Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Siberia starts to thaw...

pbman said:
REad one of these by fred singer then.

Global Effects of Environmental Pollution (Reidel, 1970)
Manned Laboratories in Space (Reidel, 1970)
Is There an Optimum Level of Population? (McGraw-Hill, 1971)
The Changing Global Environment (Reidel, 1975)
Arid Zone Development (Ballinger, 1977)
Economic Effects of Demographic Changes (Joint Economic Committee, U.S. Congress, 1977)
Cost-Benefit Analysis in Environmental Decisionmaking (Mitre Corp, 1979)
Energy (W.H. Freeman, 1979)
The Price of World Oil (Annual Reviews of Energy, Vol. 8, 1983)
Free Market Energy (Universe Books, 1984)
Oil Policy in a Changing Market (Annual Reviews of Energy, Vol. 12, 1987)
The Ocean in Human Affairs (Paragon House, 1989)
The Universe and Its Origin: From Ancient Myths to Present Reality and Future Fantasy (Paragon House, 1990)
Global Climate Change: Human and Natural Influences (Paragon House, 1989)
The Greenhouse Debate Continued (ICS Press, 1992)
The Scientific Case Against the Global Climate Treaty (SEPP, 1997)
Hot Talk, Cold Science: Global Warming's Unfinished Debate, (The Independent Institute, 1997)

http://www.sepp.org/bios/singer/cvsfs.html

As you can see he's be writting about it long before you jonny come latley europeans.

Silent since 1997?

Anything recent?
 
Donna Ferentes said:
No it isn't. It's a translation of a mixture of Caesar and Cato. And the bit about Gaul needs to be in the genitive case rather than the nominative.
How is a christian nazi savage like pbabyman meant to know that.
 
If the icy bits melt and its all goes "Waterworld" I will be sure to be one of the dudes with the jetskis on the Exxon Valdez..... it can't be that bad!

Giles..
 
pbman said:
No your sky is falling alarmest forget to mention that the antartic is expanding.

As expected.

Or that the Magnetic North Pole is marching towards Siberia!

During the last century the Pole has moved a remarkable 1100 km. What is more, since about 1970 the NMP has accelerated and is now moving at more than 40 km per year. If the NMP maintains its present speed and direction it will reach Siberia in about 50 years. Such an extrapolation is, however, tenuous. It is quite possible that the Pole will veer from its present course, and it is also possible that the pole will slow down sometime in the next half century.

http://gsc.nrcan.gc.ca/geomag/nmp/long_mvt_nmp_e.php
 
Donna Ferentes said:
I would doubt that Fred Singer's views were accepted by more than a very small minority of scientists working in his field, even if one asked only scientists from the US. It's like taking Dr Jazz as an authority on 9/11.

Then you doubt your own IPCC pannel, as he is a member. :rolleyes:

Anyways, you never even heard of him before today, talking to you is like tlaking to a pre-schooler. :p
 
pbman said:
No your sky is falling alarmest forget to mention that the antartic is expanding.

As expected.


Your ignorance is appaling... here's a simple quote from the actual Science article that that website you linked to talks about:

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/reprint/299/5603/99.pdf said:
Moreover,
the pattern of recent change is consistent with
the idea that thinning of the WAIS over the past
few thousand years is continuing, and is contributing
to present sea level rise.
 
Donna Ferentes said:
No it isn't. It's a translation of a mixture of Caesar and Cato. And the bit about Gaul needs to be in the genitive case rather than the nominative.

:rolleyes:

No this is cato's

"Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam"

Or the short vertion.

Carthago delenda est

It refers to their old enemy the carthaginians.

Read a little more history and you'll see that ceaser made a play on those words and applied it to gaul.

Why do you think he wouln't have don't such a thing?

He was a noted orator.



http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0140444335/002-5089200-4328022?v=glance

REad the book and get back to me.
 
invisibleplanet said:
The answer to soaking up all that carbon in the atmos. would surely be to plant more trees to turn it into oxygen, wouldn't it ?

Their no need to plant, as the ocean and the plants we have naturaly exchange carbon back and forth anyways., and sink a lot of it permemtly in the ground of course as well.

And without co2 in the atmospher, the earth would be cold and dead.

Global%20Warming%20Problem.gif


As you can see co2 in the atmostpher is extreamly natural.

And most of the greenhouse affect is caused by water vapor.

Water%20Vapour%20portion.gif


And only 3% of that tiny red dot is made made co2.
 
pbman said:
:rolleyes:

No this is cato's

"Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam"

Or the short vertion.

Carthago delenda est

It refers to their old enemy the carthaginians.

Read a little more history and you'll see that ceaser made a play on those words and applied it to gaul.

Why do you think he wouln't have don't such a thing?

He was a noted orator.

Sigh....

