Religions > Atheism > Environmentalists Want Everyone To Become Eunuchs For The Green Kingdom
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Sound of Trumpet" |
| Date: |
03 Sep 2007 08:33:52 PM |
| Object: |
Environmentalists Want Everyone To Become Eunuchs For The Green Kingdom |
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1887441/posts
Environemental Organizations Generate Green Guilt to Push More
Population Control
LifeSiteNews ^ | 8/27/07 | Colin Mason
Posted on 08/27/2007 4:50:56 PM PDT by wagglebee
Front Royal, Virginia, August 27, 2007 (pop.org) - If asked what
function the San Francisco-based Sierra Club performs, most of its 1.3
million members would probably reply "protecting the environment," or
"raising awareness of endangered species," or words to that effect.
Yet, in their 2007 legislative report for Minnesota, the Sierra Club
spent nearly 3 pages describing legislative initiatives that have
virtually nothing to do with the environment. Rather, this section
deals almost exclusively with population issues or, to put it more
accurately, with population control issues.
"Over 250,000 women need publicly supported contraceptive services in
Minnesota," the section's first sentence urges. It goes on to
complain that "the President's budget slashes funding for
international family planning by $111 million, nearly one fourth of
the FY 2007 funding level," and criticizes Bush's support for
abstinence education.
This disturbing attack on life and family is only one example of a
larger trend. Over the past few decades, environmentalist
organizations have adopted radically anti-natal stances, often with a
dedication and ferocity that rivals Planned Parenthood. Here are only
a few examples of organizations whose definition of environmental
responsibility necessarily includes population control.
The National Audubon Society recently released a 16-page document
entitled "Population and Habitat: Making the Connection," in which it
baldly promotes the outdated and disproven "population bomb"
mentality. This document exhorts the United States to spend more
money on international population control, insisting that "while the
U.S. remains the richest nation on earth, we spend very, very little
to help stem the tide of human population growth." It makes no mention
of the fact that the tide is cresting and will relatively soon be
receding.
Paul Watson, president of the Sea Shepherd organization (and former
Sierra Club board member), posts regular diatribes against population
on his web site. In a May 4th editorial, he insists that human beings
act "in the same manner as an invasive virus" on the earth. "I was
once severely criticized for describing human beings as being the
'AIDS of the Earth,'" he went on. "I make no apologies for that
statement."
Even local groups, set up to deal with parochial concerns, have jumped
on the bandwagon. The Clean Water Action Council of Northeastern
Wisconsin claims on its web site that "Human population growth is the
number one threat to the world's environment" (emphasis in original).
It goes on to describe how "we need to limit our growth voluntarily,
and promote contraceptive use, before Nature controls our population
for us with famines, drought and plagues. Our children's future
depends on us." The Council's anachronistic statement completely
ignores the reality of rising food production, and increasing per
capita food consumption, worldwide.
Conservation International states that "addressing the issue of human
population growth in and around the national parks and biosphere
reserves . . . is essential for CI's ultimate success in protecting
global biodiversity . . . the Population Environment program seeks to
reduce human impact and pressure on the limited natural resources in
rural, biologically rich important areas."
Think about that statement. Not content with the vast tracts of land
that have been set aside in national parks and biosphere reserves,
this group now wants to prevent people from building homes near these
areas. How long before they begin promoting the idea that everyone
should move to Texas?
This list could go on and on.
Why do environmentalists consistently promote population control? In
part this is yet another holdover from the radical sixties. Paul
Ehrlich's risible "population bomb" thesis lives on in the minds of
these aging activists, whose remain in thrall to doomsday scenarios of
total environmental collapse caused by burgeoning human numbers. They
remain oblivious to the countless demographic studies that have proven
such fears baseless.
Another reason for their promotion of population control, I believe,
is guilt. Americans have been made to feel an enormous amount of
guilt about the environment. To be sure, our consumption of natural
resources is in some ways irresponsible, and a certain amount of self-
control in consumption is probably in order. But the excessive "green
guilt" suffered by many Americans goes well beyond the rational.
It is a guilt gleefully fueled by environmental groups, which have
found that inventing ever-worsening crises and stoking green guilt, is
good for business. (Read Michael Crichton's new novel, State of Fear,
for a good--if fictional--description of how this fundraising scam
works in practice.)
This is no secret. Green guilt is openly acknowledged by these
organizations, celebrated as a legitimate way to pressure people into
following their agendas. A pair of environmentalist professors, Paul
R. Kleindorfer, and Ulku Oktem, said as much in a series of lectures
quoted in an online article entitled "Guilt is Good: A New Approach to
Environmental Problems". The two professors go on lecture tours
extolling the power of guilt in pushing the environmentalist agenda.
But what do those who have been made to feel guilty about the space
that they take up on the planet do? They not only restrict their own
fertility, they busily set about restricting the fertility--and the
freedoms--of others as well. As Joseph D'Agostino so aptly put it in
his Weekly Briefing of February 2nd, they want everyone to become
"eunuchs for the green kingdom."
With global warming fears now in full bloom, these environmentalist
organizations have been given a new lease on life. Their anti-natal
policies are gaining support among a guilt-ridden public. The
result? A new generation of doom-politicians are seeking to expand
these failed programs and policies.
Who will educate the wealthy, New York-based environmental groups, who
raise money by preying on the fears of the gullible? Who will educate
Al Gore and Bono, whose audiences cheer their every outdated
utterance? These are the people who are behind the times-touting
dated research, dated theories, and obsolete philosophies about
overpopulation in a world where many countries are facing
depopulation.
Environmentalists, save yourselves. The rest of us are doing just
fine.
Colin Mason is the Director for Media Production at the Population
Research Institute - http://www.pop.org/
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmentalists Want Everyone To Become Eunuchs For The Green Kingdom |
03 Sep 2007 09:30:33 PM |
|
|
On Sep 3, 9:33 pm, Sound of Trumpet <soundoftrum...@mailcan.com>
wrote:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1887441/posts
Environemental Organizations Generate Green Guilt to Push More
Population Control
LifeSiteNews ^ | 8/27/07 | Colin Mason
Posted on 08/27/2007 4:50:56 PM PDT by wagglebee
Front Royal, Virginia, August 27, 2007 (pop.org) - If asked what
function the San Francisco-based Sierra Club performs, most of its 1.3
million members would probably reply "protecting the environment," or
"raising awareness of endangered species," or words to that effect.
Yet, in their 2007 legislative report for Minnesota, the Sierra Club
spent nearly 3 pages describing legislative initiatives that have
virtually nothing to do with the environment. Rather, this section
deals almost exclusively with population issues or, to put it more
accurately, with population control issues.
"Over 250,000 women need publicly supported contraceptive services in
Minnesota," the section's first sentence urges. It goes on to
complain that "the President's budget slashes funding for
international family planning by $111 million, nearly one fourth of
the FY 2007 funding level," and criticizes Bush's support for
abstinence education.
This disturbing attack on life and family is only one example of a
larger trend. Over the past few decades, environmentalist
organizations have adopted radically anti-natal stances, often with a
dedication and ferocity that rivals Planned Parenthood. Here are only
a few examples of organizations whose definition of environmental
responsibility necessarily includes population control.
The National Audubon Society recently released a 16-page document
entitled "Population and Habitat: Making the Connection," in which it
baldly promotes the outdated and disproven "population bomb"
mentality. This document exhorts the United States to spend more
money on international population control, insisting that "while the
U.S. remains the richest nation on earth, we spend very, very little
to help stem the tide of human population growth." It makes no mention
of the fact that the tide is cresting and will relatively soon be
receding.
Paul Watson, president of the Sea Shepherd organization (and former
Sierra Club board member), posts regular diatribes against population
on his web site. In a May 4th editorial, he insists that human beings
act "in the same manner as an invasive virus" on the earth. "I was
once severely criticized for describing human beings as being the
'AIDS of the Earth,'" he went on. "I make no apologies for that
statement."
Even local groups, set up to deal with parochial concerns, have jumped
on the bandwagon. The Clean Water Action Council of Northeastern
Wisconsin claims on its web site that "Human population growth is the
number one threat to the world's environment" (emphasis in original).
It goes on to describe how "we need to limit our growth voluntarily,
and promote contraceptive use, before Nature controls our population
for us with famines, drought and plagues. Our children's future
depends on us." The Council's anachronistic statement completely
ignores the reality of rising food production, and increasing per
capita food consumption, worldwide.
