Yet another inconvenient truth: the LA Times reports that Greenland’s ice sheet has defied computer models, and is now sliding into the ocean three times faster than previously recorded.
I think I’ll go check out some beach-front property… in Tukwila.
The trollfucks’ cerebral matter is melting away even faster.
But Goldy, there’s nothing we can do about it. It’s the sun’s fault!
Speaking of trollfucks, betcha NONE of those unpatriotic tightwads SUPPORTS THE TROOPS!
Roger Rabbit supports the troops — I donated $99 to OPERATION HELMET (http://www.operation-helmet.org/ ) to buy a helmet upgrade kit for a U.S. soldier deployed to Afghanistan or Iraq, because the UNPATRIOTIC REPUBLICAN CHEAPSKATES who sent them are too cheap to supply our troops with battlefield equipment.
Looking for some cheap summer fun? Then play the “Identify the Fossil Fuel Industry Whore” game!
Next time a winger trots out another think tank that questions the scientific consensus on global warming, go to Mother Jones’ handy little cheat sheet on which groups are taking industry money (thanks to Daddy Love for posting the link yesterday):
http://www.motherjones.com/new.....t_hot.html
If a specific scientist is mentioned, check out the substance of their arguments at: http://www.realclimate.org/ As mentioned by a number of posters, this is the definitive site for global warming discussion by Actual, Reputable Scientists without ties to the fossil fuel industry!
Investigative journalist Ross Gelbspan also has wide-ranging information on industry attempts to hijack global warming policy discussions:
http://www.heatisonline.org/main.cfm
The bottom line: Rarely has there been an issue where the scientific community has developed such a strong consensus on an issue. So it is almost always safe to say that if a winger trots out “denialist” research, either it has ties to the fossil fuel industry or the winger is distorting the implications of the findings.
FOR SOME, GREENLAND CAN’T MELT FAST ENOUGH
Dunno how Goldy missed this article …
“‘End Times’ Religious Groups Want Apocalypse Soon
“Generations of Christians have hoped for the Second Coming of Jesus, said UCLA historian Eugen Weber …. ‘And it’s always been an ultimately bloody hope, a slaughterhouse hope,’ he added with a sigh. ‘What we have now in this global age is a vaster and bloodier-than-ever Wagnerian version. But, then, we are a very imaginative race.’ … According to various polls, an estimated 40% of Americans believe that a sequence of events presaging the end times is already underway.”
http://www.latimes.com/news/pr.....-headlines
Hi Green Thumb,
Global warming has been going on for 10,000 years. WA was covered by glaciers down to Olympia not that long ago, thus the U shaped valleys all over our state stretching north to south. Sea levels have risen 400 feet in this time. I think the debate is more about whether a 100 ppm change in the atmospheric concentration of C02 is a big deal or not. When you do the math it isn’t that big of deal. However, we still should conserve energy even if burning it doesn’t do that much to the atmosphere and in fact may have many positive effects on plants. And even if you think I’m wrong, we only have 50 to 80 years of oil left anyways – another 100 ppm or so isn’t going to do much.
What is a big deal is the amount of the earth covered with black top, brick, concrete, etc. which absorbs a lot more heat then forest, grass, etc. Just notice how Seattle is always about 2 or 3 F hotter than the suburbs — which is not a global gas effect. 1% of the earth’s surface has some type of man-made structure on it. This is responsible for about 30% of the “global warming” we see today.
What is a big deal is the sun has gotten hotter over the last 50 years, and is responsible for more than 70% of the “global warming we see today”
Having the earth a few degrees warmer is a good thing, as ice ages are repeative and far more destructive.
HOLY MOLY!!! 40% OF AMERICANS ARE PSEUDO-RELIGIO WHACK JOBS!!!
… That almost exactly corresponds with Lobbyist Mike!’s poll numbers.
6
“What is a big deal is the sun has gotten hotter over the last 50 years, and is responsible for more than 70% of the ‘global warming we see today’
Having the earth a few degrees warmer is a good thing, as ice ages are repeative and far more destructive.” Commentby John McDonald— 6/25/06@ 10:01 am
Are these the new wingnut talking points, John? First of all, before you spout wingnut-filtered crap like “the sun is responsible for 70% of global warming,” maybe you should check the ORIGINAL SOURCE MATERIAL, to wit:
“Study says sun getting hotter
“WASHINGTON (AP) – The sun is getting hotter, adding heat to an Earth already thought to be warming from greenhouse gases.
“Solar radiation reaching the Earth is 0.036 percent warmer than it was in 1986, when the current solar cycle was beginning, a researcher reports in a study to be published Friday in the journal Science. The finding is based on an analysis of satellites that measure the temperature of sunlight.
“The increase is only a small fraction of the total heat from the sun, but in a century it would be enough to seriously aggravate problems of global warming thought to be caused by greenhouse gases, says Richard C. Willson of Columbia University’s Center for Climate Systems Research.
“Willson said that most researchers expect greenhouse gases to warm the planet by 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit in the next 100 years. Solar irradiance could add another 0.72 degrees F and ‘that is not an insignificant number. It is smaller than the greenhouse effect, but it is not trivial,’ he said.”
If the sun’s impact is “SMALLER THAN THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT” how could it be responsible for 70% of global warming, John? According to my calculation, if the above estimates are correct, the sun would account for only 16.6% of the increase in temperature over the next century. Memo to wingnuts, 16.6% is less than 70%!
http://www.lubbockonline.com/news/092897/study.htm
6
So you decided to come back to HorsesAss, eh? Have you sent a donation to OPERATION HELMET (http://www.operation-helmet.org/ ), or are you unpatriotic like the rest of the trollfuck tightwads?
ROGER RABBIT QUIZ
Let’s test the scientific knowledge of our trollfuck friends. How many of you think chopping down rainforests
[ ] 1. does
[ ] 2. does not
screw up rainfall? Namely, removing trees results in
[ ] 3. less
[ ] 4. more
rain, and turns cleared land into
[ ] 5. desert
[ ] 6. productive farms.
(Cheat sheet: If you checked any even-numbered boxes, you’re an uneducated, ill-informed, scientifically-illiterate moron.)
ANother tidbit from MJ:
“SALLIE BALIUNAS, a Harvard-Smithsonian Institute astrophysicist, has, along with colleague WILLIE SOON, been giving deniers scientific cover since the mid-1990s. They began by claiming solar effects could account for the rise of the global thermostat. After that theory was debunked, Baliunas and Soon wrote a paper—partially funded by the American Petroleum Institute—for Climate Research that claimed that the 20th century hasn’t been all that warm. Their conclusions have been praised as the epitome of “sound science” by deniers, including Sen. James Inhofe. The journal’s editor, meanwhile, said the paper should never have been published. Baliunas and Soon are each connected to at least four ExxonMobil-funded groups.”
What they don’t mention are the editors who reigned in protest because shills Soon and Baliunas’ “study” was published.
http://eospso.gsfc.nasa.gov/ft.....t%20SOURCE‘
Check this nice document out. They mention the sun as 30% responsible for the global warming we have seen.
The earth has warmed up … are you denying that “black top” parking lots, “black top” buildings, are a cause of global warming. Jeez everyday on the weather channel you can see that urban areas are hotter than suburban areas … WHY? The growth of urban areas world wide tracks more closely to the recent spike in temperature even more closely than oil consumption does.
The reason Antarctica has cooled over past 2 to 3 decades is because it has no urban areas.
You want to cool the globe.
1. stop paving so much of the ground with black top, or change it’s color.
2. plant more trees in urban areas.
3. make reflective surfaces in urban area high rises.
4. limit the amount of air conditioning
5. Only allow clean diesel as the particulates are black and aborb heat very well.
Canada will hate you. If I was a Canadian I’d be totally in favor of global warming. For example, during the last global warming event, the Vikings were farming Greenland and having a jolly good time pillaging the homes of the English and Irish instead of freezing their butts off in Norway.
John McDonald, if you are going to so glibly challenge the scientific concensus on global warming, then it is only fair for us to ask: What are your credentials?
What is your doctorate in? From where? Who was your dissertation chair? What was your topic? What reputable, peer-reviewed scientific journals have you published in?
Umm, John, that NOT what your source says. What it says is:
“Some empirical models estimate that
the Sun varied by nearly 0.5% since pre-industrial times.
Climate models indicate such a change may account for
over 30% of the warming that has occurred since 1850.”
That is not at ALL inconsistent with Roger’s quote:
““Willson said that most researchers expect greenhouse gases to warm the planet by 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit in the next 100 years. Solar irradiance could add another 0.72 degrees F and ‘that is not an insignificant number. It is smaller than the greenhouse effect, but it is not trivial,’ he said.”
Yours comments on the largest possible effect the sun could have had over the last 150 years. Roger’s comments on the far larger role greenhouse gases will be playing in the warming over the next 100 years.
I personally love your blacktop theory, John. The only problem is that scientific consensus says you’re an idiot.
Washington has some of the nices beaches in the world – to bad they are like 30F to cold. Too bad, even the most extreme global warming scenarios won’t fix this problem.
Antarctica is melting, John. It was questioned in 200, but by 2005 we had a better answer: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4228411.stm
18 scientific consensus, these guys beg to differ.
http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p37.htm
John McDonald, you didn’t answer the question: What are your credentials on global warming science?
