Topic: Global warming causing a new Ice Age
TxsGal3333's photo
Thu 08/06/09 10:01 AM
This is just a friendly reminder a few post have been deleted from this thread. Please make sure that your comments do not attack another and that you stay within the Topic in hand. If you find out that you do not have anything to contribute to the thread then please move on.

Thank You
Site Mod
Kristi

metalwing's photo
Thu 08/06/09 10:26 AM

free info for anyone interested in an alternative opinion:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig9/floy4.html
The former U.S. vice president, Al Gore, is now urging civil disobedience to stop coal plants. He told a New York audience recently, "If you're a young person looking at the future of this planet and looking at what is being done right now, and not done, I believe we have reached the stage where it is time for civil disobedience to prevent the construction of new coal plants that do not have carbon capture and sequestration."

Global Warming and Reinventing Government have been Gore’s two lifelong causes. He is using the one to accomplish the other. His fundamental assumptions and views of global warming were well documented in his film, An Inconvenient Truth. Thousands of schoolchildren have viewed it. Gore was even awarded a Nobel Peace prize for the documentary in 2007 which he shared with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). It is telling that the very first Chairman of that IPCC group, John Houghton, had pronounced, "Unless we announce disasters, no one will listen." True to script, Gore announced disasters and many listened.

As Gore urges civil disobedience to stop coal plants for the sake of carbon dioxide emissions, it is time to revisit several of those assumptions and implications he made in An Inconvenient Truth. Each of the fourteen highlighted here is a snapshot of the Global Warming doomsayers’ views. The added perspective shows the fraud of the catastrophic manmade Global Warming thesis:

Carbon dioxide drives the temperature of the planet. Gore assumes that carbon dioxide (CO2) is the causal factor of warming temperatures. But, for at least 240,000 years carbon dioxide has been a lagging indicator of any warming. That means that the earth warms and, later, there is an increase in the gas carbon dioxide. Roy Spencer, Climate Research Scientist in Huntsville, Alabama, notes that "the cooling effects of weather have a stronger influence on surface temperatures than the warming influence of greenhouse gases." The major greenhouse gases are water vapor (which accounts for 70–90 percent of the effect), carbon dioxide and methane. Many scientists work on the theory that the sun is the prime driver of Earth’s climate. Earth temperature and sun activity do correlate closely. Additionally, many scientists examine the larger cosmos. Their theories reveal an interplay between the sun and cosmic rays – sub-atomic particles from exploded stars. Further, they discern long-term temperature patterns as our solar system moves through the arms of our Milky Way galaxy. Again, those events correlate more closely to Earth’s temperatures than do manmade carbon dioxide levels.

Temperatures will rise 1.5–4.5 degrees Celsius when CO2 levels double from a pre-industrial level of 280ppm to 560ppm. Because Earth’s sensitivity to carbon dioxide changes has been overstated, the scientifically likely temperature result of such a doubling is 1.5–2.0 degrees Celsius. Earth’s current CO2 level is 380ppm.

Catastrophic Global Warming will cause sea levels to rise 20 feet. The work of scientists supports a sea level rise of about one inch per decade. In one hundred years it should rise 10–12 inches.

Catastrophic Global Warming is forcing island nations to evacuate their populations to New Zealand because of rising sea levels. Tuvalu was the poster child for this alarm, but neither Tuvalu nor any other islanders have evacuated to New Zealand.

Catastrophic Global Warming is melting Antarctic sea ice. But, Antarctic sea ice is thickening over the gigantic continent. This thickening reduces sea level. There is ice loss on a tiny sliver of the continent stretching out far northward. That is what Gore’s movie image relies upon. The ice shelf collapse there was more likely to have been driven by ocean current fluctuations.

Catastrophic Global Warming is resulting in extreme weather. Tornadoes? The US is home to one-third of all the world’s tornadoes. But, tornadoes have not increased. Drought? There is not greater incidence of drought. Record typhoons and cyclones? No. Hurricanes? There are about ninety-five hurricanes annually and globally. But, hurricanes are neither more frequent nor more intense. In 2004 the IPCC hyped hurricane-fears without any scientific soundness. Gore’s film footage implies that hurricane Katrina was an inescapable consequence of manmade globally averaged warming. Facts do not support that alarm.

