nom=de=plume wrote:
"Jim" wrote in message
m...
Loogypicker wrote:
This just can't be happening, they must have used trick photography,
and lies because the right's two top climate scientists, Rush Limbaugh
and Shawn Hannity say so.....


http://www.comcast.net/articles/news...CANADA-ARCTIC/

OTTAWA — The multiyear ice covering the Arctic Ocean has effectively
vanished, a startling development that will make it easier to open up
polar shipping routes, an Arctic expert said on Thursday.

Vast sheets of impenetrable multiyear ice, which can reach up to 80
meters (260 feet) thick, have for centuries blocked the path of ships
seeking a quick short cut through the fabled Northwest Passage from
the Atlantic to the Pacific. They also ruled out the idea of sailing
across the top of the world.

But David Barber, Canada's Research Chair in Arctic System Science at
the University of Manitoba, said the ice was melting at an
extraordinarily fast rate.

"We are almost out of multiyear sea ice in the northern hemisphere,"
he said in a presentation in Parliament. The little that remains is
jammed up against Canada's Arctic archipelago, far from potential
shipping routes.

Scientists link higher Arctic temperatures and melting sea ice to the
greenhouse gas emissions blamed for global warming.

Barber spoke shortly after returning from an expedition that sought --
and largely failed to find -- a huge multiyear ice pack that should
have been in the Beaufort Sea off the Canadian coastal town of
Tuktoyaktuk.

Instead, his ice breaker found hundreds of miles of what he called
"rotten ice" -- 50-cm (20-inch) thin layers of fresh ice covering
small chunks of older ice.

"I've never seen anything like this in my 30 years of working in the
high Arctic ... it was very dramatic," he said.

"From a practical perspective, if you want to ship across the pole,
you're concerned about multiyear sea ice. You're not concerned about
this rotten stuff we were doing 13 knots through. It's easy to
navigate through."

Scientists have fretted for decades about the pace at which the Arctic
ice sheets are shrinking. U.S. data shows the 2009 ice cover was the
third-lowest on record, after 2007 and 2008.

An increasing number of experts feel the North Pole will be ice free
in summer by 2030 at the latest, for the first time in a million
years.

"I would argue that, from a practical perspective, we almost have a
seasonally ice-free Arctic now, because multiyear sea ice is the
barrier to the use and development of the Arctic," said Barber.

Fresh first-year ice always forms in the Arctic in the winter, when
temperatures plunge far below freezing and the North Pole is not
exposed to the sun.

Shipping companies are already looking to benefit from warming waters.
This year two German cargo ships successfully navigated from South
Korea along Russia's northern Siberia coast without the help of
icebreakers.

The Arctic is warming up three times more quickly than the rest of the
Earth, in part because of the reflectivity, or the albedo feedback
effect, of ice.

As more and more ice melts, larger expanses of darker sea water are
exposed. These absorb more sunlight than the ice and cause the water
to heat up more quickly, thereby melting more ice.

Barber said the ice was now being melted both by rays from the sun as
well as from below by the warmer water.

Scientists are also seeing more cyclones, which pick up force as they
absorb heat from the warmer water. The cyclones help generate waves
that break up ice sheets and also dump large amounts of snow, which
has an insulating effect and prevents the ice sheets from thickening.

After a long search, Barber's ice breaker finally found a 16-km (10-
mile) wide floe of multiyear ice that was around 6 to 8 meters (20-26
feet) thick. But as the crew watched, the floe was hit by a series of
waves, and disintegrated in five minutes.

"The Arctic is an early indicator of what we can expect at the global
scale as we move through the next few decades ... So we should be
paying attention to this very carefully," Barber said
What happened is that the people who tend to not accept science, like
evolution, and distrust regulation because it's THEIR RIGHT to do what
they want, are trying to get an argument started about "Global Warming."

Of course their point of view is it ain't happening. We are now to
justify the opposite of their point of view trying to tell them of science
and the need for regulation, proving them right, science can't be trusted,
and regulation is unacceptable.