Conservation International states that "addressing the issue of human
population growth in and around the national parks and biosphere
reserves . . . is essential for CI's ultimate success in protecting
global biodiversity . . . the Population Environment program seeks to
reduce human impact and pressure on the limited natural resources in
rural, biologically rich important areas."
Think about that statement. Not content with the vast tracts of land
that have been set aside in national parks and biosphere reserves,
this group now wants to prevent people from building homes near these
areas. How long before they begin promoting the idea that everyone
should move to Texas?
This list could go on and on.
Why do environmentalists consistently promote population control? In
part this is yet another holdover from the radical sixties. Paul
Ehrlich's risible "population bomb" thesis lives on in the minds of
these aging activists, whose remain in thrall to doomsday scenarios of
total environmental collapse caused by burgeoning human numbers. They
remain oblivious to the countless demographic studies that have proven
such fears baseless.
Another reason for their promotion of population control, I believe,
is guilt. Americans have been made to feel an enormous amount of
guilt about the environment. To be sure, our consumption of natural
resources is in some ways irresponsible, and a certain amount of self-
control in consumption is probably in order. But the excessive "green
guilt" suffered by many Americans goes well beyond the rational.
It is a guilt gleefully fueled by environmental groups, which have
found that inventing ever-worsening crises and stoking green guilt, is
good for business. (Read Michael Crichton's new novel, State of Fear,
for a good--if fictional--description of how this fundraising scam
works in practice.)
This is no secret. Green guilt is openly acknowledged by these
organizations, celebrated as a legitimate way to pressure people into
following their agendas. A pair of environmentalist professors, Paul
R. Kleindorfer, and Ulku Oktem, said as much in a series of lectures
quoted in an online article entitled "Guilt is Good: A New Approach to
Environmental Problems". The two professors go on lecture tours
extolling the power of guilt in pushing the environmentalist agenda.
But what do those who have been made to feel guilty about the space
that they take up on the planet do? They not only restrict their own
fertility, they busily set about restricting the fertility--and the
freedoms--of others as well. As Joseph D'Agostino so aptly put it in
his Weekly Briefing of February 2nd, they want everyone to become
"eunuchs for the green kingdom."
With global warming fears now in full bloom, these environmentalist
organizations have been given a new lease on life. Their anti-natal
policies are gaining support among a guilt-ridden public. The
result? A new generation of doom-politicians are seeking to expand
these failed programs and policies.
Who will educate the wealthy, New York-based environmental groups, who
raise money by preying on the fears of the gullible? Who will educate
Al Gore and Bono, whose audiences cheer their every outdated
utterance? These are the people who are behind the times-touting
dated research, dated theories, and obsolete philosophies about
overpopulation in a world where many countries are facing
depopulation.
Environmentalists, save yourselves. The rest of us are doing just
fine.
Colin Mason is the Director for Media Production at the Population
Research Institute -http://www.pop.org/
Actually, one upper-middle class American family pollutes more than a
small village of people in Africa.
American Family:
1 or 2 cars (one likely an SUV)
Large house sucking up oil or gas to heat and cool.
Purchasing of tons of ***** to furnish the house (clothes, furniture,
paint, magazines, newspapers, large screen tv's, toys, knick knacks,
etc).
Vacation travel, likely air travel.
AFRICAN VILLAGE:
None of the above.
.
|
|
|
| User: "BTR1701" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmentalists Want Everyone To Become Eunuchs For The Green Kingdom |
04 Sep 2007 01:26:13 PM |
|
|
In article <1188873033.427713.141800@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
"aol@aol.com" <geneccc@gmail.com> wrote:
Actually, one upper-middle class American family pollutes more than a
small village of people in Africa.
American Family:
1 or 2 cars (one likely an SUV)
Large house sucking up oil or gas to heat and cool.
Purchasing of tons of ***** to furnish the house (clothes, furniture,
paint, magazines, newspapers, large screen tv's, toys, knick knacks,
etc).
Vacation travel, likely air travel.
AFRICAN VILLAGE:
None of the above.
Yes, we should all live no better than average African villager. Great
point.
.
|
|
|
| User: "kT" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmentalists Want Everyone To Become Eunuchs For The GreenKingdom |
04 Sep 2007 03:47:58 PM |
|
|
BTR1701 wrote:
In article <1188873033.427713.141800@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
"aol@aol.com" <geneccc@gmail.com> wrote:
Actually, one upper-middle class American family pollutes more than a
small village of people in Africa.
American Family:
1 or 2 cars (one likely an SUV)
Large house sucking up oil or gas to heat and cool.
Purchasing of tons of ***** to furnish the house (clothes, furniture,
paint, magazines, newspapers, large screen tv's, toys, knick knacks,
etc).
Vacation travel, likely air travel.
AFRICAN VILLAGE:
None of the above.
Yes, we should all live no better than average African villager.
When the great American crash comes, that is where you will be, with no
discernible skills or support system.
--
Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator :
http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "BTR1701" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmentalists Want Everyone To Become Eunuchs For The Green Kingdom |
04 Sep 2007 05:02:14 PM |
|
|
In article <9wjDi.50$SC2.47@newsfe03.lga>, kT <cosmic@lifeform.org>
wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
In article <1188873033.427713.141800@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
"aol@aol.com" <geneccc@gmail.com> wrote:
Actually, one upper-middle class American family pollutes more than a
small village of people in Africa.
American Family:
1 or 2 cars (one likely an SUV)
Large house sucking up oil or gas to heat and cool.
Purchasing of tons of ***** to furnish the house (clothes, furniture,
paint, magazines, newspapers, large screen tv's, toys, knick knacks,
etc).
Vacation travel, likely air travel.
AFRICAN VILLAGE:
None of the above.
Yes, we should all live no better than average African villager.
When the great American crash comes, that is where you
will be, with no discernible skills or support system.
Yeah, sure. I'm losing sleep over that.
.
|
|
|
| User: "kT" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmentalists Want Everyone To Become Eunuchs For The GreenKingdom |
04 Sep 2007 05:12:47 PM |
|
|
BTR1701 wrote:
In article <9wjDi.50$SC2.47@newsfe03.lga>, kT <cosmic@lifeform.org>
wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
In article <1188873033.427713.141800@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
"aol@aol.com" <geneccc@gmail.com> wrote:
Actually, one upper-middle class American family pollutes more than a
small village of people in Africa.
American Family:
1 or 2 cars (one likely an SUV)
Large house sucking up oil or gas to heat and cool.
Purchasing of tons of ***** to furnish the house (clothes, furniture,
paint, magazines, newspapers, large screen tv's, toys, knick knacks,
etc).
Vacation travel, likely air travel.
AFRICAN VILLAGE:
None of the above.
Yes, we should all live no better than average African villager.
When the great American crash comes, that is where you
will be, with no discernible skills or support system.
Yeah, sure. I'm losing sleep over that.
As well you should :
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
http://www.amazon.com/Financial-Report-United-States-Official/dp/1595550801
--
Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator :
http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "BTR1701" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmentalists Want Everyone To Become Eunuchs For The Green Kingdom |
04 Sep 2007 06:07:38 PM |
|
|
In article <FLkDi.67$SC2.64@newsfe03.lga>, kT <cosmic@lifeform.org>
wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
In article <9wjDi.50$SC2.47@newsfe03.lga>, kT <cosmic@lifeform.org>
wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
In article <1188873033.427713.141800@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
"aol@aol.com" <geneccc@gmail.com> wrote:
Actually, one upper-middle class American family pollutes more than a
small village of people in Africa.
American Family:
1 or 2 cars (one likely an SUV)
Large house sucking up oil or gas to heat and cool.
Purchasing of tons of ***** to furnish the house (clothes, furniture,
paint, magazines, newspapers, large screen tv's, toys, knick knacks,
etc).
Vacation travel, likely air travel.
AFRICAN VILLAGE:
None of the above.
Yes, we should all live no better than average African villager.
When the great American crash comes, that is where you
will be, with no discernible skills or support system.
Yeah, sure. I'm losing sleep over that.
As well you should :
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
http://www.amazon.com/Financial-Report-United-States-Official/dp/1595550801
Doesn't bother me. Not like I can't live elsewhere. I've done it before,
I can do it again.
