Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Wayout on June 01, 2009, 03:49:17 PM
-
All you that can't accept scientific fact lets see you deny THIS!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMeyxjW--ks&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMeyxjW--ks&feature=related) :rolleyes:
-
I might believe in 'global warming' if I didn't walk out the front door at work this morning into a 34 degree June morning. Might be acceptable somewhere in the southern hemisphere, but a bit ridiculous in NY.
Now, when its 75 in January, then maybe I'll start believing.
-
I might believe in 'global warming' if I didn't walk out the front door at work this morning into a 34 degree June morning. Might be acceptable somewhere in the southern hemisphere, but a bit ridiculous in NY.
Now, when its 75 in January, then maybe I'll start believing.
agreed, but this mornin it was a little warmer than 34 here on the NY border in Mass, maybe 40 at most
-
:rofl
-
didnt watch video before i posted, thought it was a serious video...you andy griffith dweeb :rolleyes:
-
Saw the vid, still wanted to rant :)
-
Saw Mendenhall glacier last year. Global warming or not its shrinking.
-
In a cooling spell glaciers actually sort of...grow.
-
I might believe in 'global warming' if I didn't walk out the front door at work this morning into a 34 degree June morning. Might be acceptable somewhere in the southern hemisphere, but a bit ridiculous in NY.
Now, when its 75 in January, then maybe I'll start believing.
Would you believe in 'Global Cooling' then? :D
-
Saw Mendenhall glacier last year. Global warming or not its shrinking.
Any of you guys ever wonder why Greenland is called Greenland? Glaciers come and go, grow and recede. Of course, in the realm of "Chicken Little science", any change means the impending doom of the earth...
My regards,
Widewing
-
i was just reading something the other day, about the planet geos through heat cycles, and about 500 years ago they experienced the same temperatures etc, and there is a pattern or something..ill try and dig it back out as its quite an intresting read,
all this global warming excuse is really for more taxes etc imo
-
Just break out a copy of Fear by Michael Crichton. Its got everything in it you need to know...
-
See Rule #6
-
Here in Fargo ND 14 out of the last 18 months were significantly below average temp wise.
Bring back global warming PLEASE!
-
I have it, but since I live in a cold country I'd rather keep it :devil
Will bring you some back when it starts getting uncomfortable, unless the sun boots up again, - the old lady is has been dallying a year or so in the minimum.
-
I might believe in 'global warming' if I didn't walk out the front door at work this morning into a 34 degree June morning. Might be acceptable somewhere in the southern hemisphere, but a bit ridiculous in NY.
Now, when its 75 in January, then maybe I'll start believing.
I have been in 70 degree weather in January, we usually get 10-30 degree weather.
-
What makes you think people are the real cause and the earth is just changing on it's own?
-
Any of you guys ever wonder why Greenland is called Greenland? Glaciers come and go, grow and recede. Of course, in the realm of "Chicken Little science", any change means the impending doom of the earth...
My regards,
Widewing
Wide, with respect, not the "doom of the earth"....more like just our species. People that use your flawed argument as case in point proof always seem to leave out the pesky little extinction question. The planet took a shot to the jaw via asteroid 65 million years ago... it's still here. Now, not many of the species that existed in that peak time of biodiversity are, though.
In any case, the true short term threat to our species' current demise is CO2. Not via global warming though. Ocean acidification is well underway from the simple over abundance of CO2 in the atmosphere (carbonic acid, H2CO3). I just attended a conference on reef biology. The predominant feeling was that there was nothing that was going to halt the acidification process in time to save corals. A higher acidity restricts the ability of corals to lay calcareous skeleton. Once the pH gets below 7.9, corals become free floating cnidarians again. At this point, the ideology is to describe and catalog, then attempt to place as many species into a gene bank as possible, for re-introduction in the future. Reefs nurse all stocks of gamefish.... if they go, so go the fish.