Catastrophic Global Warming has caused global temperatures to be warmer now than they have been in 1,000 years. Gore’s graph displays a long level period ending in an upward sweep like a hockey stick, displaying the appearance of runaway temperatures. A young IPCC scientist named Mann created this hockey stick graph for a 2001 report, making the real Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age disappear. It was an enormously effective prop. Alarmists used it for their the-science-is-settled position. It made the 20th-century temperature increase look unique. But, Mann’s methodology would have conjured any random set of numbers into a hockey stick. And, the temperature increase was not unique. In 2006 the National Academy of Sciences issued a report stating that this graph used flawed data. The IPCC has dropped the use of the Mann hockey stick from its 2007 Report. But, this piece of deliberate disinformation caused great damage to truth and science.

Catastrophic Global Warming has dried up Lake Chad. Lake Chad has been totally dry several times before humans were adding any CO2. That situation is due to over-extraction by communities.

Catastrophic Global Warming has been shrinking the snows of Kilimanjaro. By the time Ernest Hemingway wrote The Snows of Kilimanjaro in 1936, half of the snow was already gone. This is before man began releasing CO2 into the atmosphere to any extent by burning fuels for energy. No temperature on the mountain is above freezing. There has been no temperature change in fifty-five years. Shrinking is likely to be a circulation issue and lower precipitation, not a rising temperature issue.

Catastrophic Global Warming increases mosquito-borne malaria. Malaria was endemic to most of the developed world just fifty to one hundred years ago. We eliminated malaria in Europe and the United States while the world warmed. 600,000 people died of malaria in Siberia. Malaria sickens 300 to 500 million poor people annually, killing as many as 2.7 million each year. In sub-Saharan Africa, one in 20 children dies of malaria. The approximately forty million humans killed by malaria since 1972 have died because a politician, William Ruckelshaus, as the Environmental Protection Agency’s first head, banned the beneficial pesticide DDT.

Catastrophic Global Warming is quickly melting Arctic sea ice. Arctic sea ice decreases during the summer melt season, and Arctic temperatures have risen faster than anywhere else. But, the Arctic region was warmer in the 1930’s. That could not have been caused by mankind. And, Artic sea ice has recovered from 3 million square kilometers to 14 million square kilometers. Ice-cover around the Bering Strait and Alaska has more recently been at its highest level ever recorded.

Catastrophic Global Warming is killing polar bears. Factually, that claim was based on a single sighting of four dead bears the day after an "abrupt windstorm" in an area housing one of the increasing bear populations. Global polar-bear population has increased dramatically over the past decades.

Catastrophic Global Warming is melting Greenland’s ice. Greenland has been warmer. Its ice did not melt – except around its edges. There has been no net warming – and perhaps a slight cooling – since 1937. Vikings colonized and farmed Greenland during the Medieval Warm Period. The return of colder climate drove them away.

And, lastly, for An Inconvenient Truth,

Catastrophic Global Warming has caused mass extinctions. Warming extends ranges for plant and animal species. Biodiversity is enhanced. That’s why the greatest concentration of biodiversity is in the tropics. Higher concentrations of carbon dioxide are shown to increase plant production, while lowering water requirements and reducing stress. Animals thrive on more abundant plant-life. Enriched CO2 has yielded an additional one-sixth production which would not have happened in its absence.

Each of these fourteen scenarios would have been an environmental bad had it happened and had it been empirically proven to have been caused by humans. The alarming events did not happen. The scary scenarios all came from computer climate models. There has been no empirical proof substantiating Gore’s claims and implications.

The hypothesis of catastrophic globally averaged warming resulting from human-caused carbon dioxide increases has failed. Failed hypotheses should be rejected.

The catastrophic Global Warming hypothesis fails to show that changes in carbon dioxide drive changes in temperature. Changes in carbon dioxide do not account well for the highly variable climate we know the Earth has had, including the Roman Warming (200 B.C. to A.D. 600), the cold Dark Ages (A.D. 440 to A.D. 900), the Medieval Warming (A.D. 900–1300 when CO2 levels were much lower than today), and the Little Ice Age (1300–1550 when there were few sunspots). The catastrophic Global Warming hypothesis is a feeble theory made seemingly true by pure repetition.