Sorry that was:
“Climate models indicate [that] such a change may account for over 30% of the warming that has occurred since 1850.”
Jimbo, the “17,000 signatures” is bunk, and the “beneficial effects” theory is just a way for the Right to muddy the waters for the non-scientific public.
21.
There’s the discredited Oregon petition, again.
You guys need to change the dial on your time machine. The year is 2006, not 1998.
Daddy Love,
I have absolutely no credentials based on your standard. So you can ignore me. However, I do have more credentials than Al Gore.
But besides that, I like to point out the obvious. Things people can see directly, instead of relying on the paid people from the oil industry or a starving researcher trying to get his next grant.
One, urban areas are hotter than suburban areas … every night on the news you can see this. So how much of the earth is urban — ~1% now and going up at a very rapid rate. It maps to the global warming curve quite nicely.
The sun comes up the earth gets hot, the sun goes down the earth get cool. The U. of Colorado tracks this and says that it has increased 0.4W per m2. That’s a lot! I believe them as most researcher I know I very very good about publishing actual data. Some inflate the meaning of the data, but I’ve never met a university research who made it up.
Global warming is true, flying over washington state and see the valleys of the former glaciers tells immediately that it is true and has been going on for a long time.
Finally, Antarctica has been cooling according to the on-going temperature measurements. It will be less effected by the increase in the sun due the extreme angle, and it has no urban areas. However, if the earth were getting hotter due to CO2 it should be rising right along with the rest of the planet.
Global warming is such a difficult issue to discuss because we do depend upon scientific evidence to tell us what is going on.
Most folks don’t have the background, time, and perhaps even the intelligence to wade through the scientific literature. This is why the public is an easy target by the fossil fuel industry for a vast assortment of disinformation techniques.
And this is why Goldy’s blog is really important, because in an organic fashion in helps folks begin to see through the lies, distortions and distractions that keep the public from understanding what is at stake.
No CREDIBLE scientific body disputes the global warming situation. There are some right wing think tanks that have paid third – tier scientists to say there’s no such problem but the serious science, the kind done by Nobel prize winners, says global warming is real.
The problem is that the population doesn’t care – and they won’t care until it’s too late. And I doubt anything we can say will change it. We live in a society where liars and cowards like Karl Rove are able to convince people to take positions that are counter to their own interests. Frankly, as a species, we don’t deserve to live on in my opinion.
All Democrats must stop driving cars, boats, and refuse to fly in airplanes to stop global warming! [hehe]
Surf’s up off Greenland! Drop in on a 12 foot face!
12
Oh so now it’s 30% instead of 70%? Where did the other 40% go? Wait, that’s right, this is Sunday and they’re all attending a Megachurch near their homes.
6, 12
We’re making progress — McDonald the Wingnut revised his estimate of the sun’s contribution to global warming from 70% to 30% in only 6 posts. Which leaves a mere 13.33% to go …
John McDonald @ 26:
It’s interesting to see the way you work through the various industry memes. You’re quite good — much more sophisticated than Mark the Redneck’s chi-squared crap.
You say: “I like to point out the obvious. Things people can see directly, instead of relying on the paid people from the oil industry or a starving researcher trying to get his next grant.”
You create a fascinating dichotomy: Industry hacks versus starving researchers. Only one problem with that: The scientific concensus on global warming was not determined by a few junior researchers working on the margins of their disciplines — it represents what may be the most extensive, multi-disciplinary and multi-national scientific endeavor EVER ATTEMPTED.
You also seem fixated on the U of Colorado research. Whatever. Whatever the scientific legitimacy of your point, you are presenting a false dichotomy anyway. Yeah, we need to reduce the amount of heat generated from urban areas. But that doesn’t change the fact that we also need to make rapid efforts to reduce CO2 build up in the atmosphere by tempering fossil fuel consumption.
The U.S. is far behind the rest of the industrialized world in its regulation of CO2. Ross Gelbspan calls this a crime against humanity. I suspect that he is more right than any of us may wish to admit.
13
Parking lots? Clueless one — assuming parking lots reflect heat back into the atmosphere (probably a safe assumption), it’s GREENHOUSE GAS that keeps this heat in the atmosphere, instead of escaping into space.
Dolt.
If Democrats stopped breathing, would that lower the CO2 and “save the planet”?
26.
Time to spin that dial on your time-machine, the year is now 2006. Been missing appointments lately?
It had been though that the East Antarctic ice shelf was increasing in size, but two 2006 studies showed that overall volumes of ice there now appear to be declining and that 85% of the glaciers there have increased their flow of ice to the sea. In addition, air temperatures high above the mass of ice have warmed more rapidly than anywhere else in the world.
Stll, the East shelf is still considered more stable, and less problematic, than the West Antarctic ice shelf, which rests atop islands. There glaciers that was previously resting on land melt and slide into the sea, causing a displacement of water absent in the past. Melting has always gone on there, but the size and area of the melt pools are now much larger than before. The water in the melt pools flows downward in crevices in the ice forming conduits called moulins, weaking the ide and causing it to break up. The ice pool/moulin process is exactly like what has been happening more and more rapidly in Greenland since 1992.
The sun temperature isn’t cause these rapid changes.
“I have absolutely no credentials based on your standard. So you can ignore me.”
Dude, I’m not the one talking about “credentials.” Not we don’t all know already that you do not read carefully.
“However, I do have more credentials than Al Gore.”
Oh, so you have a lifelong record of public service, wrote a bestselling book on the environment in 1992, are known as an expert on global warming, and are regularly briefed by the nation’s leading climatologists? Somehow I think not.
“But besides that, I like to point out the obvious.”
It’s easier than evaluating the research of thousands of scientists, isn’t it. After all, if it doesn’t make “common sense,” it can’t possibly be true, can it? Tell me, what does your common sense tell you about quarks? Time dilation at near-light speeds? The relationship of atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane, and halocarbons to emissions, sources and sinks?
:One, urban areas are hotter than suburban areas”
Locally.
“It maps to the global warming curve quite nicely.”
is that more of your “common sense” or do you have a source for this complicated research?
“Antarctica has been cooling according to the on-going temperature measurements.”
Again, common sense or supported by data you can present. Some might disagree, such as the British Antarctic Survey , who have determined that the atmosphere above the Antarctic has Antarctica has warmed dramatically over the past 30 years, and surface temperatures have increased 4.5ºF (2.5ºC) in the last 50 years on the Antarctic Peninsula, the mountainous arm that trails toward the southern tip of South America, while “the rest of Antarctica has done virtually nothing [at the surface].”
Oh, well, so much for the “obvious.”
That was for John McDonald. Was anyone confused? I think it was “obvious,” so even he should get it.
Glaciers that were previously, not was previously
Ice, not ide
THE SKY IS FALLING, THE SKY IS FALLING!!!!!!!!!!!!!
14
“The reason Antarctica has cooled over past 2 to 3 decades is because it has no urban areas.” Commentby John McDonald— 6/25/06@ 10:33 am
Why don’t you submit that theory — along with your supporting data — to a peer reviewed publication?
LeftTurn @ 28
I disagree. If you look at the poll data from pollingerport.com I posted elsewhere, sizable majorities of the American public
– understand the global warming is quite real
– understand that human activities are a major contributor
– say that regarding mitigation efforts for this phenomenon, environmental considerations should be more important than economic ones
Bored? Need summer fun? Give a wingnut one scientific fact, and watch them run with it!
Oh, and the data from the British Antarctic Survey was released in 2006.
Does that mean if we build a McDonald’s at Atarctica, they will come?
35
Since you claim there’s more Republicans than Democrats, a cessation of breathing by Republicans would make a greater contribution to quelling CO2 buildup in the atmosphere. The improvement will be exponentially larger if we can figure out how to rein in methane gas emissions from Republicans.
And if we bury all the Republicans after they stop breathing, it will be a good-sized carbon sink.
We could always bury them before they stop breathing.
Personally, I like Johnny Mac’s global climate model.
It’s so darn simple!
Seems like it would be pretty darn easy for evil billionaire Mikos Cassadine to build a machine to freeze Port Charles.
Cool!
I thought McDonald left this web site because he was disgusted by the name calling here. You know, the same kind of name calling wingfucks do to us. They call us “commies” and we call them “nazis” except we call McDonald a “chickenshit” because he can’t take it.
So, John, what brings you back?
TRENTON — Did Jon Corzine have a Howard Dean moment? Impressed by the 6,000 or so union members noisily rallying before him, the governor said, “We’re gonna fight for a fair contract.” We? If he’s on labor’s side of the table during negotiations, who represents their employer, the taxpayers of New Jersey? **SNIP** Reportedly, the audit found a $100 million bank account outside the state’s financial systems with no controls.
Corruption in the Garden State continues unabated.
Look, the New Jersey taxpayers voted for him. They KNEW he was a Liberal Democrat. So I figure they have NOTHING to complain about. If they’ve got the “Blues,” they deserve it.
John McDonald,
even if you can’t get your really cool model for global climate accepted for publication and peer reviewed by one of those snooty “science” periodicals, maybe you should try sending it in to one of the prime time soaps. What if it snowed on the O.C.?
Cool, huh?
