Global Warming by Hero

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

WARNING FLAMEBAIT

I note for the record that ever since 'Hero' went over the line with his 'every tasering is amusing' post (I'm sure his bosses would be interested in that one - bet his butt puckered when it was pointed out) his posts have been much more circumspect and covered with plausible deniability.

Yes, that's our 'Hero'.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

Can you say 'fired' ? Sure you can.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2007 11:12 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Fletch2:

I went to London this time last year and it was warm enough that I could walk around comfortably in a sweater. I was extremely disappointed -- I love English Novembers especially dry ones they are so crisp and the light has a hard quality that makes for great pictures.

So nope, definatly warmer than it should be. Last car we hired in England came with AC we never had AC in cars or homes until recently, there were too few hot days in a typical summer to warrent it.

Yeah, that was LAST year. Or what is called an anomaly. Things like that happen, but they're not common occurances. Not that big a deal.

Hundreds of yrs ago, England was home to vast amounts of vineyards. All over the country. Now? They're only small or very small, found in the far southern areas. Gee, wonder why.

Global warming is a myth.

Get over it.

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2007 1:06 PM

RIGHTEOUS9

"Global warming is a myth...."

and apparently you and 5 other people agree, auraptor....

these days that would almost put you and Hero in the Fringe looney land you always apply to Pirate News

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2007 1:32 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Hundreds of yrs ago, England was home to vast amounts of vineyards. All over the country. Now? They're only small or very small, found in the far southern areas.

What on Earth are you talking about?

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2007 1:36 PM

HERO

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
I note for the record that ever since 'Hero' went over the line with his 'every tasering is amusing' post (I'm sure his bosses would be interested in that one - bet his butt puckered when it was pointed out) his posts have been much more circumspect and covered with plausible deniability.

I note for the record that I said every tasering I've ever seen was amusing. That some tasering is not amusing is likely. I further note that tasering vidoes are common on YouTube and even on network TV (where they are presented for entertainment purposes) which indicates I am not alone in this sentiment.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2007 1:44 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Hmmm - yes. I see some defensive butt-covering.

There are a LOT of things on YouTube - plane crashes, bridge collapses, car-wrecks ... do you presume that they're also on YouTube b/c people find them 'amusing' ?

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2007 2:02 PM

CAUSAL

Quote:
Originally posted by oldenglanddry:
Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
I just noticed that its extremely cold outside and snowing...in Ohio...in November. Clearly the work of Global Warming.

ALGore needs to get involved (we need all the hot air we can get this time of year).

H

No, not Global warming.
The Jews did it.

Personally, I blame the Bush administration for the burning of fossil fuels en toto.

________________________________________________________________________

- Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
- Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police
- Vote JonnyQuest/Causal, for Benevolent Co-Dictator of Earth; together, toward a brighter tomorrow!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2007 2:11 PM

FLETCH2

Apparently it's an argument against global warming. I did a quick Google and found this analysis.

Medieval warmth and English wine
Filed under:
Paleoclimate

Climate Science
— gavin @ 10:00 AM
Never let it be said that we at RealClimate don't work for our readers. Since a commenter mentioned the medieval vineyards in England, I've been engaged on a quixotic quest to discover the truth about the oft-cited, but seldom thought through, claim that the existence of said vineyards a thousand years ago implies that a 'Medieval Warm Period' was obviously warmer than the current climate (and by implication that human-caused global warming is not occuring). This claim comes up pretty frequently, and examples come from many of the usual suspects e.g. Singer (2005), and Baliunas (in 2003). The basic idea is that i) vineyards are a good proxy for temperature, ii) there were vineyards in England in medieval times, iii) everyone knows you don't get English wine these days, iv) therefore England was warmer back then, and v) therefore increasing greenhouse gases have no radiative effect. I'll examine each of these propositions in turn (but I'll admit the logic of the last step escapes me). I'll use two principle sources, the excellent (and cheap) "Winelands of Britain" by geologist Richard C. Selley and the website of the English Wine Producers.

