What Do We Think About Climate Change

yea, the rich are getting the welfare and not the poor

I read something something at the beginning of this mess that turned out to be true " it's going to take a lot of money to make the rich, rich again"

 

Reduced ice extent on the western Antarctic Peninsula at 700–970 cal. yr B.P.

Geology; July 2010; v. 38; no. 7; p. 635-638; DOI: 10.1130/G30932.1
© 2010 Geological Society of America

B.L. Hall1,*, T. Koffman2,{dagger} and G.H. Denton1

1 Department of Earth Sciences and the Climate Change Institute, University of Maine, Orono, Maine 04469, USA
2 Raytheon Polar Services, Centennial, Colorado 80112, USA

http://geology.geoscienceworld.org/cgi/content/abstract/38/7/635

Abstract:
Rapid warming and consequent ice-shelf collapse have focused attention on the glacial record of the Antarctic Peninsula. Here, we present the first record of terrestrial organic material exposed by recently retreating ice that bears on past glacier extent and climate in this sensitive region. Radiocarbon dates show that ice on Anvers Island was at or behind its present position at 700–970 cal. yr B.P., coincident with ice reduction elsewhere in the Southern Hemisphere. Moreover, the data indicate that present reduced ice extent on the western Antarctic Peninsula is not unprecedented and is similar to that experienced during at least three periods in the last 5600 yr.

(Bolded is mine)

Description
Hall et al. examined organic-rich sediments exposed by recent retreat of the Marr Ice Piedmont on western Anvers Island, where glaciers have been undergoing considerable retreat in response to the well-documented warming of the Antarctic Peninsula, obtaining moss and marine shells from natural settings within 26 meters of the present ice front, as well as both clumps of peat and shells from sediments reposing in a tunnel beneath the residual ice mass, several samples of which were radiocarbon-dated and the results converted to calendar years. This work revealed, in their words, that "peat from the overrun sediments dates between 707 ± 36 and 967 ± 47 cal. yr B.P.," which led them to conclude that "ice was at or behind its present position at ca. 700-970 cal. yr B.P," which they interpret as implying that "the present state of reduced ice on the western Antarctic Peninsula is not unprecedented," which means that this period was at least as warm as, or likely even warmer than, the peak warmth of the Current Warm Period.

 

Once again your missing the point G
It's not that ice doesn't advance and retreat it's the speed at which it's retreating and the unique reason. Human induced warming

its kinda like that article you posted on the British museum and its bias view of the museums actions
they are kinda like the Zoo in that they avoid confrontation like the plague rather than make a stand
but presenting that as some kind of tacit admission of a flaw in science is ludicrous
what they really want is your money and for you to come back and spend more, so actually addressing a topic to which some visitors might take issue is specifically avoided
it doesn't mean in any way that they agree with the minority opinion or disagree with the scientific consensus which they specifically mention in that article

which is why I posted what the Museum itself had to say about the issue
and pointed out that your post of a bias article in reference to the museums position was somewhat less than a fair representation
I couldn't help but notice you did a little "weaseling" trying to come off some correspondence that in fact, nearly word for word, said what the article I posted said.

which you do a lot and its something the occasional readers deserve to have pointed out

cheers
B

 

It's the speed Guillermo, don't you get it? SPEED
At this speed, we will not have any ice left not even for Martinis

We MUST DO SOMETHING! ANYTHING!

I would start by stopping repeating the mantra that CO2 is "pollution".
That would be a good start.

Second, if you want ice, we got plenty more than last year and more than the year before.
We also had the coldest September ever.

Ah, and the drought and the fire and brimstone that was supposed to come down upon us because of all that passing wind ... Well that did not happen either. We will have a bumper crop of almost anything, Our deserts are filling up with water as we have not seen in 50 years.

Must be all that Speedy Global Warming....aaaah the pretenses!!!!

 

It's wrong to think the world is experiencing what you may be experiencing where you are at the moment

 

Aaaah the head-in-the-sand ostriches!!! "If I make fun of it or ignore it, it'll go away!!!"

Are you really such a provincial yokel that you judge the entire world by what's happening in your back yard? Or do you just think the rest of us are that dumb?