Milwaukee, Wis. Wisconsin had the sixth highest state and local taxes in 2004, according to a new analysis. **SNIP** New York had the highest state and local taxes by that measure, at 14.7 percent, followed by Wyoming at 13.9 percent, Maine at 13.4 percent, Hawaii at 12.6 percent and Vermont, which was only a hundredths of a point ahead of Wisconsin. Among neighboring states, Wisconsin was higher than Minnesota, which was 16th highest…
State taxes continue to gobble up hard-earned income.
Dang…those must be some highly prosperous Democrat states. The ‘Rat socialist dream of taxing oneself into prosperity is alive and doing well up there. So well in fact that they’ve sent their automotive industry’s south in a magnanimous effort to benefit their poor southern brethren and try to educate those poor devils in the ways of the ‘rat and raise’em up. Looks like Atlas has truely Shrugged.
If Mayor Nickels gets his tunnel, and the sea level rises 21 feet, downtown Seattle won’t need to add more sewer capacity for at least 10,000 years.
53
Can we assume that a tax-hating Republican who moves to a high-taxes Democratic state did so because he’s STUPID?
Daddy Love @ 42:
I think both you and LeftTurn make useful points. I agree with you that the public is far ahead of our current, Republican-controlled federal government.
That said, there is amble evidence in the U.S. and elsewhere that global warming is a particularly difficult problem to solve because of its complexity, potential up-front costs, and its perception as a long-term problem that does not demand immediate attention.
Many of the nations that approved the Kyoto Protocols HAVE had trouble meeting their targets. It’s also true that efforts to pass substantive legislation have elicited backlashes in some countries (Canada is a prime example).
Let’s be honest: Stopping, or at least greatly reducing the impacts of, global warming won’t be any quicker or easier than the civil rights movement.
Is that depressing? Sure. But what other choice do we have besides fighting the good fight? Can we ethically do anything less for our children and grandchildren?
@3,
Well ROGER that is mighty thoughtful of you. Too bad they aren’t getting any equpiment because the tratiorous Democrat leftists are blocking it at the Port of Olympia. But please Roger, go on about how they all “support the troops”.
http://portland.indymedia.org/.....0235.shtml
McDonald – Thanks for helping out here with these kook moonbats. They don’t seem to understand that THE FUCKING SUN causes the earth to be warm.
But we’ll never convince them. Global warming is their religion. Science and math and data don’t enter into the discussion. Their hero Algore says its true, and for them, that seals the case.
I’ve been asking an inconvenient question the past few weeks; namely, are current temps within the range of natural variation. They won’t answer the question because the know that there is NOTHING UNUSUAL about our current temps.
Most of the moonbats here are just useful idiots. A few of them are evil and want to wreck the Murkan way of life because after all, librulism is about spreading misery equally and they want the rest of us to suffer just like they are.
Speaking of Mikos Cassadine, he’s in the running as the evil perpetrator of 9/11, although still far behind the front runner:
Who do you believe was behind 9/11?
1 – Saddam Hussein, 70%
2 – Satan, 11%
3 – The Blacks, 8%
4 – Mikos Cassadine, 6%
5 – That Osama Guy, Whatshisname, you know, Von something, 4%
6 – Project for a New American Century, 1%
Note: Percentages add up to 100% because Dean Logan tallied the votes. If Stefan tallies the votes, add 10% to each category.
http://www.thepaincomics.com/weekly030917a.htm
58
Mark — what causes polar ice caps?
58
Persistent lie, from perststant liar.
Look, here’s Dr. Redneck, America’s leading scientist on climatology! He’s just back from presenting a paper at an international scientific conference.
What was your paper about, Dr. Redneck? Where are you submitting it for publication?
Oh, I forgot. Dr. Redneck doesn’t answer “inconvenient” questions about his credentials. The great thing about being a trailer park scientist is that you don’t have to base your viewpoints in any Actual Facts. All you need is supreme arrogance.
Bitchslap @ 53,
careful with that.
If you keep on with that kind of thing it just might be revealed the Washington State ranks near the bottom for local and state tax burdens.
C’mon now, if we all pull together we can whip Alabama!
The lie being that current temperatures are in line with historic norms.
Just saw that Ahhhhhhhnold told Baby Bush to suck his dick – he’s not sending any more troops to guard the Mexican border – I love watching republican train wrecks. It makes it so hard for Fox News to decide who to slander!
61
Mark the Fake Patriot doesn’t support the troops, either. He hasn’t donated a penny to http://www.operation-helmet.org/.
For the latest wingnut talking points, click on Fakepatriot.org.
MTR @ 58
natural variation;
http://www.grida.no/climate/ip.....025.htm#e3
The warming over the past 100 years is very unlikely to be due to internal variability alone, as estimated by current models. The instrumental record is short and covers the period of human influence and palaeo-records include natural forced variations, such as those due to variations in solar irradiance and in the frequency of major volcanic eruptions. These limitations leave few alternatives to using long “control” simulations with coupled models for the estimation of internal climate variability. Since the SAR, more models have been used to estimate the magnitude of internal climate variability, a representative sample of which is given in Figure 14. As can be seen, there is a wide range of global scale internal variability in these models. Estimates of the longer time-scale variability relevant to detection and attribution studies is uncertain, but, on interannual and decadal time-scales, some models show similar or larger variability than observed, even though models do not include variance from external sources. Conclusions on detection of an anthropogenic signal are insensitive to the model used to estimate internal variability, and recent changes cannot be accounted for as pure internal variability, even if the amplitude of simulated internal variations is increased by a factor of two or perhaps more. Most recent detection and attribution studies find no evidence that model-estimated internal variability at the surface is inconsistent with the residual variability that remains in the observations after removal of the estimated anthropogenic signals on the large spatial and long time-scales used in detection and attribution studies. Note, however, the ability to detect inconsistencies is limited. As Figure 14 indicates, no model control simulation shows a trend in surface air temperature as large as the observed trend over the last 1,000 years.
the diagram enlarged:
http://www.grida.no/climate/ip.....gts-14.htm
Wingnut Liar @57
What proof do you have that ANY of those protesters were “Democrats”? Over 1.5 million Washingtonians voted for Kerry and there were, what, 20 people at the Olympia protest? So, even if ALL of them were people who call themselves “Democrats” that still leaves 99.999% of Democrats who did NOT “block military shipments” (i.e., engage in a purely symbolic anti-war protest that did not prevent one ounce of “military materiel” from being shipped on time).
But the bigger question is, how do we know these “protesters” weren’t Republican operatives? We know the “protesters” who staged an illegal RIOT in Miami-Dade County to shut down the lawfully constituted canvassing board in that county weren’t “protesters” at all, but rather were PAID GOP SABOTEURS who were dispatched and bused to Miami by the RNC.
So why wouldn’t the RNC or Bush administration send paid GOP saboteurs to Olympia, to stage a fake “protest” for propaganda purposes?
I would say the chances of that are at least 99.999%.
I’ll tell you who the UNPATRIOTIC FUCKS are: The blowhards who wrap themselves in the flag but DON’T SUPPORT THE TROOPS.
Roger Rabbit donated $99 to http://www.operation-helmet.org/ because the
UNPATRIOTIC REPUBLICANS running Congress and the White House would rather give tax breaks to billionaires than buy battle equipment for the troops THEY sent to Afghanistan and Iraq.
Computer “models” are not scientific evidence…. which is one of many reasons the little political propaganda film made by a theology school flunky is being laughed off the screen by REAL scientists.
“Mr. Gore suggests that the Greenland melt area increased considerably between 1992 and 2005. But 1992 was exceptionally cold in Greenland and the melt area of ice sheet was exceptionally low due to the cooling caused by volcanic dust emitted from Mt. Pinatubo. If, instead of 1992, Gore had chosen for comparison the year 1991, one in which the melt area was 1% higher than in 2005, he would have to conclude that the ice sheet melt area is shrinking and that perhaps a new Ice Age is just around the corner.” — Dr. Petr Chylek, adjunct professor, Department of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax.
– – –
“Both the Antarctic and Greenland ice caps are thickening. The temperature at the South Pole has declined by more than one degree C since 1950. And the area of sea ice around the continent has increased over the last 20 years.” — Dr. R.M. Carter, professor, Marine Geophysical Laboratory, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia.
– – –
“From data published by the Canadian Ice Service, there has been no precipitous drop-off in the amount or thickness of the ice cap since 1970 when reliable overall coverage became available for the Canadian Arctic.” — Dr./Cdr. M.R. Morgan, FRMS, formerly advisor to the World Meteorological Organization/climatology research scientist at University of Exeter, U.K.
Al Gore: a pathetic little Charlie Chaplin.
You want to see PATRIOTISM? I’ll show you a PATRIOT:
http://69.13.97.211/t-shirt-de.....20Flag.jpg
What are the odds that MTR understands the importance of the fact that there is no trend in the past 1,000 years that matches the one since 1840?
Since 600,000 BC?
72
What do you think would happen to the career of a meteorologist who is a serving officer in the Canadian armed forces if he didn’t parrot the government line?
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-.....eighbors=1
Here the actual measured data from Halley weather station data, antarctica … 75.5S, 26.6W … Trendline COOLING … frick’in ice age coming boys! :-)
I suppose your models are better than actual measured data. By the way this is the longest continual directly measured temperature data in Antarctica.