Are vineyards a good temperature proxy? While climate clearly does impact viticulture through the the amount of sunshine, rainfall amounts, the number of frost free days in the spring and fall, etc., there a number of confounding factors that make it less than ideal as a long term proxy. These range from changing agricultural practices, changing grape varieties, changing social factors and the wider trade environment. For instance, much early winemaking in England was conducted in Benedictine monasteries for religious purposes - changing rites and the treatment of the monasteries by the crown (Henry VIII in particular) clearly impacted wine production there. Societal factors range from the devastating (the Black Death) to the trivial (working class preferences for beer over wine). The wider trade environment is also a big factor i.e. how easy was it to get better, cheaper wine from the continent? The marriage of Eleanor of Aquitaine and the English King in 1152 apparently allowed better access to the vineyards of Bordeaux, and however good medieval English wine was, it probably wasn't a match for that!

However, for the sake of argument, let's assume that climate is actually the dominant control - so what does the history of English vineyards show?

The earliest documentation that is better than anecdotal is from the Domesday Book (1087) - an early census that the new Norman king commissioned to assess his new English dominions, including the size of farms, population etc. Being relatively 'frenchified', the Normans (who had originally come from Viking stock) were quite keen on wine drinking (rather than mead or ale) and so made special note of existing vineyards and where the many new vines were being planted. Sources differ a little on how many vineyards are included in the book: Selley quotes Unwin (J. Wine Research, 1990 (subscription)) who records 46 vineyards across Southern England (42 unambiguous sites, 4 less direct), but other claims (unsourced) range up to 52. Lamb's 1977 book has a few more from other various sources and anecdotally there are more still, and so clearly this is a minimum number.

Of the Domesday vineyards, all appear to lie below a line from Ely (Cambridgeshire) to Gloucestershire. Since the Book covers all of England up to the river Tees (north of Yorkshire), there is therefore reason to think that there weren't many vineyards north of that line. Lamb reports two vineyards to the north (Lincoln and Leeds, Yorkshire) at some point between 1000 and 1300 AD, and Selley even reports a Scottish vineyard operating in the 12th Century. However, it's probably not sensible to rely too much on these single reports since they don't necessarily come with evidence for successful or sustained wine production. Indeed, there is one lone vineyard reported in Derbyshire (further north than any Domesday vineyard) in the 16th Century when all other reports were restricted to the South-east of England.

Wine making never completely died out in England, there were always a few die-hard viticulturists willing to give it a go, but production clearly declined after the 13th Century, had a brief resurgence in the 17th and 18th Centuries, only to decline to historic lows in the 19th Century when only 8 vineyards are recorded. Contemporary popular sentiment towards English (and Welsh) wine can be well judged by a comment in 'Punch' (a satirical magazine) that the wine would require 4 people to drink it - one victim, two to hold him down, and one other to pour the wine down his throat.

Unremarked by most oenophiles though, English and Welsh wine production started to have a renaissance in the 1950s. By 1977, there were 124 reasonable-sized vineyards in production - more than at any other time over the previous millennium. This resurgence was also unremarked upon by Lamb, who wrote in that same year that the English climate (the average of 1921-1950 to be precise) remained about a degree too cold for wine production. Thus the myth of the non-existant English wine industry was born and thrust headlong into the climate change debate…

Since 1977, a further 200 or so vineyards have opened (currently 400 and counting) and they cover a much more extensive area than the recorded medieval vineyards, extending out to Cornwall, and up to Lancashire and Yorkshire where the (currently) most northerly commercial vineyard sits. So with the sole exception of one 'rather improbably' located 12th Century Scottish vineyard (and strictly speaking that doesn't count, it not being in England 'n' all…), English vineyards have almost certainly exceeded the extent of medieval cultivation. And I hear (from normally reliable sources) they are actually producing a pretty decent selection of white wines.

So what should one conclude from this? Well, one shouldn't be too dogmatic that English temperatures are now obviously above a medieval peak - the impact of confounding factors in wine production precludes such a clear conclusion (and I am pretty agnostic with regards to the rest of the evidence of whether northern Europe was warmer 1000 years than today). However, one can conclude that those who are using the medieval English vineyards as a 'counter-proof' to the idea of present day global warming are just blowing smoke (or possibly drinking too much Californian). If they are a good proxy, then England is warmer now, and if they are not…. well, why talk about them in this context at all?

