Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Experts Say Global Warming Creates Ice

October 12, 2012 by  

Experts Say Global Warming Creates Ice
PHOTOS.COM

Those who reject the theory of anthropomorphic global warming have pointed to Antarctica as proof that the theory is preposterous: Ice in Antarctica has reached record levels. But global warming advocates say that the increase in ice is just part of the global warming process.

Experts say that the increase in ice is the result of a giant ozone hole. And the giant ozone hole is there because humans are causing an increase in global temperatures. So there you have it, the ice is a byproduct of global warming.

“A warming world can have complex and sometimes surprising consequences,” said researcher Ted Maksym.

According to researchers, the huge hole is caused by man-made pollutants like chlorine and bromine, and the hole has a cooling effect this time of year. The cooling effect causes the wind to be stronger and more constant which results in the expansion of ice.

Researchers also say that climate change makes the air carry more moisture.

Bryan Nash

Staff writer Bryan Nash has devoted much of his life to searching for the truth behind the lies that the masses never question. He is currently pursuing a Master's of Divinity and is the author of The Messiah's Misfits, Things Unseen and The Backpack Guide to Surviving the University. He has also been a regular contributor to the magazine Biblical Insights.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Experts Say Global Warming Creates Ice”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • Harold Olsen

    By this logic, I should be able to make ice at home by heating up water on my stove top or in my microwave. Do the global warmists realize just how stupid they sound?

    • GALT

      Really Harold? I am not really sure what train of logic you are following, unless
      you are trying to make sense of the headline which is simplistically rendered to
      manipulate you………while the remaining information is rather useless……….so
      let’s look deeper…….

      “Skeptic arguments that Antarctica is gaining ice frequently hinge on an error of omission, namely ignoring the difference between land ice and sea ice.

      In glaciology and particularly with respect to Antarctic ice, not all things are created equal. Let us consider the following differences. Antarctic land ice is the ice which has accumulated over thousands of years on the Antarctica landmass itself through snowfall. This land ice therefore is actually stored ocean water that once fell as precipitation. Sea ice in Antarctica is quite different as it is generally considered to be ice which forms in salt water primarily during the winter months.

      In Antarctica, sea ice grows quite extensively during winter but nearly completely melts away during the summer (Figure 1). That is where the important difference between antarctic and arctic sea ice exists. Arctic sea ice lasts all the year round, there are increases during the winter months and decreases during the summer months but an ice cover does in fact remain in the North which includes quite a bit of ice from previous years (Figure 1). Essentially Arctic sea ice is more important for the earth’s energy balance because when it melts, more sunlight is absorbed by the oceans whereas Antarctic sea ice normally melts each summer leaving the earth’s energy balance largely unchanged.”

      http://www.skepticalscience.com/antarctica-gaining-ice-basic.htm

      There’s more Harold……..with pictures and graphs, and this just the basic science,
      there is an “intermediate link”……..if you truly have an “enquiring mind”…….of course,
      if you are a “mushroom”……..you have already been fed, huh?

      • http://www.chandostransportsolutions.com GraemeB

        Galt: You have stated it perfectly. The problem with the arctic ice is that it is melting at an alarming rate with the focus on Greenland as there is the potential meltdown which would raise sea levels by 13 to 19 feet. Manhattan would then be able to boast swimming pools on Wall Street and flooded tunnels from NJ, thereby shutting down NY

        • Stephen Keith

          How would melting Ice of entire world raise sea levels (cover about 2/3rds of earth) by even say 5 feet. Please think about what these so callede scientists are saying; not even logical reasoning.

      • GALT

        Stephen……..science is quantification and measurement as well as reproducible results
        via experiment and falsifiability as it pertains to theory……

        Here is the answer to your question……..

        http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/geophysics/question473.htm

        “The main ice covered landmass is Antarctica at the South Pole, with about 90 percent of the world’s ice (and 70 percent of its fresh water). Antarctica is covered with ice an average of 2,133 meters (7,000 feet) thick. If all of the Antarctic ice melted, sea levels around the world would rise about 61 meters (200 feet). “

      • pete0097

        GALT, You did a good job of explaining it, however, you forgot one point. When there is sea ice, forming and melting, there is no rise in sea levels, unless there is added water to the equation (put a couple of ice cubes in a glass of water and prove it to yourself) the ice that builds up on the land takes water out of the equation thus lowering the sea levels. When it is warmer, (Up to the freezing point of water) there generally is more snowfall and if it is between 20 and 30, it tends to be wetter and denser tying up more water. The colder it is, the “fluffier” the snow is and if the air is too cold, there is no snow and you essentially have a desert condition with little or no precipitation.

      • klem

        Galt is right, if the entire Antarctic ice sheet melted the oceans would rise by hundreds of feet, just like they have risen about 300 feet since the last glaciation. However, what he does not mention is the several thousands of years that will be required to complete the task. So relax, there’s still plenty of time.

      • Hedgehog

        GALT:
        Since you are a man of science, perhaps you can explain to me where all the “man made” chlorine and bromine mentioned in this article came from? If these “man made” elements are causing an ozone hole, what countries are responsible for their manufacture? The last time I looked both chlorine and bromine were listed in the periodic table of elements (natural substances). Please tell me who has managed to actually create these elements, thus destroying the climatic balance of the planet.