Why argue with those guys? To them facts can be adjusted, there's no use
playing their game.


I agree in principle, but there's a reason, and it doesn't really have to do
with "arguing." It has to do with ensuring that the truth gets out there. A
lot of what's been going on can be boiled down to fear-based tactics. We saw
what happened when it's allowed to stand without challenge. It needs to be
challenged.

They certainly have a right to their own opinions, and they even have a
right to try to influence others, but the rest of us have a right to have
our opinions to try to influence others also. We should certainly not be
playing their game. We're not very good at using fear. We need to get better
at using facts and a civil tone. Recent history has shown that the
combination of the two works.

Every time I see any discussion of Global Warming, it seems to be (my
experience) the anti warming side telling us It's not happening.

I don't ever remember telling them it was true, but now I am expected
to. I don't think it's a discussion that will ever lead anywhere. I
don't want to play.

nom=de=plume wrote:
"Jim" wrote in message
m...
Loogypicker wrote:
This just can't be happening, they must have used trick photography,
and lies because the right's two top climate scientists, Rush Limbaugh
and Shawn Hannity say so.....


http://www.comcast.net/articles/news...CANADA-ARCTIC/

OTTAWA — The multiyear ice covering the Arctic Ocean has effectively
vanished, a startling development that will make it easier to open up
polar shipping routes, an Arctic expert said on Thursday.

Vast sheets of impenetrable multiyear ice, which can reach up to 80
meters (260 feet) thick, have for centuries blocked the path of ships
seeking a quick short cut through the fabled Northwest Passage from
the Atlantic to the Pacific. They also ruled out the idea of sailing
across the top of the world.

But David Barber, Canada's Research Chair in Arctic System Science at
the University of Manitoba, said the ice was melting at an
extraordinarily fast rate.

"We are almost out of multiyear sea ice in the northern hemisphere,"
he said in a presentation in Parliament. The little that remains is
jammed up against Canada's Arctic archipelago, far from potential
shipping routes.

Scientists link higher Arctic temperatures and melting sea ice to the
greenhouse gas emissions blamed for global warming.

Barber spoke shortly after returning from an expedition that sought --
and largely failed to find -- a huge multiyear ice pack that should
have been in the Beaufort Sea off the Canadian coastal town of
Tuktoyaktuk.

Instead, his ice breaker found hundreds of miles of what he called
"rotten ice" -- 50-cm (20-inch) thin layers of fresh ice covering
small chunks of older ice.

"I've never seen anything like this in my 30 years of working in the
high Arctic ... it was very dramatic," he said.

"From a practical perspective, if you want to ship across the pole,
you're concerned about multiyear sea ice. You're not concerned about
this rotten stuff we were doing 13 knots through. It's easy to
navigate through."

Scientists have fretted for decades about the pace at which the Arctic
ice sheets are shrinking. U.S. data shows the 2009 ice cover was the
third-lowest on record, after 2007 and 2008.

An increasing number of experts feel the North Pole will be ice free
in summer by 2030 at the latest, for the first time in a million
years.

"I would argue that, from a practical perspective, we almost have a
seasonally ice-free Arctic now, because multiyear sea ice is the
barrier to the use and development of the Arctic," said Barber.

Fresh first-year ice always forms in the Arctic in the winter, when
temperatures plunge far below freezing and the North Pole is not
exposed to the sun.

Shipping companies are already looking to benefit from warming waters.
This year two German cargo ships successfully navigated from South
Korea along Russia's northern Siberia coast without the help of
icebreakers.

The Arctic is warming up three times more quickly than the rest of the
Earth, in part because of the reflectivity, or the albedo feedback
effect, of ice.

As more and more ice melts, larger expanses of darker sea water are
exposed. These absorb more sunlight than the ice and cause the water
to heat up more quickly, thereby melting more ice.

Barber said the ice was now being melted both by rays from the sun as
well as from below by the warmer water.

Scientists are also seeing more cyclones, which pick up force as they
absorb heat from the warmer water. The cyclones help generate waves
that break up ice sheets and also dump large amounts of snow, which
has an insulating effect and prevents the ice sheets from thickening.

