The Global warming blow-hards...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman™

Please explain. I am not the first or only one to talk about about your CNP and what "other things"?

This "exclusivity" must be the entire board. You used to CNP very opinionated articles with nary point made by yourself. You've just got slightly better by adding a preface or epilogue. Usually it says, "Thie article sums up my views nicely."

Some people use facts and such articles to form their own opinion. Others post someone else's opinion and adopt it.:dabs:

---

And still others find an article of opinion that "sums up my views nicely".

What of that, and what should be required apart from a statement signifying agreement with it's content?

If I do a total C & P, and adorn it with such an introduction, I mean to say that I find it's content agreeable, and that it is as well- or better-constructed than any effort of my own, not to mention the savings of effort and time.

Others do this sort of thing all the time, much more often than I do, and most often with even less accompanying commentary.

In my case, though, you seem to feel this signifies some sort of shortcoming.

BTW-

I have taken your advice and found an audience willing to entertain any felt need on my part to use the "N"-word.

If you stumble through the door by mistake, would I have to stop?

---

First off, I still duuno where you get that it's just me and Ava. We are not the first or only ones.

Second, the only time you seem to express an opinion (whenever that happens) is when it's hidden behind an opinionated article.

When pressed about a straight opinion absent of a CNP, you clam up like a cringed cunt....unless it's after 6 pages of folks asking.

It just seems you come with your opinions on here based whether or not you found a recent article. You seem intelligent but your lack of insightfulness coupled with constant piggybacking and round about wording to something simple lends me to believe otherwise.

I wouldn't have had an opinion on the whole matter just now had you not incorrectly mentioned my name.:P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman™

First off, I still duuno where you get that it's just me and Ava. We are not the first or only ones.

I never said it was "just you and Ava".

You were just the first one to come to mind, probably due to your relentless note of it.

There are others, I just chose not to mention them.

Second, the only time you seem to express an opinion (whenever that happens) is when it's hidden behind an opinionated article.

Utterly incorrect, but where your own postage is concerned, I find it more effective to poke holes by asking questions, which activity is exceedingly easy.

Truly, though, anyone so inclined could deduce my views from the types of questions I ask.

Your problem is getting so caught-up being offended and feeling put-upon thereby that you entirely miss the point, as well as my actual opinion(s).

I don't wonder at all why you feel the way you do; after all, I intend you to feel that way until you learn to look beyond your pique and think properly.

BTW-

You are progressing, no matter your occasional discomfort.

When pressed about a straight opinion absent of a CNP, you clam up like a cringed cunt....unless it's after 6 pages of folks asking.

You would deny me the enjoyment of stringing you along?

It also increases your appreciation of the profundity of my views, a perk I find particularly gratifying.

It just seems you come with your opinions on here based whether or not you found a recent article. You seem intelligent but your lack of insightfulness coupled with constant piggybacking and round about wording to something simple lends me to believe otherwise.

Now, this paragraph well demonstrates your own lack of insight.

I wouldn't have had an opinion on the whole matter just now had you not incorrectly mentioned my name.:P

---

While you puzzle over the propriety of my mentioning your name, I will put this thread on the "mission accomplished" pile.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman™

First off, I still duuno where you get that it's just me and Ava. We are not the first or only ones.

I never said it was "just you and Ava".

You were just the first one to come to mind, probably due to your relentless note of it.

Relentless? I hardly note it at all. Normally when people CNP it's actually a news article and so the person may not have much to say. You post opinion articles that I wouldn't care to read anyway.....and they are quite lengthy. The last one I read was a complete waste of time. In contrast, vid may post an article that is fact based. You have posted articles that were fact based and I found them quite interesting.

There are others, I just chose not to mention them.

No shit. You mentioned me and 1234 for other reasons.

Second, the only time you seem to express an opinion (whenever that happens) is when it's hidden behind an opinionated article.