There is a bigger issue of course. For the sake of argument, let's accept that medieval times were as warm in England as they are today, and even that global temperatures were similar (that's a much bigger leap, but no mind). What would that imply for our attribution of current climate changes to human causes? ……. Nothing. Nowt. Zero. Zip.

Why? Well, warm periods have occured in the past, and if not the medieval period, then probably the last interglacial (120,000 years ago), certainly the Pliocene (3 million years ago), without question the (Eocene 50 million years), and in particular the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (55 million years ago), and so on. Current theories of climate change do not rely on whether today's temperatures are 'unprecedented'. Instead they examine the physical causes of climate change and match up what we know about their physical effects and time history and see which of the multiple drivers or combination can best explain the observations. For the last few decades, that is quite clearly the rise in greenhouse gases, punctuated by the occasional volcano and mitigated slightly by the concomittant rise in particulate pollution.

Understanding past climate changes are of course also very interesting - they provide test cases for climate models and can have profound implications for the history of human society. However, uncertainties (as recently outlined in the NAS report) increase as you go back in time, and that applies to our knowledge of the climate drivers as well as to temperatures. So much so that even a medieval period a couple of tenths of a degree warmer than today would still be consistent with what we know about solar forcing and climate sensitivity within the commonly accepted uncertainties.

My oenological research project has not then lead me to any profound insights into climate change in the past, but it has given me a little more respect for the dedication of my winemaking compatriots. So next time I'm in the area, I'll drink to that!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2007 3:29 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"Current theories of climate change do not rely on whether today's temperatures are 'unprecedented'. Instead they examine the physical causes of climate change and match up what we know about their physical effects and time history and see which of the multiple drivers or combination can best explain the observations. For the last few decades, that is quite clearly the rise in greenhouse gases, punctuated by the occasional volcano and mitigated slightly by the concomittant rise in particulate pollution."

Thought I'd break that out.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2007 5:32 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Righteous9:

"Global warming is a myth...."

and apparently you and 5 other people agree, auraptor....

these days that would almost put you and Hero in the Fringe looney land you always apply to Pirate News

Ahh yes, I must add on the precursor ... that HUMAN AIDED global warming is a myth. Feel beter now ?

For decades, the world labored under the false notion that Dinosaurs were slow, cold blooded and stupid. Why? Becasue they were simply big lizards, and lizards are cold blooded, stupid, etc......

I don't give a flying fornication what the 'majority' thinks, especailly when they are so clearly wrong. As is the case w/ man made global warming. Pure b.s. Nothing more.

Scientific truth is not beholden to the wishes of the majority.

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2007 5:38 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"Scientific truth is not beholden to the wishes of the majority."

Is it beholden to the facts ?

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2007 5:50 PM

RIGHTEOUS9

Then who the hell are the scientists you are basing your understanding on, Auraptor? I'm going to wager a guess and say that Hero's originating post was not a peer reviewed study.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2007 8:08 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fletch2:
Apparently it's an argument against global warming. I did a quick Google and found this analysis.

So in other words, it was a lie. Thanks

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2007 8:10 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Scientific truth is not beholden to the wishes of the majority.

By all accounts it's beholden to what Auraptor wants it to be...

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2007 9:11 AM

HERO

Quote:
Originally posted by Righteous9:
I'm going to wager a guess and say that Hero's originating post was not a peer reviewed study.

Actually the cold weather was noticed by a fair number of people yesterday...evidenced by their coats and hats.

I note for the record that it remains bitter and cold in Northeast Ohio today...despite the consensus of your scientists.

I'm fairly certain that for their next trick AlGore's cabal will prove the sun is a myth. After all, start with that conclusion, you could look outside every day and find evidence that the sun does not exist. If I were then to look outside and see the sun, you'd accuse me of only looking during the day...reasonable scientists look at night, day is not relavent to the fact the the sun is gone at night and thus therefore be gone at all times. Perhaps day is a delusion or merely the wishful thinking of those of us clinging to faith in what was or what we see, not in the world as it is defined for us.