After a long search, Barber's ice breaker finally found a 16-km (10-
mile) wide floe of multiyear ice that was around 6 to 8 meters (20-26
feet) thick. But as the crew watched, the floe was hit by a series of
waves, and disintegrated in five minutes.

"The Arctic is an early indicator of what we can expect at the global
scale as we move through the next few decades ... So we should be
paying attention to this very carefully," Barber said
What happened is that the people who tend to not accept science, like
evolution, and distrust regulation because it's THEIR RIGHT to do what
they want, are trying to get an argument started about "Global Warming."

Of course their point of view is it ain't happening. We are now to
justify the opposite of their point of view trying to tell them of science
and the need for regulation, proving them right, science can't be trusted,
and regulation is unacceptable.

Why argue with those guys? To them facts can be adjusted, there's no use
playing their game.


I agree in principle, but there's a reason, and it doesn't really have to do
with "arguing." It has to do with ensuring that the truth gets out there. A
lot of what's been going on can be boiled down to fear-based tactics. We saw
what happened when it's allowed to stand without challenge. It needs to be
challenged.

They certainly have a right to their own opinions, and they even have a
right to try to influence others, but the rest of us have a right to have
our opinions to try to influence others also. We should certainly not be
playing their game. We're not very good at using fear. We need to get better
at using facts and a civil tone. Recent history has shown that the
combination of the two works.

Facts aren't tools used by democrats. Lies and deception is more their
style. And then there's the real dumb ones that come pre-programmed.
Krause for example. You for another.

Jim wrote:
nom=de=plume wrote:
"Jim" wrote in message
m...
Loogypicker wrote:
This just can't be happening, they must have used trick photography,
and lies because the right's two top climate scientists, Rush Limbaugh
and Shawn Hannity say so.....


http://www.comcast.net/articles/news...CANADA-ARCTIC/


OTTAWA — The multiyear ice covering the Arctic Ocean has effectively
vanished, a startling development that will make it easier to open up
polar shipping routes, an Arctic expert said on Thursday.

Vast sheets of impenetrable multiyear ice, which can reach up to 80
meters (260 feet) thick, have for centuries blocked the path of ships
seeking a quick short cut through the fabled Northwest Passage from
the Atlantic to the Pacific. They also ruled out the idea of sailing
across the top of the world.

But David Barber, Canada's Research Chair in Arctic System Science at
the University of Manitoba, said the ice was melting at an
extraordinarily fast rate.

"We are almost out of multiyear sea ice in the northern hemisphere,"
he said in a presentation in Parliament. The little that remains is
jammed up against Canada's Arctic archipelago, far from potential
shipping routes.

Scientists link higher Arctic temperatures and melting sea ice to the
greenhouse gas emissions blamed for global warming.

Barber spoke shortly after returning from an expedition that sought --
and largely failed to find -- a huge multiyear ice pack that should
have been in the Beaufort Sea off the Canadian coastal town of
Tuktoyaktuk.

Instead, his ice breaker found hundreds of miles of what he called
"rotten ice" -- 50-cm (20-inch) thin layers of fresh ice covering
small chunks of older ice.

"I've never seen anything like this in my 30 years of working in the
high Arctic ... it was very dramatic," he said.

"From a practical perspective, if you want to ship across the pole,
you're concerned about multiyear sea ice. You're not concerned about
this rotten stuff we were doing 13 knots through. It's easy to
navigate through."

Scientists have fretted for decades about the pace at which the Arctic
ice sheets are shrinking. U.S. data shows the 2009 ice cover was the
third-lowest on record, after 2007 and 2008.

An increasing number of experts feel the North Pole will be ice free
in summer by 2030 at the latest, for the first time in a million
years.

"I would argue that, from a practical perspective, we almost have a
seasonally ice-free Arctic now, because multiyear sea ice is the
barrier to the use and development of the Arctic," said Barber.

Fresh first-year ice always forms in the Arctic in the winter, when
temperatures plunge far below freezing and the North Pole is not
exposed to the sun.