Utterly incorrect, but where your own postage is concerned, I find it more effective to poke holes by asking questions, which activity is exceedingly easy.

Truly, though, anyone so inclined could deduce my views from the types of questions I ask.

Your problem is getting so caught-up being offended and feeling put-upon thereby that you entirely miss the point, as well as my actual opinion(s).

You offend by mucking up your questions with shit like calling me "brother". Stay the direct root and you'll be okay but I know that's hard for you. I prefer to be direct rather than fuck around. We get enough of that from politicians.

I don't wonder at all why you feel the way you do; after all, I intend you to feel that way until you learn to look beyond your pique and think properly.


What's my pique?

BTW-

You are progressing, no matter your occasional discomfort.

Progressing at what? Posting style. You put much into it than I do.

When pressed about a straight opinion absent of a CNP, you clam up like a cringed cunt....unless it's after 6 pages of folks asking.

You would deny me the enjoyment of stringing you along?

Stringing along would mean that I'm actually wondering what your view is.
The problem with you is you act as if you are afraid to say it while I am not.
You post as if you are a politician at the podium of a bipartisan party.

It also increases your appreciation of the profundity of my views, a perk I find particularly gratifying.

But....your views are not profound. I won't call them shit (cuz I share some of them) but hardly profound. I think you have the ego on here that you've never had in real life.

It just seems you come with your opinions on here based whether or not you found a recent article. You seem intelligent but your lack of insightfulness coupled with constant piggybacking and round about wording to something simple lends me to believe otherwise.

Now, this paragraph well demonstrates your own lack of insight.

I wouldn't have had an opinion on the whole matter just now had you not incorrectly mentioned my name.:P

---

While you puzzle over the propriety of my mentioning your name, I will put this thread on the "mission accomplished" pile.

---

Now I puzzle?:lol:

If you feel better, that's all that matters, jay. Good job on accomplishing your "mission".:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bigboab

I have Googled a bit more. It seems that Ava has underestimated the rise that would occur. I have found quotes(3) that say over 70 metres. Barbie does say the Arctic which would not affect the levels much because most of it is 'ice cube'.

So I have found out where the water is going to come from. Thanks Ava.

P.S. I still find the figures incredulous but will have to accept them or go to the Antarctic and measure for myself.:lol:

Thanks to all who replied.:)

---

There is also a large amount of water beneath the sea floor, and I would imagine the change in pressure and temperature to affect how much remains beneath it.

:shuriken:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MagicNakor

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bigboab

I have Googled a bit more. It seems that Ava has underestimated the rise that would occur. I have found quotes(3) that say over 70 metres. Barbie does say the Arctic which would not affect the levels much because most of it is 'ice cube'.

So I have found out where the water is going to come from. Thanks Ava.

P.S. I still find the figures incredulous but will have to accept them or go to the Antarctic and measure for myself.:lol:

Thanks to all who replied.:)

---

There is also a large amount of water beneath the sea floor, and I would imagine the change in pressure and temperature to affect how much remains beneath it.

:shuriken:

---

I should imagine if that 'gets out' it would be replaced by sea water. :)

I believe it already is salt water... I suppose if the melting ice triggers the expulsion of this previously trapped water, the only place for the water to go...is up. Guess I will be living on the Coast again after all. :P

:shuriken:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MagicNakor

I believe it already is salt water... I suppose if the melting ice triggers the expulsion of this previously trapped water, the only place for the water to go...is up. :shuriken:

---

:noes:

http://www.ub.uit.no/northernlights/...alstrom03d.jpg

That's far more depressing.

:shuriken:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MagicNakor

http://www.ub.uit.no/northernlights/...alstrom03d.jpg

That's far more depressing.

:shuriken:

---

Yeah.

Wood cuts will do that to you. :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman™

I think you have the ego on here that you've never had in real life.

---

Spot on. :yup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman™

I think you have the ego on here that you've never had in real life.

---

I "have the ego" whenever and wherever I need it.

