our grandchildren will be paying for it.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:56 pmThese same wingnuts dont believe in global warming.If we dont do anything to slow down this man made global warming then the cost of healthcare will be the least of our problems. How can anyone deny that global warming isnt happening,fcking idiots.
“… the ice extent would be more or less steadily increasing.”
“…’the ice extent would have been steadily decreasing.”
Either way, the sentence makes no sense because of your use of “more or less”
July 27th, 2009 at 2:56 pmrmwarnick — These are invaluable photos, filling in a major gap in the public record. See the National Academy of Sciences report.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:56 pmbackup says:
If the variations are being caused by man made climate change, doesn’t it seem that the ice extents would show more of a consistent decline?
Holy Jeebus, backup -you are looking at a 3-year period and basing your so-called conclusions on that limited amount of data?
On the upside, I see you are willing to lend credibility to the NSDIC. So, for your reading pleasure:
Is climate change (or global warming) happening?
NSIDC: In the past fifty years, the amounts of greenhouse gases (GHGs) such as carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) in our atmosphere have increased rapidly. They now stand at levels far in excess of those indicated by deep ice cores spanning the past several hundred thousand years. A portion of today’s CO2 gas contains a ‘fingerprint’ (i.e., its isotopic make-up) that is consistent with fossil fuel burning.[...]All but a very few of the mountain glacier regions on Earth are in decline. This decline contributes to the present rate of sea level rise, which is currently about 1.5 mm per year (about a sixteenth of an inch). Summertime sea ice cover over the Arctic Ocean is also declining, and in some areas this ice cover is thinning rapidly.
NSIDC: “The Day After Tomorrow” Q&A Response
You may also be interested in reading more here
It takes a true believer to ignore the overwhelming amount of data and focus on the small bits and pieces that seem to support their beliefs.
July 27th, 2009 at 3:02 pmIt is always nice to have noseeum in from the filed even if it is only briefly. Well more or less…
July 27th, 2009 at 3:02 pmah “field”
July 27th, 2009 at 3:02 pmWhat? Are repugs supposed to accept science as factual? When they can deny a birth certificate that has been examined by numerous experts? Why should they accept the evidence of polar ice melting? They’re only photos – that’s not proof.
Nothing is legitimate unless it is approved by Fox, Lintball and the rightwing fringe — unless it has the imprimatur of all of them, it is not valid.
July 27th, 2009 at 3:03 pmWant to bet the repugs will say this is an attempt by Obama to “distract” from the real “truth” of his birth?
July 27th, 2009 at 3:03 pmJust a point of biological fact Waynebro. Penguins are found only in the southern Hemisphere north amazingly to the Galapagos Islands. There are no penguins in the Beaufort Sea… its in the wrong hemisphere.
July 27th, 2009 at 3:06 pmthanks, dbadass.
July 27th, 2009 at 3:08 pmI’ve got a week off, more or less.
I’m going to San Diego for a conference, I’ll make certain to stick a ruler in the sand at the waters edge.
barfly. I agree with your ‘depth’ argument. But, it seems that if the depth were decreasing the square area would also be decreasing.
The ice would be getting thiner and shrinking around the edges.
July 27th, 2009 at 3:09 pm“There are no penguins in the Beaufort Sea…”
Unless they’re secret….
July 27th, 2009 at 3:11 pmGregor. those are good points. I won’t argue them.
But, you say: Holy Jeebus, backup -you are looking at a 3-year period and basing your so-called conclusions on that limited amount of data?
Well, this thread compares 2000-2007, a 7 year period. Is that so much more significant than a 3 year period?
July 27th, 2009 at 3:12 pmnoseeum. You’re right about the ‘more or less’.
July 27th, 2009 at 3:13 pmand Gregor. To be fair. the ice extent movie is from 1979-2008:
http://nsidc.org/data/virtual_globes/images/seaice_2008_climatology_lr.mov
July 27th, 2009 at 3:17 pmbackup says: “But, it seems that if the depth were decreasing the square area would also be decreasing.”