The catastrophic Global Warming hypothesis fails to explain the reality of the last one hundred years. Half of our modern warming occurred from 1905–1940, when carbon dioxide levels were still quite low. The net warming since 1940 is a minuscule 0.2 degrees Celsius. An interlude of global cooling occurred in the 1950s and 1960s, when CO2 levels were increasing. It totally fails to explain the absence of warming in the last ten years, despite a continuing rapid increase in CO2 concentration. If greenhouse action by carbon dioxide drove warming, the upper air should have warmed faster than the surface, but observations show the opposite has been the case. Although computer models say temperatures should have risen, Alabama temperatures have fallen for 115 years. Citrus crops used to be common. What could you do about this catastrophe? Buy jackets and get out of the citrus business. In other words, adapt.

It is fraud to spread alarmism of catastrophic "human-caused global warming" based upon projections generated from computer climate models which have substantial uncertainties and are markedly unreliable. It is fraud upon fraud to throw scarce resources at Global Warming when such expenditures will have inconsequential results except to impoverish us, notwithstanding that Al Gore believes it will be good for our spirituality to work together on such a common cause. There are real and achievable global causes of diseases, malnutrition, sanitation and energy that are valid projects and worthy efforts – efforts that Bjørn Lomborg endorses in his book, Cool It. No global efforts toward expensive CO2 cuts are valid or worthy. Current Climate policies are health and wealth destruction policies.

Doomsayers are claiming that climate can be adjusted in some predictable way, but it can not. It is fraud to claim that it can. As published in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Richard Lindzen of M.I.T. has conducted studies that thwart the greenhouse effect. What that means is that "just because the greenhouse effect is real, it does not follow that an increase in intensity will necessarily lead to a significant increase in mean global air temperature, as climate alarmists are wont to claim…Hence it is not inconceivable that an increase in the atmosphere’s CO2 concentration may result in no warming at all. Or even a cooling!...Much more research will be required before we can determine that the ongoing rise in the air’s CO2 content even constitutes a problem, much less specify its magnitude and prescribe ameliorative measures for dealing with it."

The magnetic attraction of government funding for global-warming research, the political climate of fear-based policies seen in both climate issues and economic issues, and doom-sopping journalism works to push events into a downward spiral of exaggeration and hype. Al Gore rides this emotional wave. He has refused all debate with climate scientists. It is after all, for him, not about truth. For him truth is simply inconvenient.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig9/deming3.html
As the years pass and data accumulate, it is becoming evident that global warming is a fraud. Climate change is natural and ongoing, but the Earth has not warmed significantly over the last thirty years. Nor has there been a single negative effect of any type that can be unambiguously attributed to global warming.

As I write, satellite data show that the mean global temperature is the same that it was in 1979. The extent of global sea ice is also unchanged from 1979. Since the end of the last Ice Age, sea level has risen more than a hundred meters. But for the last three years, there has been no rise in sea level. If the polar ice sheets are melting, why isn't sea level rising? Global warming is supposed to increase the severity and frequency of tropical storms. But hurricane and typhoon activity is at a record low.

Every year in the US, more than forty thousand people are killed in traffic accidents. But not one single person has ever been killed by global warming. The number of species that have gone extinct from global warming is exactly zero. Both the Antarctic and Greenland Ice Sheets are stable. The polar bear population is increasing. There has been no increase in infectious disease that can be attributed to climate change. We are not currently experiencing more floods, droughts, or forest fires.

In short, there is no evidence of any type to support the idea that we are entering an era when significant climate change is occurring and will cause the deterioration of either the natural environment or the human standard of living.

Why do people think the planet is warming? One reason is that the temperature data from weather stations appear to be hopelessly contaminated by urban heat effects. A survey of the 1221 temperature stations in the US by meteorologist Anthony Watts and his colleagues is now more than 80 percent complete. The magnitude of putative global warming over the last 150 years is about 0.7 °C. But only 9 percent of meteorological stations in the US are likely to have temperature errors lower than 1 °C. More than two-thirds of temperature sensors used to estimate global warming are located near artificial heating sources such as air conditioning vents, asphalt paving, or buildings. These sources are likely to introduce artifacts greater than 2 °C into the temperature record.

Another cause of global warming hysteria is the infiltration of science by ideological zealots who place politics above truth. Earlier this month, the Obama administration issued a report that concluded global warming would have a number of deleterious effects on the US. In 1995, one of the lead authors of this report told me that we had to alter the historical temperature record by "getting rid" of the Medieval Warm Period.

