Ice returns as Greenland temps plummet

Originally posted by cavscout
Even if not, you can certainly play hockey on it. In any event, it is significant if for no other reason then that it is the first ice in a while.

...where previously it has been ice free since sometime in the 70's, during winter. Prior to that, it was ice bound during the winter for hundreds of years.

Ergo, warming has resulted in the ice not forming during winter for the past 30 odd years, whereas previously, it was common place to be ice covered.

Originally posted by stumason
Ergo, warming has resulted in the ice not forming during winter for the past 30 odd years, whereas previously, it was common place to be ice covered.

So it was ice free all those years because of man-made global warming?

And now that we are using more fossil fuels than ever, WAY more than in the 70s, it is iced over because of...global warming?

No, wait, I remember! It is now man-made global climate change!

Now EVERYTHING is our fault! I love how important man has become that we can alter a planet that has (possibly) been here for over 4 BILLION years. Wait, not just a planet, an entire solar syatem! Not arrogant all, is it? Hell, we are like gods!

I just sent a mesage to the Lord. I said "Lord, All your climates are belong to us!"

Man, were good!

Now if I could just remember where I put me keys...

reply to post by cavscout


Your making a mountain out of a mole hill here. This is not a massive ice increase, just a local cold snap whereas the mean temperature is alot warmer. Historically, over the past century, the local temperature has increased by 7c on average, which is quite a hike.

You cannot cling to this small cold snap on the western coast of Greenland as proof that climate change isn't happening.

Originally posted by stumason
Your making a mountain out of a mole hill here.

Yeah, I know. You are right, of course.

You cannot cling to this small cold snap on the western coast of Greenland as proof that climate change isn't happening.

Proof? No, I cant claim it is proof at all.

Significant enough not to sweep under the rug like you want to do? I think so.

reply to post by stumason


Hey, looks like Greenland isnt alone.

Ten dead in Suidi Arabia from the SNOW?

Crops ruined in Isreal and Syria from temps -16c?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Hurry, hurry, lower gas prices so we can drive more and heat things up! People are dieing from the cold, for craps sake!

Oh, and looky here: www.abovetopsecret.com...

I just loved how you started the post off with the phrase climate change because it is snowing during our "global warming" catastrophy

[edit on 17-1-2008 by cavscout]

reply to post by cavscout


I would have thought that you'd have the wherewithal to know what climate change would bring...

In basic terms, should glaciers and ice caps melt, this decreases seawater salinity. This affects the oceanic currents. This in turn affects the weather.

Ironically, even in the classic "Global Warming" (it is now called Climate Change) scenario of melting ice caps and increasing temps with plam trees in Manchester, the result in the end would be a shut down or severe change in oceanic currents likely to lead to a new Ice Age.

To be honest, I am not in the slightest surprised by these extreme cold snaps, as they are and have been predicted as a result in oceanic currents failing as a consequence of ice melt and increased global temperature.

reply to post by stumason


So cooling or warming or cooling by warming or warming by cooling, doesn’t matter because we just call it "global climate change?"

Right, I get it.

Thing is, any 2nd grade student knows that ice ages happen, and that there used to be palm trees in Greenland.

It happens, and it happens a lot. The Earth's climate has ALWAYS CHANGED. It has never been stable.

It happens even when humans aren’t driving cars and making stuff in factories.

Carbon happens without human interaction, too. More carbon in fact than we can create in the next 500 years, often in a matter of days, and naturally.

This all gets real old after a while. I don’t know about your neck of the woods, but out here in Nevada not enough people believe this crap for it to make one difference in my life. Out here being "green" means you have cash.

I think what I am saying is I really DONT CARE; see ya in 6 months when I decide to take part in another global warming thread. Sorry to have wasted your time, I will let you get back to sorting out your white paper trash from your colored paper trash now.


[edit on 17-1-2008 by cavscout]

reply to post by cavscout


It's not a difficult concept to grasp... even a "second grader" could understand the implications a Gulf Stream shut down and it's causes.

People have skipped over my previous comment, but explain this:

If mankind's use of CFC's for only a few decades can almost wipe out the Ozone layer, then how is it so far fetched that mankind's burning of fossil fuels could have an effect on the climate over 200+ years?

Officially, I am on the fence on this issue. I fully appreciate that the earths climate is cyclical. However, I also understand that Mankind is kind of making it a whole lot worse than it ought to be.

Originally posted by cavscout
This all gets real old after a while. I don’t know about your neck of the woods, but out here in Nevada not enough people believe this crap for it to make one difference in my life. Out here being "green" means you have cash.

I think what I am saying is I really DONT CARE; see ya in 6 months when I decide to take part in another global warming thread. Sorry to have wasted your time, I will let you get back to sorting out your white paper trash from your colored paper trash now.

what a stupid stance. Because no one in backwater America believes in it, that makes it not true?

Mwooohahaha... Whatever...

Whether the weather change is our fault or not, we still need to take responsibility for our actions.

Filling the landfills full of garbage that cannot decompose and poisons our water supply is not a good thing.

There is nothing healthy about a smog filled city.

Buzzing down all the trees won't help us either.

Troy

You suck! Rabble rabble!

No, you suck! Rabble! Rabble rabble rabble!!

Sheesh. Talk about fighting over semantics. If the ice is new, it's either going to stick around or it's not. Either way, that's in the future, and this is the present. Not even the weatherman on TV can tell you what's going to happen.