Not necessarily. Water freezes more rapidly at the surface than underneath. It can show wide variations in surface coverage, while underneath the upper ocean layers change is much more gradual.
July 27th, 2009 at 3:17 pmbackup says:
Well, you seem to be a Global Warming denier, cap’n.
July 27th, 2009 at 3:18 pmAre you, by chance, also a “birther”?
I ask because both seem to be content with ignoring all common sense and any evidence to the fallacies they promote.
You do seem to avoid the “birther” threads like the plague though. LOL
backup – you seem to need further convincing.
Please check out this site for more comparative pictures:
http://www.worldviewofglobalwarming.org/pages/glaciers.html
July 27th, 2009 at 3:18 pmbackup says:
noseeum. I obviously don’t know. It just seems to me that the ice melt would be proportional to the temperature increases.
If man’s emissions have been steadily increasing, the temperature would be steadily increasing and the ice extent would be more or less steadily increasing.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
________________
Because you’re looking at climate as a one-input, one-output system. There are lots and lots of factors that go into the global climate system, and emissions from point A don’t necessarily correlate with ice melt at point B. There are natural weather cycles, gulf stream patterns, ocean currents, El Nino/La Nina events, and other factors that also determine Arctic temperatures.
The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is one of these factors. You’re really not going to see its effect in one year increments, or two year increments. It’s in the five-year and ten-year averages that you’ll see the trends.
July 27th, 2009 at 3:19 pmbackup says:
Gregor. those are good points. I won’t argue them.
I think you may have missed this, backup…
Gregor Samsa says:
It takes a true believer to ignore the overwhelming amount of data and focus on the small bits and pieces that seem to support their beliefs.
If you didn’t miss it then why are you posting this nonsense?
backup says:
Well, this thread compares 2000-2007, a 7 year period. Is that so much more significant than a 3 year period?
Look at all the data… then get back to us.
July 27th, 2009 at 3:20 pmYou are making the faulty assumption that there’s anything steady and consistent in the greenhouse effect, B-kup. We may have years where there’s a net increase in N. Polar ice. But, just like the global temp is going up, the long term trend is horrendous in it’s implication.
As dramatic as these pictures are they are nothing new to those who have studied the issue. There have been plenty of other ice surveys.
July 27th, 2009 at 3:20 pmI might add that the loss of “old” ice is alarming. Surface ice, like we get on our Minnesota lakes, can disappear in an amazingly short time.
July 27th, 2009 at 3:21 pmBackup:
We get energy from the sun in vast amounts. It would seem that what should happen is that the earth simply gets warmer, right/
Instead, there’s all this weather stuff. The introduction of energy into a complex system creates turbulence. Inevitably.
However, the NET effect, over time is that yes, it gets warmer overall.
Boil water. Watch what happens. Does the water just placidly get warmer, and then steam starts to escape? No. It roils and burbles–and if you were a protozoan in that pot of water, there would be times where your local environment might actually be colder. For a while, and locally.
That’s why climatology takes work. Because you have to see that long term trend through all that short term turbulence. Plus the fact that we’re not doing something as dramatic as boiling. (The thing is that it doesn’t take an awful lot to ruin our way of life.) If change like that were simple, climatologists wouldn’t be needed. But they aren’t, and they are.
I was a climate change skeptic around 1991–and so were a lot of people. But a lot of work has been done since then, and I’ve been convinced. The science has become vastly more sophisticated, petabytes of data have been collected. A lot of work has been done.
If there’s one thing that just gets me personally angry about this denial stuff, it’s that a bunch of yahoos who wouldn’t even recognize a partial differential if they saw one, who think that phase space has something to do with Star Trek weaponry, suddenly wake up from watching pr0n and feel they’re perfectly justified in calling the work of thousands of smart, dedicated people over decades ‘junk science’ because they don’t like the results–or even better, don’t like Al Gore. It makes me want to shout ‘drop and give me twenty”–solutions to integrals, that is.