The Obama report refers to – six times – the work of a climate scientist named Stephen H. Schneider. In 1989, Schneider told Discover magazine that "we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have." Schneider concluded "each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest." Schneider's position is not unusual. In 2007, Mike Hulme, the founding director of the Tyndall Center for Climate Change Research in Britain, told the Guardian newspaper that "scientists and politicians must trade truth for influence."

While releasing a politicized report that prostitutes science to politics, the Obama administration simultaneously suppressed an internal EPA report that concluded there were "glaring inconsistencies" between the scientific data and the hypothesis that carbon dioxide emissions were changing the climate.

If we had an appreciation for history, we would not be fooled so easily. It has all happened before, albeit on a smaller scale in an age where people had more common sense. On May 19, 1912, the Washington Post posed these questions: "Is the climate of the world changing? Is it becoming warmer in the polar regions?" On November 2, 1922, the Associated Press reported that "the Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the waters too hot." On February 25, 1923, the New York Times concluded that "the Arctic appears to be warming up." On December 21, 1930, the Times noted that "Alpine glaciers are in full retreat." A few months later the New York Times concluded that there was "a radical change in climatic conditions and hitherto unheard of warmth" in Greenland. About the only thing that has changed at the Times since 1930 is that no one working there today is literate enough to use the word "hitherto."

After the warm weather of the 1930s gave way to a cooling trend beginning in 1940, the media began speculating on the imminent arrival of a new Ice Age. We have now come full circle, mired in a hopeless cycle of reincarnated ignorance. H. L. Mencken understood this process when he explained "the whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary."




I see. You never read the links or went back to see what this thread was about. You think that this is a Global Warming warning of the type championed by Al Gore and the media. You think the links refer to "theory" not measured current conditions. You quote old information from people who don't know squat. Your post is politically motivated but you think this thread has political roots, which it has none. You assume whatever data here is tainted without reading any of it. You even quote totally false "facts" that most high school students would dispute.

You should read the "rules for posting" at least. Perhaps you could start a new thread to showcase your knowledge and opinions.

no photo
Sat 08/08/09 02:43 AM

This is just a friendly reminder a few post have been deleted from this thread. Please make sure that your comments do not attack another and that you stay within the Topic in hand. If you find out that you do not have anything to contribute to the thread then please move on.

Thank You
Site Mod
Kristi

Dear Kristi,
Excuae me, please, for shouting, BUT
**IT WILL BE MOST USEFUL POSTING YOUR WARNING IN ALL OF THE THREADS! ! !

Katzenschnauzer's photo
Sat 08/08/09 03:36 AM

Watch out for that falling sky . . .


:laughing:

metalwing's photo
Sat 08/08/09 07:11 AM


Watch out for that falling sky . . .


:laughing:


The sky falls all the time. It is called rain. Sometimes it falls sideways with 100mph wind.laugh

But seriously,

I have stared in disbelief as people have said, and quoted others as saying, that hurricanes are no worse or more frequent now than they ever were. They don't live on the coast like I do.

Here is a record of all hurricanes. It is interesting to see how many happened in the seventies or even the forties or even before the turn of the century.

The dollar cost of damage due to hurricanes in the past four years is incredible. If not for early warning, seawalls, evacuations, and other modern 'adjustments', the death toll would be in the tens of thousands; maybe more.

http://weather.unisys.com/hurricane/atlantic/




no photo
Sat 08/08/09 06:53 PM
A hurricane is going to Hawaii as we speak. I hope it somehow misses the island.

metalwing's photo
Thu 08/13/09 06:28 PM
Two days ago it was 103F here. The heat index was 108 and the actual temperature a little west of here was 106F.

Yesterday a thunderstorm hit. The winds broke limbs off my oak trees that survived Hurricane Ike (I was in the eye of Hurricane Ike). The winds yesterday destroyed a building next door and knocked out power for half a day. I "mingled" on a portable generator. I became aware of the weatherman repeatedly using the words "unique weather patterns" in the broadcast.