Sure, the world is round, you say. But that does not mean its getting warmer. In fact, proving such things as the round earth, the orbit of the sun and such supports my theory that portions of the Earth, like Ohio, will undergo a period of cooling lasting till about March...then maybe we can talk about the warming you seem to think is going on.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2007 10:09 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Righteous9:

Then who the hell are the scientists you are basing your understanding on, Auraptor? I'm going to wager a guess and say that Hero's originating post was not a peer reviewed study.

And Rue -

I'm not gonna play " Who's got the better scientist " with y'all. Sorry. But just so you know,there are plenty of accredited and award winning meteorologist out there who dismiss the idea of man's input into global warming. One being James Spann - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Spann

There's my own observations, which is supported by my understanding of mankind's limited time here on Earth.

There's my study into geology and paleontology, which gives me some basic understanding that a plaent 4.6 billion yrs old has been through a lot, and that our petty influence on the global temperature, compared to those forces on a cosmic scale , are woefully insignificant.

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2007 10:26 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
There's my study into geology and paleontology, which gives me some basic understanding that a plaent 4.6 billion yrs old has been through a lot, and that our petty influence on the global temperature, compared to those forces on a cosmic scale , are woefully insignificant.

That's faulty reasoning. Iraq was the birthplace of civilisation, America is two hundred years old. By your reasoning the American military had nothing to do with the fall of the Iraqi government.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2007 10:40 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
There's my study into geology and paleontology, which gives me some basic understanding that a plaent 4.6 billion yrs old has been through a lot, and that our petty influence on the global temperature, compared to those forces on a cosmic scale , are woefully insignificant.
That's faulty reasoning. Iraq was the birthplace of civilisation, America is two hundred years old. By your reasoning the American military had nothing to do with the fall of the Iraqi government.

Huh? Now THAT'S faulty reasoning.

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2007 10:42 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"There's my own observations, which is supported by my understanding of mankind's limited time here on Earth."

Several large asteroids hit the earth and the debris vaporizes in seconds. By your logic the earth should be unaffected b/c the asteroids had such a limited time here on the earth (and also the earth is so old and has so much history).

***************************************************************
Is that better ?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2007 10:46 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"But just so you know,there are plenty of accredited and award winning meteorologist out there who dismiss the idea of man's input into global warming."

Name a half-dozen specialists in the field.

***************************************************************
Betcha can name just one !

(With apologies to Lay's potato chips.)

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2007 10:47 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Huh? Now THAT'S faulty reasoning.

That was my point. The wider issue aside, saying a new influence can't have an impact on an older system is illogical. The Earth could be a hundred billion years old, it doesn't follow that a new influence of only 200 years couldn't adversely effect it.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2007 11:23 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
"There's my own observations, which is supported by my understanding of mankind's limited time here on Earth."

Several large asteroids hit the earth and the debris vaporizes in seconds. By your logic the earth should be unaffected b/c the asteroids had such a limited time here on the earth (and also the earth is so old and has so much history).

Define 'large' asteroids. If the atmosphere vaporized them before they impacted the ground, then they really didn't do much to the Earth. If they were larger, like the one which made the crater in Arizona, or bigger, like the one in Chicxulub, Mexico, then that would be different. Sucked to be around Arizona the day the former hit, sucked to be around ANYWHERE the day the latter hit.

And yet, here we are. Earth all rotating and full of life.

Takes a lickin', and keeps on tickin'.

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2007 11:34 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Huh? Now THAT'S faulty reasoning.
That was my point. The wider issue aside, saying a new influence can't have an impact on an older system is illogical. The Earth could be a hundred billion years old, it doesn't follow that a new influence of only 200 years couldn't adversely effect it.

I never said 'no influence', but on such a small scale, it's hardly worth mentioning. Earth has been around, survived far more than humans can possibly comprehend, ( well, most humans ) and yet here we are, life abounds, plenty of fresh water, clean air, rich soils , all over the damn place. One afternoon, a meteor COULD hit, a volcano COULD blow, and pump more pollution into the atmosphere in a few seconds than a 1000 yrs of the Industrial Revolution.

Never said we should pollute and burn fossil fuels like there's no tomorrow. Clearly, there is a tomorrow and we should serve as the best stewards of our planet as we can. But the scare politics of accusing mankind of causing global warming, or even of affecting it on a significant scale, are in my opinion, disingenuous and dangerous.