July 27th, 2009 at 3:28 pmnoseeum. I believe what you are saying, but as a layman you can see why I would believe that even though water freezes more rapidly at the surface, that tendency would be consistent over time. The trend of warmer temperatures over time would still shrink the circumference, even though the water may be freezing more rapidly at the surface. It would still be relative.
If there is significant information that the thickness is decreasing or those temperatures underneath are significantly and steadily increasing, it becomes more credible. (I’m sure you have some studies to that effect).
But, if you look to the top of this thread, the message is that surface area is in decline by looking at the photos of Beaufort Sea from 2001 compared to 2007 (actually 6 years).
It seems to me that when you consider the NSDIC movie from 1979-2008 (and the July 2009 picture), that difference in ice extent may be more of a local anomaly than a significant trend.
July 27th, 2009 at 3:30 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
I was talking to a republican recently about water issues and she said something to the effect of, “What’s the problem? We’ll just desalinate the ocean water!”.
This is what we’re dealing with people. Mind you she’s one of those Wackos who thought that Palin was “great”…
July 27th, 2009 at 3:33 pmHipple – for God’s sake I hope you’re kidding.
July 27th, 2009 at 3:35 pmHipple_rev_paul_t says:
One word: (and then a whole lot more nonsense)
Hmm, it seems you’re ability to count is only equaled by your understanding of climatology. Congrats!
July 27th, 2009 at 3:36 pmbackup, you can nit-pick and circumlocute to your hearts content, however the reality of global climate change is irrefutable and upon us.
July 27th, 2009 at 3:36 pmJuly 27th, 2009 at 3:39 pm
you’re = your @3:36…
blush.
July 27th, 2009 at 3:39 pmForgot the link…I hate aging
http://athropolis.com/arctic-facts/fact-penguins.htm
July 27th, 2009 at 3:41 pmIn all fairness to Bush (shit, did I just type that?) this all began under Reagan when he laughed off Carter’s work towards easing the U.S. off fossile fuels. Then Pappy Bush kept the Reagan oil consumption up (for his BFFs at the Carlyle Group) and Clinton did little to turn things around. Of course, he had the Newt Crew do deal with so little of what he wanted actually arrived on his desk.
Remember, presidentin’ was hard werk, so W, under Cheney’s direction, just kept pumpin’ and dumpin’.
PEACE
July 27th, 2009 at 3:45 pmI was being facetious Mike.
And WAYNEBRO was making a joke.
I understand there are no penguins in the Arctic.
July 27th, 2009 at 3:48 pmYet.
Species that survive climate change will do so by adapting and moving to regions of the planet which support them.
This is already happening on a wide scale.
noseeum. I’ll buy the argument that the Earth’s ecosystem has many factors that don’t necessarily facilitate consistent, steady climate or temperature trending.
I’m also influenced by the consensus of the scientific community. It’s significant.
But, if we agree the ecosystem has many factors that complicate the trend data – why are we so certain of the overall warming trends in the very same multifaceted ecosystem over arguably a geologically short time frame?
And although the scientific methods and observation are objective – the hypotheses and attestation of results may not be.
Even though I respect science, the political aspect of the issue and the liberal bias of scientists cause me to keep an open mind to the arguments of deniers.
http://people-press.org/report/?pageid=1549
I’m out.
July 27th, 2009 at 3:59 pmYou got that right, noseeum. I’ve spent several decades in the field and I’ve seen new species appear and old one’s disappear from their range. I’ve seen migration patterns and breeding behavior change. I’ve personally charted the ice on my local lake. And I’ve even seen a shift in precipitation patterns and storm tracks.
We, as a species, need to reevaluate what we burn, why we burn it, and how we burn it. It’s as simple as that. And we need to keep pushing the fact that, throughout human history, new things to burn and new ways to burn them results in huge PROFIT. We haven’t even scratched the surface for potential money makers in green tech and there are fortunes to be made.
July 27th, 2009 at 4:01 pmI’ve come to the conclusion that backup is the most insidious sort of troll. His politeness is a tactic he uses to consistently muddy the waters.
July 27th, 2009 at 4:01 pmI don’t think B-kup muddies the waters, wiley. He hones our response and, for me at least, has inspired me to do more research on some subjects.