.
|
|
|
| User: "kT" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmentalists Want Everyone To Become Eunuchs For The GreenKingdom |
04 Sep 2007 07:20:20 PM |
|
|
BTR1701 wrote:
In article <FLkDi.67$SC2.64@newsfe03.lga>, kT <cosmic@lifeform.org>
wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
In article <9wjDi.50$SC2.47@newsfe03.lga>, kT <cosmic@lifeform.org>
wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
In article <1188873033.427713.141800@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
"aol@aol.com" <geneccc@gmail.com> wrote:
Actually, one upper-middle class American family pollutes more than a
small village of people in Africa.
American Family:
1 or 2 cars (one likely an SUV)
Large house sucking up oil or gas to heat and cool.
Purchasing of tons of ***** to furnish the house (clothes, furniture,
paint, magazines, newspapers, large screen tv's, toys, knick knacks,
etc).
Vacation travel, likely air travel.
AFRICAN VILLAGE:
None of the above.
Yes, we should all live no better than average African villager.
When the great American crash comes, that is where you
will be, with no discernible skills or support system.
Yeah, sure. I'm losing sleep over that.
As well you should :
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
http://www.amazon.com/Financial-Report-United-States-Official/dp/1595550801
Doesn't bother me. Not like I can't live elsewhere. I've done it before,
I can do it again.
Sure, get yourself another planet. You'll need it, and soon.
--
Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator :
http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "BTR1701" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmentalists Want Everyone To Become Eunuchs For The Green Kingdom |
04 Sep 2007 08:42:06 PM |
|
|
In article <eDmDi.76$SC2.74@newsfe03.lga>, kT <cosmic@lifeform.org>
wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
In article <FLkDi.67$SC2.64@newsfe03.lga>, kT <cosmic@lifeform.org>
wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
In article <9wjDi.50$SC2.47@newsfe03.lga>, kT <cosmic@lifeform.org>
wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
In article <1188873033.427713.141800@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
"aol@aol.com" <geneccc@gmail.com> wrote:
Actually, one upper-middle class American family pollutes more than a
small village of people in Africa.
American Family:
1 or 2 cars (one likely an SUV)
Large house sucking up oil or gas to heat and cool.
Purchasing of tons of ***** to furnish the house (clothes, furniture,
paint, magazines, newspapers, large screen tv's, toys, knick knacks,
etc).
Vacation travel, likely air travel.
AFRICAN VILLAGE:
None of the above.
Yes, we should all live no better than average African villager.
When the great American crash comes, that is where you
will be, with no discernible skills or support system.
Yeah, sure. I'm losing sleep over that.
As well you should :
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
http://www.amazon.com/Financial-Report-United-States-Official/dp/1595550801
Doesn't bother me. Not like I can't live elsewhere. I've done it before,
I can do it again.
Sure, get yourself another planet. You'll need it, and soon.
You can't seem to keep on track here. First you claim I need to worry
about the collapse of the American government due to its high debt, then
it's "get another planet, you'll need one".
I had no idea that the physical fate of the earth was so closely tied to
the ephemeral and non-physical human concept of financial debt in a
nation that didn't even exist 300 years ago. What did the earth do to
regulate its temperature before America started running a debt?
You must be one of those fruitloops who can take absolutely any problem
and somehow lay it at the feet of global warming. The most recent and
most amusing example of this are the prostitutes in Holland, who claim
the downturn in their business this year is being caused by global
warming. I've even seen some idiots claiming the Christmas tsunami was
caused by global warming.
.
|
|
|
| User: "brique" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmentalists Want Everyone To Become Eunuchs For The Green Kingdom |
05 Sep 2007 10:47:32 AM |
|
|
BTR1701 <btr1702@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:btr1702-B9B84A.21420604092007@news.giganews.com...
In article <eDmDi.76$SC2.74@newsfe03.lga>, kT <cosmic@lifeform.org>
wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
In article <FLkDi.67$SC2.64@newsfe03.lga>, kT <cosmic@lifeform.org>
wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
In article <9wjDi.50$SC2.47@newsfe03.lga>, kT <cosmic@lifeform.org>
wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
In article
<1188873033.427713.141800@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
"aol@aol.com" <geneccc@gmail.com> wrote:
Actually, one upper-middle class American family pollutes more
than a
small village of people in Africa.
American Family:
1 or 2 cars (one likely an SUV)
Large house sucking up oil or gas to heat and cool.
Purchasing of tons of ***** to furnish the house (clothes,
furniture,
paint, magazines, newspapers, large screen tv's, toys, knick
knacks,
etc).
Vacation travel, likely air travel.
AFRICAN VILLAGE:
None of the above.
Yes, we should all live no better than average African villager.
When the great American crash comes, that is where you
will be, with no discernible skills or support system.
Yeah, sure. I'm losing sleep over that.
As well you should :
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
http://www.amazon.com/Financial-Report-United-States-Official/dp/1595550801
Doesn't bother me. Not like I can't live elsewhere. I've done it
before,
I can do it again.
Sure, get yourself another planet. You'll need it, and soon.
You can't seem to keep on track here. First you claim I need to worry
about the collapse of the American government due to its high debt, then
it's "get another planet, you'll need one".
I had no idea that the physical fate of the earth was so closely tied to
the ephemeral and non-physical human concept of financial debt in a
nation that didn't even exist 300 years ago. What did the earth do to
regulate its temperature before America started running a debt?
You must be one of those fruitloops who can take absolutely any problem
and somehow lay it at the feet of global warming. The most recent and
most amusing example of this are the prostitutes in Holland, who claim
the downturn in their business this year is being caused by global
warming. I've even seen some idiots claiming the Christmas tsunami was
caused by global warming.
The by-products of global warming will affect many things, incuding those
whose business relies upon clement weather, street-walkers do not do very
good business in poor weather, indeed, many businesses rely on 'footfall'
for much of their trade, anything that keeps the punters indoors will be
detrimental. As for tsunami's, the effect is very simple, namely, a higher
sea-level will mean a greater mass of water to be affected by such an event,
thus a greater likelihood of more severe damage upon striking land. The same
applies to storm surges, which are also predicted to increase in height due
to warmer sea temperatures. The same applies to tropical storms, predicted
to increase in both numbers and intensity because a key factor in their
formation and intensity is the sea water temperature.
It gets political too, the current spat in the Arctic over mineral and
exploration rights is occuring now because the ice cover is melting and
allowing the possibility of fiancially-viable exploitation , so the various
players are hurrying to put their markers down....
.
|
|
|
| User: "BTR1701" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmentalists Want Everyone To Become Eunuchs For The Green Kingdom |
05 Sep 2007 01:38:37 PM |
|
|
In article <1189007422.583.0@proxy00.news.clara.net>,
"brique" <briquenoir@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
BTR1701 <btr1702@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:btr1702-B9B84A.21420604092007@news.giganews.com...
In article <eDmDi.76$SC2.74@newsfe03.lga>, kT <cosmic@lifeform.org>
wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
In article <FLkDi.67$SC2.64@newsfe03.lga>, kT <cosmic@lifeform.org>
wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
In article <9wjDi.50$SC2.47@newsfe03.lga>, kT <cosmic@lifeform.org>
wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
In article
<1188873033.427713.141800@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
"aol@aol.com" <geneccc@gmail.com> wrote:
Actually, one upper-middle class American family pollutes more
than a
small village of people in Africa.
American Family:
1 or 2 cars (one likely an SUV)
Large house sucking up oil or gas to heat and cool.
Purchasing of tons of ***** to furnish the house (clothes,
furniture,
paint, magazines, newspapers, large screen tv's, toys, knick
knacks,
etc).
Vacation travel, likely air travel.
AFRICAN VILLAGE:
None of the above.
Yes, we should all live no better than average African villager.
When the great American crash comes, that is where you
will be, with no discernible skills or support system.
Yeah, sure. I'm losing sleep over that.
As well you should :
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
http://www.amazon.com/Financial-Report-United-States-Official/dp/1595550801
Doesn't bother me. Not like I can't live elsewhere. I've done it
before,
I can do it again.
Sure, get yourself another planet. You'll need it, and soon.
You can't seem to keep on track here. First you claim I need to worry
about the collapse of the American government due to its high debt, then
it's "get another planet, you'll need one".
I had no idea that the physical fate of the earth was so closely tied to
the ephemeral and non-physical human concept of financial debt in a
nation that didn't even exist 300 years ago. What did the earth do to
regulate its temperature before America started running a debt?
