Comments for Glaciers Melt At Fastest Rate in Past 5,000 Years »
Posted By Neophile 1 year, 8 months ago in Science & TechnologyWorld's glaciers are melting faster than at any time since records began, threatening catastrophe for millions.
Read Full Story at guardian.co.uk »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 136
-
Neutral
kboy1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Based on historical records and other evidence, the rate at which the glaciers are melting is also thought to be faster that at any time in the past 5,000 years" but the actual monitoring has been just the last 30 years. A lot of speculation! How about this: A thousand (give or take)years ago Vikings liven in Greenland and raised wheat and cattle. How's come this area is now covered with ice if everything is melting?
Reply-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned22 Replies
-
Neutral
airglide1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Try another. An Alaska pilot can no longer land near a glacier where he used to take tourists because the glacier has grown a half mile in the last two years.
With record snow fall this winter in the northern hemisphere, I presume an increase in other places. Nay sayers will belittle evidence rather than countering with CURRENT proof to the contrary.
Reply-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned9 Replies
-
Neutral
wtagg1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Using one glacier is wrong as evidence. Exit Glacier and Portage Glacier are demonstratively retreating. Does that mean we are experiencing global warming? No. Just as your example of a nameless pilot not being able to land on a nameless glacier (you really haven't done very well with presenting your evidence) does not provide evidence that global warming isn't occurring.
We need to examine all glaciers in context. That not only includes the percentage of advancing, stagnating, or retreating glaciers, it also needs to include the rate of advance or decay.
Reply-
Neutral
airglide1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Alright
http://www.iceagenow.com/List_of_Expanding_Glac...
http://freestudents.blogspot.com/2007/04/everyt...
Even one from several years ago
http://cei.org/gencon/019,03669.cfm
Reply-
Neutral
capn_caveman1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I think iceagenow needs to update their list of expanding glaciers. Some of the listed glaciers on that site are NOT expanding, but are actually retreating. But that doesn't matter for people who are willing to swallow the lie without questions.
Reply -
Neutral
wtagg1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I am not sure that a blog constitutes empirical evidence. You would do better to cite actual studies that use the entire world as base for gathering evidence.
The iceagenow site states that we are on the verge of an ice age because the road to the sun open late one year. Are you stating that this is evidence to believe global warming isn't occurring? That is worthless as evidence, just as opening road to the sun early one year would to proof that global warming does exist. If you can demonstrate that the majority of glaciers in Glacier National Park are advancing, you might have some (and a very small "some") evidence that global warming is not taking place. Unfortunately, I believe Glacier National Park is not going to be very fruitful to you as being the bearer of that evidence.
Yes, there will be glaciers that are advancing. Again, you need to show that the majority of the world's glaciers are advancing.
Reply-
Neutral
airglide1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What troubles you most? A failure in your "empirical" evidence or the possibility that it has a failure in its' foundation? When the facts change you are permitted to change your mind.
Those who don't learn from history are destined to make its' mistakes. Examples. There are more but here are two. Spotted owls needed old growth forest so we destroyed Oregon's economy to do it. It is an imported bird, and nests on transformers in town were not deterrents. Freon was destroying the ozone layer so we spent billions removing it. A number of years later the holes in the ozone were larger than ever, but it didn't matter. We had done something.
IF we replace hydrocarbons with hydrogen, we will cause global warming because water vapor is the most significant factor. We need to reduce pollution. We don't need to do something hastily because the facts aren't all in.
Reply-
Neutral
wtagg1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My comment is directed at your citation of a blog as a fact source. Because someone has an opinion, which is well within their right to have, it doesn't make it a fact. Cite the actual studies that you believe supports your opinion. An alleged pilot who allegedly stated that he can no longer allegedly land on an unknown glacier is not empirical evidence, which I believe you don't understand the definition of.
You complain of how evidence is gathered and rushing to judgment, both are benchmarks that you are having issues with reaching.
"We need to reduce pollution. We don't need to do something hastily because the facts aren't all in."