The "official" temperature at Houston,Texas is actually cooler than in the city because the weather station is at the airport, a heavily wooded area. The "official" temps are still a hundred degrees or more almost every day this summer. This is not typical weather.

no photo
Fri 08/14/09 11:21 AM
Wow that is soo hot over there in Texas. sheessshh.indifferent

I too had electricity fall out one day and was soaking in the bathtub with a bucket of ice cream to stay cool. laugh


What would interest me is if a hurricane category 5 hits Hawaii and goes over the volcanoes there, would it activate them to explode? Would it be catastrophic? Actually has something happened like this before where hurricans triggered volcanic eruptions?


metalwing's photo
Fri 08/14/09 11:48 AM

Wow that is soo hot over there in Texas. sheessshh.indifferent

I too had electricity fall out one day and was soaking in the bathtub with a bucket of ice cream to stay cool. laugh


What would interest me is if a hurricane category 5 hits Hawaii and goes over the volcanoes there, would it activate them to explode? Would it be catastrophic? Actually has something happened like this before where hurricans triggered volcanic eruptions?




That would be unlikely but stranger things have happened. Sometimes the "explosion" associated with a volcano is trapped steam tearing the rock apart. If the storm caused a lot of water to fall on an area that did not normally get much, and had the ability to trap water, and the conditions were just right, then maybe. Usually eruptions occur when magma moves towards the surface but the processes that cause magma movement in Earth's mantle are not well understood.

I read some years ago that Krakatoa, one of the largest volcano eruptions in history, was caused by trapped water which turned to steam in the surrounding rock.

Begin quote:
The World Explodes, August 27, 1883

At 5:30am the first of four cataclysmic explosions began on the island of Krakatoa. Tsunamis lashed out from the island pounding nearby coastlines and ash and pumice fell in droves on surrounding islands. At 6:44am a second massive blast came from Krakatoa unleashing similar effects. Finally at 10:02am the colossal blast took place that blew the island apart. Perboewetan and Danan erupted and fell into the emptying caldera 250m below sea level. Adding to the empty chamber was Rakata as half of the erupting volcano slid into the ocean displacing large volumes of and generating a massive tsunami. In total, 23 square kilometers of the island fell into the 6km wide caldera. The ground shook in the wake of the blast which was heard over 4500km and was estimated to be equal to the detonation of over 21,000 atomic bombs.


no photo
Fri 08/14/09 11:57 AM
21,0000 Atomic bombs! ugh my hair on my arms went upindifferent

It just tells you how to cherish life each and every day for the natures of Earth are surely powerful in itself and you never know if you are in one at the wrong time and spot of that day.

Right now I am surprised no Hurricane has come this way this year.

no photo
Fri 08/14/09 11:34 PM
SO, WHAT DO YOU PROPOSE WE DO? ? ?

metalwing's photo
Sat 08/15/09 05:33 AM
Edited by metalwing on Sat 08/15/09 05:54 AM

SO, WHAT DO YOU PROPOSE WE DO? ? ?


That is a broad question, we as individuals, Americans, or a species?

As individuals, we need to make ourselves aware of what is happening to our world, regardless of where we direct the blame, if any. After that, we need to take a hard look at our leadership and what their priorities are accomplishing. Lip service is cheap. The reduction in energy use by additional insulation, for example, is cheap, and has a quick payback; a win win situation. Driving smaller cars is one of the biggest ways to reduce energy use. If the Gulf Stream shuts down, like it has in the past and appears to doing now, a lot of people are going to move south rather quickly.

As Americans, we need to get off the oil economy and switch to an electric energy system primarily fueled by nuclear energy. it's not happening. We need to transition from oil by using natural gas to run cars, trucks, and buses. We have already developed the technology to do this but almost our entire natural gas supply got converted to produce electrify, an incredibly stupid thing to do in the long run but a fast way to build power plants in the short run. The continued use of oil as the primary transportation fuel will bankrupt the US. Last time I checked we were sending 700 billion dollars a years overseas to buy oil.

As a species, we need to stop breeding because we are already consuming the world's resources at a rate that has depleted major foodstocks, timber, mining, farming, fishing, and other resources.
All major ocean fishing resources have been severely depleted and we are looking at doubling the world population every thirty years or so? The pressures of overpopulation are removing the rainforest rapidly. The rainforest not only absorbs much of the carbon emissions from burning oil, it produces the oxygen we breath in the process.