People constantly need to be relieved of their ignorance, and it is difficult to perform that service without a large ego.

Most do not require such treatment as you do, however, as they are not so resistant to sense and logic.

They realize this is not an adversarial endeavor.

Quote:

---

Disappearing world: Global warming claims tropical island


For the first time, an inhabited island has disappeared beneath rising seas. Environment Editor Geoffrey Lean reports
Published: 24 December 2006

Rising seas, caused by global warming, have for the first time washed an inhabited island off the face of the Earth. The obliteration of Lohachara island, in India's part of the Sundarbans where the Ganges and the Brahmaputra rivers empty into the Bay of Bengal, marks the moment when one of the most apocalyptic predictions of environmentalists and climate scientists has started coming true.

As the seas continue to swell, they will swallow whole island nations, from the Maldives to the Marshall Islands, inundate vast areas of countries from Bangladesh to Egypt, and submerge parts of scores of coastal cities.

Eight years ago, as exclusively reported in The Independent on Sunday, the first uninhabited islands - in the Pacific atoll nation of Kiribati - vanished beneath the waves. The people of low-lying islands in Vanuatu, also in the Pacific, have been evacuated as a precaution, but the land still juts above the sea. The disappearance of Lohachara, once home to 10,000 people, is unprecedented.

It has been officially recorded in a six-year study of the Sunderbans by researchers at Calcutta's Jadavpur University. So remote is the island that the researchers first learned of its submergence, and that of an uninhabited neighbouring island, Suparibhanga, when they saw they had vanished from satellite pictures.

Two-thirds of nearby populated island Ghoramara has also been permanently inundated. Dr Sugata Hazra, director of the university's School of Oceanographic Studies, says "it is only a matter of some years" before it is swallowed up too. Dr Hazra says there are now a dozen "vanishing islands" in India's part of the delta. The area's 400 tigers are also in danger.

Until now the Carteret Islands off Papua New Guinea were expected to be the first populated ones to disappear, in about eight years' time, but Lohachara has beaten them to the dubious distinction.

Human cost of global warming: Rising seas will soon make 70,000 people homeless

Refugees from the vanished Lohachara island and the disappearing Ghoramara island have fled to Sagar, but this island has already lost 7,500 acres of land to the sea. In all, a dozen islands, home to 70,000 people, are in danger of being submerged by the rising seas.
Also in this section

---

source

http://www.call-of-the-sea.com/potpo...kampanakis.gif

Not entirely unprecedented.

:shuriken:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MagicNakor

http://www.call-of-the-sea.com/potpo...kampanakis.gif

Not entirely unprecedented.

:shuriken:

---

Ah yes.

An Ice Age or so ago, no?

In any case well before the last several threatened/imagined ones.:dabs:

Just think, to be thought of in the same breath as Atlantis...

It's thrilling, utterly thrilling. :whistling

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman™

I think you have the ego on here that you've never had in real life.

---

People constantly need to be relieved of their ignorance, and it is difficult to perform that service without a large ego.

---

Funny you should say that, because there are a number of us on here who relieve you of your ignorance on a regular basis, without an over inflated ego, or the need to claim social and intellectual superiority.


PS: Happy Summer Solstice everyone. :)

In my area, J2, we have a lot of bio-diesel / alternative fuel plants springing up. A lot of these plants are and will be using a steady supply of feed corn to produce the alcohol used in these fuels.

When you consider the fact that we also have some of the largest cattle feed lots in the country here, you can imagine what is already happening to the price of corn per bushel. We have seen increases up to a dollar per bushel of corn recently. That will be reflected in the cost of producing beef.

I can only wonder what that will do to supply.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Everose

In my area, J2, we have a lot of bio-diesel / alternative fuel plants springing up. A lot of these plants are and will be using a steady supply of feed corn to produce the alcohol used in these fuels.