74
You’d be wasting your breath. Redneck only hears what he wants to believe. That’s why his stocks keep going down, and he can’t pay his gambling debts.
Click here for photo of sillyguy testing his theory of flight. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I.....hopter.JPG
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-.....eighbors=1
Here is the actual temp data from Amundsen-Scot weather station Antarctica showing no change in average temperature there. This is the second longest direct measurement of temperature in Antarctica.
I suppose I need a phD to read a temperature gauge
So Global warming is happening and it’s because of the SUN, because of the massive buildout of Urban areas, a teeny bit due to CO2. A few sheets of black plastic are enough to heat a pool in the summer time, imagine the massive amounts of heat energy in a black top mall parking lot or a 5 mile strip of road.
That’s why antarctica is not getting warmer, no strip malls yet.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-.....eighbors=1
Henry weather station … has gotten 2.5C COLDER — OH my goodness! This is the closet weather station to the south pole.
That’s 2.5C COLDER — NOTE C NOT F.
so harry the expert turtle, show us all those climate studies that show “no trend in the past 1,000 years that matches the one since 1840? Since 600,000 BC?”
We’d all be really interested to see them…
considering they’ve only been recording them for the last 150 years.
Tune in tonite for more “Global Warming: faith for the godless” with the Wrong Reverend Al Gore. BE HEALED!… just send your checks and money orders to Rev Al Gore so he can further his ministry with Rolex’s, private planes, limo’s and trips to France.
Do your own global warming experiment.
Take your bare feet on a bright sunny day.
Go stand on some grass (cool, refreshing), Then go stand on some white paint (not bad), then go stand on black top in a strip mall parking lot for 10 min (seek medical attention for 2nd degree burns and use your new degree to stop posting crap like black top is not heating the planet)
84
John, you really should try to get your theories (and supporting datum) published in a peer reviewed journal.
HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR
ROGER RABBIT QUIZ FOR WINGNUTS
A cooler Gulf Stream is evidence of
[ ] 1. global warming
[ ] 2. global cooling
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-.....eighbors=1
Godthab Nuuk weather station in Greenland. This is the longest direct measurement of Temperature in Greenland.
Shows Global warming shows +4.5C global warming from 1880 to 1940, shows -4.5C global cooling from 1940 to 1995, shows 4C global warming from 1995 to 2006.
Make of the data what you will.
ASSPRIDE @ 72,
“Computer “models” are not scientific evidence…”
Of course they are! Just what exactly do you think “scientific evidence” consists of? Just about all “scientific evidence” consists of models – whether generated in a computer or in a lab or in some other controlled environment – models which have been shown to have a high reliability for predicting future outcomes.
And just exactly what credentials do you have to pass judgement on what constitutes “scientific evidence”?
That’s just about one of the most absurd statements I’ve ever seen one of you tin hats post on here.
Roger, I should … it would be really funny. Most of this global warming stuff is like DUH. I think the their a lot of people with agendas that over confuse the subject.
The C02 rate of increase in the temperature is a real easy math equation and we have to excellent data points in Mars and Venus to check the math as both these planets have far higher CO2 levels. One cold, one super hot.
Had enough Yet!
Actual data always trumps models. You can’t say Antarctica is getting hotter if the actual data says it is getting colder. Your eyeballs looking a real temperature guage while you are freezing your arse off in the south pole is hard DATA.
Of course once, you take your measurement you can plot that against other effects and come up with models, THEN YOU CHECK THE ACCURACY OF THE MODELS AGAINST REAL DATA.
289 What and idiot. Ya think the inverse square law governing radiant energy might be a stronger governing factor? Huh?
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-.....eighbors=1
Here is data from the most northern weather station in Greenland.
It shows cooling from 1950 to 1985 and strong warming from 1985 to present day.
Johnny Mac,
you keep slandering blacktop like that, and Al DeAtley’s gonna quit sending all that money to Dianne Tebilius.
Johnny Mac
even your little proposed barefoot experiment (what is it with you people and bare feet?) consists of nothing more than a model. Albeit a very flawed one. And the data collected from such a model is only as good as the model itself. Which brings us back to that pesky concept of peer review.
@91 Another dumbass attempt at creating astraw man. Please carefully delineate how current climate models are disproved by these data points. Or will carefull examination reveal the opposite. . .they are taken into account and are part of the overall truth of the model.
TFF @ 91,
since johnnycakes can’t tell the difference between climate and weather, it’s pretty unlikely he’d know about the inverse square law of radiant energy.
So for John John’s sake:
If something is closer to a source of radiant energy, it gets way, way hotter, way, way faster. Like say, Venus as compared to Mars.
But I gotta admit, the idea of either Venus or Mars (what with the all the variables of atmosphere, geopysics, and solar orbital dynamics) being better planetary climate models for Earth than the work of all those “hippie” scientists is kinda amusing.
Had Enough Yet?@96 What village is missing this idiot @89 and various others? (Un)Sound Politics?
Tree Frog Farmer …
Please explain HOW if all the data, all the weather stations across all of Antarctica show cooling, can you have a model that says warming. Is that climate or weather … help poor John understand how falling temperature guages = global warming in Antarctica.
Johnny,
the problem probably lies in this statement of yours:
“global warming in Antarctica”
Can you see the problem?
Daddy 68 – Interesting gibberish, but misses the mark.
So the INCONVENIENT QUESTION remains. Are current temps outside natural norms. Answer: No evidence yet…
@98 You have not responded to the observation in the BBC article earlier cited :
“Professor Rapley said that if this was natural variability, it might be expected to be taking place in only a handful of places. However, studies had shown that it was happening in all three major ice streams in West Antarctica, he added.Professor Rapley said that if this was natural variability, it might be expected to be taking place in only a handful of places. However, studies had shown that it was happening in all three major ice streams in West Antarctica, he added.
Several major sections of Antarctic ice have broken off in the past decade.
The Larsen A ice shelf, which measured 1,600 sq km, broke off in 1995. The 1,100 sq km Wilkins ice shelf fell off in 1998 and the 13,500 sq km Larsen B dropped away in 2002.
Several major sections of Antarctic ice have broken off in the past decade.
The Larsen A ice shelf, which measured 1,600 sq km, broke off in 1995. The 1,100 sq km Wilkins ice shelf fell off in 1998 and the 13,500 sq km Larsen B dropped away in 2002.”
These are all observations. . . included in the consensus model of global warming. You are like the blind man examining the elephants tail and telling me “it is like a snake.”
John McDonald, you seem to have taken a rather keen interest in global warming. Does this relate to your job in any way?
My favorite quote from you is this: “I suppose I need a phD to read a temperature gauge.”
You are essentially arguing that all of those scientists from dozens of disciplines from around the world are full of shit. With a magic wand you reject the validity of theories that have been tested, debated and refined for decades by some of the finest minds on the planet.
Be honest, John: You do not understand the scientific method. Either that, or you are purposely misrepresenting the truth to further your own political agenda.
Which one is it, John?
Hi had enough,
Yes I see the problem with the statement “Global warming in Antarctica” … the problem is it is not happening in Antarctica, THEN it is NOT global.
It should be call “primarily North Hemisphere warming” due to a massive urban build out and vast areas of pavement since 1980 (note where “global warming” started).
Green Thumb,
I have no political agenda and I drive a Prius. So screw you. I do think we should have manadatory MPG improvements as it is not good to waste any resource and we will run out of oil, and the dudes that get the oil money in Bin Laden land aren’t poster children for good behavior
I just don’t think 100 ppm of CO2 increase is the frick’in end of the world or even that big of deal.
Tree Frog Farmer,
Jeez a broken ice berg … that’s what glaciers and ice shelf’s do. Yes it was big one … how long as ice shelf breakage been measured. Based on the weather station data it would be since roughly 1950. There have been exactly 56 years since then (no PhD required for that math) therefore there is a ~2% chance in any year that you will see the biggest one break one. LIKE DUH!
Temperature Gauges are important scientific instruments in determine Temperature increasing or falling, et al. published 2006 on Horsesass. Apparently, a Teraflop machine based in a dimly lited room somewhere cranking out Terabits of information consuming Terajoules of energy is more important in the religion of Chicken Little in determine both the temperature has been and will be.
Johnnypoo,
“global warming in Antarctica” is like
“nationwide Republican political collapse in Kansas”.
Just cause hillbillies in Kansas can’t get enough of Republicans, doesn’t mean they won’t be losing seats in November.
Mars get roughly 1/2 the energy of the Moon and Earth per square meter. The Earth has 370 ppm of CO2, the Moon 0 ppm CO2. Mars is colder than both and has 30x the CO2 as compared to Earth. The biggest impact that CO2 could have if all heat on mars is due to CO2 and Sun Light is 0.77C per 100 ppm, on Venus it would be 0.002C per 100 ppm. The truth for earth lies in the middle of these two points on an expontential curve.
Hi Had Enough,
Exactly Republicans are going down big time in November. They are in denial about spending, competence in government, etc. Just like you are in denial that the Sun getting hotter, and urban build out is causing localized “global warming”. It strange how people can agree on the facts and then come to very different conclusions about the data.
@104 you say “I have no political agenda and I drive a Prius.”