Shipping companies are already looking to benefit from warming waters.
This year two German cargo ships successfully navigated from South
Korea along Russia's northern Siberia coast without the help of
icebreakers.

The Arctic is warming up three times more quickly than the rest of the
Earth, in part because of the reflectivity, or the albedo feedback
effect, of ice.

As more and more ice melts, larger expanses of darker sea water are
exposed. These absorb more sunlight than the ice and cause the water
to heat up more quickly, thereby melting more ice.

Barber said the ice was now being melted both by rays from the sun as
well as from below by the warmer water.

Scientists are also seeing more cyclones, which pick up force as they
absorb heat from the warmer water. The cyclones help generate waves
that break up ice sheets and also dump large amounts of snow, which
has an insulating effect and prevents the ice sheets from thickening.

After a long search, Barber's ice breaker finally found a 16-km (10-
mile) wide floe of multiyear ice that was around 6 to 8 meters (20-26
feet) thick. But as the crew watched, the floe was hit by a series of
waves, and disintegrated in five minutes.

"The Arctic is an early indicator of what we can expect at the global
scale as we move through the next few decades ... So we should be
paying attention to this very carefully," Barber said
What happened is that the people who tend to not accept science, like
evolution, and distrust regulation because it's THEIR RIGHT to do
what they want, are trying to get an argument started about "Global
Warming."

Of course their point of view is it ain't happening. We are now to
justify the opposite of their point of view trying to tell them of
science and the need for regulation, proving them right, science
can't be trusted, and regulation is unacceptable.

Why argue with those guys? To them facts can be adjusted, there's no
use playing their game.


I agree in principle, but there's a reason, and it doesn't really have
to do with "arguing." It has to do with ensuring that the truth gets
out there. A lot of what's been going on can be boiled down to
fear-based tactics. We saw what happened when it's allowed to stand
without challenge. It needs to be challenged.

They certainly have a right to their own opinions, and they even have
a right to try to influence others, but the rest of us have a right to
have our opinions to try to influence others also. We should certainly
not be playing their game. We're not very good at using fear. We need
to get better at using facts and a civil tone. Recent history has
shown that the combination of the two works.

Facts aren't tools used by democrats. Lies and deception is more their
style. And then there's the real dumb ones that come pre-programmed.
Krause for example. You for another.

Actually it would be nice if facts were used by both sides in any
debate. Unfortunately we disagree with the definition of a fact.

Remembering from school, one side sees facts as something you manipulate
to get what you want, to others, facts are facts and can't be changed.

Lies and deception are good ways to manipulate facts. You see it all
the time.

Jim wrote:
Facts aren't tools used by democrats. Lies and deception is more their
style. And then there's the real dumb ones that come pre-programmed.
Krause for example. You for another.

I forgot, which side was it that came up with "Death Panels" in the
health care debate? I'll agree that that side did use lies and deception.

"Jim" wrote in message
m...
nom=de=plume wrote:
"Jim" wrote in message
m...
Loogypicker wrote:
This just can't be happening, they must have used trick photography,
and lies because the right's two top climate scientists, Rush Limbaugh
and Shawn Hannity say so.....


http://www.comcast.net/articles/news...CANADA-ARCTIC/

OTTAWA — The multiyear ice covering the Arctic Ocean has effectively
vanished, a startling development that will make it easier to open up
polar shipping routes, an Arctic expert said on Thursday.

Vast sheets of impenetrable multiyear ice, which can reach up to 80
meters (260 feet) thick, have for centuries blocked the path of ships
seeking a quick short cut through the fabled Northwest Passage from
the Atlantic to the Pacific. They also ruled out the idea of sailing
across the top of the world.

But David Barber, Canada's Research Chair in Arctic System Science at
the University of Manitoba, said the ice was melting at an
extraordinarily fast rate.

"We are almost out of multiyear sea ice in the northern hemisphere,"
he said in a presentation in Parliament. The little that remains is
jammed up against Canada's Arctic archipelago, far from potential
shipping routes.