When you consider the fact that we also have some of the largest cattle feed lots in the country here, you can imagine what is already happening to the price of corn per bushel. We have seen increases up to a dollar per bushel of corn recently. That will be reflected in the cost of producing beef.

I can only wonder what that will do to supply.

---

I predict someone will manage to profit handily from a circumstance that bodes slightly ill for others.

BTW-

I heard recently (about a month ago) that organically-grown chicken totally sucks from a health/nourishment/cholesterol/taste point-of-view.

I don't wonder why, but I do laugh about that.:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ava Estelle

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

People constantly need to be relieved of their ignorance, and it is difficult to perform that service without a large ego.

---

Funny you should say that, because there are a number of us on here who relieve you of your ignorance on a regular basis, without an over inflated ego, or the need to claim social and intellectual superiority.

---

Never mind others; perhaps you'd furnish some sort of reference to any instance where you yourself would claim to have done what you just described. :dabs:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

perhaps you'd furnish some sort of reference to any instance where you yourself would claim to have done what you just described. :dabs:

---

That would be a rather pointless exercise with someone who, even now, believes there are WMDs in Iraq, and that the US have brought democracy to Afghanistan. Jesus Christ himself would have trouble getting you to admit you were wrong about anything. :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ava Estelle

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

perhaps you'd furnish some sort of reference to any instance where you yourself would claim to have done what you just described. :dabs:

---

That would be a rather pointless exercise with someone who, even now, believes there are WMDs in Iraq, and that the US have brought democracy to Afghanistan. Jesus Christ himself would have trouble getting you to admit you were wrong about anything. :lol:

---

Spoken like a true weasel, Ava. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

Spoken like a true weasel, Ava. ;)

---

Bless you my son.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vidcc

Quote:

---

Disappearing world: Global warming claims tropical island


For the first time, an inhabited island has disappeared beneath rising seas. Environment Editor Geoffrey Lean reports
Published: 24 December 2006

Rising seas, caused by global warming, have for the first time washed an inhabited island off the face of the Earth. The obliteration of Lohachara island, in India's part of the Sundarbans where the Ganges and the Brahmaputra rivers empty into the Bay of Bengal, marks the moment when one of the most apocalyptic predictions of environmentalists and climate scientists has started coming true.

As the seas continue to swell, they will swallow whole island nations, from the Maldives to the Marshall Islands, inundate vast areas of countries from Bangladesh to Egypt, and submerge parts of scores of coastal cities.

Eight years ago, as exclusively reported in The Independent on Sunday, the first uninhabited islands - in the Pacific atoll nation of Kiribati - vanished beneath the waves. The people of low-lying islands in Vanuatu, also in the Pacific, have been evacuated as a precaution, but the land still juts above the sea. The disappearance of Lohachara, once home to 10,000 people, is unprecedented.

It has been officially recorded in a six-year study of the Sunderbans by researchers at Calcutta's Jadavpur University. So remote is the island that the researchers first learned of its submergence, and that of an uninhabited neighbouring island, Suparibhanga, when they saw they had vanished from satellite pictures.

Two-thirds of nearby populated island Ghoramara has also been permanently inundated. Dr Sugata Hazra, director of the university's School of Oceanographic Studies, says "it is only a matter of some years" before it is swallowed up too. Dr Hazra says there are now a dozen "vanishing islands" in India's part of the delta. The area's 400 tigers are also in danger.

Until now the Carteret Islands off Papua New Guinea were expected to be the first populated ones to disappear, in about eight years' time, but Lohachara has beaten them to the dubious distinction.

Human cost of global warming: Rising seas will soon make 70,000 people homeless

Refugees from the vanished Lohachara island and the disappearing Ghoramara island have fled to Sagar, but this island has already lost 7,500 acres of land to the sea. In all, a dozen islands, home to 70,000 people, are in danger of being submerged by the rising seas.
Also in this section

---

source

---

Lohachara Island actually disappeared about 20 years ago.

