On Dec 19, 9:47 am, "Ryan P."
wrote:
dgk wrote:
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 13:35:21 -0500, "Clark..."
wrote:

Clark... wrote:
I couldn't open my fricken door this morning for crying out loud, (no
it was not jammed shut with a 10 inch pine stick)
gonna be outside with my trustie 5hp 24inch Craftsman snow blower all
fricken day !
takes an hour or two to do the snow here in Southampton, then we are
off to Holyoke to clear the rental property, and then to dig out my
grandmothers car out , the whole deal is gonna take 5 hours I bet.
Al Gore should the hell up, what a moron...

Clark...

Two things,
1. could you tell my hands were cold and stiff when I typed the above? holy
crap...
2. Glad to see some guys in here don't buy into the Global warming thing.
but let's add to that, how about

California is going to fall into the ocean.

the Y2K joke. I worked for a good sized bank at the time and was on one of
the many Y2K testing and compliance teams.

spotted owls can only live in one kind of tree, then found nesting in a
store sign.

Clark...

Right, rip down all the ****ing trees, who cares? Dump more CO2 into
the oceans so they become more acidic and kill off the little beasties
that fish eat. Who cares? Well, maybe the folks that eat fish. And
anything else.

That's a bit of an extreme reaction, isn't it? Just because somebody
makes fun of whacko environmental extremists doesn't mean that they
think all nature should be burnt down.



Actually, virtually all scientists agree that the world is getting
warmer, and almost all agree that human activity is having an impact.
Even the lying *******s running our government sort of have to admit
it.

That's half false. Obviously, global warming occurs. However,
nothing approaching a majority of scientists agree that HUMANS are the
*main* factor.

Isn't it funny that all these melting glaciers are revealing ancient
forests? How can it be possible that only a few hundred years ago
Greenland was a bountiful colony, and within 100 years became too cold
to support pre-industrial civilization? How was the planet ever warm
enough before humans built their terrible, nasty, electricity-needing
civilizations? Clearly those ancient forests, tropical plant fossils in
the Antarctic, and sea creature fossils found on the tops of mountains
were put there by George W. Bush and other Republicans JUST so that they
can deny global warming!

And for your assertion that there is no global warming because it's
snowing outside, global warming means more energy in the atmosphere.
That means a more active atmosphere, with more extreme events. Colder
colds, hotter hots, deeper snows, heavier rains.

Who determines what the "perfect" global climate is? 10,000 years
ago, before cities and electricity, we were in an ice age. Was that the
perfect natural climate? 60,000,000 years ago most of the land mass was
tropical or sub-tropical in temperature. Was that perfect?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


The above shows exactly what some of us are concerned about. You
can't even raise any question about global warming without being
attacked as some kind of neanderthal and called an ahole. The same
thing is happening in academic circles. Many scientists have a
choice to make. Raise legitimate questions about global warming and
be ridiculed, outcast, have your funding cut off, denied tenure, or
stay silent so others can claim there is no disagreement.

To your issue about Mars also seeing a rise in temp, I would add
this. According to current evidence, there have been 4 major cycles
of global warming and cooling going back about 700K years. This is
the common graph used to link CO2 with global warming. It's used by
Al Gore in his movie. It shows CO2 and the earth's temp rising and
falling together. However, it also shows that in every cycle, the
temp starts to rise a few hunderd to 1500 years BEFORE CO2 starts to
rise. I've yet to hear anyone explain that. Typical response I've
seen was from an alleged expert at a major university, who stated that
this only shows CO2 isn't responsible for the early part of the rise.
Huh? I would submit that if that answer were given to a question in
high school science, it wouldn't pass.

On the other hand, I've listened to an Ocean Sciences professor at MIT
who believes cycles in the output of the Sun is responsible for
increased warming of the Earth. The oceans are a major reservoir of
CO2 and as they get heated, just like a warming open bottle of soda,
they release CO2. And because the oceans are so deep, it takes
hundreds of years after the warming starts for the CO2 to increase.
Sounds pretty reasonable and it explains the graph, but like others,
this guy is dismissed as an ahole heretic by the true believers.