You must be one of those fruitloops who can take absolutely any problem
and somehow lay it at the feet of global warming. The most recent and
most amusing example of this are the prostitutes in Holland, who claim
the downturn in their business this year is being caused by global
warming. I've even seen some idiots claiming the Christmas tsunami was
caused by global warming.
street-walkers do not do very good business in poor weather,
indeed, many businesses rely on 'footfall' for much of their
trade, anything that keeps the punters indoors will be
detrimental
Yeah, I'm sure gonna take the judgment of a bunch of hookers as to cause
of the few rainy days they've had this year. Whores are well-known for
their meteorological expertise.
As for tsunami's, the effect is very simple, namely, a higher
sea-level will mean a greater mass of water to be affected by
such an event, thus a greater likelihood of more severe damage
upon striking land.
The Sumatra-Andaman earthquake-- which caused the tsunami-- was a
megathrust event in a subduction zone in the Pacific Ocean. An estimated
994 miles of faultline slipped about 50 feet along the subduction zone
where the India Plate slides under the Burma Plate. These two tectonic
plates have been grinding together longer than mankind has existed as a
species. The water displaced by the earthquake would have been the same
regardless of sea level and hence the resulting wave would have been the
same as well. Global warming had precisely zero to do with either the
cause or the effect of the tsunami.
The same applies to tropical storms, predicted to increase in
both numbers and intensity because a key factor in their
formation and intensity is the sea water temperature.
And yet last year, which was predicted to be a record year for hurricane
formation pretty much fizzled and produced fewer storms than average.
.
|
|
|
| User: "brique" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmentalists Want Everyone To Become Eunuchs For The Green Kingdom |
05 Sep 2007 09:01:51 PM |
|
|
BTR1701 <btr1702@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:btr1702-0870A7.14383705092007@news.giganews.com...
In article <1189007422.583.0@proxy00.news.clara.net>,
"brique" <briquenoir@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
BTR1701 <btr1702@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:btr1702-B9B84A.21420604092007@news.giganews.com...
In article <eDmDi.76$SC2.74@newsfe03.lga>, kT <cosmic@lifeform.org>
wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
In article <FLkDi.67$SC2.64@newsfe03.lga>, kT
<cosmic@lifeform.org>
wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
In article <9wjDi.50$SC2.47@newsfe03.lga>, kT
<cosmic@lifeform.org>
wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
In article
<1188873033.427713.141800@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
"aol@aol.com" <geneccc@gmail.com> wrote:
Actually, one upper-middle class American family pollutes
more
than a
small village of people in Africa.
American Family:
1 or 2 cars (one likely an SUV)
Large house sucking up oil or gas to heat and cool.
Purchasing of tons of ***** to furnish the house (clothes,
furniture,
paint, magazines, newspapers, large screen tv's, toys, knick
knacks,
etc).
Vacation travel, likely air travel.
AFRICAN VILLAGE:
None of the above.
Yes, we should all live no better than average African
villager.
When the great American crash comes, that is where you
will be, with no discernible skills or support system.
Yeah, sure. I'm losing sleep over that.
As well you should :
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
http://www.amazon.com/Financial-Report-United-States-Official/dp/1595550801
Doesn't bother me. Not like I can't live elsewhere. I've done it
before,
I can do it again.
Sure, get yourself another planet. You'll need it, and soon.
You can't seem to keep on track here. First you claim I need to worry
about the collapse of the American government due to its high debt,
then
it's "get another planet, you'll need one".
I had no idea that the physical fate of the earth was so closely tied
to
the ephemeral and non-physical human concept of financial debt in a
nation that didn't even exist 300 years ago. What did the earth do to
regulate its temperature before America started running a debt?
You must be one of those fruitloops who can take absolutely any
problem
and somehow lay it at the feet of global warming. The most recent and
most amusing example of this are the prostitutes in Holland, who claim
the downturn in their business this year is being caused by global
warming. I've even seen some idiots claiming the Christmas tsunami was
caused by global warming.
street-walkers do not do very good business in poor weather,
indeed, many businesses rely on 'footfall' for much of their
trade, anything that keeps the punters indoors will be
detrimental
Yeah, I'm sure gonna take the judgment of a bunch of hookers as to cause
of the few rainy days they've had this year. Whores are well-known for
their meteorological expertise.
then you are foolish, any trade which relies on weather is likely to produce
a body of knowledge in the subject, ask a farmer about the 'weather' and
wait for three hours before, eyes glazed, you can get a word in edgeways...
As for tsunami's, the effect is very simple, namely, a higher
sea-level will mean a greater mass of water to be affected by
such an event, thus a greater likelihood of more severe damage
upon striking land.
The Sumatra-Andaman earthquake-- which caused the tsunami-- was a
megathrust event in a subduction zone in the Pacific Ocean. An estimated
994 miles of faultline slipped about 50 feet along the subduction zone
where the India Plate slides under the Burma Plate. These two tectonic
plates have been grinding together longer than mankind has existed as a
species. The water displaced by the earthquake would have been the same
regardless of sea level and hence the resulting wave would have been the
same as well. Global warming had precisely zero to do with either the
cause or the effect of the tsunami.
Firstly, it has not been claimed here that global warming _caused_ the
tsunami, it was stated that one of the side-effects of increased sea
temperatures would be to make such events more damaging.
Try throwing a basketball into first, a half-filled bath and then into one
filled to the brim. Now explain the differing result in terms of water
damage to the bathroom without considering the different water levels.....
The same applies to tropical storms, predicted to increase in
both numbers and intensity because a key factor in their
formation and intensity is the sea water temperature.
And yet last year, which was predicted to be a record year for hurricane
formation pretty much fizzled and produced fewer storms than average.
You do know what an 'average' is, don't you? Of far more interest would be
to ask what has been happening to that 'average' figure.
.
|
|
|
| User: "BTR1701" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmentalists Want Everyone To Become Eunuchs For The Green Kingdom |
06 Sep 2007 01:13:59 PM |
|
|
In article <1189044286.4792.0@proxy00.news.clara.net>,
"brique" <briquenoir@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
BTR1701 <btr1702@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:btr1702-0870A7.14383705092007@news.giganews.com...
In article <1189007422.583.0@proxy00.news.clara.net>,
"brique" <briquenoir@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
BTR1701 <btr1702@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
You must be one of those fruitloops who can take
absolutely any problem and somehow lay it at the feet
of global warming. The most recent and most amusing
example of this are the prostitutes in Holland, who
claim the downturn in their business this year is being
caused by global warming. I've even seen some idiots
claiming the Christmas tsunami was caused by global
warming.
As for tsunami's, the effect is very simple, namely,
a higher sea-level will mean a greater mass of water to
be affected by such an event, thus a greater likelihood
of more severe damage upon striking land.
The Sumatra-Andaman earthquake-- which caused the tsunami--
was a megathrust event in a subduction zone in the Pacific
Ocean. An estimated 994 miles of faultline slipped about 50
feet along the subduction zone where the India Plate slides
under the Burma Plate. These two tectonic plates have been
grinding together longer than mankind has existed as a species.
The water displaced by the earthquake would have been the same
regardless of sea level and hence the resulting wave would have
been the same as well. Global warming had precisely zero to do
with either the cause or the effect of the tsunami.
Firstly, it has not been claimed here that global
warming _caused_ the tsunami
No, but when I mentioned those who have claimed it you argued with me
about it.
it was stated that one of the side-effects of increased sea
temperatures would be to make such events more damaging.
No, it was stated by some true loons that global warming caused the
tsunami.
Try throwing a basketball into first, a half-filled bath
and then into one filled to the brim. Now explain the
differing result in terms of water damage to the bathroom
without considering the different water levels.....
Yeah, that's interesting and all but is in no way analogous to the
coastal areas damaged by the wave. People in that part of the world
(hell, in nearly *every* part of the world) tend to live right along the
shore so even if global warming had raised the sea level a foot in that
area over the years (which it hasn't-- not even by a fraction), the
people would *still* be living right at the high tide line and would
still be devastated by any large displacement wave that happened to come
along.
.
|
|
|
| User: "brique" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmentalists Want Everyone To Become Eunuchs For The Green Kingdom |
06 Sep 2007 09:46:16 PM |
|
|
BTR1701 <btr1702@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:btr1702-D461BE.14135906092007@news.giganews.com...