One day last week, the temperatures in Los Angeles were the highest ever recorded, since they started keeping track in 1873 - and that was at the end of September, when it's normally cooling down at the end of summer. By your reasoning, that should be absolute proof positive to Angelenos that global warming is real.

Also, why do you keep screaming that CO2 can't be pollution? Too much of a good thing isn't good. A little bit of the horse manure you're trying to shovel is good for your rose bushes. Dumping wheelbarrow loads of the stuff around, like you're doing, will kill them...

 

It seems to be a standard trick of denial to refuse to even learn what the issues are, rather than accept the realities of both the science and the consensus
and of course it goes well past simple denial, into some seemingly deliberate failures to comprehend the basics
Weather and climate are two different things for instance
Or following the scientific process
CO2 not only as a greenhouse gas but also as a waist product of combustion, which makes it a pollutant
Some really basic stuff that is obvious to everyone else, Is denied by some few oil and gas shills who then attempt to spread there disinformation on various public venues
like this one

cheers
B

 

"Edgy" is good. Provacative, funny, on target...BUT, as with everything progressive, you people just don't know when to quit. After one scene, "derivative", "predictable" and "gross" are the words formed. Is there going to be a sequel?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgYOs71Vwng

 

Unfortunately not
It's far more likely that once the oceans collapse
It's just a mater of time

Did you watch the video I presented to the group by DR Jeremy Jackson
State of the oceans

Pretty grim

 

ScienceDaily (Oct. 5, 2010) — Freshwater is flowing into Earth's oceans in greater amounts every year, a team of researchers has found, thanks to more frequent and extreme storms linked to global warming. All told, 18 percent more water fed into the world's oceans from rivers and melting polar ice sheets in 2006 than in 1994, with an average annual rise of 1.5 percent.
See Also:
Earth & Climate
Water
Global Warming
Climate
Environmental Issues
Weather
Geography
Reference
Monsoon
Climate
Antarctic ice sheet
Consensus of scientists regarding global warming
"That might not sound like much -- 1.5 percent a year -- but after a few decades, it's huge," said Jay Famiglietti, UC Irvine Earth system science professor and principal investigator on the study, which will be published this week in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. He noted that while freshwater is essential to humans and ecosystems, the rain is falling in all the wrong places, for all the wrong reasons.
"In general, more water is good," Famiglietti said. "But here's the problem: Not everybody is getting more rainfall, and those who are may not need it. What we're seeing is exactly what the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicted -- that precipitation is increasing in the tropics and the Arctic Circle with heavier, more punishing storms. Meanwhile, hundreds of millions of people live in semiarid regions, and those are drying up."
In essence, he said, the evaporation and precipitation cycle taught in grade school is accelerating dangerously because of greenhouse gas-fueled higher temperatures, triggering monsoons and hurricanes. Hotter weather above the oceans causes freshwater to evaporate faster, which leads to thicker clouds unleashing more powerful storms over land. The rainfall then travels via rivers to the sea in ever-larger amounts, and the cycle begins again.
The pioneering study, which is ongoing, employs NASA and other world-scale satellite observations rather than computer models to track total water volume each month flowing from the continents into the oceans.
"Many scientists and models have suggested that if the water cycle is intensifying because of climate change, then we should be seeing increasing river flow. Unfortunately, there is no global discharge measurement network, so we have not been able to tell," wrote Famiglietti and lead author Tajdarul Syed of the Indian School of Mines, formerly of UCI.
"This paper uses satellite records of sea level rise, precipitation and evaporation to put together a unique 13-year record -- the longest and first of its kind. The trends were all the same: increased evaporation from the ocean that led to increased precipitation on land and more flow back into the ocean."
The researchers cautioned that although they had analyzed more than a decade of data, it was still a relatively short time frame. Natural ups and downs that appear in climate data make detecting long-term trends challenging. Further study is needed, they said, and is under way.
Other authors are Don Chambers of the University of South Florida, Joshua Willis of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, and Kyle Hilburn of Remote Sensing Systems in Santa Rosa, Calif. Funding is provided by NASA.