1. Caesar was not a noted orator, though Cato was. There's not many famous speeches by Caesar (can you name any?).

2. The phrase by Caesar that is being garbled is Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres. This means "All of Gaul is divided into three parts". If the sentence was reconstructed so that (in Latin rather than in translation) "all" came at the front, it would begin omnia gallia. Because it now means "of Gaul" instead of just "Gaul", the word changes to gallia

Still, fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt.
 
To me this is all fairly simple. Yes there is a natural warming and cooling process but the current warming process is most certainly being sped up by our abuse of the planet. You simply cannot release that much shit into the atmosphere and expect it not to have any effect on the planet.

Anyone thinking we are not harming the planet and ergo ourselves clearly needs taking out back and shooting.
 
Peebs you've never heard of the difference between absolute values and marginal changes then? It's the pressure at the margins that makes all the difference.
 
Matt S said:
>>Actually studies show that evolution thrives in an unstable ecosystem, I guess it's the same logic as the Japanese word for crisis also being the word for opportunity.>>

Tell that to millions of bangladeshis who wont have a home in a couple of
decades time, or the millions of people living in areas of Africa which will finally be unable to grow *anything*.

Matt

Like I said, it's only ourselves we're harming. Good to know the planet won't actually be killed by human activity, call me an uncaring cold-hearted misanthrop if you want, but I find it comforting that we won't bring about the end of life on Earth just coz we're a bunch of monkeys with just enough intelligence to be dangerous.
 
foreigner said:
Like I said, it's only ourselves we're harming. Good to know the planet won't actually be killed by human activity, call me an uncaring cold-hearted misanthrop if you want, but I find it comforting that we won't bring about the end of life on Earth just coz we're a bunch of monkeys with just enough intelligence to be dangerous.

The Earth is currently scheduled to be roasted by the Sun in 5.7 billion years. Now thats what I call Global Warming...! http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1749389.stm
 
The 'scientists' who claim that climate change is not happening are just a well-funded, politically motivated denial lobby of the sort who tried for years to disprove a link between smoking and lung cancer - Fred Singer being a perfect example.

Problem is, until people like peebs wake up, drop their religious blinkers and come to appreciate the true power of humankind and our own awesome potential for self-destruction we're not going to get anywhere.
 
pbman said:
lol The earth has been cooling the last 10-20 years.

Anyways, try some real sience instead of the sky is falling crap.

Cooler Heads Coalition
January 08, 2003


Antarctic Ice Sheet not in Danger from Global Warming

Fears that the Western Antarctic ice sheet (WAIS) is experiencing accelerated declines due to global warming are unfounded, according to a new study in the Jan. 3 issue of Science. A team of scientists, led by John O. Stone with the Quaternary Research Center and Department of Earth and Space Sciences at the University of Washington, found that deglaciation of the WAIS began at least 10,000 years ago and that the rate of melting has remained constant until the present time.

http://www.globalwarming.org/article.php?uid=199

http://www.70south.com/news/1101267300/index_html

Antaritica doesn't have any trouble.

Latest research shows that the thinning of the Larsen B ice shelf was accelerated over the last few decades, at the same time as the average temperature in Antarctica rose 2.5 degrees celsius. Latest reports, PB's are outdated
 
Pbman,

At the risk of my own sanity, I am going to make at least one post engaging with your Singer-groupie, science denying cut-and-paste Republican views. Its just a question, referring (shock, horror) to the actual topic of this thread, rather than some random stuff about Antarctica:

Do you accept that Siberian permafrost is beginning to melt? If so, do you accept that that *will* release a massive amount of methane into the atmosphere? And if so - are you really maintaining that such a massive atmospheric change will have no impact on our climate?

If so, fine...but I'd just like an answer on the topic of this thread.

Matt
 
Donna Ferentes said:
Sigh....

1. Caesar was not a noted orator, though Cato [/i].

Don't read shit about him written by his enemys only. :rolleyes:

Like the distorted image above, the problem seen in all biographies of Caesar lies at the heart of his mystery; the man is described by various sources so differently that it sometimes appears he was the model for Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Reconciling the contradictory images - even in Cicero's letters, Caesar apparently has multiple personalities - has occupied historians for centuries. Additional complexity is added by the fact that the historians of the past have approached Caesar with their own agendas; whether the idolatry of Mommsen and the popular novelist Colleen McCullough, or the detestation of those who, like Tacitus onward, have looked at his every action with the conviction that he was the cold-blooded viper in the Republic's bosom. Yet the original Roman sources, the only ones which bear some slight reference to contemporary truth, do provide some images of the man himself which eke out the portrait painted by historians. It is difficult not to wonder, however, how much original source material on Caesar the man was quietly buried by Augustus, the heir.