97% of the oceans fish stocks have been exploited or depleted.

http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:6AHKOkXHsZ4J:www.fao.org/newsroom/common/ecg/1000505/en/stocks.pdf+world+fish+stocks&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

The shutdown of the US/Canadian/European wheat/corn production for several years as the Gulf Stream restarts will remove much of the world's food supply. The next six billion humans are not going to eat fish because there isn't any more.

Ten years from now, there is good evidence that we will have the beginnings of a different world.

The irony in all this is that a major cause of the energy problem in the US that led to the unbalanced oil dependent economy was the anti nuclear movement in the sixties than stopped the building of new nuclear power plants and caused the laws on the books today that inhibit further growth. These were the concerned people who were trying, in their mind, to save the world.




adj4u's photo
Sat 08/15/09 05:49 AM
betty boop is causing the global warming issue






no photo
Sat 08/15/09 03:09 PM
Joe, you might recall sometime ago HANDLEWITHCAUTION has told you about our uncle -- working at the research institute in the mid 80's -- who proposed a fully working model of an electric car... What Happened? Simple:
The people from "Ford" purchased that project! (and the dream remains just a dream somewhere at the bottom of the drawer...)

Nowadays, you can't start the revolution from the bottom up. The initiative has to come from the Top!!!

Those who hold the purse DO RULE THE BALL...

metalwing's photo
Sat 08/15/09 06:09 PM

Joe, you might recall sometime ago HANDLEWITHCAUTION has told you about our uncle -- working at the research institute in the mid 80's -- who proposed a fully working model of an electric car... What Happened? Simple:
The people from "Ford" purchased that project! (and the dream remains just a dream somewhere at the bottom of the drawer...)

Nowadays, you can't start the revolution from the bottom up. The initiative has to come from the Top!!!

Those who hold the purse DO RULE THE BALL...


Actually the whole world is waking up to the problem, but slowly. The long are short term planning has started. The planning process is what led to the original post link with which I started this thread. The real problem is the argument about what to do. High paid lobbyists are pushing hard for the status quo. Obama promised much and is providing little so far in the way of alternate energy and nuclear power plant construction. We will have a few years to make some big changes once the major effects start to show. The problem is that we only have a few years to react once the major effects start to show.

Nothing happens smoothly. Everything in nature generally happens in a series of peaks and valleys. The "trend" of the peaks and valleys upwards is the key. If you compare the temperatures, hurricanes, condition of the rainforests, etc., in the year 2005 to the past century, the contrast is amazing.

no photo
Sat 08/15/09 11:05 PM
Edited by JaneStar1 on Sat 08/15/09 11:07 PM
My dear, are you -- by any chance -- TRYING TO RAISE
THE AWARENESS OF THE FALKS AT THE DATING SITE? ? ?
................................. biggrin ............................................

metalwing's photo
Sun 08/16/09 06:19 AM

My dear, are you -- by any chance -- TRYING TO RAISE
THE AWARENESS OF THE FALKS AT THE DATING SITE? ? ?
................................. biggrin ............................................


happy Not the dating site, the forum site; we discuss things of interest. I happen to live in Houston, one of the energy centers of the world and have contacts in the industry ... as well as NASA. The number of minglers who even go into the science threads is small so not much is going to happen here to change the world. However, real information from real sources is a counter to some of the false information that is politically motivated that dominates so much of the internet. There are so many who claim to have knowledge they do not actually possess, many are never directed to actual sources of real information about real world problems.

If you goggle "Gulf Stream Shutdown" you find a huge amount of web "information" about the primary topic of this thread, i.e., the shutdown of the primary ocean current that brings warmth to Britain and Northern Europe. The problem got huge coverage resulting in the ridiculous movie "The day after tomorrow" being made. The variances in the current showed a slight reversal in trend resulting in many sources claiming the problem wasn't real and there is no actual danger. These reports ended up on the net and in unreliable sources such as Wikipedia. After 2005 and particularly after 2007, the data (now in large quantities) showed that the shutdown is real and just goes through fluctuation like everything else in nature. However, major information sources like Wikipedia still explain things based on the older inclusive data.

