NASA: Strange and sudden massive melt in Greenland - Page 6
Forum Index > General Forum |
FuGGu
United States176 Posts
| ||
Geoube
Canada67 Posts
Little long winded but takes a new look at the economic side of this whole debate. (at least read the first 3 pages) http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/global-warmings-terrifying-new-math-20120719 | ||
Crownlol
United States3726 Posts
The fact is, it probably matters zero to denialists that they're damaging the climate of children's futures. The effect of immediacy will cause them to first consider how they're going to pay their mortgage and put their kids through school- and then how to get stupid rich- before they consider damaging the environment. If rich conservative politicians embraced the reforms required to solve the issue, they'd be spitting in the face of the huge businesses that back them financially, and committing career suicide. This isn't a scientific issue, it's a political issue. Keep in mind, plenty of people deny that the holocaust ever happened too. | ||
SkelA
Macedonia13017 Posts
I seriously doubt we had anything with the global warming in the past and possibly in the present. Ok we might contribute a little with our human behavior but thats so little to actually matter on a grand scale. | ||
Thorakh
Netherlands1788 Posts
On July 25 2012 23:34 NeMeSiS3 wrote: No. As I said, it's been proven that the 11 year cycle is not a (major) factor in global warming.Sorry did you say the earth is 12,000 years old or were you just quoting ridiculous scripture to make your point... If we go by your logic, people can come from thin air, and the earth is the center of the universe. "facepalms" I am not disagreeing with you on all points but "its because of the sun" is actually a very valid argument, I would equate it. The sun is in a cycle, every 11 years (2012 being the 11th year) it emits (to keep it realy simple we'll call it heat) heat out into space, but about approximately every 10th 11 year cycle it builds up much hotter than usual, in retrospect, which than can actually short out telecommunications/satellites etc... It is also the cause of big heat waves which can result in this "global warming" feeling. That's why specifically the last 10 years were the "hottest ever" because it was additive of the 11 year cycle of heat emission with the inclusion of our pollution. But are people causing it? Yes, not entirely though, I would give it 70/30 (people the 70) as an approximation. I seriously doubt we had anything with the global warming in the past and possibly in the present. Ok we might contribute a little with our human behavior but thats so little to actually matter on a grand scale. And you know this because...? Are you a climatologist? No? Then why do you believe you know better than the thousands of experts in this field? | ||
DeepElemBlues
United States5079 Posts
Ice cores from [Summit Station in central Greenland] show that melting events of this type occur about once every 150 years on average. With the last one happening in 1889, this event is right on time," says Lora Koenig, a Goddard glaciologist and a member of the research team analyzing the satellite data. "But if we continue to observe melting events like this in upcoming years, it will be worrisome." So... it's perfectly normal, but it's also unprecedented and rabble rabble rabble global warming. God this fake crisis gets boring. | ||
Infernal_dream
United States2359 Posts
| ||
dvorakftw
681 Posts
On July 26 2012 02:16 DeepElemBlues wrote: http://www.tgdaily.com/sustainability-features/64925-greenland-ice-melt-unprecedented-says-nasa So... it's perfectly normal, but it's also unprecedented and rabble rabble rabble global warming. God this fake crisis gets boring. Denier! Denier! Persecute the unbeliever!!! | ||
gForce.
United Kingdom345 Posts
| ||
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
On July 26 2012 02:35 Infernal_dream wrote: Does global warming exist? Yeah. Has it always, yeah. That's the point. The world would have never come out of the ice age if not for normal global warming. People just like to blow shit up so that it sounds better. And to all of those "you're fucking the world up for your children." What are you doing exactly? Typing on your computer doing the same stuff I am. So I'm not going to pretend that I give a damn while my actions show the complete opposite. The fact that we know that global warming has natural causes has no impact on whether or not our interaction with the system accelerates or intensifies global warming in perhaps a destructive way (on top of the destructive nature of pollution in general). | ||
dvorakftw
681 Posts
On July 26 2012 01:18 Crownlol wrote: This isn't a controversial topic, and it isn't a debate. It's a fact, and denialists exist. Incentives for denial exist financially and career-wise. Imagine if you'd spent 40 years building a political empire as a conservative, only to have "well, honestly your policies are ruining the climate for humans" thrown in your face. You'd be required to deny it just to keep your job and your wealth. lolololol, and the scientists who are selling us all this alarming news have absolutely ZERO incentives. Btw, those policies ruining the climate? That's things like having a nice home with electricity and being able to travel in a car. If only we could be more like Native Americans living in harmony with the environment! And here's a treat for everyone who has never bothered to look at a chart of Earth temperatures that goes back more than one or two hundred years, let alone the one or two decades that are used in most scare propaganda. ![]() | ||
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
Surely you know what happens after global warming peaks and stuff starts melting right ![]() | ||
Tantaburs
Canada1825 Posts
