What Do We Think About Climate Change

[Boston]

obviously you didnt watch the video

very entertaining I might add

story as she tells it is that the middle one is real and it was the other two that she had "done" to make them a better match

I'd link to the flick of her going at it but that might be a tad much for some of our viewers

but she is not the only case of multiple tits or nipples apparently
( told you I looked it up )

there is a girl with 7 nipples on 2 tits and numerous girls with three and four tits

this girl is but ugly but has the same condition as the previous with a tit inthe middle that developed and the two others that didnt

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgu...IpawsQOg0tD8Cw

this ones got three tits that all developed but she's not all that hot either

this one might offend some folks by the way
http://www.flurl.com/video/5259977_comments.htm

you might look up Supernumerary breasts if you are all that doubtful

[Zed]

Oh dear god... I have a bridge for you to buy!

[Boston]

your imagining things again
as I said
according to the girl the middle one is the one that developed and she had the two others done to match

she does an interview on Dailymotion followed by a more detailed look if you know what I mean

it is a relatively common medical condition in which typically only the extra nipple is visible
apparently occurring to some degree or another about 1% of the time
its called
supernumerary mamalia or something like that

look it up instead of acting like someone is claiming something they are not

[Zed]

I said nothing... how can I be imagining things? You are projecting again.

[fasteddy106]

Back to the regularly scheduled programing. This link is to a great article pointing out the mindset of the zero growth wack jobs who promote the AGW agenda in order to promote their own tortured agenda of devolution and societal regression..............

http://www.fcpp.org/files/1/PS084%20...ploitation.pdf

[Guillermo]

Originally Posted by fasteddy106

Another interesting read from JoNova.....................

http://joannenova.com.au/2010/02/the...rature-swings/

Most interesting. Thanks for bringing it here. I will read it carefully.

Cheers.

[Guillermo]

GW alarmists would like to shut down all power plants, yet “An offline Florida power plant is providing a warm-water refuge for several hundred manatees who like the Sunshine State's human residents are shivering in record low cold temperatures. … The oil- and gas-fired plant was taken off line last year for modernization but [Florida Power and Light] FPL has installed a special heating system to keep waters at an attractively balmy temperature for the manatees” [http://planetark.org/enviro-news/item/56265]

The LA Times showed the following picture of manatees using the warm water output from a power plant to survive. “More than 200 manatees are wintering in a balmy canal outside a power plant, the latest exotic Florida animals seeking refuge from the state's frigid temperatures. Giant eagle rays and spinner sharks joined them in the 70-degree waters Thursday as onlookers watched them frolic near Apollo Beach. With temperatures up to 20 degrees below normal, some less resourceful animals needed help from humans to survive.” [http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/unle...and-rays.html]



A study of Florida’s manatees and power plants (“Laist and Reynolds “Florida Manatees, Warm-Water Refuges and an Uncertain Future”, 2005 [http://mmc.gov/reports/publications/...amanatees.pdf]) states: “Most Florida manatees depend on localized warm-water refuges in the southern two-thirds of Florida to survive winter; about 60% use outfalls from 10 power plants. Future availability of these refuges is in doubt; most of these power plants may be retired within the next 20 year … plant retirements may increase cold-stress-related deaths and significantly decrease manatee abundance. … All power plant outfalls now used by manatees were built between the 1940s and early 1970s. Many of these plants have reached or are approaching the end of their planned operational lives and soon may be retired. Since they were built, regulations under the U.S. Clean Water Act have prohibited new facilities from discharging effluent substantially warmer than the receiving waterbodies. The older, pre-existing plants, however, were granted variances allowing them to continue discharging warm water. Unless the older units are “repowered,” an expensive process of updating or replacing existing generating units with more efficient units, their retirement in the next 10 to 20 years will eliminate discharges on which most Florida manatees now depend for winter survival.”

The above report states: “As most power plants now used by manatees had not yet been built at that time [1950], some assume that, if power plants were closed, manatees would simply move south to warmer areas in Florida with no effect on overall manatee abundance. Such assumptions, however, may be overly simplistic and largely incorrect. Based on site-fidelity to winter refuges and manatee responses to past outfall shut-downs, it seems questionable, if not doubtful, that all or even many manatees would move to southernmost Florida or to natural springs that lie outside of their familiar range.”


Perhaps the pro-AGW environmentalists will just claim that the manatees are an “invasive species” and should be allowed to succumb to the cold.