In article <1189044286.4792.0@proxy00.news.clara.net>,
"brique" <briquenoir@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
BTR1701 <btr1702@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:btr1702-0870A7.14383705092007@news.giganews.com...
In article <1189007422.583.0@proxy00.news.clara.net>,
"brique" <briquenoir@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
BTR1701 <btr1702@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
You must be one of those fruitloops who can take
absolutely any problem and somehow lay it at the feet
of global warming. The most recent and most amusing
example of this are the prostitutes in Holland, who
claim the downturn in their business this year is being
caused by global warming. I've even seen some idiots
claiming the Christmas tsunami was caused by global
warming.
As for tsunami's, the effect is very simple, namely,
a higher sea-level will mean a greater mass of water to
be affected by such an event, thus a greater likelihood
of more severe damage upon striking land.
The Sumatra-Andaman earthquake-- which caused the tsunami--
was a megathrust event in a subduction zone in the Pacific
Ocean. An estimated 994 miles of faultline slipped about 50
feet along the subduction zone where the India Plate slides
under the Burma Plate. These two tectonic plates have been
grinding together longer than mankind has existed as a species.
The water displaced by the earthquake would have been the same
regardless of sea level and hence the resulting wave would have
been the same as well. Global warming had precisely zero to do
with either the cause or the effect of the tsunami.
Firstly, it has not been claimed here that global
warming _caused_ the tsunami
No, but when I mentioned those who have claimed it you argued with me
about it.
No, I addressed your claim that global warming did not affect tsunamis....
I point out that global warming will have an effect upon how tsunami's
_behave_ and the consequent damage arising.
That you also claim that others claim other effects is not my problem, I
addressed the simple issue that it's not that simple.
it was stated that one of the side-effects of increased sea
temperatures would be to make such events more damaging.
No, it was stated by some true loons that global warming caused the
tsunami.
Actually, you claim that some loons claim that, you presented no evidence
that such is the case, so the claim remains yours, not mine. Of course it
is nonsense.... but it is not nonsense to state that global warming does
have effects which will exacerbate other issues, such as storm surge,
tsunamis' and businesses reliant on weather conditions.
Try throwing a basketball into first, a half-filled bath
and then into one filled to the brim. Now explain the
differing result in terms of water damage to the bathroom
without considering the different water levels.....
Yeah, that's interesting and all but is in no way analogous to the
coastal areas damaged by the wave.
No, of course, the water level doesn't affect a tsunami-type event, does it?
People in that part of the world
(hell, in nearly *every* part of the world) tend to live right along the
shore so even if global warming had raised the sea level a foot in that
area over the years (which it hasn't-- not even by a fraction), the
people would *still* be living right at the high tide line and would
still be devastated by any large displacement wave that happened to come
along.
And devastated with far greater force and further inland and more
regularily....
But I see your problem, global warming is not occuring thus any of the
predicted events cannot occur.... thus sea levels have not risen, the ice
caps have not melted, the ocean can not have become warmer.
Your problem begins with the sad observable fact that all the above have
occurred, are occurring and continue to occur and occur with increasing
rapidity.
So, what's your explanation then? 'Solar flux', 'cyclic variation', or
'liberal conspiracy'?
.
|
|
|
| User: "BTR1701" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmentalists Want Everyone To Become Eunuchs For The Green Kingdom |
07 Sep 2007 01:57:43 PM |
|
|
In article <1189133331.5467.0@proxy02.news.clara.net>,
"brique" <briquenoir@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
BTR1701 <btr1702@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:btr1702-D461BE.14135906092007@news.giganews.com...
In article <1189044286.4792.0@proxy00.news.clara.net>,
"brique" <briquenoir@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
BTR1701 <btr1702@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:btr1702-0870A7.14383705092007@news.giganews.com...
In article <1189007422.583.0@proxy00.news.clara.net>,
"brique" <briquenoir@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
it was stated that one of the side-effects of increased sea
temperatures would be to make such events more damaging.
No, it was stated by some true loons that global warming caused the
tsunami.
Actually, you claim that some loons claim that, you presented
no evidence that such is the case, so the claim remains yours,
not mine.
Yep, that's my claim.
Of course it is nonsense.
I agree. It is nonsense of the highest order.
Try throwing a basketball into first, a half-filled bath
and then into one filled to the brim. Now explain the
differing result in terms of water damage to the bathroom
without considering the different water levels.....
Yeah, that's interesting and all but is in no way analogous to the
coastal areas damaged by the wave.
No, of course, the water level doesn't affect a tsunami-type
event, does it?
Actually, it doesn't.
People in that part of the world (hell, in nearly *every*
part of the world) tend to live right along the shore so
even if global warming had raised the sea level a foot in
that area over the years (which it hasn't-- not even by a
fraction), the people would *still* be living right at
the high tide line and would still be devastated by any
large displacement wave that happened to come along.
And devastated with far greater force and further inland
and more regularily....
You have no idea what you're talking about. The wave was caused by an
undersea displacement of the seabed. The size of the wave was directly
proportional to the amount of physical earth and rock on the seabed that
was displaced. It had nothing to do with how high the water level was
along the shore. High water or low water, the wave would be exactly the
same size and since the people would have been living the same distance
from the high tide line, no matter the average height of sea level, the
damage would have been the same as well.
And I have absolutely no idea what you mean by "more regularity". Are
you suggesting that there will be more earthquakes causing more tsunamis
as the water level rises? That global warming is somehow speeding up the
movement of the earth's tectonic plates as they grind against each
other? Because that's just... idiotic.
But I see your problem, global warming is not occuring
Never said that. Global warming is occurring. Just as it has many times
in the past. You do realize that the earth has been much warmer that it
is now at various times throughout its history, don't you? Antarctica
was once a tropical climate way back when. The dispute arises as to what
(if any) impact human activities have on the process. Considering that
the earth has been warmer through quite a number of historical periods
(most of which occurred before man even existed, let alone the period of
man's history in which greenhouse gases became all the rage) the
question focuses on whether its a natural process or not. (Perhaps
caused by the sun-- did you know Mars is also coincidentally
experiencing a global warming trend right now? Weird, huh? Maybe the
Martians need to give up their SUVs, too.)
No one here is disputing the warming. What we dispute is the supposed
certainty of the cause of it and why it is that the "solutions" only
require countries like the USA to make significant sacrifices while
leaving other countries like India and China alone, despite the fact
that they contribute just as significantly to the "problem".
thus sea levels have not risen, the ice caps have not
melted,
The ice caps haven't melted. They're still there. I hate to break the
news to you. I know Al Gore has told you that the ice caps are gone but
they really aren't.
For example, the data shows that one relatively small area on the
Antarctic Peninsula, which represents 2% of the continent, is melting
and calving huge icebergs into the sea. That's the thing that gets
reported year after year in the media and hyped by guys like Al Gore to
make you believe the sky is falling but in reality, the continent as a
whole is actually getting *colder* and the principal (West Antarctic)
ice sheet is getting *thicker*. And of course what the media never tells
you is that the part of the Antarctic Peninsula ice that is melting has
been melting at the same rate for the last 6,000 years. This is really
nothing new.
Cites:
Nature Magazine 415: 517-20 "Antarctic Climate Cooling and
Terrestrial Ecosystem Response". Data shows that from 1976 to 2000,
central Antarctic valleys cooled .7 degrees Celsius per decade.
Science Magazine 295: 476-80 "Positive Mass Balance of the Ross Ice
Streams, West Antarctica". Side-looking radar measurements show West
Antarctic ice is increasing at the rate of 26.8 gigatons/year, reversing
the melting trend of the last 6,000 years.
.
|
|
|
| User: "brique" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmentalists Want Everyone To Become Eunuchs For The Green Kingdom |
07 Sep 2007 04:56:43 PM |
|
|
BTR1701 <btr1702@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:btr1702-09976D.14574307092007@news.giganews.com...
In article <1189133331.5467.0@proxy02.news.clara.net>,
"brique" <briquenoir@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
BTR1701 <btr1702@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:btr1702-D461BE.14135906092007@news.giganews.com...
In article <1189044286.4792.0@proxy00.news.clara.net>,
"brique" <briquenoir@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
BTR1701 <btr1702@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:btr1702-0870A7.14383705092007@news.giganews.com...