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2007 11:58 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
I never said 'no influence', but on such a small scale, it's hardly worth mentioning. Earth has been around, survived far more than humans can possibly comprehend, ( well, most humans ) and yet here we are, life abounds, plenty of fresh water, clean air, rich soils , all over the damn place. One afternoon, a meteor COULD hit, a volcano COULD blow, and pump more pollution into the atmosphere in a few seconds than a 1000 yrs of the Industrial Revolution.

Never said we should pollute and burn fossil fuels like there's no tomorrow. Clearly, there is a tomorrow and we should serve as the best stewards of our planet as we can. But the scare politics of accusing mankind of causing global warming, or even of affecting it on a significant scale, are in my opinion, disingenuous and dangerous.

Except the industrial revolution is outside of the natural balance, and even a small change can produce a massive deviation. Theres numerous examples in nature where a tiny change has drastically reordered the natural balance. No species in the history of the planet has had technological mastery that has allowed it to live outside of the natural laws (evolution and so forth).

The largest scientific consensus agrees with global warming, to put it in context theres more support for 'man made' global warming than there was for evolution and einstian physics. The weight of evidence points one way, there being a small group of detractors doesn't change that, just like there still being a flat Earth society doesn't change the shape of the planet.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2007 11:59 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"And yet, here we are. Earth all rotating and full of life.
Takes a lickin', and keeps on tickin'."

But not the same as before. And it changed in seconds. And that is the point.

Jus b/c something's been around a long time doesn't mean it can't change catastrophically and nearly instantaneously.

BTW the Chicxulub impact was minor compared to this one:

http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/erthboom.htm

The 300-mile-wide (Wilkes) crater lies hidden more than a mile beneath the East Antarctic Ice Sheet. And the gravity measurements that reveal its existence suggest that it could date back about 250 million years -- the time of the Permian-Triassic extinction, when almost all animal life on Earth died out.

Its size and location -- in the Wilkes Land region of East Antarctica, south of Australia -- also suggest that it could have begun the breakup of the Gondwana supercontinent by creating the tectonic rift that pushed Australia northward.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2007 12:01 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"But the scare politics of accusing mankind of causing global warming, or even of affecting it on a significant scale, are in my opinion, disingenuous and dangerous."

So you don't base your opinion on science but on politics ?

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2007 1:06 PM

SIGMANUNKI

I'm always at a loss as to why anyone responds to Hero when he posts such non-sense. I mean seriously, the guy doesn't have a clue as to the difference between weather and climate and flatly refuses to be educated on the subject no matter how many links and/or explanations are posted. They guy's a lost cause. Just let him be in his personal pocket dimension where he is always right regardless of any of those pesky facts.

----
I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2007 1:14 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

THANK YOU.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2007 4:23 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
The largest scientific consensus agrees with global warming, to put it in context theres more support for 'man made' global warming than there was for evolution and einstian physics.

That's bullshit. Most of that 'consensus' is nothing more than political grandstanding. The sun increases in activity, it gets warmer here. As it does on Mars.

I'm really fucking tired of having this discussion over and over and over. I'm done w/ it. Y'all go play w/ yourselves.

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2007 4:28 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
rue wrote:

But not the same as before. And it changed in seconds. And that is the point.

No, the REAL point is that NOTHING is the same as before. The Earth has been in CONSTANT change since day 1. The idea of a 'pristine, age old ' enviroment which has been undisturbed since the dawn of time is a flat out myth.

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2007 4:31 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Rap

And yet
- the sun is NOT increasing in activity beyond very small amounts (0.1%)
- only the south pole of Mars is affected
- other planets are getting colder

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2007 5:04 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Rap

And yet
- the sun is NOT increasing in activity beyond very small amounts (0.1%)
- only the south pole of Mars is affected
- other planets are getting colder

It's the sun, it doesn't NEED to increase activity very much. ANY is enough.

Does it really matter that one pole is affected more than the other ?

Other planets aren't getting colder.

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2007 5:06 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

It's the sun, it doesn't NEED to increase activity very much. ANY is enough.