This part of your comment does seem worthy to repeat.
Reply -
Neutral
Wolfie20071 year, 8 months ago
-
Neutral
PapaWolf1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
DDT: http://www.3dchem.com/molecules.asp?ID=90
"DDT seemed to be the ideal insecticideit is cheap and of relatively low toxicity to mammals (oral LD50 is 300 to 500 mg/kg). However, problems related to extensive use of DDT began to appear in the late 1940s. Many species of insects developed resistance to DDT, and DDT was also discovered to have a high toxicity toward fish.
(continued)
Reply -
Neutral
PapaWolf1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"The chemical stability of DDT and its fat solubility compounded the problem. DDT is not metabolized very rapidly by animals; instead, it is deposited and stored in the fatty tissues. The biological half-life of DDT is about eight years; that is, it takes about eight years for an animal to metabolize half of the amount it assimilates. If ingestion continues at a steady rate, DDT builds up within the animal over time.
"The use of DDT was banned in the United States in 1973, although it is still in use in some other parts of the world. The buildup of DDT in natural waters is a reversible process: the EPA reported a 90% reduction of DDT in Lake Michigan fish by 1978 as a result of the ban.
1st: how can a US ban affect the rest of the world, especially since "it is still in use in some other parts of the world"?
2nd: relatively low toxicity, but it is stored in the body bringing ingested levels above toxic over time.
Reply -
Neutral
PapaWolf1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You may want to look at http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts35.html, too. The CDC says:
"High levels of DDT can affect the nervous system causing excitability, tremors and seizures.
So you'd rather have seizures than find another, less toxic way to control mosquitoes.
Reply
-
-
-
Neutral
capn_caveman1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here's what you need to know about the iceagenow site. I spent about 10 minutes researching some of the glaciers they have listed as advancing and iceagenow is full of crap. They list Helm glacier in Canada as a retreating glacier. In fact, Helm glacier may be a poster child for the state of retreating glaciers across the globe.
Please read:
http://cgip.wetpaint.com/page/Helm Glacier?t=anon
That is one of many fallacies on the site and just another reason why it should not be trusted as a resource.
Reply -
-
-
-
Neutral
Isoparm1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You are absolutely right. It's about NET loss, or net gain of TOTAL ice mass over time, that determines change in heat balance. This is not that hard to understand. If some people would just take a cherry-picking minute to think about it, they should see it.
Reply-
-
Neutral
amazed1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
just as it shouldn't be hard to understand that, in a planet the age of the earth (billions of years) that has had warm periods and ice ages throughout them, that 30 years is NOT over time. That's not even a blink of an eye.
Now, once again, do I think that we should pollute with impunity? Of course not. Do I think we should rush into catastrophic measures to achieve incremental measurements? Absolutely not.
We rushed into MTBE -- and within the first year, it was shown to be highly toxic and leaching into and contaminating ground water, added cost and reduced the efficiency of gasoline. It took almost 10 years before the gov't finally allowed the oil companies to stop using it.
Reply-
Neutral
amazed1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
cont'd
Now, we're onto ethanol. It takes about .9 gallons of fossil fuel to produce a gallon of ethanol. Ethanol has nowhere near the BTU's (energy) of gasoline, so you need more to go the same distance. It has already imcreased the cost of all foods and third world countries are starving because they no longer can afford to buy corn or grain (wheat having gone up ridiculously because farmers can make way more growing corn for fuel than wheat for food). In addition to these wonderful features of ethanol, ethanol tends to eat away synthetic parts of engines, increasing wear and tear and repair costs and decreasing the overall life of your engine. Yet, anyone who questions the wisdom is a knuckle-dragging, evolution-denying, all around terrible and ignorant person who wants to destroy the earth.
There are few who object to reasonable measures to clean up the planet, it is the unreasonable and unfeasible to which we object.