Scientists link higher Arctic temperatures and melting sea ice to the
greenhouse gas emissions blamed for global warming.

Barber spoke shortly after returning from an expedition that sought --
and largely failed to find -- a huge multiyear ice pack that should
have been in the Beaufort Sea off the Canadian coastal town of
Tuktoyaktuk.

Instead, his ice breaker found hundreds of miles of what he called
"rotten ice" -- 50-cm (20-inch) thin layers of fresh ice covering
small chunks of older ice.

"I've never seen anything like this in my 30 years of working in the
high Arctic ... it was very dramatic," he said.

"From a practical perspective, if you want to ship across the pole,
you're concerned about multiyear sea ice. You're not concerned about
this rotten stuff we were doing 13 knots through. It's easy to
navigate through."

Scientists have fretted for decades about the pace at which the Arctic
ice sheets are shrinking. U.S. data shows the 2009 ice cover was the
third-lowest on record, after 2007 and 2008.

An increasing number of experts feel the North Pole will be ice free
in summer by 2030 at the latest, for the first time in a million
years.

"I would argue that, from a practical perspective, we almost have a
seasonally ice-free Arctic now, because multiyear sea ice is the
barrier to the use and development of the Arctic," said Barber.

Fresh first-year ice always forms in the Arctic in the winter, when
temperatures plunge far below freezing and the North Pole is not
exposed to the sun.

Shipping companies are already looking to benefit from warming waters.
This year two German cargo ships successfully navigated from South
Korea along Russia's northern Siberia coast without the help of
icebreakers.

The Arctic is warming up three times more quickly than the rest of the
Earth, in part because of the reflectivity, or the albedo feedback
effect, of ice.

As more and more ice melts, larger expanses of darker sea water are
exposed. These absorb more sunlight than the ice and cause the water
to heat up more quickly, thereby melting more ice.

Barber said the ice was now being melted both by rays from the sun as
well as from below by the warmer water.

Scientists are also seeing more cyclones, which pick up force as they
absorb heat from the warmer water. The cyclones help generate waves
that break up ice sheets and also dump large amounts of snow, which
has an insulating effect and prevents the ice sheets from thickening.

After a long search, Barber's ice breaker finally found a 16-km (10-
mile) wide floe of multiyear ice that was around 6 to 8 meters (20-26
feet) thick. But as the crew watched, the floe was hit by a series of
waves, and disintegrated in five minutes.

"The Arctic is an early indicator of what we can expect at the global
scale as we move through the next few decades ... So we should be
paying attention to this very carefully," Barber said
What happened is that the people who tend to not accept science, like
evolution, and distrust regulation because it's THEIR RIGHT to do what
they want, are trying to get an argument started about "Global Warming."

Of course their point of view is it ain't happening. We are now to
justify the opposite of their point of view trying to tell them of
science and the need for regulation, proving them right, science can't
be trusted, and regulation is unacceptable.

Why argue with those guys? To them facts can be adjusted, there's no
use playing their game.


I agree in principle, but there's a reason, and it doesn't really have to
do with "arguing." It has to do with ensuring that the truth gets out
there. A lot of what's been going on can be boiled down to fear-based
tactics. We saw what happened when it's allowed to stand without
challenge. It needs to be challenged.

They certainly have a right to their own opinions, and they even have a
right to try to influence others, but the rest of us have a right to have
our opinions to try to influence others also. We should certainly not be
playing their game. We're not very good at using fear. We need to get
better at using facts and a civil tone. Recent history has shown that the
combination of the two works.

Every time I see any discussion of Global Warming, it seems to be (my
experience) the anti warming side telling us It's not happening.

I don't ever remember telling them it was true, but now I am expected to.
I don't think it's a discussion that will ever lead anywhere. I don't
want to play.


I certainly understand. It's not too important to speak up in a forum like
this, but in other situations, I believe it is.