When you cite isolated datum and use this to attack well thought out consensus scientific thought, and then make claims like the quote above, you show yourself to be a meretricious liar.
I leave you to the splendid isolation and darkness of your ignorance.
JonJon,
isn’t it just possible that you placed the word “Antarctica” on the wrong side of your little equation?
That also doesn’t require a PhD, but a little chemistry or physics after high school wouldn’t hurt.
“Just like you are in denial that the Sun getting hotter.”
Commentby John McDonald— 6/25/06@ 2:31 pm [Er, John, That means the girls wear less clothes and get better tans. Sounds like a good thing to me.]
John, you didn’t answer the question. Why do you have such detailed knowledge of this topic yet you can so airily dismiss the scientific consensus?
I find your approach highly disingenuous. For example, you make reference to 100 ppm of CO2 increase. We would be so lucky if the increase turned out that low.
I get the distinct impression that you are not speaking out of ignorance.
PS: What happened to your call for civility, John?
LOL … I went back through all the post. THE ONLY THING YOU GUYS DID NOT REPSOND TO WAS THE ACTUAL TEMPERATURE DATA SHOWING ANTARCTICA GETTING COLDER. LOL LOL LOL LOL
I would have been nice to get, wow John that’s interesting or it is getting colder in antarctica because warm current no longer flow there, or something. Instead I got models and a bunch of how I’m not an authority on anything (which is a given) but then spouting crap from highly paid enviromental or oil lobbyists doesn’t make you an expert either.
Lots of global warming today. It kind of makes you wish it was the 70’s when we had global cooling.
The cities don’t have to be hotter than the suburbs, it is their choice to be that way. I saw a show a few years ago about Tucson, Arizona and how they lowered the temperture in the cities core by planting trees and installing water fountains.
Plant more trees up there and vote out all politicians who clear cut trees for developement……………
Poor John. No one will respond in the way that he prefers. Let us all join together and try to soothe John’s fragile ego. He makes poorly formed arguments opposed to the consensus theories of global climate change, insists on the issue being defined in his terms, then he becomes frustrated when he is dismissed.
It simply isn’t fair. It’s just not like it is over at uSP where everyon cheers him on.
John at 79.
Look at your own data. At Amundsen-Scott you have mean temp at or above -48.5 about once every ten years. Then in the last six years you have readings of greater than -48.5. The two mean years on record. You also have two of the lowest mean temp years in the same six year time span. Gobal warming means higher highs and lower lows. And it appears to be happenning at Amundsen-Scott.
Okay, John. Wow, that’s interesting how you don’t understand the scientific method. That’s interesting how you didn’t do you homework, yet you expect us to start believing the the earth is flat, night is day, and peace is war.
I believe you, John. And by the way, will you do open-heart surgery on my dad?
115
“I saw a show a few years ago about Tucson, Arizona and how they lowered the temperture in the cities core by planting trees and installing water fountains.”
Now Tucson’s only problem is, where they gonna get the water?
BigGlen,
Please go figure out what Global warming means. Every Global warming advocate I chat with has a different opinion on what it means. Some think all the ICE is going to melt in Antarctica and Greenland. If it is going to get colder periodically then how is the ICE going to melt. By the way did you see the average temperature. it was like -14C or something. ICE don’t melt until 0C. This is the first time I heard global warming means colder temperatures. Then what is global cooling for, (hotter temperatures?) Was it balmy in the last ICE age, time to have a beach party in Olympia.
I’m inclinded to question Mr. McDonald’s assertion regarding asphalt, because “black body radiation” works both ways–the asphalt mght absorb more solar energy during the day, but it would also more effectively radiate the heat back as infrared (some of which would go right through the atmosphere into space). Not that I’m in favor of anyone covering more of the planet with the stuff.
At this point, it seems that anyone would have to be a damn fool, a total capitalist whore, or both to continue denying that something’s going on. You can take an icebreaker cruise to the North Pole nowadays, and there are serious studies going on of use of the “inside passage” for commercial shipping. On the other hand, we may be heading for something more complicated than simply to have the glaciers melt for 40 days and 40 nights and then have the sewers back up. For instance, you don’t hear of great water shortages in California like you did 15 years ago. Maybe some of that water from the Greenland glaciers has somehow found its way to the Sierra snowpack.
The thing about all this is it’s high time we as a species quit debating about whether something’s happening or not, but rather to figure out as best we can what it is and be ready to adapt to it.
Roger,
they need to get the water from washington.
We will be the new Saudi Arabia of the 21st Century!
Roger, once they tap out the Colorado they will invariably cast their eyes upon Columbia River water. A nice trans-continental pipeline should do the trick.
Just remember, if you live in Tucson you gotta have a swimming pool. That’s the American way!
“AWOL” HAS A NEW MEANING
Republicans love to trumpet about how they have the military in their pocket, and rail against “uncounted military votes.” But the GOP has a dirty little secret: Hundreds of soldiers have “resigned” from the Iraq war4, and soldiers increasingly are using the term “AWOL” to mean:
“Against War Of Lies”
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/062506A.shtml
Now watch the trollfucks — not one of whom has donated to http://www.operation-helmet.org/ to buy essential safety gear that our Republican leaders are too cheap to buy for our soldiers in the combat zones — flock into this thread to denounce the “Against War Of Lies” ex-soldiers as “unpatriotic” and “traitors.”
Hey, if you’re too fucking cheap to buy a battle helmet for a soldier in Iraq, you’re an unpatriotic traitor.
114
It shouldn’t affect you — your brain is already baked.
John,
until that post at 120 I thought you’d actually educated yourself and that you just chose to believer otherwise.
But that post makes it obvious you’ve missed some important information along the way.
I’d encourage you to keep up the reading.
Artfart,
CO2 does not create heat either. It traps it and releases it back to earth or back to space back into space eventually. CO2 does this because it is “black” in infrared. Black Asphalt (black in both visiable light and infrared) traps heat and the releases it slowly too. When the heat transfer process is slowed things get hotter.
CO2 has a 370 ppm concentration in our atmosphere and covers 100% of the earth, Black Asphalt has a 1,000,000 ppm concentration everywhere it is used and covers around 1% of the earth’s surface.
One large strip mall parking lot stores heat at a rate of nearly a 1 MegaWatt per hour!
Had enough yet,
I understand the thrust of your comment. Please understand mine, Global Warming is turning into all things to all people.
If things are calm and sunny, oh that’s global warming it’s hot out today.
If things are rainy, oh that’s global warming because we have bad weather.
If things are up and down, oh that’s global warming because things vary.
I can’t keep up.
I think Global warming should mean … Global temperatures are rising, period. In which case I believe in global warming because factually global temperatures are rising. I get hung up on all the crap attributed to global warming and the plan stupid comments like antarctica calving a massive ice berg is a sign of global warming, there is way too much gloom and doom. I think Global warming and higher CO2 concentrations will be a net benefit to the US and globe in general.
And no I’m not tool of the oil companies, I think we ought to switch to renewables because it is better to spend money locally, good for business, and we are going to run out of the black stuff anyways, better to conserve the stuff while we still got some.
Green Thumb,
There is nothing wrong with swimming pools. This is the problem with the enviromental movement you are trying to deprive people of joy. Stop it. Figure out how to move the skagit river water to the southwest, make a ton of money, buy yourself a pool. You don’t even need to put in clorine and all the critters will love you as people aren’t the only people that love water.
Being for the environment does not mean you have to be anti-pool.
Exactly what i mean by doom and gloom. Man is bad, you must not enjoy life unless you eat unidentifiable veggies, and tofu shaped like chickens.
Roger,
Stay focused man this is a green subject. I know it is easy to start talking about other subjects. If you try hard enough you probably could roll the Nicaraqua, Nixon, Global Warming, and the Iraq war into a single post.
It would seem after reading the article about the ice melting three times faster than expected, that we are already caught up in a cycle of warmimg that may be unstoppable. With that assumption, what are the governments of the world doing to alleviate the flooding that will occur starting over the next 30 years or so?
120
“This is the first time I heard global warming means colder temperatures. Then what is global cooling for, (hotter temperatures?) Was it balmy in the last ICE age, time to have a beach party in Olympia.” Commentby John McDonald— 6/25/06@ 2:59 pm
Okay, John, you’ve just proved you don’t know what you’re talking about. Here’s how it works:
Burning fossil fuels increases the amount of “greenhouse gases” in the atmosphere.
These gases trap heat that otherwise would reflect back into space.
Warmer atmospheric temperatures melt arctic ice, which discharges into the North Atlantic as cold freshwater.
This discharge slows the North Atlantic Drift, which carries transports heat from the tropics to northern Europe.
When the transport of tropical heat to northern Europe by ocean currents slows, northern Europe gets colder.
http://www.commondreams.org/he.....201-03.htm
Does anyone have a study as to what the expected rise in sea-level will be over the next 25-200 years – year by year? Does anyone have a study as to what the expected changes are to the enviroments? I would hope that governments are concerned with those two factors and are taking them into their panning cycles!
Opps – try planning cycles!
129
“I think Global warming should mean … Global temperatures are rising, period.”
That’s like saying, “The Republicans are in control of Congress.” It’s meaningless until you consider what the implications of rising temperatures or GOP control of Congress are.