[Guillermo]

The following figures show the sea surface temperatures (SST) for the Florida manatee area. The graphs show the monthly SST anomalies (blue) and annual average SST anomalies (red) for 1930 through 2008 (data from the CRU HadSST2 database plotted at http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/climate.aspx). The HadSST2 database is averaged over 5x5 degree grids – the temperatures for the 4 grids encompassing the manatee area are shown.

The grid covering most of Florida’s coastline (25-30Nx80-85W) shows a slight cooling trend over the last 80 years. The other grids show a slight warming trend which does not exceed the warming of the 1930s.

The Gulf Coast Side of Florida


The Gulf Stream Side of Florida

[Guillermo]

I ask again: rapid compared with what? with the fast warming periods shown in these graphs, per example? some other? I'd greatly appreciate if you could post a long term graph to let us know what are you talking about, Boston.

Data from NOAA GISP2 ice core data, central Greenland:

[Boston]

no time at the moment to go over all of that G but I was reading the Ocean News before I have to go and found this which might help you understand rapid climate change a little better

February 6, 2010

WINNIPEG — Sea ice in Canada’s fragile Arctic is melting faster than anyone expected, the lead investigator in Canada’s largest climate-change study yet said Friday — raising the possibility that the Arctic could, in a worst-case scenario, be ice-free in about three years.

University of Manitoba Prof. David Barber, the lead investigator of the Circumpolar Flaw Lead System Study, said the rapid decay of thick Arctic Sea ice highlights the rapid pace of climate change in the North and foreshadows what will come in the South.

“We’re seeing it happen more quickly than what our models thought would happen,” Barber said at a student symposium on climate change in Winnipeg. “It’s happening much faster than our most pessimistic models suggested.”

Barber and more than 300 scientists from around the globe spent last winter on the Canadian Coast Guard research ship Amundsen in the Arctic, studying the impact of climate change. It was the first time a research vessel remained mobile in open water during the winter season. The Canadian government provided $156 million in funding for the study.

Barber said the melting sea ice can be compared to disappearing rain forests.

“If you go into the rain forest and you cut down all the trees, the ecosystem in that rain forest will collapse,” he said. “If you go to the Arctic and you remove all the sea ice or if you remove the timing of the sea ice, the system will change.”

That change will include more invasive species moving up from the South and species that live in the Far North having to adapt to a different environment.

The occurrence of Arctic cyclones is also on the rise, which contributes to ice breakup.

Barber said before the expedition that climate scientists were working under the theory that climate change would happen much more slowly. It was assumed the Arctic would be ice-free in the winter by 2100.

“We expect it will happen much faster than that, much earlier than that, somewhere between 2013 and 2030 are our estimates right now. So it’s much faster than what we would expect to happen. That can be said for southern climates as well.”

The impact means more variability in the Earth’s climate — warm trends are warmer and cold trends are colder.

Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/technol...#ixzz0g0UfebgQ

[hoytedow]

Originally Posted by Guillermo

GW alarmists would like to shut down all power plants, yet “An offline Florida power plant is providing a warm-water refuge for several hundred manatees who like the Sunshine State's human residents are shivering in record low cold temperatures. … The oil- and gas-fired plant was taken off line last year for modernization but [Florida Power and Light] FPL has installed a special heating system to keep waters at an attractively balmy temperature for the manatees” [http://planetark.org/enviro-news/item/56265]

The LA Times showed the following picture of manatees using the warm water output from a power plant to survive. “More than 200 manatees are wintering in a balmy canal outside a power plant, the latest exotic Florida animals seeking refuge from the state's frigid temperatures. Giant eagle rays and spinner sharks joined them in the 70-degree waters Thursday as onlookers watched them frolic near Apollo Beach. With temperatures up to 20 degrees below normal, some less resourceful animals needed help from humans to survive.” [http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/unle...and-rays.html]



A study of Florida’s manatees and power plants (“Laist and Reynolds “Florida Manatees, Warm-Water Refuges and an Uncertain Future”, 2005 [http://mmc.gov/reports/publications/...amanatees.pdf]) states: “Most Florida manatees depend on localized warm-water refuges in the southern two-thirds of Florida to survive winter; about 60% use outfalls from 10 power plants. Future availability of these refuges is in doubt; most of these power plants may be retired within the next 20 year … plant retirements may increase cold-stress-related deaths and significantly decrease manatee abundance. … All power plant outfalls now used by manatees were built between the 1940s and early 1970s. Many of these plants have reached or are approaching the end of their planned operational lives and soon may be retired. Since they were built, regulations under the U.S. Clean Water Act have prohibited new facilities from discharging effluent substantially warmer than the receiving waterbodies. The older, pre-existing plants, however, were granted variances allowing them to continue discharging warm water. Unless the older units are “repowered,” an expensive process of updating or replacing existing generating units with more efficient units, their retirement in the next 10 to 20 years will eliminate discharges on which most Florida manatees now depend for winter survival.”

