1930s photos show Greenland glaciers retreating faster than today
Recently unearthed photographs taken by Danish explorers in the 1930s show glaciers in Greenland retreating faster than they are today, according to researchers. Danish explorers in Greenland in 1932. Credit: National Survey and Cadastre of Denmark We're not worried about rising sea levels. Well, we are in a seaplane. The …
This topic is closed for new posts.
Dear Reg editors :-
This stopped being funny a long time ago. Please sort it out.
Re: Dear Reg editors :-
It is indeed not funny, but your request may not get the response it deserves...
You do know Lewis IS the editor and runs the show here now (since last year, in fact)?
http://lewispage.blogspot.co.uk/2011/12/full-time-staff-hack-job-at-reg-has-now.html
"Full time staff hack job at the Reg has now turned into being the editor and running the show, to the extent anyone does"
Re: Dear Reg editors :-
What exactly do you expect the reg editors to do about Greenland's glaciers?
Re: Dear Reg editors :-
Then he's an even bigger idiot; shitting in his own bed.
Re: Dear Reg editors :-
When the human race is due for extinction anyway what is the point in worrying about global warming?
Here in the UK we bend over and take the green issues up our backsides. We do all this to set an example to the rest of the world....
In return developing countries, China, India etc increase outputs of greenhouse gasses at a rate that leave the UK' s savings infinitesimal. Then of course there is the USA which does it's best to stick two fingers up at us.
So what's the point?
Re: Dear Reg editors :-
>We do all this to set an example to the rest of the world....
Except you don't actually make the durable goods you consume, just farm that out to China, India etc.
My TV, DVD, cookware, clothes, washing machine, dishwasher, vacuum cleaner, phone, radio, speakers, hifi, cooker, microwave, blender, clothes hanger, cutlery, wallet, lightbulbs, doormat, earbuds, hard drive, cables, workwear, satnav were all made in China.
Re: Dear Reg editors :-
@ LarsG... "Then of course there is the USA which does it's best to stick two fingers up at us."
That is grossly inaccurate, sir. We only stick one finger up at you. Perhaps because ours was implemented post musket? As far as I know, the two fingered 'Screw you! I've still got my bow fingers' salute is a uniquely British thing.
So you've still got that going for you then...
You're missing the point
Poking fun at the established popular view is a key charm of El Reg. It's the spice that makes the meal. If they stop this they will have no special offer.
If you don't like that why are you here? There are many places where you can get your preferred pablum bland though it may be. That is the common fare. Why do you have to come here and demand the common gruel when there is no lack of supply elsewhere?
Is there some drive in you that insists that because you cannot bear spice that there must be none anywhere? What right have you to impose on all the world your intolerance of variety?
Re: You're missing the point
"Poking fun at the established popular view is a key charm of El Reg."
Actually, I beleive that it has been some time since the belief in AGW was the popular view. These days it is just the true believers and the one world government watermelons that continue to push that barrow.
Re: Dear Reg editors :-
Remember the good old days when the reg used to debunk stupid reporting, before it became the source of it? I want that site (i.e. the British site) back.
If I wanted to read this shit I'd go to fox news with the rest of the slack-jawed yokels.
Re: Thing
And yet here you are reading this shit and even posting comments...
Re: You're missing the point
'I beleive that it has been some time since the belief in AGW was the popular view'
For 90% of the world and 99% of the worlds scientist AGW is still the prevailing view. It's only if you've been raised in a trailer in Buttfuck Alabama on a diet of Fox News, Glenn Beck and tub-thumping evangelical creationist idiocy that you are likely to think otherwise. By using the phrase 'one world government' you have very neatly saved everybody here the trouble of working out whether you were or not.
99% of the worlds scientist are not sure about global warming. Saying such a thing just paints you as an AGW zealot without a brain.