Though I’m sure he doesn’t see the significance of the fact that, after Chimpy, only 6% of scientists identify themselves as Republicans. He doesn’t realize that out of all the scientists, regardless of age, specialty, college, economic class, race, creed and pet political theories; all but 6% are too smart to buy the Reichwing lies.
July 27th, 2009 at 4:13 pmHipple_rev_paul_t says:
One word: God caring for his polar bears, giving them a warmer than normal summer, via the miracle of natural sun spot cycle activity.
So they can drown? That’s some real tough love, rev.
July 27th, 2009 at 4:39 pmbackup says:
Gregor. To be fair. the ice extent movie is from 1979-2008:
You still haven’t read the links I provided, or you wouldn’t reply as you did.
You should really start reading the NSIDC’s conclusions and stop cherry-picking the evidence. It makes you look foolish. Specially when we consider the NSIDC concluded the exact opposite of the “questions” you are trying to raise.
Again, for the benefit of others:
July 27th, 2009 at 5:06 pmThe ground is not freezing as deeply as it used to in winter, and the ground is not staying frozen as long. In Russia and China, scientists have found that the active layer became much thicker in the last fifty years.
NSIDC: Climate and Frozen Ground
And the warped teabaggin repugs say:
Hey that isn’t global warming, it’s bad lighting.
July 27th, 2009 at 5:11 pmbackup says:
the liberal bias of scientists cause me to keep an open mind to the arguments of deniers.
Yeah, backup, we know: Facts have a well known liberal bias.
Like when those evil liberal scientists talk about the theory of evolution -knowing their bias, you may want to keep an open mind towards creationism, right?
How about a 6000-year old Earth? Or the moon landing “hoax”, the Loch Ness monster, Sasquatch? Do you keep an open mind about those too?
Sheesh, you are a loony….
July 27th, 2009 at 5:15 pmAfter reading all the party-approved ramblings of most of the postes here, I have to say that this is one of the few that makes sense. It’s on target, and reasonable.
We must absolutely live responsibly. However, it’s looks as if most of you have latched on to the guilt-based PR ploy of the environmentalists.
A few things to keep in mind, which will predictably be scorned:
*The Earth is warming, no argument there…we’ve been ascending out of an ice age for the last 15,000 years or so…part of a natural cycle.
*We only have a couple hundred years of concrete weather data, in comparison to a planet that is roughly 4.5 billion years old…even if we round up to 300 years of continuous data, the percentage we’re looking at is negligible. It’s the scientific equivalent of aliens coming to this planet, and taking your picture while you’re in the middle of blinking…then zooming back home to show the other aliens that these strange Earthlings have optic-organs that are constantly closed for some reason.
*Yes, I do realize we have technology to track climate changes for millennia past…and those data confirm a cyclic pattern. In addition, if we are looking at current data that shows a degree or two difference over the past ___ decades, is appropriate to cross reference that with the margin of error that accompanies other geological/climatological data sets (as far as temperature variations are concerned).
And finally, we would all be wise to question the motives and outcomes of those seeking federal grant money.
PS: I am passionate about this issue, and would love to engage in an intelligent, stimulating discussion.
July 27th, 2009 at 5:16 pm“the liberal bias of scientists”
July 27th, 2009 at 5:18 pm—
Okay so let me see if I have this correct. The media, the entertainment industry, education, and now the scientists. Just what is the right good at? How come these losers keep getting driven out of so many aspects of society?
oh and let’s not forget labor…
July 27th, 2009 at 5:22 pmWell gee…thank you Marlin Perkins.
Because you see, I actually believed there were penguins stationed at the North Pole that were trained as predator drones.
:|
I figured Santa was training them.
July 27th, 2009 at 5:30 pmLunchBox says: “PS: I am passionate about this issue, and would love to engage in an intelligent, stimulating discussion.”
I’ll trade you my loonburger for your polar bear pate’…
July 27th, 2009 at 5:30 pmHere Waynebro, you’re simply ahead of the curve on your suppositions…
http://www.tierramerica.info/nota.php?lang=eng&idnews=2955
(The link provided by Mike Hunt was aimed at about the middle-school student viewer.)
