|

Wednesday, December 07, 2005

Do You Also Have 200 Words To Describe Melting Ice?

Eskimos (No I don't call them Inuits) blame US for melting ice. Wow, I guess before too long we will be able to sell ice to the Eskimos. I've brought this up previously and never had anyone answer, so here it goes again: Prove to me that Global Warming even exists as a real human caused event, and more specifically, that humans have done more damage to the planet than normal, natural, events like volcanoes, tsunamis, etc. That's a trick question since it can't be done yet. And, if someone comes here and spouts off some ridiculous 5 year study, I'm going to delete your post immediately because you show your stupidity. Give me a study for the last 1000 years. Since we're dealing with a seriously large scale event, and this is not something that can be duplicated in a lab, I want conclusive proof. Nobody has it no matter what the tree-humping hippies say. Here's another question: Is it possible that volcanic eruptions around the world allow for more greenhouse gases to "damage" the planet than just about anything humans can throw at it? Answer: It's just as possible as any nutty we're killing ourselves with carbon monoxide rant. Here's the story. It makes me want to go club some seals... and I like seals. Eskimos are looking for a gravy train The people of the Arctic filed a landmark human rights complaint against the United States, blaming the world's No. 1 carbon polluter for stoking the global warming that is destroying their habitat. The Inuit Circumpolar Conference (ICC), representing native people in the vast, sparsely-populated region girdling the Earth's far north, said they had petitioned an inter-American panel to seek relief for Canadian and US Inuit. "For Inuit, warming is likely to disrupt or even destroy their hunting and food-sharing culture as reduced sea ice causes the animals on which they depend to decline, become less accessible, and possibly become extinct," said Robert Corell, who spearheaded an Arctic climate impact assessment. I guess we could just level the place and get it out of the way, but I know someone would call for an environmental impact study. Wusses! Attention Nuk-Nuk, just because you want to live in a lean-to in sub-freezing weather conditions, doesn't mean I have to give up the comfort of my airconditioner when it's 105 in the summer. Survive or die, adapt or perish, it's your call. In all seriousness, I would not have a problem with their complaint if it truly could be proven. As an example: If we spill oil in their backyard, I expect it to be cleaned up, and any party affected should be fully compensated. But blaming a global change brought about by one country... that's nuts. How about this Nuk Nuk... I'll donate $500.00 for you to purchase a refrigerator with ice maker. That way you can continually have material to repair your home after my CO2 gases have destroyed it. On second thought, you don't use electricity, so that won't work... Anyway, here's a few volcano climate sites:

Here and here, and this one even proposes it may be gases coming from ocean volcanoes that are causing an upswing in temperature

From the first site linked above: The major climatic affect that volcanoes have is due to the aerosol particles that are exploded into the troposphere by large eruptions. Even though there are many more small eruptions, unless the aerosols (and ash) makes it out of the troposphere to the stratosphere, it will be rained or snowed out in a short time. The aerosols that do reach the stratosphere can have two effects. If they are larger than about 2 microns, they allow incoming solar radiation to reach the Earth's surface but block outgoing heat radiation--this will contribute to global warming. On the other hand, if the aerosols are smaller than about 2 microns, they tend to block the incoming solar radiation--leading to global cooling. Pinatubo, for example, caused about a 1/2 degree C cooling of the Earth for the year or so following its big 1991 eruption. Here's the breakdown: Nobody knows conclusively. So someone tell Nuk Nuk to go climb back in his igloo.

2 Comments:

Blogger Editor said...

Proof is here

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&author1=oreskes&searchid=1103229626242_9090&stored_search=&FIRSTINDEX=0&fdate=10/1/1995&tdate=12/31/2004

As for your racist BS. Go to hell.

12/12/2005 03:53:00 PM  
Blogger Rooster Cashews said...

As usual, I would expect someone to come here cursing and name calling when they have little control of the English language to speak in a coherent and rational way.

Did you even read what I wrote? Apparently not. My question was, and I'll make it simple for you so you can understand, pulling apart the sentences for easier digestion:

more specifically, that humans have done more damage to the planet than normal, natural, events like volcanoes, tsunamis

and

The idea that

blaming a global change brought about by one country

is insane.

Your "proof" is worthless when I can show article for article "expert" opinion that will validate the opposite of your opinion. See below.

Now go back and read the whole thing. Then go here:
http://www.sepp.org/weekwas/2005/Jan.%208.htm

or here:

http://www.news.utoronto.ca/bin4/thoughts/forum030127.asp

My point is there is no concrete proof on either side, and there can't be because of the scale of the question. The main story simply illustrates another attempt by a group to push the United States in a direction they wish to go.

And if you can show where I've been racist in this statement, I'll buy you lunch. Would using a tired cliché like Nanook of the North be more to your liking?

Come back when you can communicate like an adult.

12/12/2005 08:56:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Free Web Site Counter
Counters
eXTReMe Tracker