Reply-
Neutral
Ratskii1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I question your stats. I agree that it is stupid to use corn, soybeans or good land to make ethanol. I think it actually costs about 50% more energy than it produces. However if you make ethanol from switchgrass or canola grown on marginal land with little or no use of cultivation, then ethanol is produced with a substantial gain of energy.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
PapaWolf1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
>>With record snow fall this winter in the northern hemisphere, I presume an increase in other places
That's your problem. You are PRESUMING...
Here, in the DC area, where temps usually hover in the single- digit & low teen mark for weeks at a time, didn't even get down to single digits this year. And the "worse than average winter" turned into 1 snowstorm that was basically melted within 2 days, & 2 ice storms that were gone w/in a couple of days each.
I have to admit the wind has picked up. Windchills were horrendous, but the temps were beyond mild. We had 70's in January, 50's in February, & early March is too nice already.
So, from your statement, I can PRESUME that the rest of the US, if not the world, is going through a similar warm period.
Reply -
-
-
Neutral
injest1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Neo, please explain HOW planes that landed on TOP of the ice in July 15, 1942, would be found 46 years later UNDER 260 feet of ice?
World War II Planes Found in Greenland In Ice 260 Feet Deep
AP
Published: August 4, 1988
LEAD: Six American fighter planes and two bombers that crash-landed in Greenland in World War II have been found 46 years later buried under 260 feet of ice, searchers said today.
Six American fighter planes and two bombers that crash-landed in Greenland in World War II have been found 46 years later buried under 260 feet of ice, searchers said today
A group from Atlanta said it found what became known as the ''lost squadron'' last month and plans to tunnel into the ice and side the eight air-planes to the surface.
Reply-
lovermanComment removed: Retracted by user
-
Neutral
wtagg1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It is easily explained if you have any knowledge of the process of glacierization. Snow falls, it compacts into ice, etc.... Global warming would not change whether the planes were found under the ice.
Some information not present that would provide some insight would be the normal ice thickness build-up over the same period of time over different periods of the glacier's history. If the typical build-up over 46 years, taken at 5 to 10 different random periods in history was less, then you could claim that the glacier does not support global warming (which is still not evidence globally). If it was more, then you could say the opposite (which again is still not evidence globally).
The real question is one of whether we are leaving the world better than when we entered it. My wife and I have no children, so quite frankly, we have nothing to directly consider. Are you happy with what you are leaving to your heirs? If you are wrong about this, that's a shame for them.
Reply
-
-
-
Neutral
simonsez1 year, 8 months ago
-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned13 Replies
-
-
Neutral
THOMNH621 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hey Libs, well put. So plain and true why is it people can't see the damn forest through the trees. Hillary is a socialist and Obama is well we are not really sure yet, he is certainly anti American or anti capitalism. They all talk about getting rid of the special interest groups but who is funding their campaigns. I give up, all I want to do is mind my own business and enjoy life but with Obama and Hillary on the way you can bet your tax rate will be well over 50%, how do you enjoy life then.
Reply-
Neutral
quackpot1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
How can you possibly "enjoy life" knowing that your "enjoyment" is at the expense of your future generations?
Do you really think that the Bush program of MASSIVE debt, TRASHING of the dollar, and OUT-OF-CONTROL spending is rational?
Reply
-
-
-
-
HMMaceComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned
-
Neutral
wtagg1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The real irony is that conservatism starts with the word conserve. Many of the supporters of our current administration are in no way conservative, just as our current administration is not conservative.
I think to label them as neo-cons is wrong. Non-cons would be better.
Reply -
-
-
-
-
Neutral
cloud151 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Can everyone PLEASE stop talking about expanding and retreating Glaciers? Some are retreating some are expanding, everyone knows that! Does it prove anything? It proves that climates are changing. Does that mean there is man made global warming? NO! Does that mean that the climate changes are not man made? Absolutely not.
To sum it up, talk about glaciers doesn't solve the argument of man made climate change the slightest bit.
Reply -
-
-
Neutral
cleare1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
yeah, i'm smoothing my tail feathers right now. but you go ahead and follow the "nuke 'em all and let god sort it out" approach. it relieves you of any responsibility or the need to take any action.
by the way, you're only one of several generations of alarmists over the past 3000 years to believe that armageddon is at hand.