--
Nom=de=Plume

"Jim" wrote in message
news
Jim wrote:
nom=de=plume wrote:
"Jim" wrote in message
m...
Loogypicker wrote:
This just can't be happening, they must have used trick photography,
and lies because the right's two top climate scientists, Rush Limbaugh
and Shawn Hannity say so.....


http://www.comcast.net/articles/news...CANADA-ARCTIC/

OTTAWA — The multiyear ice covering the Arctic Ocean has effectively
vanished, a startling development that will make it easier to open up
polar shipping routes, an Arctic expert said on Thursday.

Vast sheets of impenetrable multiyear ice, which can reach up to 80
meters (260 feet) thick, have for centuries blocked the path of ships
seeking a quick short cut through the fabled Northwest Passage from
the Atlantic to the Pacific. They also ruled out the idea of sailing
across the top of the world.

But David Barber, Canada's Research Chair in Arctic System Science at
the University of Manitoba, said the ice was melting at an
extraordinarily fast rate.

"We are almost out of multiyear sea ice in the northern hemisphere,"
he said in a presentation in Parliament. The little that remains is
jammed up against Canada's Arctic archipelago, far from potential
shipping routes.

Scientists link higher Arctic temperatures and melting sea ice to the
greenhouse gas emissions blamed for global warming.

Barber spoke shortly after returning from an expedition that sought --
and largely failed to find -- a huge multiyear ice pack that should
have been in the Beaufort Sea off the Canadian coastal town of
Tuktoyaktuk.

Instead, his ice breaker found hundreds of miles of what he called
"rotten ice" -- 50-cm (20-inch) thin layers of fresh ice covering
small chunks of older ice.

"I've never seen anything like this in my 30 years of working in the
high Arctic ... it was very dramatic," he said.

"From a practical perspective, if you want to ship across the pole,
you're concerned about multiyear sea ice. You're not concerned about
this rotten stuff we were doing 13 knots through. It's easy to
navigate through."

Scientists have fretted for decades about the pace at which the Arctic
ice sheets are shrinking. U.S. data shows the 2009 ice cover was the
third-lowest on record, after 2007 and 2008.

An increasing number of experts feel the North Pole will be ice free
in summer by 2030 at the latest, for the first time in a million
years.

"I would argue that, from a practical perspective, we almost have a
seasonally ice-free Arctic now, because multiyear sea ice is the
barrier to the use and development of the Arctic," said Barber.

Fresh first-year ice always forms in the Arctic in the winter, when
temperatures plunge far below freezing and the North Pole is not
exposed to the sun.

Shipping companies are already looking to benefit from warming waters.
This year two German cargo ships successfully navigated from South
Korea along Russia's northern Siberia coast without the help of
icebreakers.

The Arctic is warming up three times more quickly than the rest of the
Earth, in part because of the reflectivity, or the albedo feedback
effect, of ice.

As more and more ice melts, larger expanses of darker sea water are
exposed. These absorb more sunlight than the ice and cause the water
to heat up more quickly, thereby melting more ice.

Barber said the ice was now being melted both by rays from the sun as
well as from below by the warmer water.

Scientists are also seeing more cyclones, which pick up force as they
absorb heat from the warmer water. The cyclones help generate waves
that break up ice sheets and also dump large amounts of snow, which
has an insulating effect and prevents the ice sheets from thickening.

After a long search, Barber's ice breaker finally found a 16-km (10-
mile) wide floe of multiyear ice that was around 6 to 8 meters (20-26
feet) thick. But as the crew watched, the floe was hit by a series of
waves, and disintegrated in five minutes.

"The Arctic is an early indicator of what we can expect at the global
scale as we move through the next few decades ... So we should be
paying attention to this very carefully," Barber said
What happened is that the people who tend to not accept science, like
evolution, and distrust regulation because it's THEIR RIGHT to do what
they want, are trying to get an argument started about "Global
Warming."

Of course their point of view is it ain't happening. We are now to
justify the opposite of their point of view trying to tell them of
science and the need for regulation, proving them right, science can't
be trusted, and regulation is unacceptable.

Why argue with those guys? To them facts can be adjusted, there's no
use playing their game.