The above report states: “As most power plants now used by manatees had not yet been built at that time [1950], some assume that, if power plants were closed, manatees would simply move south to warmer areas in Florida with no effect on overall manatee abundance. Such assumptions, however, may be overly simplistic and largely incorrect. Based on site-fidelity to winter refuges and manatee responses to past outfall shut-downs, it seems questionable, if not doubtful, that all or even many manatees would move to southernmost Florida or to natural springs that lie outside of their familiar range.”


Perhaps the pro-AGW environmentalists will just claim that the manatees are an “invasive species” and should be allowed to succumb to the cold.

If you had posted this as a teaser I would have said Crystal River Nuclear Power Plant.

[hoytedow]

...and I would have been wrong.

[Guillermo]

Originally Posted by Boston

no time at the moment to go over all of that G but I was reading the Ocean News before I have to go and found this which might help you understand rapid climate change a little better

How do you infere from there that thinning of Arctic ice is due to increased athmospheric CO2?

NSIDC regularly puts out a news article describing the deteriorating state of the Arctic, called the Sea Ice News. In their May 5, 2008 article, they stated:
" …the Arctic Oscillation was in its positive phase through the winter season, associated with a wind pattern helping to flush thick ice out of the Arctic, leaving thinner ice. This is one of the factors helping to set the stage for pronounced ice losses this summer."

Additionally, Dr. Walt Meier from NSIDC said:

"The NAO/AO (Arctic Oscillation) is a particularly prominent one and a substantial amount of the decline in the sea ice during the late 1980s and early 1990s could be attributed to a strong positive mode during winters because the positive mode favors the loss of thicker ice (through drift) that is less likely to melt during summer."

Multiyear Artic ice has rather to do with the drift during the winter due to winds patterns there, as recognized by the own NSDIC, than with atmospheric temperature. And, of course, it has nothing to do with ACO2. This has been already asumed by most in the quickly vanishing "warmists" camp, including NSDIC. Except Al Gore, Real Climate and Boston, of course.


Once clarified this elementary thing, please fullfill my curiosity and don't hide away with ridiculous distraction maneouvres: can you please post a long term temperatures graph to let us know what are you talking about when you talk rapid climate change?

[Boston]

cause in the very next paragraph the article goes on to say what just about every scientist involved in climate research is saying

Dr. John Hanesiak, an associate professor at the University of Manitoba’s Centre For Earth Observation Science, said that due to human actions and the release of greenhouse gases, those extremes may include more frequent summer droughts and more spring floods in southern climates.

“We know that we’re part of the problem,” he said. “There’s no question about that.

Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/technol...#ixzz0g1nTfewF

Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/technol...#ixzz0g1n3lVCa

[Guillermo]

I see.
“We know that we’re part of the problem,” he said. “There’s no question about that. The models are telling us that now.”

Do you realize? MODELS (why did you omit that sentence?), not facts. He is one more in the crowd of people fooled by the failed IPCC's computer models.

Read this NASA press release: http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/loo...-20071001.html

From there:

Nghiem said the rapid decline in winter perennial ice the past two years was caused by unusual winds. "Unusual atmospheric conditions set up wind patterns that compressed the sea ice, loaded it into the Transpolar Drift Stream and then sped its flow out of the Arctic," he said. When that sea ice reached lower latitudes, it rapidly melted in the warmer waters.

"The winds causing this trend in ice reduction were set up by an unusual pattern of atmospheric pressure that began at the beginning of this century," Nghiem said.

NASA doesn't mention AGW at all.

Watch the COMPLETE history of the NSIDC arctic sea ice in a video:



Here is another video which shows the flow of sea ice down the west coast of Greenland and the Beaufort sea. Clearly there is more at work here than simple melting, there is a whole dynamic flow going on.



(I beleive this two videos had been already posted, but anyway...)