July 27th, 2009 at 5:36 pmThe data is pretty dang convincing, LunchBox. And I bet you wouldn’t like my solution. Because? The first thing I would do is cancel every tax break and subsidy that currently goes to the energy industry. Then, I would take half of that “extra” money and distribute it as a dedicated subsidy to increase the efficiency and “cleanliness” of every point source in the country. Finally, I would take the other half and grant it to new energy technology.
July 27th, 2009 at 5:37 pmOn a related note, the Sun isn’t causing global warming. Solar output is at a historic low.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8008473.stm
July 27th, 2009 at 5:44 pmpete. your solution in/around #123 sounds reasonable.
July 27th, 2009 at 6:30 pm51. noseeum says, “I saw a particularly fine ursus americanus last week as it was going over the mountain.”
I do hope that you weren’t in the USA. First, the bear is using some foreign language – and good american bears recognize english as the official language.
So if you were in the USA, this is obviously some foreign bear using the declassified satellite pictures to invade us.
(Sorry, coudln’t resist)
July 27th, 2009 at 6:41 pm“So if you were in the USA, this is obviously some foreign bear using the declassified satellite pictures to invade us.”
It did kinda look like he had a pic-a-nic basket…
July 27th, 2009 at 7:02 pmpete says:
The first thing I would do is cancel every tax break and subsidy that currently goes to the energy industry. Then, I would take half of that “extra” money and distribute it as a dedicated subsidy to increase the efficiency and “cleanliness” of every point source in the country. Finally, I would take the other half and grant it to new energy technology.
Ummm-you are asking Congress to do the right thing instead of working the lobbyists for money. That won’t happen in our lifetimes.
July 27th, 2009 at 7:21 pmIt can get frustrating, if not maddening, pags2. But they said the same kind of thing about cleaning up the Great Lakes and rescuing children from sweatshops.
But mostly we just need better marketing and lobbying. As crappy as it seems to say it, once we get lobbyists for green energy paying off bribes and kickbacks, things will speed up.
July 27th, 2009 at 7:37 pmLunchBox says:
Look you can be as stupid as you have to be. You can feel free to let rightwing screechmonkeys do your thinking for you since you KNOW you are too stupid to think for yourself but you just make yourself look like a fool when you couple such transparently ignorant spewage with condescension. You are a moron and we can leave it at that. If you ever get enough of a clue, which is doubtful to know what actual SCIENCE is feel free to get back to us. Till then you still serve a purpose. I love to laugh at people as stupid as you.
July 27th, 2009 at 8:20 pmAlso lunchbox instead of a brain NO you dont want to have an intelligent discussion or you wouldnt have begun your ignorant post with this
After reading all the party-approved ramblings of most of the postes here
July 27th, 2009 at 8:22 pmpete says:
It can get frustrating, if not maddening, pags2. But they said the same kind of thing about cleaning up the Great Lakes and rescuing children from sweatshops.
But mostly we just need better marketing and lobbying. As crappy as it seems to say it, once we get lobbyists for green energy paying off bribes and kickbacks, things will speed up.
No, what we need is a complete, comprehensive law banning all gifts, vacations, etc., given to any government employee. In other words, nothing of value can be given to the employee or the family. All campaign contributions can only be made by a person who is qualified to vote which means no PACS or group donations. Then a max limit on the dollar amount per person and per year with a cap on all campaign contributions. Then the lobbyists can go home because there will be no way to spend money on Congress.
July 27th, 2009 at 8:42 pmHi Pete…I do not agree with your solution, but it is well intentioned. I would point out a well known truth: corporations do not pay taxes…we do. I fear that increasing taxes on energy companies takes more out of our own pockets. I do agree that more incentives toward renewable energies are key…I think most everybody here, and across the world would agree with that.
July 27th, 2009 at 10:15 pmLunchbox, if you want a serious debate about AGW, then come up with some specifics. What part of the science, what hypothesis, what data analysis done by climate scientists do you find doubtful and why. Claiming that their work is dubious because of their political stance does nothing but show a disturbing misunderstanding of how science works.