Thankfully, the scientific community in general is much more interested in getting all the data and building a picture as accurate as possible before drawing the conclusions that impose themselves from the analysis, rather than stupidly spouting a hastily-drawn one-sided conclusion taken from incomplete data.
This is why such information is important, given that our understanding of meteorology is still very much in its infancy - but I understand that the masses (and the zealots) kind of miss that point since you need to be intelligent to understand that the world is the most complex dynamic system we can possibly hope to comprehend.
Re: Dear Reg editors :-
Every time Lewis posts one of these trolling articles the eco-tards start summoning the troops on mailing lists and forums. They then come and spam the register comments section with cookie-cutter arguments because dissenting opinion seems to be something they can't handle. Lewis is laughing all the way to the bank of course because they're just increasing page views and therefore advertising revenue for the site of which he is editor.
If the regulars disabled their adblockers for el reg perhaps Lewis could stop subjecting us to this asshattery every week?
Science and humans
@Pascal Monet: Your view of science is excellent, or at least in line with mine. :) However, to say that "the world is the most complex dynamic system we can possibly hope to comprehend" is not consistent with that. Humans cannot hope to comprehend such a complex and dynamic system. Unless, of course, you have some private meaning for the word "comprehend".
To set an example to the rest of the world
"Here in the UK we bend over and take the green issues up our backsides. We do all this to set an example to the rest of the world...."
Are you kidding? Where exactly is the UK setting an example in green issues? By building shoddy small homes after outdated construction methods from some 200 years ago? It's really amazing that in this day and age things like double glazing and wall insulation are still something special in Britain when these things are standard in most mainland European homes for half a century and not worth mentioning. But then most homes in mainland Europe also have been equipped with mixer tabs for a similar time already.
Or are you thinking of leading by example through successfully killing off most of Britain's manufacturing industry in favor of the 'services' and financial industry which means most products sold in the UK are cheap crap from China which ultimately ends up in a landfill here or in some 3rd world country?
But maybe Britain is setting an example by NOT heavily investing in green technology and clinging to nuclear power instead, ignoring the risks and the true costs (and probably still believing the myth that electricity in France is cheaper than anywhere when in reality prices in countries like Germany which heavily invest in green technology are actually far lower; in fact, France has often fallen back on Germany's electricity 'exports' to compensate for their insufficient infrastructure).
If Britain is setting an example then that it is not only backwards in house building but also in green technology, way behind countries like Sweden, Norway or Germany, and even the USA.
Re: Dear Reg editors :-
"debunk stupid reporting" ??? How perfectly leftist of you to believe that the mere reporting of the existence of photographs is "stupid". Perhaps because the photos do not bolster your mythology. Being you must suck as all the scientific (not consensus) evidence destroys your religion.
Plus alll your food
Agriculture is a BIG CO2 generator.
Here is NZ our Greenies give us hell because our per-capita CO2 is high. But most of that is due to agriculture which is exported (eg. 90% of NZ milk is exported). That allows some hipster living in Europe to live a low-CO2 life and still eat.
The only fair way to do any CO2 accounting is based on consumption. If you buy Chinese goods then you are contributing to China's CO2. If you buy NZ food, then you're contributing to NZ's CO2.
Re: Science and humans @Ole Juul
Going by my Concise OED, the word you *should* be quibbling over is "hope", with expectation being in the definition. Nothing wrong with his use of "comprehend" at all. Too bad - your comments were uncommonly reasonable until you tried to be patronizing in your last sentence
Re: You're missing the point
Touched a nerve, did he?
Watermelon rage.
@Fibbles -- Re: Dear Reg editors :-
"If the regulars disabled their adblockers for el reg perhaps Lewis could stop subjecting us to this asshattery every week?
Now, now, that nasty barbed comment's a bit below the belt. Trying to make us feel guilty or something?
El Reg readers? Nuh, not possible....
Watermelon?
I've missed the development of this insult. What does it mean? To whom should I apply it?