The major effects of global warming include “rising sea levels, altered patterns of agriculture, increased extreme weather events, and the expansion of the range of tropical diseases.” But there’s a lot more than that — e.g., ocean acidification, changes in rainfall patterns, changes in weather patterns, and a lot more. I suggest you read this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E.....ulation.3F
“Global warming” is a Democrat bull shit brain fuck. As if the Russians or Chicomms care. Only idiot Democrats believe this commie lib bull shit.
Johnnyhoo,
so the fact that some lay people and media spokesmodels misunderstand the consensus theories of global climate change justifies your dismissal of the life work of the smartest climate scientists on earth? Sorry, that’s not gonna make it.
Global climate change is scary stuff. The same pre-eminent climate scientists who advocate for a reduction in greenhouse emmisions admit to being very concerned, mostly for their kids. But they’re boring scientists. So it’s up to people like Goldy to employ hyperbole to get people to pay attention. Who the fuck knows if the ice sheet in Greenland is sliding into the ocean faster because Ahhnold drives a Humvee? But if it can convince a couple of people to drive a Prius like you, all the better.
The poster at 137 is no doubt some sort of mental patient. I can’t even understand what this moron’s name is supposed to be let along understand the drivel he/she posts. If this is a shining example of the right then the GOP is done.
Silly Guy-
How apt your choice of monikers.
Tree Fucker etc, Just repeating Algores inconvenient half truths does not change them from the lies they are.
Anectdotal evidence, all of it. So the Earth is warming, go sit in the shade until the cycle reverses, it will. Noone can prove it has anything to do with my SUV. Period.
Roger-
You are preaching pretty hard to the choir, get off of your bitter ass and do something.
It is interesting anecdotal evidence that in 1972 when I stationed in Ft Lewis that the lakes froze over that wnter for several days? Has that occurred since then? I was in Washington DC in 1961 where The stream in Rock Creek Park froze over. (My brother and I would catch the ducks and them throw in the air and watch sliding to a landing on the creek. We also went ice skating on the creek.). It would be interesting to question PSE to have them publish their records of temperature extremes.
Dumb Guy-
Gee how far back do you think PSE has temp records? Even if they had 100 years, you cannot extrapolate that into Algores hyperbole.
140
My question was even if the evidence is anecdotal, based on my experience the climate warmer (maybe you are not as old as I am), what planning is being done to alleviate the problems that could be caused by global warming? Your lack of response to such a hypothetical question shows your …. (please fill in the blanks.)
140
the climate is warmer based on my anecdotal evidence.
So Roger,
Is that your final prediction about how the artic will get colder with global warming? Or do you have 3 or 4 other contigency theories about colder and warmer and nothing happening in the North Atlantic. ICE, Fresh Water, etc. make up only 3% of all the water in the world 97% is salt water. LOL. The ICE in greenland is going to swamp the North Atlantic Ocean … good grief.
So global warming is the next ICE age … I’m laughing so hard I could cry.
All the ICE was melting and dumping cold water into the North Atlantic that it got cold in the Artic and ICE stopped melting and then the atlantic warmed up and ICE started melting and then it dumped cold water in the North Atlantic that it got cold in the Artic and ICE stopped melting and then the atlantic warmed up and ICE started melting and then it dumped cold water in the North Atlantic that it got cold in the Artic and ICE stopped melting and then the atlantic warmed up and ICE started melting and then it dumped cold water in the North Atlantic
Jeez I can’t keep up
How about Global warming means the Globe is warming?
142
You are not understanding the problem..we are already having global warming based on my anecdotal evidence..and a lot of scientic evidence. I think that we have passed the point of not being able to fix it.
What steps have our governments take to help allviate the problems that might be associated with the that. What plannning have they done? The governments from local to federal to the UN should have contingency plans in place much as the military have extensive plans in place. What are those plans?
BUFFETT’S FORTUNE WILL GO TO GATES FOUNDATION
Billionaire Warren Buffett, the world’s second richest individual, announced his plans to donate the bulk of his $44 billion fortune to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation over several years. Buffett will join the Gateses as a trustee of the Gates Foundation.
The remainder of Buffett’s fortune will go to the long-standing Buffett Foundation, and to three other foundations headed by his children.
When Buffett’s wife died two years ago, she bequeathed $2.5 billion to the Buffett Foundation, which supports “reproductive health, family planning, and pro-choice causes, and on preventing the spread of nuclear weapons.”
http://articles.news.aol.com/b.....0000000001
It must gall the SHIT out of neocons that the world’s two richest men are combining their fortunes to support LIBERAL causes.
147
Sillyguy — can you redesign this thing to work as a fan? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I.....hopter.JPG
John McDonald,
is it still your contention that “the sun … is responsible for more than 70% of the ‘global warming we see today”?
150
I think we negotiated him down to 30%.
146
“How about Global warming means the Globe is warming?” Commentby John McDonald— 6/25/06@ 3:58 pm
Because it doesn’t mean that. Global warming means northern Europe may get colder, and perhaps even become uninhabitable.
Silly Guy-
Duh, I see it is warmer, anectdotally. But I don’t see how it has anything to do with human causes. So, what the government should work on is saving me from things like terrorism, which they can and are doing something about, to the consternation of the NYT and both of Goldy’s listeners.
Oh, and make a plan for all those batteries in all those hybrids. Those are going to be a problem.
McDonald — your intuitive “common sense” approach doesn’t work because it ignores climate mechanics and cause-and-effect relationships.
Ocean currents are caused by variations in the temperature and salinity of ocean water. These currents move vast amounts of heat from the tropics to the temperate zones.
In addition to the consequences of dumping more cold, fresh, meltwater into the path of the current that warms Northern Europe, increased CO2 in the atmosphere makes ocean water more acidic, and sea levels rise not only because of adding more meltwater to the oceans, but also because the water already in the oceans expands as it absorbs heat trapped in the atmosphere.
149
Roger – you will need to keep your ornithopter in your front yard as a yard ornament to keep the hunters away. I am sure that the visitors here would hate to see that you and your family have been ‘materialized’ into rabbit stew. Besides that – is your warren getting warmer?
153
This planet has no problems that couldn’t be solved by the extinction of your species, preferably starting with you.
156
Just kidding! ha-ha-ha
155
I’d sure like one of those lawn ornaments, if you’ve got an extra one to spare!
In response to your question, it’s quite cool down here in my burrow, thank you very much. Just keep those lawn sprinklers running in the park!
ROGER RABBIT POLL
Where’s the coolest place to be on a day like this?
[ ] 1. In a bikini at Alki Beach
[ ] 2. Cruising Lake City Way in a BMW convertible with the top down
[ ] 3. Cruising the Crista campus in a BMW convertible with the top up, the air conditioner going, and listening to AM 1090
[ ] 4. Doing a talk show in KIRO’s air-conditioned studio
[ ] 5. Blogging at a computer deep underground in Roger Rabbit’s converted missile silo
153
Your government need to be more farsighted.. What are they planning if the sea levels do rise 21 feet in the next 100 years? Opps – thats outside their 5 year plan…(What minute – we have to ask Ron Sims about it.)
(My point is that the un, federal, state and local governments should have contingency plans in place.)
Why hasn’t Rubberstamp Reichert hugged a rabbit yet?
Roger, just sit there by your fan and sweat. You have no BMW, nor AC, no one listens to 1090, your bus doesn’t come to Alki, and the campus police are on the lookout for wierdos like your bitter ass trolling around. Notice I said come to ALki? The breeze up here overlooking the beach is nice and cool, in my Neocon neighborhood. Do you cruise your apartment in that bikini? Wierd.
Silly Guy, no government looks that far ahead. And Roger has no front lawn, he has a hallway to the elevator. Another source of his bitterness.
Global warming is too faith-based for me to buy into it. And the folks pushing it want to put the breaks on world capitalism and personal freedom that comes with it so I am suspicious. The conscription of Mother Nature is a red flag. See? Mother Nature herself hates you capitalist running dogs. O how very very convenient for the left that Gaia herself is pissed at technological man. There is something primitive in the progressive left; the more technologically advance we become the more the left feels the need to propitiate the gods of nature. All these supposedly smart people sitting around talking with certainty about the weather seems like madness. When conservative scientists in droves start shouting about global warming then I’ll sit up and pay attention. Till then I’ll be happy to let the hard jurnalism majors (Al gore) purple veins bulge and (with luck) burst over my smirking condescending agnosticism…
The right may be crazy but it doesn’t try to conscript mother nature when it is backed into a corner
John @ 130:
“Figure out how to move the skagit river water to the southwest, make a ton of money, buy yourself a pool. . . Being for the environment does not mean you have to be anti-pool. . . . Exactly what i mean by doom and gloom. Man is bad, you must not enjoy life unless you eat unidentifiable veggies, and tofu shaped like chickens.”
Now we’re getting somewhere. You’ve finally shown us your underlying worldview.
Who did you say you work for?
It is interesting to read the continued comments here on a Sunday afternoon as they appear to be more and more based upon a Dionysius attitude. Please enjoy the afternoon on your deck or at the beach with a nice glass of wine! (And for those teetotalers, a coke or a glass of tea will suffice also!)
Thanks, sillyguy.
Time for a glass of Syncline rose.