As I've said before, glacier size is not intrinsically tied to warming/and or cooling cycles. Primary consideration is the predominant precipitation in the upper reaches of the glacier field. You can have a glacier form and grow in a warm climate (see tropical glaciers Peru), as long as the upper field is getting snow.
-
What makes you think people are the real cause and the earth is just changing on it's own?
The direct tie of increase of CO2 in atmospheric % to the industrial revolution, with a slowing of natural release events, (which also trend the climate in a cooling direction, even though volcanoes release much CO2)
-
I have it, but since I live in a cold country I'd rather keep it :devil
Will bring you some back when it starts getting uncomfortable, unless the sun boots up again, - the old lady is has been dallying a year or so in the minimum.
Hey Angus! She's been waking up as of recently. Solar flux is up around 75-77 today. (Highest its been since March 2008) The 1019 region is a 13 point sunspot complex, the first major Cro beta group of the new cycle. Hopefully, it is safe to say, she's out of minimum now. Once the flux gets up into historical norms (90 to 100) we should get a better grasp on just how up the creek we've gone since she entered minimum a few years ago. At least this cycle isn't predicted to be a strong one.
(http://soho.nascom.nasa.gov/data/synoptic/sunspots_earth/mdi_sunspots_1024.jpg)
-
Hey Angus! She's been waking up as of recently. Solar flux is up around 75-77 today. (Highest its been since March 2008) The 1019 region is a 13 point sunspot complex, the first major Cro beta group of the new cycle. Hopefully, it is safe to say, she's out of minimum now. Once the flux gets up into historical norms (90 to 100) we should get a better grasp on just how up the creek we've gone since she entered minimum a few years ago. At least this cycle isn't predicted to be a strong one.
(http://soho.nascom.nasa.gov/data/synoptic/sunspots_earth/mdi_sunspots_1024.jpg)
Breaking news!
Anyway, I wish you could read my language, - here is a most wonderful website on Astronomy, this link will go for the sun. Lots of images anyway.
Now, the 10 years of global climate will be interesting, if our sun steps up again and increases power steadily for the next 5-6 years. Like some one once said, - "It's the sun, stupid!".
:devil
-
Would you believe in 'Global Cooling' then? :D
I do.
http://www.spaceandscience.net/id16.html
-
I find it funny when the wackos were hollering "global warming is killing the polar bears" and show some pictures of a bear stranded on a lone piece of ice surrounded by water.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-433170/Global-warming-sees-polar-bears-stranded-melting-ice.html
Funny thing is ALL these pics that are shown that were taken from a high angle NOT showing more of the area around the ice that the bear is on. Why? Could it be because the pics would show ALOT more ice around than what they are trying to make us believe there is? Saw a show on History channel the other day where they showed a map of the Arctic circle in the summer time and one during the winter. The guy on there said the ice pack doubles during the winter and then half of it melts in the summer.
They showed video of the ice packs during the summer and it was broken up but the same area in winter time was solid. Just amazes me how the wackos always try to come up with a bunch of scientific double talk to prove thier wacko ideas. Then a simple video shows how things have been occuring in the Arctic for thousands of years.
Reminds me of the old saying, "A man with a little education and alot of common sense could accomplish more than a man with alot of education and little common semse".
-
they used to be able to grow grapes in england back in the late 13th century, early 14th century, and i dont think it was because of their cars, AL GORE CREATED MANBEARPIG AND GLOBAL WARMING THE SAME DAY!!!!!!
-
Any of you guys ever wonder why Greenland is called Greenland? Glaciers come and go, grow and recede. Of course, in the realm of "Chicken Little science", any change means the impending doom of the earth...
My regards,
Widewing
Of course WideWing... and doom means mucho gub'ment grants. Enough to support a career until retirement. All you have to do is scare the sheeple, and their representatives.
:rolleyes:,
Wab
-
they used to be able to grow grapes in england back in the late 13th century, early 14th century, and i dont think it was because of their cars, AL GORE CREATED MANBEARPIG AND GLOBAL WARMING THE SAME DAY!!!!!!