| ||
thrawn2112
United States6918 Posts
On July 26 2012 02:44 dvorakftw wrote:lolololol, and the scientists who are selling us all this alarming news have absolutely ZERO incentives. as soon as i read this sentence i knew you weren't arguing because you are concerned with the facts, it's some sort of personal mission to show the internet how smart and edgy you are. in the same sentence you are making an argument about motives and issues outside of the actual debate, and you are trying to go for a witty critique instead of making it about the facts On July 26 2012 02:44 dvorakftw wrote:Btw, those policies ruining the climate? That's things like having a nice home with electricity and being able to travel in a car. If only we could be more like Native Americans living in harmony with the environment! Nobody is suggesting that we need to emulate Native Americans. Once again you are not talking about the actual issue and using manipulative debating tactics to try and prove your point. And as far as the electricity and modern living statement goes, it seems like you are saying that no matter what the effects of our way of life we don't need to change them because, hey, they're great! I can assure you that there are many people from countries outside ones such as the US that don't see "being able to travel in a car" as a privilege. On July 26 2012 02:44 dvorakftw wrote:And here's a treat for everyone who has never bothered to look at a chart of Earth temperatures that goes back more than one or two hundred years, let alone the one or two decades that are used in most scare propaganda. + Show Spoiler + ![]() Once again you've taken on this witty and condescending tone that adds nothing to your argument. As far as the chart goes, it's hard for me to write a response to it as you have completely failed to make any point about the data, you just put the chart in after a not so subtle comment suggesting that you have researched the topic way more than anyone else. There are many different points I see that you could be trying to make, so instead of me trying to cover all the bases could you add in your actual argument? | ||
Rassy
Netherlands2308 Posts
At least its a good concept to rally people together for a cause and push technological progress. Think greenland just has its occasional heatwave wich happens everywhere now and then, and that this is just a meteorological event , not related to climate. Its more extreme then normal it seems but not an indication the world will end in the next few months. | ||
REDBLUEGREEN
Germany1903 Posts
On July 26 2012 01:39 SkelA wrote: Greenland in our not so distant past didnt even have ice through the whole year. It was a land with grass in the south part and thats why its called Greenland. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erik_the_Red When Erik returned to Iceland after his exile had expired, he is said to have brought with him stories of "Greenland". Erik deliberately gave the land a more appealing name than "Iceland" in order to lure potential settlers. He explained, "people would be attracted to go there if it had a favorable name".[...]After spending the winter in Iceland, Erik returned to Greenland in 985 with a large number of colonists and established two colonies on its southwest coast: the Eastern Settlement or Eystribyggð, in modern-day Qaqortoq, and the Western Settlement or Vestribyggð, close to present-day Nuuk. (Eventually, a Middle Settlement grew, but many people suggest it formed part of the Western Settlement.) The Eastern and Western Settlements, both established on the southwest coast, proved the only two areas suitable for farming. There was only a small southern coastal strip that was free of ice and the scientist aren't even speaking about those, it's the massive inner core which is the topic. | ||
Rassy
Netherlands2308 Posts
Doesnt this just only mean that its above 0 degrees in 97% of greenland? | ||
nkr
Sweden5451 Posts
![]() | ||
Thorakh
Netherlands1788 Posts
On July 26 2012 02:44 dvorakftw wrote: What are you even trying to say with that chart? That it was hotter in some periods in the past? Yes, obviously. But what relevance does that have to global warming right now? One million years ago there weren't any civilizations that could get destroyed by global warming (or cooling). The entire point of the debate is that the global warming that is happening now will have significant, possibly civilization threatening effects on the entire world.lolololol, and the scientists who are selling us all this alarming news have absolutely ZERO incentives. Btw, those policies ruining the climate? That's things like having a nice home with electricity and being able to travel in a car. If only we could be more like Native Americans living in harmony with the environment! And here's a treat for everyone who has never bothered to look at a chart of Earth temperatures that goes back more than one or two hundred years, let alone the one or two decades that are used in most scare propaganda. ![]() The data shows that CO2 and average temps are increasing over the past decades and that's what counts. | ||
thrawn2112
United States6918 Posts
On July 26 2012 04:17 nkr wrote: Lets say we can never convince the doubters that we are 100% the cause of global warming. I used my incredible paint skills to illustrate why "taking action" against global warming should be the obvious choice, regardless of if we can proove that humans are the sole cause. + Show Spoiler + ![]() an argument such as that suggests that each potential outcome has the same probability of occurring which skews the risk/reward decision. my first thought when i saw the picture was of pascal's wager, and it falls apart for the same reason. my position is the same as yours, but i think that argument isn't going to get you very far | ||
| ||