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.
You aren't helping your case. Creationists generally suggest evolution is a faith stance rather than argue that the bible is a scientific textbook.
Jesus in a piece of toast isn't christian at all. That's a pagan talisman with a christian label applied.
Mmmm... Pagan toast! (drool)
'Jesus in a piece of toast isn't christian at all. That's a pagan talisman with a christian label applied.'
Jesus toast...
...for those transubstantiation followers who prefer their meat cooked, not raw?
And always remember:
Predicting the future of the planet is a competition!
I think that Lewis ought to be running in the Derby this afternoon,
after all he's wearing a large pair of blinkers already
Huh?
"but nobody worried about it". But it still caused acid rain and other problems. How is this helping the argument against AGW? Or is this a neutral article?
"the argument against AGW"
I want to point out that this is ambiguous. There are a set of arguments against the existence of Anthropogenic Global Warming as a factual condition. Some take issue with each of the three words of the phrase individually (Anthropogenic, Global, Warming), some each subset of two words in the three-word phrase in three pairs (Anthropogenic Global, Anthropogenic Warming, Global Warming), and some all three words as a group (Anthropogenic Global Warming). Another opposing class presumes the existence of the condition expressed by the trio as proved fact and is opposed to its evolution and is committed to its reversal. All can be said to "argue against Anthropogenic Global Warming", so your meaning is completely unclear.
The rare few who care you've left out are those who may acknowledge the cause and condition with varying degrees of certainty but welcome its effect as a boon, like me. If I must choose between warming or cooling then for me and mine I choose warming because it's hard to grow crops on a glacier and a lack of crops leads inevitably to some unpleasantness for future generations. Of the cause of this needful warming, I don't care from whence it comes as long as it does.
It's doubtful that it matters. The vast mass of humanity we can put in the "don't know and don't care" group anyway. Most of us have more immediate concerns. Since reversing global warming - whether it exits and by whatever cause - would require a global unanimous concerted effort centuries long directly against the immediate interests of most participants, and that's not going to happen, the whole thing seems moot to me. You may as well ask the world to agree to and achieve a 300M static global human population as a sustainable load. There are 7 billion of us and each has considerable freedom of action and genetic motivation to prevent this outcome. A global event or government that could achieve this end would be dire, and is not to be wished.
My main point here though is that you've said something and linguistically it amounts to almost nothing. You may as well have not bothered. Words mean things. If you're going to express yourself please try to be clear about what you're trying to say.
Re: "the argument against AGW"
I don't care. :)
I live 50 metres above the Oslo Fjord. When someone knocks on my window from a rowing boat, then I might start caring. I suspect I'll be long gone before that ever comes to pass though.
Re: "the argument against AGW"
"I live 50 metres above the Oslo Fjord. When someone knocks on my window from a rowing boat, then I might start caring."
The majority of the world would already have drowned by then as they live next to the sea.
Maybe you don't care because you are from a very rich oil producing nation?
Re: "the argument against AGW"
Sea levels are not rising, despite what people living in the Maldives would have you believe. The majority of the world is not going to drown. When someone paints a scary scenario for you, then asks you for money to 'solve' the problem (as the people of the Maldives have been doing for 20 years!) it should sound alarm bells for you. The problem is, once paid these shysters then have to come up with an even more compelling scare story for more money, and then more money and then more. That is why these scenarios have become more and more ridiculous and further and further away from any semblance of real science.
Frankly, if you believe any of it these days then you must be a salesman's dream.
Re: "next to the sea"
The Oslo Fjord is a salt water fjord open in the south to Skagerrak, the strait running between southern Norway and Denmark, which in turn is open to the North Sea.
Also, I just live here. I'm not Norwegian.
Re: "the argument against AGW"
"I don't care. :)"
Right. We had this argument a week or so ago with the editorial about the more scientifically literate one is the less one is concerned about the problem.
So there's global warming! Big deal! I was taught this fact back when I was a kid in the 1960s.
There's really only two issues: the effects of lots of scaremongering which has made half the world go mad and the second is to ensure technology is on course for a solution sometime in the future.
"Or is this a neutral article?"
Don't know about the article, but there is clear evidence that Lewis's brain is in neutral (or reverse).
Yes I know that ad hominems are in general A Bad Thing, but just like with the idiot Christopher Booker (a self confessed "summariser of summarisers"), there comes a time...
Oh dear.
It's always so darn annoying when your hockey stick pops up in the wrong decade!
Here's my solution to the AGW sheeple - tell them it's all caused by smoking grass. I'm sure all that does have a minor impact on warming, and it must release some tiny amount of nasties like sulphur trapped in the leaves, but watch them shut up when their second favourite past-time threatens their first.
Re: Oh dear.