Had a geolgy professor in colleg that told us about that. Needless to say he said global warming was crap. He called it climate change.
-
Of course WideWing... and doom means mucho gub'ment grants. Enough to support a career until retirement. All you have to do is scare the sheeple, and their representatives.
:rolleyes:,
Wab
People who consistently say this kind of thing have never had a government "grant", nor have the faintest clue what they are talking about.
Wabbit, on this, you have absolutely no clue.
-
I donīt know who to trust. 100 scientists say, its man made global warming. Other 100 scientists say, the sun is responsible, another 100 scientist say itīs not global warming but a coming ice age....I am not a scientist and I donīt have the knowledge to differ truth from false. When the weatherman is not able to predict the weather for the next 4 weeks, how should it be possible to predict the climate for the next 100 years? All I understand is, that the truth is been found in the past. Scientist (Michael Mann, Raymond Bradley, and Malcolm Hughes) go back 2000 (or was it 1000?) years and come up with the hockey-stick-curve. And now McIntyre and McKitrick claim that the hockey stick is totally wrong and based on wrong facts.... :rolleyes: who is right and who is wrong?? I donīt have the time to study the climate or the studies that were made already. So in this case I neither trust the one or other side.
-
The weatherman will be able to predict seasons, which are much farther away than the next 4 days.
And anyway, Greenland being called Greenland, - that was a very good advertisment from Eric the Read,
-
I might believe in 'global warming' if I didn't walk out the front door at work this morning into a 34 degree June morning. Might be acceptable somewhere in the southern hemisphere, but a bit ridiculous in NY.
Now, when its 75 in January, then maybe I'll start believing.
In Central Texas, it's 75 a LOT in January. :lol
-
Hey Angus! She's been waking up as of recently. Solar flux is up around 75-77 today. (Highest its been since March 2008) The 1019 region is a 13 point sunspot complex, the first major Cro beta group of the new cycle. Hopefully, it is safe to say, she's out of minimum now. Once the flux gets up into historical norms (90 to 100) we should get a better grasp on just how up the creek we've gone since she entered minimum a few years ago. At least this cycle isn't predicted to be a strong one.
(http://soho.nascom.nasa.gov/data/synoptic/sunspots_earth/mdi_sunspots_1024.jpg)
Just read this article in S&T: http://www.skyandtelescope.com/community/skyblog/newsblog/48607432.html
Seems like people have been predicting that the sun will move out of the minimum for the past 3 years now. But it still hasn't. Now here's why I find this interesting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder_Minimum
-
i was just reading something the other day, about the planet goes through heat cycles, and about 500 years ago they experienced the same temperatures etc, and there is a pattern or something..ill try and dig it back out as its quite an intresting read,
Here's a fact SOME might not know, but is pretty well known where I am from: around the time of the American Revolution, earth was going through a mini-ice age. The whole Delaware river thing almost didn't happen because of ice clogging the river. Some would have been there normally, but the rest.....all caused by the mini-ice age. ALSO, the Napoleonic War thing; how Napoleon's army retreated into that one city for winter and he lost around 2/3 of it or something around that. Most froze to death, while some starved to death. A lot of thing were caused by the earth's natural fluctuations in temperature.
-
Didn't anyone get the memo?
The new catch phrase is "Climate Change" please stop using the old "Global Warming" moniker.
-
Any of you guys ever wonder why Greenland is called Greenland? Glaciers come and go, grow and recede. Of course, in the realm of "Chicken Little science", any change means the impending doom of the earth...
My regards,
Widewing
I think you dont have a clue why Greenland is called Greenland.
-
Didn't anyone get the memo?
The new catch phrase is "Climate Change" please stop using the old "Global Warming" moniker.