-
Judging my the pattern of voting here there are far more "Global warming panic is just religion not science" people than "We're killing Gaia" people around and yet there also seems to be fear / anger that green types are swamping the place.
I think the anti-hippy contingent can probably relax a little, they seem to be ahead in the battle for hearts and minds on the Reg.
Re: Dear Reg editors :-
"Then he's an even bigger idiot; shitting in his own bed."
A journalist relating the facts accurately is doing his job.
You regard the truth as faeces. Which says a lot about your regard for the truth.
Re: Dear Reg editors :-
Urban Legend Alert: 'still got bowfingers' is considered unlikely as the source of 'the Vs'
"A journalist relating the facts accurately is doing his job."
Well, yes. But on this subject, it's a long time since I saw Lewis Page doing his job.
Industrial Revolution
I was taught it started in the mid-18th century and was virtually over by the 1840s. All that coal being burnt in steam engines for 100 years might have begun to have an effect.
I note that in figure 2 of the article you can see how much more melting is going on in the 2000-2010 decade.
Re: Industrial Revolution
But in those days the world population was about 1 billion, most of them not in industrialised countries. UK population was around 10 million, the US not much more.
The steam engines might have had a seriously bad effect on local air quality, but I don't know if there was enough to have a significant global effect.
Re: Industrial Revolution
What I see, some of the vocal promoters, on both sides of these arguments, can't even do that sort of simple arithmetic. Some of the environmental scares seem to depend on almost homeopathic thinking. Cutting down of fossil-fuel use--carbon neutral energy--is something we shall have to do, whatever the global warming reality. And it is something we can do.
Re: Industrial Revolution
..though sadly not with renewable energy, which doesn't reduce emissions overall measurably at all.
"We show that many land-terminating glaciers underwent a more rapid retreat in the 1930s than in the 2000s, whereas marine-terminating glaciers retreated more rapidly during the recent warming."
See also the difference between short-lived local variations and an easily observable planet-wide trend.
@TheOtherHobbes - YUH ALL WRONG! - - GLOBAL WARMING'S DUE TO SEX.
In a lifetime, the average person consumes about 100 tonnes of food. In addition to the energy required to feed a person over a lifetime, add his/her consumption of everything else from goods, housing, transport, plasma TV etc. etc. and the figure's gawd-awful huge.
It's brain-dead simple. Stop breeding and global warming will go away.
(Of course, the global-warming do-gooders never mention population growth, as that's much too close to home.)
Re: GLOBAL WARMING'S DUE TO SEX.
So people need to cut out the high-friction sex?
@Graham Wilson
"the global-warming do-gooders never mention population growth, as that's much too close to home"
Eh? Aren't they always on about population growth being a huge problem?
They certainly used to be when QE2 was having her silver jubblies.
Self Justification
It is amazing that after a decade of absolutely nothing happening that these climatologists and 'climate change' experts are still managing to justify their existence - if only the Minister for Industrialisation had the same kind of mentality as these climate nuts during the 1800s, we'd still be in the age of steam.
Lewis is getting desperate
Even the piece in the Mail admitted in the text that it was only a minority that had suffered faster decline. This trolling to support big oils $60bn taxpayers funding is sounding a little hysterical now. Nice reference too to the Glacier melting more slowly (than a general estimate in 2008, they are still melting faster than the IPCC projections just like global warming is still exceeding IPCC projections)
Re: Lewis is getting desperate
Ah but, in Lewis's parallel reality the industrial revolution only kicked off in 1940 and quickly became so efficient it no longer affects the planet.
More realistically I suspect he plans on passing his military training on his descendants so they can fight their way to success whatever happens. Survivalists, have to laugh at them (shooting thems not allowed).
Re: Lewis is getting desperate
I'm vaguely curious who is paying him [Lewis something or other]. The rather mindless troll hypothesis has worn too thin to be tenable.