No. If I linked the study would you actually read it. Or just blow on past the facts like you always do ?

Both poles are affected.

Again, no. And again if I linked the study would you actually read it. Or just blow on past the facts like you always do ?

Other planets aren't getting colder.

Yes they are. And again if I linked the study would you actually read it. Or just blow on past the facts like you always do ?

BETTER YET - YOU ARE THE ONE WHO CLAIMS TO HAVE ALL THIS INFORMATION. IT'S THE SUN ! MARS IS WARMING UP ! THE PLANETS ARE ALL GETTING WARMER !!!

HOW ABOUT YOU BACK UP YOUR ASSERTIONS JUST ONCE

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, November 8, 2007 8:08 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
That's bullshit. Most of that 'consensus' is nothing more than political grandstanding.

No it isn't, but whatever.

Quote:
The sun increases in activity, it gets warmer here. As it does on Mars.

Actually that's been refuted, quite soundly. It's based on the Martian southern pole ice cap receeding, but the Northern Pole is spreading so Mars isn't warming up on a global scale at all.

Quote:
I'm really fucking tired of having this discussion over and over and over. I'm done w/ it. Y'all go play w/ yourselves.

Ok, but you might want to look into why you can't hold your temper over a divergent opinion. Cognative Dissonance?

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, November 8, 2007 9:28 AM

There are four parts to this presentation.

This links to part 1.

I'll take this guys facts over Al Gores tales anytime.

Am I a Lion?... No, I think I'ma tellin' the truth.

BarnStormer

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, November 8, 2007 9:33 AM

Or, how about this one.

http://icecap.us/index.php/go/joes-blog/comments_about_global_warming/

Am I a Lion?... No, I think I'ma tellin' the truth.

BarnStormer

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, November 8, 2007 9:34 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by BarnStormer:

I'll take this guys facts over Al Gores tales anytime.

Because of course global warming proponents get all their information from Al Gore. I've not watched "an inconvenient truth" and I don't plan to either.

Beyond that, I think they've both got the same level of facts in their presentations.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, November 8, 2007 9:36 AM

Or what this one tells us about the character of those who spout "Gorebal Warmingism"

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=520555

Am I a Lion?... No, I think I'ma tellin' the truth.

BarnStormer

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, November 8, 2007 9:39 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by BarnStormer:
Or what this one tells us about the character of those who spout "Gorebal Warmingism"

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=520555

Well, character assassination. I'd steer clear of ad hominems if you want to make a case, fallacies are what people use when they don't have an argument, eh ;)

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, November 8, 2007 9:41 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
Originally posted by BarnStormer:

I'll take this guys facts over Al Gores tales anytime.
Because of course global warming proponents get all their information from Al Gore. I've not watched "an inconvenient truth" and I don't plan to either.

Beyond that, I think they've both got the same level of facts in their presentations.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

How can you compare when you have'nt seen?

Science or Propoganda, Science or Propaganda.

I guess you've chosen Propaganda?

Am I a Lion?... No, I think I'ma tellin' the truth.

BarnStormer

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, November 8, 2007 9:43 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by BarnStormer:
How can you compare when you have'nt seen?

Science or Propoganda, Science or Propaganda.

I guess you've chosen Propaganda?

I haven't seen all or Al Gores, I have seen that video you linked. So you must be saying that the video linked is propeganda, huh?

I made my decision looking at the evidence, if you chose confirmation bias, that's you're own look out.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, November 8, 2007 9:44 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
Originally posted by BarnStormer:
Or what this one tells us about the character of those who spout "Gorebal Warmingism"

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=520555
Well, character assassination. I'd steer clear of ad hominems if you want to make a case, fallacies are what people use when they don't have an argument, eh ;)

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

Are you so sure this Harvard Article is a fallacy, or do you only wish it was?

Am I a Lion?... No, I think I'ma tellin' the truth.

BarnStormer

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, November 8, 2007 9:47 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by BarnStormer:
Are you so sure this Harvard Article is a fallacy, or do you only wish it was?

Attaking the messenger over the message is always a fallacy, no matter who it comes from. An Ad Hominem is a fallacy, no matter how much you wish it wasn't.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, November 8, 2007 10:10 AM