In article <1189007422.583.0@proxy00.news.clara.net>,
"brique" <briquenoir@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
it was stated that one of the side-effects of increased sea
temperatures would be to make such events more damaging.
No, it was stated by some true loons that global warming caused the
tsunami.
Actually, you claim that some loons claim that, you presented
no evidence that such is the case, so the claim remains yours,
not mine.
Yep, that's my claim.
Of course it is nonsense.
I agree. It is nonsense of the highest order.
Yep, introduce a nonsense claim to claim that it is nonsense......well, that
works, dont it?
Try throwing a basketball into first, a half-filled bath
and then into one filled to the brim. Now explain the
differing result in terms of water damage to the bathroom
without considering the different water levels.....
Yeah, that's interesting and all but is in no way analogous to the
coastal areas damaged by the wave.
No, of course, the water level doesn't affect a tsunami-type
event, does it?
Actually, it doesn't.
If you assume that tsunami-type events only occur from one cause....
People in that part of the world (hell, in nearly *every*
part of the world) tend to live right along the shore so
even if global warming had raised the sea level a foot in
that area over the years (which it hasn't-- not even by a
fraction), the people would *still* be living right at
the high tide line and would still be devastated by any
large displacement wave that happened to come along.
And devastated with far greater force and further inland
and more regularily....
You have no idea what you're talking about. The wave was caused by an
undersea displacement of the seabed. The size of the wave was directly
proportional to the amount of physical earth and rock on the seabed that
was displaced. It had nothing to do with how high the water level was
along the shore. High water or low water, the wave would be exactly the
same size and since the people would have been living the same distance
from the high tide line, no matter the average height of sea level, the
damage would have been the same as well.
And I have absolutely no idea what you mean by "more regularity". Are
you suggesting that there will be more earthquakes causing more tsunamis
as the water level rises? That global warming is somehow speeding up the
movement of the earth's tectonic plates as they grind against each
other? Because that's just... idiotic.
Are you dense or intent on confusion? Still, no doubt it helps to ignore
anything else and keep trying to restrict the debate to one specific type of
event, an earthquake as if that was th eonly cause of any oceanic
movement.....
But I see your problem, global warming is not occuring
Never said that. Global warming is occurring. Just as it has many times
in the past. You do realize that the earth has been much warmer that it
is now at various times throughout its history, don't you? Antarctica
was once a tropical climate way back when.
Indeed, and the Earth has titlted on its axis several times, switched its
polarity several times, has numerous ice-ages, been hit by meteors, ahd
incredibly high levels of volcanic activity and so on.
The dispute arises as to what
(if any) impact human activities have on the process. Considering that
the earth has been warmer through quite a number of historical periods
(most of which occurred before man even existed, let alone the period of
man's history in which greenhouse gases became all the rage) the
question focuses on whether its a natural process or not. (Perhaps
caused by the sun-- did you know Mars is also coincidentally
experiencing a global warming trend right now? Weird, huh? Maybe the
Martians need to give up their SUVs, too.)
Except that the research undertaken by numerous bodies interested in
recording solar activity can't find any reason why the sun should be having
such an effect, to wit, there is no correlation betwene solar activity and
the current tendency towards global warming.....
No one here is disputing the warming. What we dispute is the supposed
certainty of the cause of it and why it is that the "solutions" only
require countries like the USA to make significant sacrifices while
leaving other countries like India and China alone, despite the fact
that they contribute just as significantly to the "problem".
And thus no evidence will ever be sufficient because it's not your
fault......
thus sea levels have not risen, the ice caps have not
melted,
The ice caps haven't melted. They're still there. I hate to break the
news to you. I know Al Gore has told you that the ice caps are gone but
they really aren't.
Odd, but for some strange reason satelite coverage shows the arctic ice
cover is not only melting more in summer, it is re-freezing less in winter..
I guess Al Gore has hacked the global sattelite system as part of his
campaign to destroy the USA....
For example, the data shows that one relatively small area on the
Antarctic Peninsula, which represents 2% of the continent, is melting
and calving huge icebergs into the sea. That's the thing that gets
reported year after year in the media and hyped by guys like Al Gore to
make you believe the sky is falling but in reality, the continent as a
whole is actually getting *colder* and the principal (West Antarctic)
ice sheet is getting *thicker*. And of course what the media never tells
you is that the part of the Antarctic Peninsula ice that is melting has
been melting at the same rate for the last 6,000 years. This is really
nothing new.
Cites:
Nature Magazine 415: 517-20 "Antarctic Climate Cooling and
Terrestrial Ecosystem Response". Data shows that from 1976 to 2000,
central Antarctic valleys cooled .7 degrees Celsius per decade.
Science Magazine 295: 476-80 "Positive Mass Balance of the Ross Ice
Streams, West Antarctica". Side-looking radar measurements show West
Antarctic ice is increasing at the rate of 26.8 gigatons/year, reversing
the melting trend of the last 6,000 years.
Indeed, and if you bother to examine the data, you will see that the highest
rise in temperatures is occuring in the northern hemisphere..... oddly, just
about where the Arctic ice cover used to be....
.
|
|
|
| User: "BTR1701" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmentalists Want Everyone To Become Eunuchs For The Green Kingdom |
07 Sep 2007 07:24:20 PM |
|
|
In article <1189202728.17733.0@damia.uk.clara.net>,
"brique" <briquenoir@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
BTR1701 <btr1702@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
For example, the data shows that one relatively small area on the
Antarctic Peninsula, which represents 2% of the continent, is melting
and calving huge icebergs into the sea. That's the thing that gets
reported year after year in the media and hyped by guys like Al Gore to
make you believe the sky is falling but in reality, the continent as a
whole is actually getting *colder* and the principal (West Antarctic)
ice sheet is getting *thicker*. And of course what the media never tells
you is that the part of the Antarctic Peninsula ice that is melting has
been melting at the same rate for the last 6,000 years. This is really
nothing new.
Cites:
Nature Magazine 415: 517-20 "Antarctic Climate Cooling and
Terrestrial Ecosystem Response". Data shows that from 1976 to 2000,
central Antarctic valleys cooled 0.7 degrees Celsius per decade.
Science Magazine 295: 476-80 "Positive Mass Balance of the Ross Ice
Streams, West Antarctica". Side-looking radar measurements show West
Antarctic ice is increasing at the rate of 26.8 gigatons/year, reversing
the melting trend of the last 6,000 years.
Indeed, and if you bother to examine the data, you will see
that the highest rise in temperatures is occuring in the
northern hemisphere..... oddly, just about where the Arctic
ice cover used to be....
Oh, and one last thing: if you're contending that it's the northern
polar cap that's melting, then worrying about rises in sea level is
ridiculous. There is no land under the northern polar ice. The ice is
floating on the water, therefore when it melts, sea level will not rise
at all, just as ice cubes melting in a glass of water do not raise the
level of the water.
Only the southern polar ice has the potential for raising sea levels
since it's sitting on land.
.
|
|
|
| User: "brique" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmentalists Want Everyone To Become Eunuchs For The Green Kingdom |
08 Sep 2007 07:30:12 AM |
|
|
BTR1701 <btr1702@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:btr1702-21BDEF.20242007092007@news.giganews.com...
In article <1189202728.17733.0@damia.uk.clara.net>,
"brique" <briquenoir@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
BTR1701 <btr1702@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
For example, the data shows that one relatively small area on the
Antarctic Peninsula, which represents 2% of the continent, is melting
and calving huge icebergs into the sea. That's the thing that gets
reported year after year in the media and hyped by guys like Al Gore
to
make you believe the sky is falling but in reality, the continent as a
whole is actually getting *colder* and the principal (West Antarctic)
ice sheet is getting *thicker*. And of course what the media never
tells
you is that the part of the Antarctic Peninsula ice that is melting
has
been melting at the same rate for the last 6,000 years. This is really
nothing new.
Cites:
Nature Magazine 415: 517-20 "Antarctic Climate Cooling and
Terrestrial Ecosystem Response". Data shows that from 1976 to 2000,
central Antarctic valleys cooled 0.7 degrees Celsius per decade.
Science Magazine 295: 476-80 "Positive Mass Balance of the Ross Ice
Streams, West Antarctica". Side-looking radar measurements show West
Antarctic ice is increasing at the rate of 26.8 gigatons/year,
reversing
the melting trend of the last 6,000 years.