I got it!! :rofl
-
Just read this article in S&T: http://www.skyandtelescope.com/community/skyblog/newsblog/48607432.html
Seems like people have been predicting that the sun will move out of the minimum for the past 3 years now. But it still hasn't. Now here's why I find this interesting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder_Minimum
That article was a great one. The existence of those "jet streams" was inferred in other papers but wasn't directly observed. The tie in to sunspot activity seems to have an added bit of understanding. We will see if that plays out. The sun has had more spots this past month than in the year or so prior.
-
Here's a fact SOME might not know, but is pretty well known where I am from: around the time of the American Revolution, earth was going through a mini-ice age. The whole Delaware river thing almost didn't happen because of ice clogging the river. Some would have been there normally, but the rest.....all caused by the mini-ice age. ALSO, the Napoleonic War thing; how Napoleon's army retreated into that one city for winter and he lost around 2/3 of it or something around that. Most froze to death, while some starved to death. A lot of thing were caused by the earth's natural fluctuations in temperature.
Napoleon had to submit to the Russian winter, which is also what Hitler had a problem with.
It was no particular fluctuation, just a Russian winter, - somewhat a novelty for a French General.
-
Glaciers ARE receding, no question about that.. Seen it, over the years, with my own eyes. I believe that humans ARE having an effect on the environment (in some ways)..
Globally? Hmmm, I'm not really sure yet... Not sure enough to jump on the Eco/Nazi bandwagon anyway... If a global climate shift does occur, I think it will be due to natural forces, completely outside human ability to affect...
We'll just have to ride it out.. No other choice!
RC
-
Its interesting to note that events like the Maunder Minimum occur roughly every 150-200 years. According to the last Minimum we are right on schedule (or a bit late even) for another one. During a solar maximum wouldnt you expect the eart to heat up? We are right in the middle of one.....wow what a thought and it was warming too? Now the Earth is cooling according to some as we approach what could be a solar miniumum......lets not make particle physics out of basic chem 101.
My 2 cents.....
-
Its interesting to note that events like the Maunder Minimum occur roughly every 150-200 years. According to the last Minimum we are right on schedule (or a bit late even) for another one. During a solar maximum wouldnt you expect the eart to heat up? We are right in the middle of one.....wow what a thought and it was warming too? Now the Earth is cooling according to some as we approach what could be a solar miniumum......lets not make particle physics out of basic chem 101.
My 2 cents.....
I believe we just past the minimum last year. I don't think we'll be in the maximm for another 5 years or so.
Wab
-
I should have termed it Modern Maximum (opposite of Maunder Minumum) which we are smack in the middle of according to charts.
-
That article was a great one. The existence of those "jet streams" was inferred in other papers but wasn't directly observed. The tie in to sunspot activity seems to have an added bit of understanding. We will see if that plays out. The sun has had more spots this past month than in the year or so prior.
True on the number of sun spots, but thats not saying much. The last year has been crazy, bizzarly quite. Even though the count has increased, I still think we are far below what would normally have been. And there are sun spots and then there are sun spots. The ones we've had so far have been pretty pathetic pin salamanders. Overall, I'd say the sun is still in a weird slumber and having trouble awakening.
off topic but cool:
http://www.ucar.edu/news/releases/2009/sunspots.jsp
Wab
Edit:Lol I didn't intend to say "salamanders"! Filtered.
-
I should have termed it Modern Maximum (opposite of Maunder Minumum) which we are smack in the middle of according to charts.
Ah got ya.
-
True on the number of sun spots, but thats not saying much. The last year has been crazy, bizzarly quite. Even though the count has increased, I still think we are far below what would normally have been. And there are sun spots and then there are sun spots. The ones we've had so far have been pretty pathetic pin salamanders. Overall, I'd say the sun is still in a weird slumber and having trouble awakening.
off topic but cool:
http://www.ucar.edu/news/releases/2009/sunspots.jsp
Wab
If past history is considered it certainly isnt wierd....
-
Well, the 11 year swings have been pretty regular, and now ours is, what? 12-13?