Reply-
Neutral
foksipayne1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
First,I never said that I WANTED it to be that way. I would much rather prefer that people just leave each other alone, and life a fulfilling life. I just see so many idiots in powerful positions, which leads me to believe that they might trip over all the threats lying around and fall onto the red button.
Reply -
-
-
-
-
Neutral
ETproductions1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It sure looks from here like George W. Bush will rise to the level of absolute worst President in the history of the USA.
One of his earliest acts was scuttling the Kyoto Protocol, thereby ensuring 8 years of virtually worldwide stay the course toward disaster.
And with the US economy going into absolute meltdown, we're stuck in GWB's pointless war in Iraq. It's made us less safe, given Bin Laden time to regroup, and eaten up a half trillion dollars in direct cost plus 3 trillion in long-term commitments (veterans care, equipment wear and tear, etc.)
Reply-
Neutral
BB641 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Skippy, you quote the Kyoto Protocol, have you ever read it? The only nation truly affected by it is the United States. It give total passes to nations like China and India. In a global economy, that doesn't seem fair or just. Especially to the American workers. Take Wisconsin for an example. 40 years ago, we had foundries, breweries, tanneries, yeast companies, coal heated homes and the like, all producing the "evil" greenhouse gases. The plants are gone, we have one brewery that's leaving and we heat with natural gas but you want me to cut down further? What should I do, start shooting people? Not everyone can be a barista for Starbucks.
Reply -
Neutral
BB641 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
As to your warming, we've had the 4th coldest winter with the 3rd most snow in recored history. That can't be possible with your current "Al Gore" bible. We should be all dying of heat. Yea right. Could you send me more salt for the walks, the global warming caused ice on the drive and I broke my shoulder. Warming in deed.
As to the economy, I'm not sure what's causing the down turn. $ 3.50 a gallon for gas is a start. Using food for fuel is a huge cost. Forcing industries to move because of "new and improved" air quality standards hurts us. Terrible lending practices are hurting us. 15,000,000 illegal workers and their families leaching health, education and housing benefits rightfully for Americans only, hurts us. That represents almost 20% of our annual budget. As to the war, it represents less than 3% of our annual budget.
As to safe, we haven't been attacked have we?
Reply-
Neutral
SusieQ721 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
On the same hand I can say that where I live we are almost at record highs with almost 90 degree temps already and it's only March. The whole theory of global warming is based on weather patterns over a handful of years not just whats happening this winter in one small area of the world. So to say that just because where you live is having huge amounts of snowfall means that global warming is false is asinine.
Reply -
-
-
-
Neutral
BB641 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Skippy, the change in fight that started a little over a year ago certainly is working. Rather than the name calling I usually do to guys like you who will pitch, "I support the troops, but not the mission." Here's an idea. Spend some time at an Army, Marine or other military hospital with the guys who came home. Truly learn what it means to fight for freedom. I served, saw wounded. Worked here and there in my career but never really spent time with them until 9-11 and then Iraq. It will give you a better understanding of who and what we're fighting. It might even answer why. But then again, it's never the Bush basher or liberal who listens to the other side. It's easier to read off the bumper sticker DNC slogans and preach your form of intolerant tolerance.
Reply-
Neutral
PapaWolf1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
>>But then again, it's never the Bush basher or liberal who listens to the other side.
Try listening to Iraq & Afghan Vets against this war. They recently held a "Winter Soldier" meeting in MD - http://ivaw.org/wintersoldier
Reply -
-
-
-
-
Neutral
BB641 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well, Zippy, I was back in November. I work in the power generation world. I build large plants that support plants, and cities. I often go where I send my people. It's good for moral and for the simple fact if it's too dangerous for me, how can I send them. That's one of the reasons I have great staff retention.