You know Matt ... that makes perfect sense, I believe you may have discovered the real cause of global warming !
The increase of emissions of TetraHydroCannabinol does correlate perfectly with the increase in global mean temperature.
and there's no need to fudge a hockey stick chart to support that fact
Although looking at the down votes your getting, It seems the spliff huffing greentards won't be too pleased.
Re: Oh dear.
Or maybe it's just that you don't have to be a tree hugger to enjoy the odd smoke?
Why would one huff a spliff anyway? Despite what every politician seemed to think whilst they were at university, you're supposed to inhale, not blow smoke out of the end of it.
Re: Re: Oh dear.
".....I believe you may have discovered the real cause of global warming !...." Crap! A silly thought turns out to be a "major scientific discovery" / coincidence and the Gubbermints of the World are already milking it for cash (AKA the War on Drugs). I thought I was on to something of Real Benefit To Mankind (AKA good for my bank balance) then.
"Box theorises that this is likely to be...
"...because of sulphur pollution released into the atmosphere by humans"
So what you're saying is that mankind's activites *DO* have an effect on the climate...?
Re: "Box theorises that this is likely to be...
That's the strange thing about the article. "Oh, everything was dire, they did not worry and they suffered. So no need for us to worry either".
Re: "Box theorises that this is likely to be...
"Climate deniers" don't deny that human activities do change the cimate. Where they disagree with the AGW lot is in terms of the degree of change. We don't think it'll be 6 degrees by 2100 and we think human activities could just as easily cause the temperate to drop with negative feedback. We just don't know what will happen as climate is such a complex mechanism and don't believe that models which aren't backed by any emperical evidence can predict the future.
Re: "Box theorises that this is likely to be...
I cannot speak for the AWG "crowd" but I thought the comment usually went along the lines of "stop peeing in the bath water".
damnit make up your mind
I thought we where supposed to START peeing in the bath water, to save water and energy used to process it.
We can't WIN with you greenies!
Was it only me.....
Who didn't see much comment on this (and much less than usual for LP and AO).
My read was 'scientist A discovers old photos, he gives explanation for glacier loss, two groups of other scientists offer alternate explanation. This information should be used to further inform our models.'
So why the ad-hominems?
Re: Was it only me.....
"So why the ad-hominems?"
Its the usual rent-a-mob; the idea of drowning out specific individuals has been around for a number of years in various areas on t'internet - it goes back to the glory days of usenet.
Some of them can be spotted by their over-reaction to the actual content of something posted by a target.
{ anon to avoid having another email alias added to a hit list (wasn't AGW last time). }
Re: Was it only me.....
This.
Turns out some people just can't distinguish between "reportage" and "journalism".
Strange how we named our own species "Homo Sapiens", yet so few of us seem to understand the meaning of the second word.
Re: Was it only me.....
Yup you've sussed it out correctly,
the ad-hom's against Lewis (and Andrew Orlowski etc.. ) are from mindless ecotards who don't read the article .. note how quickly they always appear (within minutes of the article posting)
From Eco-Troll Central here is why:
"Are you fed up with sceptics and pseudo-scientists dominating blogs and news articles with their denialist propaganda? Well, fight back! We are trying to create an online army of online volunteers to try and tip the balance back in the favour of scientific fact, not scientific fiction."
http://www.realclimategate.org/2010/11/bishop-hill-targeted-sceptic-alerts/
Re: "So why the ad-hominems?"
It seems an increase in solar output leads to an increase in the number of arseholes.
I wish the sky would fall on the lot of them.
Re: Was it only me.....
"the ad-hom's against Lewis (and Andrew Orlowski etc.. ) are from mindless ecotards who don't read the article .."
A lot of us are old time Vulture readers fucking annoyed with Lewis and Orlowski hijacking the site for their own personal and deliberately divisive crusades. I want the old 'us against the IT industry' Reg back, I can read biased shit anywhere and it's annoying everywhere it stains the web.
FFS they were both too busy to track the Oracle vs Google case, beyond reprinting whatever Mueller or Naughton were paid to say (Oracle & Microsoft payroll respectively) . One of the most significant lawsuits ever for IT and no research done at all. WTF were they doing? Not their jobs.
Re: Was it only me.....
'A lot of us are old time Vulture readers fucking annoyed with Lewis and Orlowski hijacking the site for their own personal and deliberately divisive crusades.'
This...
Re: Was it only me.....
"the ad-hom's against Lewis (and Andrew Orlowski etc.. ) are from mindless ecotards who don't read the article .. note how quickly they always appear (within minutes of the article posting)"
Why bother reading the article, its not a debate, it a propaganda piece, whose sole purpose is to push the ridiculous opinions of the author who would be banned as a troll is he wasn't the editor.