The northwards progression of the Indian plate is causing it to tilt slightly and as a result the whole area is slowly sinking. It has absolutely nothing to do with sea level rise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lynx

Lohachara Island actually disappeared about 20 years ago.

---

It didn't disappear, it was flooded, some people went back again.

Did it sink or was it flooded.

I think we have a right to know.

wikipedia knows all

Quote:

---

Lohachara Island was an islet on the Sundarban river delta in the Sundarban National Park, located near the Indian state of West Bengal which was permanently flooded in the 1980s.[1]

The islet is one of a number of "vanishing islands" in India's part of the delta: in the past two decades, four islands - Bedford, Lohachara, Kabasgadi and Suparibhanga - have sunk into the sea and 6,000 families have been made homeless.[2] Although other islands have disappeared due to various man-made construction projects, Lohachara was the first inhabited island to disappear, purportedly due to global warming.[3] There are multiple causes[4] of the disappearances of islands in the delta, including sea-level rise , coastal erosion, cyclones(the number has reduced but intensity increased[5]), mangrove destruction and coastal flooding. The loss of land has created thousands of refugees in the area.

Overall population of the Sundarbans has risen 200% to nearly 4.3 million.

---

edit: have been reading up on sea level rises. The whole glacier rebound thing and plate tectonics does seem to add a lot of uncertainty to the whole thing. Interesting and slightly sceptical view of sea level rises

So that's a "don't know" then.

Any discussion of plate tectonics is disallowed when debating global warming, as it doesn't fit any "acceptable" scenarios.

Under the global warming guidelines (as outlined in the global warming handbook, Global Warming for Dummies), all floodings/sinkings/inundations are due solely to melting glaciers.

So the words natural moveage isn't allowed.

Sorry, my bad.

Well Lynx's actually.

Damn you Lynx, for your alluring arguments.

The thing I find about the "man has nothing to do with global warming" blow hards is that they argue with straw men.
Nobody said "global warming (sea temperatures rising) will cause more hurricanes" they said global warming will increase the severity of the hurricanes that occur.
Nobody in the scientific community has said that warming/cooling cycles are not natural, they said pollution is speeding the process up.

Quote:

---

outgoing Chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works James Inhofe (R-OK) argued that the current wave of unprecedented warming is due to “natural changes.” “God’s still up there,” Inhofe said, and to the extent there is warming going on, it is “due to the sun.”

---

Well no shit sherlock, but the scientist are not denying that the main heat source is the sun, they are saying that man's pollution has affected the way the earth deals with the radiation.

I am left wondering what the point of creating a "hoax" like global warming would be trying to achieve. Stossel suggests it's because some people hate profit, it's a socialist conspiracy.

Personally I think man has affected the planet, this doesn't mean I agree with a "green tax", I would go more for tax breaks based on less pollution instead of more tax, if you want to pay less tax, clean up your act.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vidcc

The thing I find about the "man has nothing to do with global warming" blow hards is that they argue with straw men.
Nobody said "global warming (sea temperatures rising) will cause more hurricanes" they said global warming will increase the severity of the hurricanes that occur.
Nobody in the scientific community has said that warming/cooling cycles are not natural, they said pollution is speeding the process up.

Quote:

---

outgoing Chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works James Inhofe (R-OK) argued that the current wave of unprecedented warming is due to “natural changes.” “God’s still up there,” Inhofe said, and to the extent there is warming going on, it is “due to the sun.”

---

Well no shit sherlock, but the scientist are not denying that the main heat source is the sun, they are saying that man's pollution has affected the way the earth deals with the radiation.

I am left wondering what the point of creating a "hoax" like global warming would be trying to achieve. Stossel suggests it's because some people hate profit, it's a socialist conspiracy.

Personally I think man has affected the planet, this doesn't mean I agree with a "green tax", I would go more for tax breaks based on less pollution instead of more tax, if you want to pay less tax, clean up your act.