In addition to my travels, I have a vested interest. My fiancee is a US Naval officer. She travels on a regular basis between Iraq and Qatar as a part of Fallon's staff, although I'm not sure whats going on now. Haven't heard from her in a few days, she's in country again.
So I guess you'd be wrong in several ways when you say Iraq and our losses are meaningless to me.
As to my comments, I was talking domestically. Perhaps if you didn't spend so much time on line in mommy's basement you'd have a better grasp of the English language.
Reply -
-
-
Neutral
ETproductions1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
BB64, Read up on it. When you add heat to the weather system, you stir the pot. The first result is a spike in extremes of heat and cold, wind rain and drought. We are seeing just that.
Doing something about global warming is NOT a cost-only equation. Look at our current transportation system. If you step back to the 1800s and calculate only the COST of building a transcontinental rail system, Interstate highway system, air transportation and all the airports, planes and trains, cars and trucks required by that, the cost would be utterly staggering.
But doing those things, while it did cost trillions of dollars, generated FAR more wealth than it cost. The same will be true of developing green technology. Because everybody will need it, it will be an industry of huge proportions. And it's an industry where the USA is positioned to compete with on-shore jobs.
Reply
-
-
-
Neutral
Centinel1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Has anyone considered that cosmic events are the culprit. We are approaching a significant cosmic event that may well cause an extinction level event in 2012. The earth and sun will align directly with the center of the galaxy's black hole. The gravitational forces may well have catastrophic affects on the planet. The poles may well shift drastically. We puny humans will be able to do absolutely nothing to avert such a disastrous event. Considering the "time" in cosmic terms; 4 years is an instant. Could it be that we are experiencing some initial affects of that alignment?
Megalomaniacs like Gore and Blair and others are crazy to believe humans could have effected cosmic events.
Get Real!
Reply-
Neutral
HannibalBarca1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There is no such thing as black holes!!!well maybe but you have to understand what playing old LP's on a turntable with headphones on while on acid, a black hole is that space between songs, when your acid soaked brain is sucked into void of some kind only to be saved when the next song come on.....
It was a bummer when the album ended and someone didn't change it,...oh the klunk...klunk...klunk drove one insane
Reply-
Neutral
Centinel1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
OK how about "gravity wells". Our Galaxy rotates about a center. What causes that rotation? Imagination? It is a gravity well. We orbit our sun for the same reason.
Go back to high school and pay attention this time in science class.
Astronomers have evidence to support the existence of "black holes". Einstein theorized them, Stephen Hawken has mathematically proven their existence, and astronomers have detected evidence.
"There is no such thing as black holes!!!" So your expertise is in what? Physics or astronomy?
I am a mechanical engineer who understands physics and many other scientific venues.
Reply-
Neutral
djrevelky1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Don't you know any science the majority of libs here do not agree with are just simply not real?
To them, the Earth never experienced global warming and global cooling patterns before greenhouse gases...all that effect us is greenhouse gases. It has nothing to do with cosmic events, the distance to the sun, the earth's tilt, or anything like that...nope, just strictly those eveeel capitalist factories.
Reply-
Neutral
Ratskii1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hate to say it dj, but just because one person you disagree with makes a mistaken comment doesn't mean most of us on the left don't pay attention to science. Fallacy of generalization. Yes, black holes almost certainly exist and there is almost certainly one at the center of our galaxy. The current tilt of the earth should be causing us to cool. Instead we are warming. Please pay attention to facts and not what you think the facts should be.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
saintetienne1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"It was a bummer when the album ended and someone didn't change it,...oh the klunk...klunk...klunk drove one insane"
So THAT'S what happened to you, Hannibullcrap. I should have known all along that you were a fried-out, lunkheaded, wastrel of a hippie freak. Blowing your brains with acid and yammering on and on about how evil big business is, and why can't the government do anything to help you?
Now that your life is essentially over, let me ask you this: Are you currently living in a government-subsidized trailer, or are you in some government-subsidized nursing home, having flashbacks about how great your life was forty years ago? The reason I ask is so that I know which specific form of government subsidies I can vote to eliminate.