The primary source of actual data and analysis of the problem is to be found at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute. That is the point of this thread; explain the actual problem and explain were the source of real scientific date and analysis can be found. Those guys cannot tell anyone when Canada and Britain are going to freeze over any more than they can tell when hell is going to freeze over, but the data and analysis from them is the most unbiased, based on real measurements, and offers the best analysis of the problem.. and they are scared because the melting of the polar ice, the raising of the world's temperature including the ocean ... all the things we have become worried about, are accelerating.


TelephoneMan's photo
Fri 09/25/09 03:33 AM
Edited by TelephoneMan on Fri 09/25/09 03:53 AM
Well, evidence showed just 7 months ago, when temperatures were 30 below zero wind chill here in Michigan last Feberuary for THREE SOLID WEEKS STRAIGHT that once again... global warming is taking over Michigan...

...not...

But they sure are generating TONS of grant money to the university systems on the topic...

And let's not forget to label it correctly as...

"The THEORY of Global Warming"

It is NOT proven, indesputable scientific fact, such as "The LAW of Gravity."

Global Warming is still... in the scientific world... just a theory...

... howbeit a theory that sells books, generates lot's of college grant monies, and is a great sensational topic for the media circus... not to mention a cool way to place your face out on the political campaigns... let me just mention that a LOT of opportunistic things are going on in happy capitalist America pertaining to the topic... not all of which are legitimate and well-founded... many of which are simply just cashing in on the pandamonium.... much like Y2K... but different... and its lasted longer

Let's not forget to add these realities to the equation when we are all puking on pollution and pondering what to do with the overflow of the landfills.

Industrialzation is the major cause for these rampant pollutants and toxic wastes pouring into our biosystem. Do you like your computer? Then you have added to the pollution problem. How about a cell phone? Got one of those? More waste, more problems.

The human condition in the industrialized nations is one of technology and pleasures at the cost of the environment. The third world countries haven't caught us yet. But with globalization, and the off-shoring of the industrialized work force to the third world, the greedy pleasure-driven industrialized middle-class polluters are coming to these countries fast and furious.

The Basel Action Network http://www.ban.org/ is an awareness group who's purpose is to alert people to the problems with eWaste. Ever take your computer to a nice recycling center, thinking you were doing the planet a favor? Ban.org has discovered that many of these seemingly legit recycling centers are actually selling their used goods by the cargo container load to businesses in third world countries, where there is no EPA and legal policies to protect people... And in these countries, things like CRT computer monitors are being broken open with a sledgehammer so that the worker can harvest the lead inside with their bare hands. Or workers are using toxic acids to recover the gold in computer motherboards and CPUs.

Here's the problem... humankind has become addicted to the pleasures associated with high technology usage. Being able to push a button, talk on a cell phone, e-mail friends on your computer. When just these few technological items hit the dump, they all include toxic substances inside (such as mercury and others).

To gain control of the pollution problem, one must first convince these humans buying the technolgies NOT to buy the technolgies. Or... let's try convincing the tehcnological manufacturers NOT to make or create or engineer any more technology.

Let's just try asking one compnay... let's say... Intel... let's get Intel to stop making computer chips...

Hell will freeze over first (if there is a hell)

It will all most likely end when the planet is in a Mad Max Road Warrior state... remind me to stock up on ammo and gasoline for the event...


TelephoneMan's photo
Fri 09/25/09 03:42 AM
Edited by TelephoneMan on Fri 09/25/09 03:46 AM


SO, WHAT DO YOU PROPOSE WE DO? ? ?



As a species, we need to stop breeding because we are already consuming the world's resources at a rate that has depleted major foodstocks, timber, mining, farming, fishing, and other resources.



Yes, ... what... just become a homosexual??, end all of this breeding stuff, and be done with it... great answer...

There is yet a final frontier that has not yet been explored/exploited... the deep sea... we've been to the moon, but still have a lot of questions pertaining to what is actually under these oceans...

The reason the world's resources are being depleted so rapidly isn't because people are being born... it is because of industrialization, created an economy based on goods, goods, and more goods... it takes natural resources to make those goods...

Besides... we could breed until there was no food left... and just eat each other, no problem... we could actually become our own food source (minus any ethical considerations of course...) so stopping the breeding isn't the answer... actually... hey, it could be the cure

TelephoneMan's photo
Fri 09/25/09 03:44 AM
Edited by TelephoneMan on Fri 09/25/09 03:45 AM
oops, double postered