 

ScienceDaily (June 13, 2009) — The Greenland ice sheet is melting faster than expected, according to a new study led by a University of Alaska Fairbanks researcher and published in the journal Hydrological Processes.
See Also:
Earth & Climate
Global Warming
Climate
Oceanography
Ice Ages
Snow and Avalanches
Floods
Reference
Ice shelf
Ice sheet
Greenland ice sheet
Antarctic ice sheet
Study results indicate that the ice sheet may be responsible for nearly 25 percent of global sea rise in the past 13 years. The study also shows that seas now are rising by more than 3 millimeters a year--more than 50 percent faster than the average for the 20th century.
UAF researcher Sebastian H. Mernild and colleagues from the United States, United Kingdom and Denmark discovered that from 1995 to 2007, overall precipitation on the ice sheet decreased while surface ablation--the combination of evaporation, melting and calving of the ice sheet--increased. According to Mernild’s new data, since 1995 the ice sheet lost an average of 265 cubic kilometers per year, which has contributed to about 0.7 millimeters per year in global sea level rise. These figures do not include thermal expansion--the expansion of the ice volume in response to heat--so the contribution could be up to twice that.
The Greenland ice sheet has been of considerable interest to researchers over the last few years as one of the major indicators of climate change. In late 2000/early 2001 and in 2007, major glacier calving events sent up to 44 square miles of ice into the sea at a time. Researchers are studying these major events as well as the less dramatic ongoing melting of the ice sheet through runoff and surface processes.
Ice melt from a warming Arctic has two major effects on the ocean. First, increased water contributes to global sea-level rise, which in turn affects coastlines across the globe. Second, fresh water from melting ice changes the salinity of the world’s oceans, which can affect ocean ecosystems and deep water mixing.
“Increasing sea level rise will be a problem in the future for people living in coastal regions around the globe,” said Mernild. “Even a small sea level rise can be a problem for these communities. It is our hope that this research can provide people with accurate information needed to plan for protecting people and communities.”ScienceDaily (June 13, 2009) — The Greenland ice sheet is melting faster than expected, according to a new study led by a University of Alaska Fairbanks researcher and published in the journal Hydrological

 

Bos, out of respect to you, I looked for the vid you posted and culdn't find.
I DID, however, notice some mention of the Feds having the right to build roads specifically mentioned in the constitution. However, under Article 1, Section 8, "To establish post offices and post roads" - (Tho I abhor the notion that I may be considered somewhat of a knower of the Constitution becuz I am NOTHING like that piece of crap "constitutional lawyer" in the Whitehouse. I just sometimes paid attention in school). There was some legal grappling on this issue as the intent, by none other than Jefferson, was to allow post offices and post by existing roads and not until later was constructing (as opposed to establishing) any kind of interstate postal routes (first, the rails) deemed constitutional.
From that, we have morphed into the asphalt monster we hate today. From that, we have developed and prospered so much that we are now forced to put on the brakes. So, rather than have centuries more of living by the land and working with our families, we have...traveling salesmen, acid rain (and CO2, if you must - whatever), and carbon taxes. The progressive power grab started early in the New World!

 

So building highways was nothing but a liberal 'power grab' by the government. I suppose you would rather all the roads were built by private individuals and companies instead - so they could control who used them, and how much they had to pay for the privilege?

Sure, why not? That way they could have handed the reins of power over to wealthy individuals and corporations right off the bat, instead of pretending the government should be stronger than them. And they could have encouraged the masses to stay put like good little serfs - instead of needlessly moving in search of a better living and a better life, and doing idiotic things like settling the West. They could even have kept my grandfather on my mother's side from moving to California, and forced him to keep sharecropping so he could be proper exploited....

“[Railroads will] only encourage the common people to move about needlessly.”
--The Duke of Wellington, 1835

 

Sorry Mark I should have included the post #



if the u tube thing is not working try this one

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZkwewR69w8&feature=related

its pretty depressing but its the way it is

cheers
B

 

I think the rich and poor should be separated so the rich don't have to see what the policies that made them rich have done.

I mean out of sight out of mind.