You do not get into a debate with a mindless troll.
Great job Lewis as always! =)
Great job Lewis as always! =) Let's just hope that humankind comes to its senses fast enough and starts to focus on productivity instead of "spook" problems such as the "three" horsemen of the apocalyse:
* Greenhouse effect.
* Capitalism.
* Terrorism.
No matter what happens, pick at least one of the above and you can motivate any nr of tax increases. Personally I have never seen a terrorist, the summer is record _cold_ (but of course that is because of CO2, and if it should be too warm, that is CO2 as well) and capitalism allows me to buy strawberries at the local supermarket in the winter.
Wake up people! A couple of years ago the ozone layer was going to disappear, I also remember all forrests dieing because of acid rain, and numerous indian gurus constantly predict the end of the world.
Can we just focus on our jobs and on enjoying life without having to pay 100% in tax?
Great post Lewis, you are desperately needed in the world!
Re: Great job Lewis as always! =)
"Wake up people! A couple of years ago the ozone layer was going to disappear..."
The main reason that the ozone layer has not been more seriously depleted by CFCs is that the Montreal Protocol was internationally agreed and put into effect:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal_protocol
Fortunately the threat of ozone depletion was recognised and action taken early enough to avert long-lived and damaging changes to the environment.
Re: Great job Lewis as always! =)
Who on earth downvotes someone for posting information on the subject being discussed?
RE:"Who on earth downvotes someone for posting information on the subject being discussed?"
A certain type of commentard when they fear that the information concerned might contradict something they prefer to believe. Try doing the equivalent on virtually any thread about, for example, "A Certain Major Software Company" or maybe "A Famous Mobile Phone Producer" - just don't be surprised if you get hosed with down-votes.
Re: Great job Lewis as always! =)
'enjoying life without having to pay 100% in tax?'
WTF has any of this got to do with tax? Always suspected the people who came here to support this garbage were republicans. It would be nice to put a firewall around the US to keep the opinions of cousin Cleetus contained in whatever century they're living in.
Re: Great job Lewis as always! =)
I think because in most western nations, where the eco-tards have acquired a measure of power, "Green Tax" is seen as the biggest taxation opportunity for governments, and explicitly so.
Re: Great job Lewis as always! =)
"No matter what happens, pick at least one of the above and you can motivate any nr of tax increases. Personally I have never seen a terrorist, the summer is record _cold_ (but of course that is because of CO2, and if it should be too warm, that is CO2 as well) and capitalism allows me to buy strawberries at the local supermarket in the winter."
Ignorance is apparently a bliss for you.
"Can we just focus on our jobs and on enjoying life without having to pay 100% in tax?"
Oh, I see, you're American. That explains it then.
Re: Great job Lewis as always! =)
"Oh, I see, you're American. That explains it then."
So Brits enjoy paying 100% taxes? Or was 'American' just the worst insult you could think of at the time?
Re: Great job Lewis as always! =)
"capitalism allows me to buy strawberries at the local supermarket in the winter"
Perhaps (though why would another system not allow this?), but they are shit strawberries.
I'd rather have nice ones even if I can only have them in summer.
I stared at that photo for a long time
but I could not see any shrinking or expansion of glaciers.
Re: I stared at that photo for a long time
IIRC I saw a lot of pictures from the KR expiditions many years ago, before the AGW nonsense took hold. The pictures indicated a great deal less ice than now.
The "black helicopter" view is that this dissenting evidence is being generally suppressed, directly or indirectly, in order to feed the AGW machine which will in turn feed the bank balances of greedy corrupt politicians
For cripes sake, everything causes change to everything else, stars die so we may be created, probably best to not worry overly. We are stardust after all. Peace out.
Hey I remember a time when we were told.....
...we'd all be dead from AIDS.
25 years later and thankfully I still don't know anyone personally that's died from it or has it.
Isn't hyperbole great?
They said 6 years ago we'd all be using Netbooks.
Re: Hey I remember a time when we were told.....
I do, and everybody who used a condom might have been saved because he was told to use one.
Re: Hey I remember a time when we were told.....
Er..I don't think it was the condom's that saved us, it was little facts like 1 in every 100 people are actually immune to aids, and cannot catch it and that despite John Hurt's scary advert - AIDS isn't as contagious as made out, with only a 25% chance of passing it on. Five times more people die of flu every year as AIDS; it was never the epidemic we were led to believe it was or should i say, panicked into believing it was.
The vast majority of new cases in the UK come from African immigrants and even then it is in decline.
Re: Hey I remember a time when we were told.....
this was a site about IT.
Re: Hey I remember a time when we were told.....
And then there is Linux.
I've only had my Linux Netbook for 4 years, so we shall have to wait and see, won't we.
This topic is closed for new posts.