I agree in principle, but there's a reason, and it doesn't really have
to do with "arguing." It has to do with ensuring that the truth gets out
there. A lot of what's been going on can be boiled down to fear-based
tactics. We saw what happened when it's allowed to stand without
challenge. It needs to be challenged.

They certainly have a right to their own opinions, and they even have a
right to try to influence others, but the rest of us have a right to
have our opinions to try to influence others also. We should certainly
not be playing their game. We're not very good at using fear. We need to
get better at using facts and a civil tone. Recent history has shown
that the combination of the two works.

Facts aren't tools used by democrats. Lies and deception is more their
style. And then there's the real dumb ones that come pre-programmed.
Krause for example. You for another.

Actually it would be nice if facts were used by both sides in any debate.
Unfortunately we disagree with the definition of a fact.

Remembering from school, one side sees facts as something you manipulate
to get what you want, to others, facts are facts and can't be changed.

Lies and deception are good ways to manipulate facts. You see it all the
time.


"There are lies, damn lies, and statistics."

--
Nom=de=Plume

"Jim" wrote in message
m...
Jim wrote:
Facts aren't tools used by democrats. Lies and deception is more their
style. And then there's the real dumb ones that come pre-programmed.
Krause for example. You for another.

I forgot, which side was it that came up with "Death Panels" in the health
care debate? I'll agree that that side did use lies and deception.


The bottom side.

--
Nom=de=Plume

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 12:14:12 -0700 (PDT), Loogypicker
wrote:

"The Arctic is an early indicator of what we can expect at the global
scale as we move through the next few decades ... So we should be
paying attention to this very carefully," Barber said

Uh huh....

Welllllll.........

http://www.climatedepot.com/a/3515/P...global-warming

"Key Excerpt: Observations of the Sun show that as for the increase in
temperature, carbon dioxide is "not guilty" and as for what lies ahead
in the upcoming decades, it is not catastrophic warming, but a global,
and very prolonged, temperature drop."

Are we back to the ice age thing agian? Are we now going to be told to
burn everything to increase the temperature. Mr. Smith you are being
fined $2,500 for not burning enouh fossil fuel to keep the CO2 levels
high enough to sustain life during the coming ice age.

I was watching a show last night about the magnetite in lava and how it
orients it self to the magnetic poles before the lava hardens. I believe
we have more to worry about when the North and South poles switch, which
we are well over due to have occur. Some scientists say it is a process
and others say it can be like flipping a light switch.

What I am waiting for is the 5 or 6 category 5 hurricanes we still
should have between now and the end of November.

On 10/30/09 8:02 AM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 12:14:12 -0700 (PDT), Loogypicker
wrote:

"The Arctic is an early indicator of what we can expect at the global
scale as we move through the next few decades ... So we should be
paying attention to this very carefully," Barber said

Uh huh....

Welllllll.........

http://www.climatedepot.com/a/3515/P...global-warming

"Key Excerpt: Observations of the Sun show that as for the increase in
temperature, carbon dioxide is "not guilty" and as for what lies ahead
in the upcoming decades, it is not catastrophic warming, but a global,
and very prolonged, temperature drop."

Are we back to the ice age thing agian? Are we now going to be told to
burn everything to increase the temperature. Mr. Smith you are being
fined $2,500 for not burning enouh fossil fuel to keep the CO2 levels
high enough to sustain life during the coming ice age.

I was watching a show last night about the magnetite in lava and how it
orients it self to the magnetic poles before the lava hardens. I believe
we have more to worry about when the North and South poles switch, which
we are well over due to have occur. Some scientists say it is a process
and others say it can be like flipping a light switch.

What I am waiting for is the 5 or 6 category 5 hurricanes we still
should have between now and the end of November.




Why? You live well inland, and you don't have a boat to worry you. Do
high winds interfere with your lousy golf game?

nom=de=plume wrote:


I certainly understand. It's not too important to speak up in a forum like
this, but in other situations, I believe it is.

Get theee into another situation pronto, puleeeeze.