Which in a few more years will apparantly be made in Prince Rupert, B.C. instead of Bingen, WA.
162
Is this your penthouse? I think it is. http://www.lilligren.com/Redne.....ehouse.jpg
130
“Figure out how to move the skagit river water to the southwest, make a ton of money, buy yourself a pool.” Commentby John McDonald— 6/25/06@ 3:21 pm
Spoken like a true Republican — steal a publicly owned resource for private gain, and leave behind dead fish and environmental wreckage for others to clean up at taxpayer expense.
Oh, and let’s not forget — only wage slaves should pay taxes. Owners of capital should get a free ride — no capital gains tax, no taxes on interest or dividends, and above all no estate tax!
131
“Stay focused man this is a green subject. I know it is easy to start talking about other subjects. If you try hard enough you probably could roll the Nicaraqua, Nixon, Global Warming, and the Iraq war into a single post.” Commentby John McDonald— 6/25/06@ 3:23 pm
Hell, I can do it in one sentence:
Nixon started global warming by selling guns to death squads in Nicaragua who murdered nuns in order to steal Iraq’s oil.
140
“Roger- get off of your bitter ass and do something.” Commentby Observer— 6/25/06@ 3:41 pm
I AM doing something — I’m annoying you.
“Yo” is a contraction of the word “yahoo” (as in “trailer park yahoo”) and is properly spelled “Y’o.” Like most wingnuts, Y’o can’t spell his own name. For a photo of Y’o’s Alki Beach condo, click here: http://www.athene.biz/content/treehouse.jpg
Science Panel Backs Study on Warming Climate
By ANDREW C. REVKIN
Published: June 22, 2006
WASHINGTON, June 22 — A controversial paper asserting that recent warming in the Northern Hemisphere was probably unrivaled for 1,000 years was endorsed today, with a few reservations, by a panel convened by the nation’s pre-eminent scientific body.
At a news conference at the headquarters of the National Academies, several members of the panel reviewing the study said they saw no sign that its authors had intentionally chosen data sets or methods to get a desired result.
“I saw nothing that spoke to me of any manipulation,” said one member, Peter Bloomfield, a statistics professor at North Carolina State University. He added that his impression was the study was “an honest attempt to construct a data analysis procedure.”
More broadly, the panel examined other recent research comparing the pronounced warming trend over the last several decades with temperature shifts over the last 2,000 years. It expressed high confidence that warming over the last 25 years exceeded any peaks since 1600. And in a news conference here today, three panelists said the current warming was probably, but not certainly, beyond any peaks since the year 900.
Roger-
You do not annoy me, you amuse me. Idiots amuse me, unless they are driving, that annoys me. I am sure you cannot annoy me from the back of a bus.
No. 172:
Yes, but this study doesn’t conform to Dr. Redneck’s chi-squared test.
Remember, Dr. Redneck is America’s most renowned expert in global warming. Last year he won a Nobel Prize for a landmark study that completely debunked IPCC findings. Indeed, Dr. Redneck’s study is solely responsible for the IPCC disbanding in disgrace.
We should feel very honored that Dr. Redneck spents time here at little, old HA. That must mean Goldy has really hit the big-time.
Hi Roger,
One scientific principle is to look for the obvious cause first. The near term temperature spike in the Northern Hemisphere maps more closely to urban development then it does CO2 emissions. The long term tempertaure record maps more closely to the sun’s output.
What else can I say … that’s the data. I don’t deny that CO2 is a greenhouse gas or that the Northern Hemisphere is warming and that recently the Southern Hemisphere has started to warm (Note urban development took longer in the Southern Hemisphere). However, CO2 is a the 3rd or 4th reason not the primary reason.
Is global warming reverisable. Yes, but why would we want too?. But if we must turn Seattle into a glacier, then we need to pave with a whiter material, use an oil that doesn’t make roads black (not sure if this is possible), cover the tops of the building with solar panels, never use dark materials, require rows of trees in every row of parking lot, … go with wind, nuclear, or solar power and use only clean coal, filtered diesel. These are the practical things to do. Cutting CO2 emission is sort of rediculous to solve global warming, but it should be done anyway so we don’t send money to the Bin Laden types.
So go on your way believing in the “big experts” who are just involved in getting more money and fame as any big oil executive is.
Do you think that the Sierra Club and folks like that are really interested in much more than donations. What have they really done other than get people all excited with scare tactics. GWB does the same thing to his supporters, why do you let yourselves be played.
Watch TV and see what I mean about Urban areas being warmer, and remember every big parking lot is like a small power plant in the amount of energy it contains on a sunny day, notice how much solar power would be generated if the road was paved in solar cells, well it is paved in solar cells because roads are massive heat absorbers they just don’t generate electricity with it.
MTRs Inconvenient Pin in the Balloon:
Current temps are NOT outside historical norms. Global warming is therefore bullshit.
QED.
174.
I think Dr. Redneck has gone one step further. It is now simply, it is false becuase he says so.
That does away with all that peer reviewed study nonsense. Particular when the studies rain on his parade.
Harry, you are absolutely correct. There is no longer any reason for that scientific nonsense.
All you need to do is believe in ME. I am the Truth. I am the Power. I am the Glory. Forever and Ever. Amen.
If Mayor Nickels gets his tunnel, and the sea level rises 21 feet, downtown Seattle won’t need to add more sewer capacity for at least 10,000 years. -Commentby Roger Rabbit— 6/25/06@ 11:53 am
WE CAN ONLY HOPE….
If ya think I’m full of shit boys, show me the data.
Still waiting and waiting and waiting and waiting…
Oh, people of such small minds,
I have a secret for you
that I will now reveal.
There is no new data you can show me,
for my data is supreme.
I am the Minister of Global Warming Truth.
I am the Kingdom,
the Power,
and the Glory,
for Ever and Ever.
Amen.
Mark, your ideas make a lot of sense to me. Could you please share more about your plan to save America from the fucking moonbats?
“It would seem after reading the article about the ice melting three times faster than expected, that we are already caught up in a cycle of warmimg that may be unstoppable. With that assumption, what are the governments of the world doing to alleviate the flooding that will occur starting over the next 30 years or so?”
Well, our illustrious mayor keeps insisting on building an underground highway tunnel right next to the waterfront.
Anyone else OK with this? I’m not.
Why aren’t the ocean levels rising if all this ice is supposedly melting?
Hi ArtFart,
Long article … few facts. The thing that is annoying about most environmental articles is that they talk on and on about “what if” scenarios while giving few facts. However, we did find out about what kind of earring the guy wore.
Here is the actual temperature data from the glacier
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-.....eighbors=1
As you can see the temperature has been cooling around the glacier since the 1930’s! Hard to blame the speed of the glacier and it’s melting on global warming. This is way to funny :-)
Now please please please be honest and tell everyone that this article was ridiculous. I’m sure the glacier is going fast, I’m sure the it is adding fresh water to the ocean, etc. But this speed cannot be caused by global warming as the air temp has gotten cooler there!
Once again, Mr. McDonald, what is your training in this subject matter? What gives you the credentials to speak with such certitude?
Hi Green Thumb,
I have credentials to comment because I passed the 2nd grade lab on how to read a temperature gauge. I passed the 8th grade lab on the dew point and the properties and phases of Water.
So when someone claims that a glacier is melting and slip sliding away and connects that to global warming, I say this is interesting. I look up the temperature readings of the nearby weather station (I posted the weather station data here) and find that they are in a 75 year cooling trend. Aren’t you curious how things can melt while getting colder. I’ve never seen this, before. If you can demonstrate in a lab where ICE that gets colder under constant pressure actually melts … then I will believe you. But right now I don’t believe anyone no matter how many Nobel prizes or PhDs after their name who tell me that ICE melts when it gets colder.
Al Gore pointed out that the massive ICE Berg that broke off from Antarctica. He implied that this was an effect of global warming. Only problem is, is Antarctica has gotten colder (I posted many weather stations data here to prove it). Why aren’t you curious about this, a lack of curiousity is more akin to a religious belief instead of a scientific belief. So if the high priests of the Environmental Movement who tell you to believe something entirely contrary to everything you have witnessed your entire life, you will? Like ICE melting when it gets colder.
I believe that the average global temperature have increased. The increase is pronounced in the Northern Hemisphere in the band that includes the US and Europe, which points to Urban development as the cause. The Southern Hemisphere lagged in global warming but is now starting to heat up, which points to Urban development as the cause. The recent increase in global warming since the 1980’s points to urban development and the sun getting hotter as the cause (Univ of Colorado data posted here).
CO2 with increase of 100ppm plays a very minor role for now.
Finally, most of the crisis talk has a vein of truth with a large helping of hype. And with virtually every problem there are a list of benefits. Global warming is not an all negative event. Global cooling which happens very regularly is a truly terrible event as all of Canada would be destroyed, vast forests destroyed, salmon runs destroyed, a glacier is the cold equivalent of a desert … I don’t see a lot of criters running acrossed a glacier. Oh sure, you’ll probably find some blue algea and tell me how that is critical to the ecosystem. So one way to think of Global warming is “A reduction in the size of the cold desert, an expansion of the Northern eco-system” Go into any of the glacier valleys of Washington and notice the beautiful ecosystems that have developed now that glaciers are gone. Be amazed at how the trees have managed to take root even though the evil glaciers scrapped off the top soil down to bedrock. Glaciers are EVIL. Why can’t you be happy when such a great thing happens to the earth!