---

Is your avatar from Silent Night Deadly Night?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman™

Is your avatar from Silent Night Deadly Night?

---

No caddyshack .......at least i thought it was :unsure:













:P

You guys should watch "An Inconvenient Truth" by Al Gore. It really does have a lotta facts straight and even if you don't believe in Global Warming, curbing it cant hurt. Temp levels are hell of a lot higher than the normal earth cycle's temperatures. Global Warming is an inevitable truth & fact and must be curbed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vidcc

Nobody said "global warming (sea temperatures rising) will cause more hurricanes" they said global warming will increase the severity of the hurricanes that occur.

---

I'm afraid you're wrong there vidcc, huricanes, (cyclones, typhoons), all form at sea, and they don't form until the sea temperature reaches a very critical point, 26.5 °C (80°F), for every hurricane that forms, many more don't quite make it. If you increase the sea temperature even a half degree it will increase the number of hurricanes.

Gloabal warming is leading to a new Ice Age... sooner than you all could possibly imagine..

Buy stocks and shares in fossil fuels, now....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kazaaman

You guys should watch "An Inconvenient Truth" by Al Gore. It really does have a lotta facts straight. Global Warming is an inevitable truth & fact and must be curbed.

---

I think Al Gore should be curbed; others agree...:dry:

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/harris061206.htm

Or are the Canadians notorious for their abuse of the environment. :whistling

That site, despite the name, isn't even Canadian. They tried, however; badly Photoshopped images of Bloc leaders are a hallmark of every reputable news source up here. Maybe next time they'll remember to remove their State-centric ones and fool us all. :rolleyes:

:shuriken:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

... others agree...:dry:

---

The first quote there was from Bob Carter ... and guess who 'funds' him?

Exxon-Mobil's funding of climate change skeptics. :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ava Estelle

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vidcc

Nobody said "global warming (sea temperatures rising) will cause more hurricanes" they said global warming will increase the severity of the hurricanes that occur.

---

I'm afraid you're wrong there vidcc, huricanes, (cyclones, typhoons), all form at sea, and they don't form until the sea temperature reaches a very critical point, 26.5 °C (80°F), for every hurricane that forms, many more don't quite make it. If you increase the sea temperature even a half degree it will increase the number of hurricanes.

---

And now you are saying what the scientist are not.

A hurricane doesn't form because the sea reaches a certain temperature, it requires other factors to exist. The rising of the sea temperature doesn't cause those other factors.
http://www.weatherquestions.com/What...hurricanes.htm


Right wingers have been attacking Al Gore saying he said there would be more hurricanes, then cited that 2006 was the quietest season in a decade as proof that Gore was wrong. The problem is that Gore didn't say that there would be more hurricanes, he said hurricanes would be more intense.

Add to that there are other factors that can reduce the number and intensity of hurricanes on a year to year basis.

Quote:

---

Storms were starved for fuel after ingesting masses of dry Saharan dust and air over the Atlantic Ocean. Scientists say the storm-snuffing dust was more abundant than usual this year.

In the season’s peak, storms were curving right like errant field goals. High pressure that normally hunkers near Bermuda shifted far eastward, and five storms rode the clockwise winds away from Florida.

Finally, a rapidly growing El Nino, a warming of water over the tropical Pacific Ocean, shifted winds high in the atmosphere southward. The winds left developing storms disheveled and unable to become organized.

---

source

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

I think Al Gore should be curbed; others agree...:dry:

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/harris061206.htm

Or are the Canadians notorious for their abuse of the environment. :whistling

---

No shit???? A bunch of right wingers (that may be posing as Canadians) think Al Gore should be curbed :rolleyes:

I can't say I'm surprised though, free speech and freedoms in general are on the right wing hit list of enemies that must be destroyed :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vidcc

A hurricane doesn't form because the sea reaches a certain temperature,

---

I didn't say 'because', I said 'until'.

In my area we have had a record number of cyclones, and they were, on average, more intense.