Actually, the most interesting aspect to me is how people like him helped destroy England. There was a time when England was the leader of the industrial revolution because science and engineering were respected and even prestigious. Dare I predict Lewis whatever is an old family scion well trained in some useful branch of estate management?
Nah this is what desperation is ....
Eco-loons organising trolling into a fine art:
whenever a "climate holocaust denier" story appears on any major news site or blog ..
the CACC mailing list kicks into action... alerting all "right thinking" ecotards with the url
and if you don't believe it -> http://www.campaigncc.org/node/384
PS: But, since you’re here now eco-loons .. look at the article that woke up the apathetic majority and put the Reg on the eco-loons hitlist
(and as an added bonus it's guaranteed to make any watermelon explode)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/30/crugate_analysis/
global warming is still exceeding IPCC projections
Well we've had twenty years of IPCC predictions and none of them have turned out right. The IPCC was projecting a warming of a nearly 6 degrees by 2100. Over the past twenty years the earth has warmed by about 0.5 degree, so how will it suddenly shoot up exponentially to reach 6 degrees in another 80 years.
Re: global warming is still exceeding IPCC projections
You used the word 'prediction' in one sentence and 'projecting' in the next. Do you understand the difference?
projecting predicting
Yes there is a difference, they are spelt differently. They are synonyms for the same thing, looking into the future. Predicting tends to means more guess work than projecting, but considering that the IPCC's forcasts (another word to mean looking into the future) have always been wrong, predicting is just as valid as projecting.
Re: Lewis is getting desperate
What he did in the Royal Navy, I doubt he would still be alive if he were that sort of idiot. The sea make no distinction between Eton and Bash St. Comprehensive.
Re: Lewis is getting desperate
Lewis was in the Navy, would that make his military skills useless for self defense?
Down to your last line of defense, eh ?
Apparently your other arguments did not bring the expected adulation of your opinion, so you're down to mudslinging and name-calling on Lewis to try and keep a beachhead in the debate.
That sort of pathetic behavior automatically disqualifies your credibility in my opinion.
Re: Lewis is getting desperate
You should look him up: All Arms Commando Course...
Re: global warming is still exceeding IPCC projections
But this isn't about science. It seems to me that in the mind of a dedicated warmer, if you say something often enough it's going to be be true. It's a religion for the modern age and this sort of blind repetition helps keep the faith. Posting the same 'it just is' comments on 'denier' articles seems to be a bit like a modern equivalent of praying and that by doing it the practitioner will receive salvation in the next life.
Re: Lewis is getting desperate
Yet, the entire state of Alaska has had a net increase in glaciation, and so have other regions. Nice try. The truth is that the warmingistas have no clue regarding actual atmospheric dynamics and climatology, and more studies than not prove that there is no AGW. So far no min/max ice coverage extent, sea-level fluctuation, nor temperature change has been witnessed which exceeds the threshold of well established natural variables, hence, no backing proof exists of such absurd notions as those presented by the IPCC. As a matter of fact, regarding Greenland, much of its glaciation didn't even exist before the LIA, so even if much of it were to sublimate or melt, it would only be reforming itself to the era preceding the aforementioned. Again, none of this can be formulated as proof of AGW, at least not if you understand the real science behind it (Best believe it as well, the air temperatures in most of Greenland are still far too cold for ice to melt).
Re: Lewis is getting desperate
Or perhaps Lewis simply refuses to swallow the popular b-s and say "May I please have some more?"
Re: Lewis is getting desperate
For heaven's sake, he's winding you all up--and he's good at it!
"Actually, the most interesting aspect to me is how people like him helped destroy England."
How the fuck do you come to that conclusion? There's some woolly logic here methinks. Please explain.
Agreed Cheapster, like all delusional extremists he's clutching at every single thing to "prove" his point. Like people who see jesus on their toast, and just as sad.
He also thinks he's hiding behind "skepticism" which in his case is exactly like creationists presenting their faith as science. He's lost and he's a sore loser.
This topic is closed for new posts.