This is also the man renowned not only for the elegance and clarity of his rhetorical speeches, but for his fine appreciation on the intellectual issues of rhetoric, literature and philosophy in his own day. Cicero is said to have written "Do you know any man who, even if he has concentrated on the art of oratory to the exclusion of all else, can speak better than Caesar" Or anyone who makes so many witty remarks? Or whose vocabulary is so varied and yet so exact?" Cicero had the highest praise for Caesar's war commentaries, stating that, in their clarity and "faultless grace" of style, they are incapable of being improved upon. From Cicero (ever jealous of his own rhetorical skills), this was remarkable commendation. Several of Caesar's well-regarded works on rhetoric and poetry are, sadly, lost: it would be fascinating to see what type of poem this warrior prince could produce.

ROFLMAO

http://heraklia.fws1.com/private_man/index.html
 
Matt S said:
Pbman,

At the risk of my own sanity, I am going to make at least one post engaging with your Singer-groupie, science denying cut-and-paste Republican views. Its just a question, referring (shock, horror) to the actual topic of this thread, rather than some random stuff about Antarctica:

Do you accept that Siberian permafrost is beginning to melt? If so, do you accept that that *will* release a massive amount of methane into the atmosphere? And if so - are you really maintaining that such a massive atmospheric change will have no impact on our climate?

If so, fine...but I'd just like an answer on the topic of this thread.

Matt

NIce bait and switch you guys have going.

Its way to early to tell whats happening, but 1/2 of a degree of warming that has in fact occured in the last hundred years isn't going to melt all the permafrost witch is what you seam to be implying.

But i for one am glad you guys are in fact noticiing that their are other greenhouse gases, its a start, maybe you will also learn the that the solar cycle and Volcanic eruptions also effect the earths temperature much more than co2.......

Anyways, all you have are prediction so global warming that depend on dodgy computer modeling, models that have been proven to be mathimaticly silly at best, and fraudulent as worst.
 
Poi E said:
Latest research shows that the thinning of the Larsen B ice shelf was accelerated over the last few decades, at the same time as the average temperature in Antarctica rose 2.5 degrees celsius. Latest reports, PB's are outdated

lol

Your still outdated.

Published Thursday 24th February 2005 12:47 GMT
The high-profile collapse of some Antarctica's ice shelves is likely the result of natural current fluctuations, not global warming, says a leading British expert on polar climates.

This surprising finding is supported by analysis of data from the European Space Agency's ERS-1 satellite, according to Duncan Wingham, Professor of Climate Physics at University College London. The data, measuring changes in ice thickness across the Antarctic ice sheet using the polar orbiting satellite, show areas of growth from snowfall are as common as areas of decline.

This is a contrasting picture to one based solely on the northern Antarctic Peninsula - a shark's fin of land jutting out from the body of the continent, and reaching to just 750 miles from Chile - where there has been a drastic increase in temperature, thinning of ice sheets and collapse of ice shelves. The Larsen A ice shelf, 1600 square kilometres in size, fell off in 1995. The Wilkins ice shelf, 1100 square kilometres, fell off in 1998 and the Larsen B, 13,500 square kilometres, dropped off in 2002. Meanwhile, the northern Antarctic Peninsula's temperatures have soared by six celsius in the last 50 years.

"A lot of attention and research has focused on this relatively accessible area of the Antarctic Peninsula, but satellites are giving us a picture of the continent as a whole," Wingham told the Register. This broader picture shows evidence of growth and decay from place to place, a picture more in line with natural variations in snowfall and ocean circulation. The Antarctic is to some extent insulated from global warming because to its north are zonal flows in the atmosphere and ocean, unimpeded by other landmasses. This insulates the continent from warmer events further north and leads one to suppose it is better protected from global warming.

And when ice sheaves over extend themselves, its expected that they break off and melt.

Thats the naturual process that has been going on for billions of years,its nice of you guys to ignore that fact, and the fact that other parts of anartica are at historic lows.
 
What about the Yellowtone National Park Volcano, the animals have started a mass exodus, (no sign of Yogi yet). Does Dubya know? Probably yes. As for the gas couldn't Naza bottle it and use it for the Mars shuttle service?
 
Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres

You know, in order to be coherent it is necessary to do more than to Google until you find something you like on the Internet, to cut-and-paste it and to then add LOL or ROFLMAO as if you had done something clever.

Let's go back and look at it again.

1. On the matter of Caesar's oratorical skills, you haven't actually shown us one single speech - remarkable, since no man of his time was more widely reported than he. You have a claim that Cicero said something flattering about his Emperor - but, alas, no actual quotes from Gaius Julis Caesar at all. Hence, you have no case.

2. On the matter of your Latin grammar. Unfortunately, you cannot get around the fact that your tagline is simply wrong. It's not even a debate like global warming, where the vast majority of opinion is against you. You're wrong, because you ignore the rules by which the language works. It's quite amusing to watch you do this, since it demonstrates that your sole interest is in never admitting you're wrong, but it is nevertheless lamentable.
 
Back
Top Bottom