Indeed, and if you bother to examine the data, you will see
that the highest rise in temperatures is occuring in the
northern hemisphere..... oddly, just about where the Arctic
ice cover used to be....
Oh, and one last thing: if you're contending that it's the northern
polar cap that's melting, then worrying about rises in sea level is
ridiculous. There is no land under the northern polar ice. The ice is
floating on the water, therefore when it melts, sea level will not rise
at all, just as ice cubes melting in a glass of water do not raise the
level of the water.
If all you think constitutes northern hemisphere ice cover is sea ice, then
you are sadly mistaken.
Only the southern polar ice has the potential for raising sea levels
since it's sitting on land.
Well, don't want to scare you, but the total mass of ice cover in the
Antartic _has_ fallen.
But still as long as we ignore glaciers and the Greenland ice cover and
rather a lot of other examples of ice-melt directly contributing to
sea-level change.... well, then nothing will have changed, will it?
But, apart from that, there is a link between melting sea-ice cover and
increased sea-levels. The sea-ice cover acts as a reflector, reducing the
amount of heat retained in the water below. Once the ice melts, the revealed
sea water obsorbs more heat and warms. It's not rocket science, warm water
occupies a larger volume than cold... therefore, the sea-level rises. So,
it's not necessarily that there is more water added from sea-ice melt, per
se..... it just ends up taking up a bit more space once it warms up, which
it does. It's a bugger, ain't it?.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "BTR1701" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmentalists Want Everyone To Become Eunuchs For The Green Kingdom |
07 Sep 2007 07:17:48 PM |
|
|
In article <1189202728.17733.0@damia.uk.clara.net>,
"brique" <briquenoir@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
Indeed, and if you bother to examine the data, you will see that the highest
rise in temperatures is occuring in the northern hemisphere..... oddly, just
about where the Arctic ice cover used to be....
It's still there.
.
|
|
|
| User: "brique" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmentalists Want Everyone To Become Eunuchs For The Green Kingdom |
08 Sep 2007 07:22:19 AM |
|
|
BTR1701 <btr1702@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:btr1702-BB3999.20174807092007@news.giganews.com...
In article <1189202728.17733.0@damia.uk.clara.net>,
"brique" <briquenoir@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
Indeed, and if you bother to examine the data, you will see that the
highest
rise in temperatures is occuring in the northern hemisphere..... oddly,
just
about where the Arctic ice cover used to be....
It's still there.
http://www.terranature.org/arcticIce2006.htm
"15 September 2006
NASA data shows that Arctic perennial sea ice, which normally survives the
summer melt season and remains year-round, shrunk abruptly by 14 percent
between 2004 and 2005."
"Data from the National Centers for Environmental Prediction, Boulder,
Colorado, suggest that winds pushed perennial ice from the East to the West
Arctic Ocean (primarily located above North America) moving ice out of the
Fram Strait, an area located between Greenland and Spitsbergen, Norway.
This ice movement out of the Arctic is a different mechanism for ice
shrinkage than the melting of Arctic sea ice, but it also reduces the amount
of perennial Arctic sea ice.
If sea ice continues to decline, the surrounding ocean will get warmer,
further accelerating summer ice melt and impeding fall freezing. This longer
melt season will, in turn, further diminish Arctic ice cover."
"13 September 2006
The Arctic has experienced record low sea ice in the last two years. In a
study by NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland,
satellite observations show unusually warm wintertime temperatures and a
resulting decline in the length of the Arctic seasonal ice.
The amount of winter sea ice has fallen by 6 percent over each of the last
two winters. The average annual loss is 1.5 percent per decade since
satellite monitoring began in 1979. This increased winter loss is occurring
as summer sea ice continues its retreat at an average of 10 percent per
decade.
"This amount of sea ice reduction the past two winters has not taken place
before during 27 years that satellite data has been available," said NASA
scientist Joey Comiso. In the past, winter sea ice reduction was
significantly lower than summer reduction."
If the words are too complicated for you, there are some nice satelite
pictures illustrating the depletion.
here's another page :
http://www.terranature.org/antarcticIce_NASA2006.htm
2 March 2006
"The first gravity survey of the entire Antarctic ice sheet, conducted using
data from the NASA/ German Aerospace Center Gravity Recovery and Climate
Experiment (Grace), concludes the ice sheet's mass has decreased
significantly from 2002 to 2005.
Isabella Velicogna and John Wahr from the University of Colorado,
demonstrated for the first time that Antarctica's ice sheet lost a
significant amount of mass since 2002.
The estimated loss was enough to raise global sea level about 1.2
millimeters (0.05 inches) during the survey period, or about 13 percent of
the overall sea level rise for the same period."
And that's a somewhat different view to yours about the Antartic, isn't it?
But hold on :
2 March 2006
"In the most comprehensive survey ever undertaken of the massive ice sheets
covering Greenland and Antarctica, NASA scientists confirm climate warming
is changing how much water remains locked in Earth's largest storehouses of
ice and snow.
"If the trends continue and climate warming continues as predicted, the
polar ice sheets could change dramatically," said lead author Jay Zwally of
NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center. "The Greenland ice sheet could be facing
an irreversible decline by the end of the century."
This new survey is the first to inventory the losses of ice and the addition
of new snow on both in a consistent and comprehensive way throughout an
entire decade.
There was a net loss of ice from the combined polar ice sheets between 1992
and 2002, and a corresponding rise in sea level. The survey documented for
the first time extensive thinning of the West Antarctic ice shelves, an
increase in snowfall in the interior of Greenland and thinning at the edges.
All are signs of a warming climate predicted by computer models."
Greenland is having a massive shift in how its ice is distributed, extra
snowfall is thickening the interior regions cover but the edges are
thinning, resulting in increased run-off rates. Similar changes seem to be
occuring in parts of the Antartic, whilst the overall mass is reducing, in
some areas it is increasing thickness, in others whole areas are
disappearing as the thinning edges become more vulnerable to breaking up.
another page
http://www.terranature.org/IPCC_CO2concentration.htm
Steve Connor, Science Editor
3 February 2007
"Concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere are at their highest
levels for at least 650,000 years and this rise began with the birth of the
Industrial Revolution 250 years ago, according to the IPCC
(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change).
Carbon dioxide is the principal greenhouse gas responsible for global
warming and, in 2005, concentrations stood at 379 parts per million (ppm).
This compares to a pre-industrial level of 278 ppm, and a range over the
previous 650,000 years of between 180 and 300 ppm, the report says.
Present levels of carbon dioxide - which continue to rise inexorably each
year - are unprecedented for the long period of geological history that
scientists are able to analyse from gas trapped in the frozen bubbles of
deep ice cores."
Well, we could blame the Chinese for that as well.....
.
|
|
|
| User: "BTR1701" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmentalists Want Everyone To Become Eunuchs For The Green Kingdom |
08 Sep 2007 08:30:45 AM |
|
|
In article <1189254296.27894.0@damia.uk.clara.net>,
"brique" <briquenoir@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
BTR1701 <btr1702@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:btr1702-BB3999.20174807092007@news.giganews.com...
In article <1189202728.17733.0@damia.uk.clara.net>,
"brique" <briquenoir@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
Indeed, and if you bother to examine the data, you will see that the
highest
rise in temperatures is occuring in the northern hemisphere..... oddly,
just
about where the Arctic ice cover used to be....
It's still there.
http://www.terranature.org/arcticIce2006.htm
"15 September 2006
NASA data shows that Arctic perennial sea ice, which normally survives the
summer melt season and remains year-round, shrunk abruptly by 14 percent
between 2004 and 2005."
That means it's still there. Just 14% smaller.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "brique" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmentalists Want Everyone To Become Eunuchs For The Green Kingdom |
05 Sep 2007 10:00:41 PM |
|
|
brique <briquenoir@freeuk.c0m> wrote in message
news:1189044286.4792.0@proxy00.news.clara.net...
BTR1701 <btr1702@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:btr1702-0870A7.14383705092007@news.giganews.com...
In article <1189007422.583.0@proxy00.news.clara.net>,
"brique" <briquenoir@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
BTR1701 <btr1702@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:btr1702-B9B84A.21420604092007@news.giganews.com...