If you have no argument other than going to motive then you have nothing.
July 27th, 2009 at 10:27 pmThis photo proves nothing.
I am unable to see the small print.
Unlike every last one of you leaving comments—I have actually been to the Beaufort Sea—–I have stood on the Arctic Ice.
This could be a small bay, that if you asked the Inuit Natives, maybe every 7 or 8 years is ice free.
It Happens!!!!!
Look, most of you are probably young enough to be my kid.
I was there on the first Earth Day, and I have been an avid “global warming” advocate to anybody who would listen to me—and believe me in the last 25 years or so very, very, very, few people have listened to me. Even though I live in tree-hugging Seattle.
So, what do we do with this type of info? It is hard for us to validate its usefulness because we can’t just drop everything and fly up to Kaktovik, Alaska (yes, that is perhaps the best place to view Arctic Ice from shore) and check it out.
Is Global Warming real? Yea, probably. Is it caused by man–not entirely–please, do some research on solar wind and sun spots–they contribute far more than ever imagined.
Is this melting caused by Bush–no, get a grip people. China, India, Russia, etc., are far worse at pollution than we are–stop and think—do the Chinese, Russians, Indians actually give REAL DATA at the “environmental summits”?
Bush was right not to sign Kyoto Protocol—because it was trick to have the USA, England, and a couple of other countries pay for EVERYBODY! Including the super-polluters China, Russia, and India (there’s lots of others, but they are very 3rd World, and nobody can verify crap in any of them).
Gore has had a few scientists resist his presentations of their work saying that they were taken out of context, and other such problems. Problems like what I have with these photos.
Don’t for one minute think that the Democrats are pure as the driven snow—–maybe they will receive $ from the developers of energy sources that we don’t even need.
Running helter-skelter towards “sustainable”, or “renewable” sources of energy just might be a trap!!! Think.
July 27th, 2009 at 10:34 pmHi…thank you for illustrating my prediction so accurately.
Your assumptions are as colorful as your tantrum, and prove that what you don’t know about me, I could just about sqeeze into the Grand Canyon.
1.) I am not bound by party shackles…both parties are corrupt, and produce conniption belching drones. (*see above)
2.) Science is all about asking questions, and challenging commonly held beliefs. That is why we are no longer the center of all existence, and the Earth is now roughly spherical. (*you may want to jot some of that down)
3.) Not that it will matter to you, but my degree is enviro-sci, and I teach it as well. (*hopefully you have not procreated, and there is no threat of your spawn gracing my roster.)
Now, was there one particular aspect of my “ignorant spewage” that you would like to discuss…or have you fallen asleep now after filling your shorts…
July 27th, 2009 at 10:38 pmHi Gary…I went back and read my post to make sure I didn’t call into question the political views of the scientists working on this. All I was saying in regards to that, is some scientists live grant-to-grant…I have friends like that. I am confident they would not sell out to the money-holders…but not so sure about the rest of them. I’m not calling anyone out specifically…I’m just saying it looks a little fishy sometimes, but no one ever questions it.
As far as the other points I made, I think they were relatively specific based on concepts…obviously, debating or discussing every study out there would take forever. I’m just commenting on specific trends.
I guess the part I have a real issue with is the lack of evidence that we are to blame. How can a molecule of CO2 be identified as coming from an SUV, or a volcano.
Maybe I’m a little conspiratorial, but if global warming was a natural occurance, it would be pretty hard to cash in on. By spinning it as a man-made thing, it opens up avenues of taxation.
July 27th, 2009 at 10:51 pmOh…Gary, I should say that these are just my thoughts…I’m not here to convert anyone to anything…I crave the discussion.
Thanks!
July 27th, 2009 at 10:53 pmLunchBox says:
What do you want you ARE stupid
Hi…thank you for illustrating my prediction so accurately.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You didnt make a POINT MORON. You tried a stupid, juvenile and patently transparent tactic of premetively accusing us of insulting YOU so that YOU could insult US, as I showed, and hopefully escape our return serve. You didnt really think we were as stupid as you did you?