On second thought, I'll just vote to eliminate them all.
Thanks anyways, Barcreep. Enjoy what little is left of your pathetic life!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Reply-
Neutral
HannibalBarca1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
To all have a great day, and since this is the second St. Patrick's Day this week-end I will continue to swill my Guinness, and tomorrow when I am on the throne with the runs I will think of the NUMPTY and wonder why he smells so bad.....what a dense loser he is NUMPTY
Reply -
-
-
Neutral
djn3nunez31 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"playing old LP's on a turntable with headphones on while on acid, a black hole is that space between songs, when your acid soaked brain is sucked into void of some kind only to be saved when the next song come on..... "
Hence the need for automated record changers.
Reply
-
-
-
-
Neutral
Bradwhite1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Top psychiatrist concludes liberals clinically nuts
Eminent psychiatrist makes case ideology is mental disorder
WASHINGTON â;; Just when liberals thought it was safe to start identifying themselves as such, an acclaimed, veteran psychiatrist is making the case that the ideology motivating them is actually a mental disorder.
"Based on strikingly irrational beliefs and emotions, modern liberals relentlessly undermine the most important principles on which our freedoms were founded," says Dr. Lyle Rossiter, author of the new book, "The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness." "Like spoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilities of adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs from cradle to grave."
Reply-
-
-
Neutral
saintetienne1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Like spoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilities of adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs from cradle to grave."
Hey! I've been posting this for months! Nice to know there's a book written about it. And if you factor in the Baby Boom generation (appropriately named), and all those millions of parents religiously adhering to "Dr. Spock's Baby and Child Care" in the '60's, raising their brats to whine and complain until you get what you want from the government, you come up with one nasty, bad-ass generation of petulant, malcontent adults.
Thank GOD this generation is on its way to retirement and then out the door.
And here's a thought: If they're so concerned about global warming, why doesn't this asinine generation just stop whining and shut their mouths? The temperature of the atmosphere would drop by 8 or 10 degrees right there from the stoppage of all that hot air.
Reply-
Neutral
HannibalBarca1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The temperature of the atmosphere would drop by 8 or 10 degrees right there from the stoppage of all that hot air.
This coming from you NUMPTY??????LMFAO,
If you had half a brain you would bet a quarter of a nit; which is half a nit-wit.....Always the dense one you are NUMPTY ROTF
Reply
-
-
-
-
Neutral
deaconblue761 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
And yet this winter has the highest amount of ice and snow on the Northern hemisphere since records have been kept: http://www.nationalpost.com/most_popular/story....
In fact, this winter has averaged as codler than the average for all of the 20th century. New Ice age? Probably not, but maybe there sin't as much warming as the Chicken Littles of the world would like to squawk about.
Reply-
Neutral
djrevelky1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually, global warming melts the glaciers thus releasing cold water into the world's oceans. As a result, the climate cools.
So...if global warming is happening (it isn't) the earth naturally regulates itself overtime. Isn't that neat?
Reply
-
-
Neutral
saintetienne1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
From the book, "The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness":
"Modern liberalism's irrationality can only be understood as the product of psychopathology. So extravagant are the patterns of thinking, emoting, behaving and relating that characterize the liberal mind that its relentless protests and demands become understandable only as disorders of the psyche." The Liberal Mind reveals the madness of the modern liberal for what it is: a massive transference neurosis acted out in the world's political arenas, with devastating effects on the institutions of liberty."
This is all true, but we can't let Liberals know. They'll demand to be treated for this psychiatric condition, then demand that the government (i.e. us taxpayers) pay for it.
Reply-
-
Neutral
Ratskii1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Now the author couldn't possibly be attempting to cash in on what is obviously a lucrative line of though that will appeal to you and people like you based on your prejudices. No, if he is stating something you already believe, he must be representing the truth. It couldn't possibly be that he's trying to make a buck off of you fools, could it?
You right wingers are so laughable.
Reply -
-
-
-
-
loading ...
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.