In article <eDmDi.76$SC2.74@newsfe03.lga>, kT <cosmic@lifeform.org>
wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
In article <FLkDi.67$SC2.64@newsfe03.lga>, kT
<cosmic@lifeform.org>
wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
In article <9wjDi.50$SC2.47@newsfe03.lga>, kT
<cosmic@lifeform.org>
wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
In article
<1188873033.427713.141800@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
"aol@aol.com" <geneccc@gmail.com> wrote:
Actually, one upper-middle class American family pollutes
more
than a
small village of people in Africa.
American Family:
1 or 2 cars (one likely an SUV)
Large house sucking up oil or gas to heat and cool.
Purchasing of tons of ***** to furnish the house (clothes,
furniture,
paint, magazines, newspapers, large screen tv's, toys,
knick
knacks,
etc).
Vacation travel, likely air travel.
AFRICAN VILLAGE:
None of the above.
Yes, we should all live no better than average African
villager.
When the great American crash comes, that is where you
will be, with no discernible skills or support system.
Yeah, sure. I'm losing sleep over that.
As well you should :
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
http://www.amazon.com/Financial-Report-United-States-Official/dp/1595550801
Doesn't bother me. Not like I can't live elsewhere. I've done it
before,
I can do it again.
Sure, get yourself another planet. You'll need it, and soon.
You can't seem to keep on track here. First you claim I need to
worry
about the collapse of the American government due to its high debt,
then
it's "get another planet, you'll need one".
I had no idea that the physical fate of the earth was so closely
tied
to
the ephemeral and non-physical human concept of financial debt in a
nation that didn't even exist 300 years ago. What did the earth do
to
regulate its temperature before America started running a debt?
You must be one of those fruitloops who can take absolutely any
problem
and somehow lay it at the feet of global warming. The most recent
and
most amusing example of this are the prostitutes in Holland, who
claim
the downturn in their business this year is being caused by global
warming. I've even seen some idiots claiming the Christmas tsunami
was
caused by global warming.
street-walkers do not do very good business in poor weather,
indeed, many businesses rely on 'footfall' for much of their
trade, anything that keeps the punters indoors will be
detrimental
Yeah, I'm sure gonna take the judgment of a bunch of hookers as to cause
of the few rainy days they've had this year. Whores are well-known for
their meteorological expertise.
then you are foolish, any trade which relies on weather is likely to
produce
a body of knowledge in the subject, ask a farmer about the 'weather' and
wait for three hours before, eyes glazed, you can get a word in
edgeways...
As for tsunami's, the effect is very simple, namely, a higher
sea-level will mean a greater mass of water to be affected by
such an event, thus a greater likelihood of more severe damage
upon striking land.
The Sumatra-Andaman earthquake-- which caused the tsunami-- was a
megathrust event in a subduction zone in the Pacific Ocean. An estimated
994 miles of faultline slipped about 50 feet along the subduction zone
where the India Plate slides under the Burma Plate. These two tectonic
plates have been grinding together longer than mankind has existed as a
species. The water displaced by the earthquake would have been the same
regardless of sea level and hence the resulting wave would have been the
same as well. Global warming had precisely zero to do with either the
cause or the effect of the tsunami.
Firstly, it has not been claimed here that global warming _caused_ the
tsunami, it was stated that one of the side-effects of increased sea
temperatures would be to make such events more damaging.
Try throwing a basketball into first, a half-filled bath and then into one
filled to the brim. Now explain the differing result in terms of water
damage to the bathroom without considering the different water levels.....
The same applies to tropical storms, predicted to increase in
both numbers and intensity because a key factor in their
formation and intensity is the sea water temperature.
And yet last year, which was predicted to be a record year for hurricane
formation pretty much fizzled and produced fewer storms than average.
You do know what an 'average' is, don't you? Of far more interest would
be
to ask what has been happening to that 'average' figure.
As an addendum:
taken from http://www.pewclimate.org/hurricanes.cfm
year 2004 :
"The Climate Prediction Center of the National Weather Service (US)
predicted that the 2004 Atlantic hurricane season would see above normal
tropical storm activity, with 12-15 named storms, 7 reaching hurricane
strength. This prediction was close but conservative, as there were 15 named
storms and 9 hurricanes. The National Hurricane Center described this number
of events as "well above-normal activity."
year 2005:
"The Climate Prediction Center (US) expected significantly greater activity
for 2005 than occurred in 2004, predicting 18-21 tropical storms and 9-11
hurricanes, 5-7 of which were expected to reach category 3 or greater. The
actual activity significantly exceeded these expectations, as well as all
previously recorded activity for a single season. The following activity
occurred during the 2005 season:
* 28 tropical storms for the first time since systematic record keeping
began about 150 years ago. The previous record was 21 storms, set in 1933.
* 15 hurricanes
* 7 major hurricanes
* The earliest date on record by which four named tropical storms formed
(Arlene, Bret, Cindy, Dennis formed before July 5)
* The earliest date on record by which two category 4 hurricanes
occurred (Dennis formed July 4-7; Emily formed July 10-16)
* The most powerful hurricane ever recorded in the Atlantic basin
(Wilma, central barometric pressure of 882 mBar)
* Three of the six most powerful hurricanes ever recorded in the
Atlantic basin (Katrina, Rita, Wilma)
* The first time three category 5 hurricanes have ever been recorded in
the same year in the Atlantic basin
* The most destructive hurricane in U.S. history (Katrina)
* Tied the record for latest date of storm formation set in 1954
(tropical storm Zeta formed on Dec. 30, 2005)
In terms of overall hurricane activity (number and intensity of storms), the
2005 Atlantic hurricane season was the most active season ever recorded."
year 2006:
"Actually, the 2006 North Atlantic hurricane season had a normal level of
activity. It was only quiet relative to expectations generated by its
hyperactive predecessors in 2004 and 2005. The Climate Prediction Center
forecast a very active season, but the number of storms fell far short of
initial predictions. With 10 tropical storms, 5 hurricanes, and 2 major
hurricanes, the North Atlantic 2006 season was near normal.
One likely reason for the reduced Atlantic hurricane activity relative to
initial predictions is that an unanticipated El Niņo event formed during the
summer of 2006. El Niņo events typically suppress hurricane activity in the
North Atlantic, but enhance it in the North Pacific. Indeed, while the
Atlantic was experiencing a near-normal season, hurricane activity was far
above normal in the Pacific.
Ordinarily, hurricane activity would have been reduced below normal activity
during an El Niņo event, so why did the activity reach near-normal levels?
According to the National Weather Service, "The near-normal season mainly
reflected the competing influence of El Niņo and the ongoing conditions
associated with the current active hurricane era that began in 1995." In
other words, while El Niņo acted to suppress activity, other climate
conditions were more favorable to hurricanes than usual, boosting activity
above the below-normal activity expected for El Niņo events.
Another factor calming the Atlantic in 2006 may have been extremely large
dust storms from the African continent that covered the tropical Atlantic
Ocean in the early summer of 2006. This dust shaded the sea surface from
sunlight, lowering the sea surface temperatures in the main region where
hurricanes develop. The dust also absorbed moisture from the atmosphere,
thus lowering humidity. Such events are unpredictable and add uncertainty to
tropical storm projections. Improved understanding of these massive dust
storms may improve the ability of scientists to forecast hurricane activity
in the future."
year 2007:
"The Climate Prediction Center forecasts much above normal hurricane
activity for 2007:
* 13-16 named tropical storms
* 7-9 hurricanes
* 3-5 major hurricanes (category 3 or higher)
As of August 30, six named storms have formed, including two major
hurricanes (Dean & Felix). Hurricane Dean struck the Yucatan Peninsula of
Mexico as a category 5 hurricane on August 21 and Felix struck Nicaragua as
a category 5 hurricane on September 4. This is the first time in recorded
history that two hurricanes have made landfall at category 5 strength during
the same season. In 2005, Katrina, Rita, and Wilma all reached category 5
strength at sea, but all three weakened to category 3 at landfall."
Thus it would appear that 2006 was not 'below average' at all, even with the
factors mentioned (dust clouds, El Nino) which should have suppressed
hurricane activity in the Atlantic, it still managed 'near-normal levels'.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "kT" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmentalists Want Everyone To Become Eunuchs For The GreenKingdom |
05 Sep 2007 01:43:04 PM |
|
|
BTR1701 wrote:
So when are you going to make a retraction on your volcanic carbon
dioxide emissions lie?
Retractions are easy, you just admit you were wrong.
--
Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator :
http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html
.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