Your assumptions are as colorful as your tantrum, and prove that what you don’t know about me, I could just about sqeeze into the Grand Canyon.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
YOu are bound by stupid shakles and STILl dont know what sceince is. I see you are still tossing out the insults and I bet you will continue to snivel like the punk you are that I am going to return them.
2.) Science is all about asking questions, and challenging commonly held beliefs. That is why we are no longer the center of all existence, and the Earth is now roughly spherical. (*you may want to jot some of that down)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Ah not exactly STUPID. Science is about setting up experiments and doing studies that produce reproducable results and test hypothoses. Look up scientific method. Then if you anti global warming dogma weenies want to be taken seriously you ought to actually DO science the way science is done and stop doing science the way hamburgers are sold with a PR campaign. Any fool can ask questions and challenge beliefs unless you try to ANSWER those questions you arent DOING science you are doing philosophy or brainwashing the gullible.
3.) Not that it will matter to you, but my degree is enviro-sci, and I teach it as well. (*hopefully you have not procreated, and there is no threat of your spawn gracing my roster.)
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
OH MY GOD. I hope you are lying. You dont even know what science IS and you supposedly teach it? You are stupid. This is a plain fact. Your posts show it. My SPAWN is a genius like her mother was and has an IQ that puts you little pea brain in the toilet. Then again my goldfish could give YOU a run for your money.
Now, was there one particular aspect of my “ignorant spewage” that you would like to discuss…or have you fallen asleep now after filling your shorts…
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
I have spanked you twice now moron. Keep insulting us then sninveling like a punk when we insult you though. I love to laugh at people as stupid as YOU
July 27th, 2009 at 11:25 pmYou are a LIAR lunchbox. If what you wanted was discussion instead of a flame war you would not have BEGUN YOUR VERY FIRST POST like this
After reading all the party-approved ramblings of most of the postes here
July 27th, 2009 at 11:28 pmseattlemark says:
Yeah because what we REALLY need to do is stay forever with UNSUSTAINABLE sources of energy. Was your post a joke? The photo shows what it shows. I am sure you THINK we ought to take YOUR word that we should ignore the photographic evidence because of your cute little story but we really arent that dumb.
July 27th, 2009 at 11:45 pmBy the way lunchbox moron by YOUR definition of science I would be doing science by asking how many angels dance on the head of a pin.
July 27th, 2009 at 11:50 pm.
B U S H
C H E N E Y
B R O K E
W O R L D !
.
July 27th, 2009 at 11:56 pmHas anyone seen Tim Vaculik?
July 28th, 2009 at 12:15 amLunchbox,
you might start here .
And if the warming was natural there would be less we could do about it which would excuse the energy companies from taxes and use reductions. Which group do you think stands to make the most money?
Your comment proposes a pretty big conspiracy that would be difficult to sustain. If that were the case, dissenting voices would be loud and proud, their number would exceed what we see now and the papers disputing the hypothesis would be more difficult to debunk than the current crop of denialist propaganda.
I have a question for you, why does what the denial group claims the scientists say different than what the scientists say?
By addressing the science as I suggested, the motives of the scientists and the politicians can be ignored.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:21 amdbadass says:
Has anyone seen Tim Vaculik?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think he came by calling himself lunchbox hoping for some credibility.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:22 amGaryB says:
Assigning venal motives is always a bottom of the barrel argument. First of all it requires amazing mind reading powers that I just dont believe those on the right ACTUALLY possess. Second it is an easy argument that can be made on ANY issue. Is there REALLY gravity? What if those airlines are just trying to make money by convincing us we cant really fly all on our own?
July 28th, 2009 at 12:28 amthat is alarming – no wonder Palin can see Russia from her house – the ice blocking the view is f*&in’ gone!!!
July 28th, 2009 at 3:50 amThank you..
Sesli Chat
July 30th, 2009 at 2:54 pmSesli Sohbet
Sesli Chat
Sesli Sohbet