Well, John,
I’m no climatologist myself, but I do believe that there are quite a few more confounding variables involved in deposition and decomposition of arctic and glacial ice than just annual mean air temperature. It is because of the large number of confounding variables, that climate scientists depend upon computer models. Can you imagine what some of those confounding variables might be?
As I said, I’m no climatologist, but in my younger days I worked as a technical advisor with computers and monitoring equipment used to help crop scientists and agronomists determine how much and when to irrigate. We relied upon a rather simple computer model based on an equation that predated modern computers by many decades. It was called a “modified Penman equation” and it looked like this:
………mRn + PaCpCatdE
E = ———————-
……….Lv(m+y)
where:
m = Slope of the saturation vapor pressure curve (Pa K-1)
Rn = Net irradiance (W m-2)
Pa = density of air (kg m-3)
Cp = heat capacity of air (J kg-1)
Cat = atmospheric conductance (m s-1)
de = vapor pressure deficit (Pa)
Lv = latent heat of vaporization (J kg-1)
y = psychrometric constant (Pa K-1)
It’s a pretty simple equation, with pretty simple mathematics involved. But look at the number of variables. And look at the number of variables involved in calculating the variables. All this to determine something as simple as when and how much to water your lettuce.
As I’ve mentioned before, and based on what I’ve read, there are quite a few more confounding variables involved in predicting changes in deposition and decomp of glacial and polar ice. Now try to consider how many confounding variables are involved in predicting changes in global climate trends. I think if are honestly willing to consider the overall complexity of it, you might also be willing to conceed that merely citing mean annual air temp readings from a few weather stations falls far short of the rigor required to make usefull judgements. I know it’s comforting to simplify. But some problems defy simplification. Global climate change appears to be one of them.
Had Enough Yet?
I have a lot of experience with farming. Trust me, farmers are not checking their vapor pressure deficit to determine when to water. Much of eastern washington is dry land farming … they way they get water is to pray for it or rain dance depending on your religion.
In the areas where my wife grew up where you can here the phish -phish – phish of the irrigation going 24-7. They cycle the watering on a regular basis and only slow down when it has rained which is not that often in the irrigation region. Ain’t exactly rocket science.
I’m sure in some geeky research lab and test fields they measure all things you mention and check the cause and effect of every concievable atmospheric condition as they test new seeds, fertizilers etc because they want to ensure the only difference in growth is due to the varible they are testing … it is NOT what they do in the farm field I assure you.
“Hi Ol’McDonald, how’s the crop this year, Well, Joe the latent heat of vaporization being as low as it is has really been hurting the ‘taters this year” LOL!
Now back to ICE Melting. ICE melts or freezes at 0 C. Of all the things you mentioned how much would variables effect the melting temperature of ICE?
Give yourself plenty of latitude and use extreme numbers that will prove your point so long as they are actually possible … how much will the melting temperature of ICE be affected?
m = Slope of the saturation vapor pressure curve (Pa K-1)
Rn = Net irradiance (W m-2)
Pa = density of air (kg m-3)
Cp = heat capacity of air (J kg-1)
Cat = atmospheric conductance (m s-1)
de = vapor pressure deficit (Pa)
Lv = latent heat of vaporization (J kg-1)
y = psychrometric constant (Pa K-1)
I await your response in the form of “The melting temperature of ICE will be +10C or +8C or +1C or +0.000001C degrees C.” given all this complicated math and atmospheric condition.
A long drawout answer that with an indefinite conclusion is not useful.
Here is the actual temperature data from the glacier
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-.....eighbors=1
As you can see the temperature has been cooling around the glacier since the 1930’s! Hard to blame the speed of the glacier and it’s melting on global warming. This is way to funny
Did you notice that the data for that station ends in 1980? Notice what happens when you select the stations with current data. For instance:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-.....eighbors=1
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-.....eighbors=1
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-.....eighbors=1
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-.....eighbors=1
I suppose it can be seen as funny but probably not in the way you think.
[b]John[/b]
stay out of this end of the pool.
“[i]they way they get water is to pray for it or rain dance depending on your religion[/i]”
The second largest irrigation project in the U.S. lies in the eastern half of our state. The number of acres under closed circuit irrigation in Eastern Washington is second only to California. There is more – quite a bit more – to agriculture in E.W. than the Palouse. Tree fruit still outpaces both software and aerospace in total economic production in this state. Tree fruit farmers pump, and irrigate. They use a variety of means. Most rely on consultants to schedule their irrigation for them. Most consultants rely on data collected from neutron probes which they feed into computers to determine scheduling coefficients. I sure can’t comment on whatever the hell your wife’s family is doing. Sounds alot like hay or alfalfa to me. Very low value crop. Don’t see much of it in the basin compared to row crops and tree crops. Who the hell knows what “family” farmers do. Who cares. They are typically refered to in the industry as hobbyists. But hey, just like with everything else apparantly, one week of bucking bails on your wife’s family farm and your a certifiable fucking expert.
What an arrogant ass.
MTR
You can order the CD containing the entire IPCC Climate Change 2001 final report from http://www.earthprint.com/cgi-.....8;cgrfnbr=
It’s FREE. You do have to pay about $15 shipping. I ordered one. You can too, or I’ll have reams of data for you soon.
Another TJ
Damn if those curves don’t look like they’re going up.
The dip (in two graphs) just after 1970 got me thinking: That was when our particulate pollution was at its highest, and about the time MAJOR particulate pollution mitigation efforts began in the US and Europe (the “inductrialized world” of the time). The small group of scientists speculating about a new Ica Age weren’t creating models back then that took the reduced sunlight from pariculate pollution into account. So I’m wondering if the “new Ice Age” speculation of the time was just a phenomenon of our poor understanding of pollution-caused sunlight decreases.
Give it up Daddy,
Old MacDonald has made up his scientifical mind. The only thing that regulates the deposition and decomposition of glacial or polar ice is average air temperature. That’s it. It’s not his responsibility to explain the boundry interractions between liquid seawater and frozen freshwater. Surface and deep ocean currents are no concern to him. Cloud cover affecting solar radiation – irrelevant! Changes in distribution of precipitation – who cares!
No variable you could name , nor anything else matters one bit because he knows better. He just does. ‘Cause it’s obvious. And he knows. ‘Cause he does.
Good point TJ the data showing cooling at the glacier did run out in 1980, my bad.
Here is the next closest weather station to the glacier in question.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-.....eighbors=1
Showing slight heating 1980, very cold years around 1982-3, general cooling from 1980 to the mid 90’s and a steady heating since 1995 to present day. So scientifically i would say the average temperature is -5C with temperature spikes going from -9C to -2C. We are above average by +2.5C for the past 3 years or so but with in the normal variation of the local temperatures.
Many of the weather station graphs you used are very far from the glacier in question.
Had enough yet,
My comments on Dry land farming (wheat) are accurate … a huge section of Washington does not irrigate at all. The other farm I was referring to is growing potatoes.
I believe your ignoring of your own comments and the redirect into apple farming using consultants only illustrated to the absurdity of your comments about lettuce farmers using Penman equation.
“It was called a “modified Penman equation” and it looked like this:
………mRn + PaCpCatdE
E = ———————-
……….Lv(m+y)
where:
m = Slope of the saturation vapor pressure curve (Pa K-1)
Rn = Net irradiance (W m-2)
Pa = density of air (kg m-3)
Cp = heat capacity of air (J kg-1)
Cat = atmospheric conductance (m s-1)
de = vapor pressure deficit (Pa)
Lv = latent heat of vaporization (J kg-1)
y = psychrometric constant (Pa K-1)
“
Daddy Love,
Exactly, but your point about heat capacity only supports the opinion that the glacier is not melting due to global warming. The last three years have averaged -2.5C at the glacier vs. a norm of -5C.
“I believe your ignoring of your own comments and the redirect into apple farming using consultants only illustrated to the absurdity of your comments about lettuce farmers using Penman equation”
Can you please repeat that in English you ignorant fuck.
“ a huge section of Washington does not irrigate at all.”
What the fuck does that have to do with anything anybody on this thread has said? You don’t know the first fucking thing about modern agriculture, but so what? No big surprise there. Just like you don’t know the first fucking thing about climate science. But hey, why should that stop a bombastic ass hat like John McDonald?
Had Enough Yet,
The last refuge of a losing arguement is the potty mouth. Happens everytime.
In numerous post you claim how everything is so complicated and difficult that only someone with a PhD could possibly understand all that goes into weather, farming, etc. thus your example of lettuce farmers and the Penman equation.
I was pointing out that a large number of Washington farmers do absolutely nothing with regards to rain or the Penman equation — frankly I bet only 1% of lettuce farmers have ever heard of the Penman equation. They plant the seeds, sometimes spray herbicide or fungicide, they wait, they harvest, and they worry obessively about the futures markets. Then you go all potty mouth of me when I point out that most people know that ICE freezes below zero and virtually all other influences can be ignored as they are so minor as to not matter.
The temperature around the glacier today is within the historical variation norms – yet you are going all crisis on us.