I mean around here it was supposed to be -2F next Sunday. Now it's supposed to be 7, but -5 on Tuesday. The funny thing is it was in the 60s a week ago, which melted the half a foot of snow that fell the week before. I don't really care what's causing the wacky weather anymore. I like it! It's not the same old sun up, sun down. Makes things interesting.

I figured out how the global warming scam works a while back.
The key to the globalists success is the imposition of carbon credits on all businesses throughout the world. You can't do business (ie pollute, use electricity gas etc.) unless you pay the carbon mafia off. It's a form of protection money. Now guess who gets the credits? Approved eco-projects, carbon sinks etc. get this money. Follow me so far?

OK now who will approve the eco-projects? Why the UN of course. Many of the recipients of the eco credits are proven scams. They are there to funnel money into the UN bureaucracy. In other words they finally have their UN global tax. Why now they can fund armies and invasions and enforce global governance to their hearts content.

Did I mention ecology or climate in this? No I didn't since it has almost nothing to do with that. That's a red herring. Maybe we are causing global warming, maybe not. That's not the issue when you have a world to conquer.

[edit on 17-1-2008 by SevenThunders]

Originally posted by stumason
what a stupid stance.

Thank you, thank you very much. I think your stance on my stance is also stupid. In fact, I am currently sticking out my tongue at you. Oh, and “your momma.” Are we done exchanging school yard insults? I want to put my big boy underwear back on. You would also do well to wear your big boy underwear on ATS.

Because no one in backwater America believes in it,

Does that mean that all of American is backwater, or just the US, or just Nevada?

The thing about it is this: If we have caused enough global warming, sorry, global climate change, that we are seeing a steady rise in temps. already, it is too late to do anything and as you pointed out, it doesn’t matter because as the glaciers melt they bring cool water south.

Now, if it has not reached that critical level, then we would not be able to detect it and therefore the global warming observation is BS.

Either way, it does NOT MATTER. Not enough for me to worry about it and not enough for people to loose money and jobs over it.


[edit on 17-1-2008 by cavscout]

Originally posted by traderonwallst


Stop being lemmings!!!!!!!!!

Being a bit off topic here, but i think we all know that the biggest conspiracy is the fact lemmings don't follow each other off cliffs, Disney pushed them off so they could film a fictitious lemming mass suicide. Poor lemmings.
DOWN WITH DISNEY!!

A year ago, I didn't believe the whole INCREASED global change due to human emissions of CO2, CH4, N2O, Halocarbons etc.

But I'm now studying Earth&Economy at the Free University of Amsterdam, and I'm basicly learning a lot about the earth, meteorology, geology and I've now got the course 'Global Change'.
Learning a lot about global warming, and for me it's hard to believe that it's not true!
It doesn't look like the warming can be the effect of something else like the change in solar radiation.

reply to post by centurion1211


I'm just an unbiased lurker, but damn you seem really smug.

Since I ought to contribute to this thread in some way - I think it is a global trend toward warming, with added impetus from human activity. That much should be obvious I think.

I really don't understand people who won't acknowledge man made climate change.

But then if people are ignorant about the subject they have nothing to fear because they don't realise what the horrific implications are.

I really think education on ecology and climate should be more thorough in general. Especially for ecology, then people would realise how much they are apart of nature and the # that's going to happen to them.

Originally posted by cavscout

Originally posted by stumason
what a stupid stance.

Thank you, thank you very much. I think your stance on my stance is also stupid. In fact, I am currently sticking out my tongue at you. Oh, and “your momma.” Are we done exchanging school yard insults? I want to put my big boy underwear back on. You would also do well to wear your big boy underwear on ATS.

Because no one in backwater America believes in it,

Does that mean that all of American is backwater, or just the US, or just Nevada?

The thing about it is this: If we have caused enough global warming, sorry, global climate change, that we are seeing a steady rise in temps. already, it is too late to do anything and as you pointed out, it doesn’t matter because as the glaciers melt they bring cool water south.

Now, if it has not reached that critical level, then we would not be able to detect it and therefore the global warming observation is BS.

Either way, it does NOT MATTER. Not enough for me to worry about it and not enough for people to loose money and jobs over it.


[edit on 17-1-2008 by cavscout]

It really does matter because even if it's not a man made phenomena we have to start making plans to save civilisation.

reply to post by stumason


I'm pretty sure that CFC's are exclusively man made, (Not found in nature) and therefore the Earth's climate has no way to balance their effects. (Possibly. I'm no scientist)

[edit on 18/1/08 by Nemiro]

Originally posted by monkey_descendant
It really does matter because even if it's not a man made phenomena we have to start making plans to save civilisation.

Wise words indeed.

Are we asking the wrong questions about global warming?

Public discussion over global warming is often caught in a vortex of misinformation perpetuated by extreme forces who say it’s all just a big hoax.

This often causes the most relevant scientific questions to get lost, suggests Washington state climatologist Philip Mote, who has been working for years to understand climate changes brought about by human activity.

What we should be talking about when we talk about climate change, Mote suggests, is no longer if it is occurring but how and where. Further, what lasting impacts climate change will have upon individual regions like the Pacific Northwest, and most important, what can we do about it"

Think about it -- if it's not because of humans, yet it is happening, we still gotta prepare for it. If it's because of humans, but people keep on doubting, it's gonna happen anyway, and we still gotta prepare. Either way, we have to prepare for the inevitable change.

So what's the point of arguing about it?