      • GALT

        Just answering Stephen’s question, guys……..the link contains further info covering
        klems qualification….and pete’s also……melting sea ice is only slightly causitive……as
        water expands with heat…..so warmer ocean’s are less dense…..but it will not
        require much of a rise to make the effects noticeable……….

        Storm’s surges first………while the current projected rise is 7.3 to 23 inches over the
        course of the century……….provided there are no unexpected feed back loops to accelerate the process……….one of these would occur from “melting tundra” which would
        release methane gas, which has been stored for years……….and which is 20 times
        more powerful than CO2………as a greenhouse gas……….nitrous oxide is stronger still…..

        Any way…..Florida’s average height above sea level is three feet…….Miami would be the
        new Venice…..although it sort of looks like that now…….

        Me……..I am starting up………Ye Olde Dyke Building Company……..Goldman said
        they’d handle the IPO…………you want in?

      • GALT

        Actually the term is Chloroflorocarbons, invented by Thomas Midgley in the 30′s, spelling may not be accurate…….but an easy search…..as a substitute for freon as a refrigerant….
        also as a propellant in aerosol cans…….

        “A catalytic reaction cycle is a set of chemical reactions which result in the destruction of many … A single CFC molecule can destroy 100,000 ozone molecules.”

        Given this ratio…….and the isolation of the polar air mass…….total depletion of ozone
        and the resulting hole is not unexpected…………when the seasonal isolation ends, the
        hole drifts………and persists until the brownian motion, restores the ozone gradually
        to what ever the proximate equilibrium level is for the rest of the atmosphere……

        http://www.theozonehole.com

      • Doug Rodrigues

        Why is the underwater increased vocanic activity under the Artic never addressed? Volcanos…..heat….gee, I wonder if there is a relationship to ice melting…you think?

      • klem

        “Me……..I am starting up………Ye Olde Dyke Building Company……..Goldman said
        they’d handle the IPO…………you want in?”

        Naw, but my great great great great grandchildren might though.

        You also forget to mention a few other things which affect ocean rise (or fall) beyond ice melt and thermal expansion. From Wikipedia “Global sea level is also affected by vertical crustal movements, changes in the rotational rate of the Earth, large scale changes in continental margins and changes in the spreading rate of the ocean floor…Post-glacial rebound can also be a cause of rising sea levels. When the sea floor rises, which it continues to do in parts of the northern hemisphere, water is displaced and has to go elsewhere.”

        But for greenies like yourself, ocean rise is just so simple, its all caused by us. Lol!

      • metalflyer11

        First was a New Ice Age was coming(Global Cooling the weather fear mongering if the 70s). That did not happen, now is Global Warming, no wait, more than a decade has past and Florida is still not underwater like Gore promissed lets call it now Climate Change(this way sounds more generic so no matter how the climate goes they win) and lets blame humanity for everything that happens in the planet so the UN can implement a carbon tax.
        I want a clean planet and leave some protected areas for wildlife to, but all this Green Religion about climate is nothing more than a scam to take all private property away and create a perpetual tax. Wake Up!!!!!
        Sorry, but if the government or the UN fearmonger me for money, I have to question it.

      • Feargal

        Wake up people !! Global warming is a natural occurring phenomena and it happens in cyclical patterns. Take a look at this link, it was released recently without any huge media fanfare !! The truth is that all the models they use to forecast and predict global warming are totally inaccurate as there are too many variables not incorporated into the working models to give a true and accurate picture !! The Green Industry is a multi-billion dollar business and their continued profit growth depends entirely on the bogus global warming reports. See the attached link, it details the latest findings

        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2217286/Global-warming-stoppe
        d-16-years-ago-reveals-Met-Office-report-quietly-released–chart-prove-it.ht
        ml

    • Need PROOF of global warming

      Years ago when I was a student at SSU in the late 1960′s. I had a professor, a Dr Weston, who pointed out the fallacy of the global warming theory and to illustrate the point she referred to the Arizona desert and the Saquaro cacti as an example. The Saguaro cacti is susceptible to cold temperature, if the air around it freezes the water in the cacti freezes and kills the plant. The cacti grows about an inch per year. The normal nothern range of the cacti is the Mexican border or thereabouts. As the cacti started expanding it’s range northward. The alarmists hung thier hats on the fact that the cacti was now in N Arizona, and the alarmists pointed to the cacti as proof that there was global warming (remember this was in 1969-70) It only tood one cold snap to freeze out the cacti and move it’s living population back to the southern AZ border and leave 20 foot high Saguaro cacti skeletons in the area around Sedona and Flagstaff. growing an inch per year it took 240 years for the cacti to spread into nothern AZ but it only took one cold snap to kill that 240 years of expansion back to the natural cacti range, habitat. When you can show me a thousand or so years of real statistics/proof ( not manufactured in some professors mind/notebook) showing increasing temperatures, I’ll listen to your argument of global warming until then you are just blowing hot and no matter how hard you try that amount of hot air will not change the climate.

      • klem

        There’s plenty of proof of global warming, plant migration is not a good example, its for non-scientists and journalists really. Where I live my house is built on a drumlin which are piles of gravel left from the last glaciation. They are the best evidence of global warming I know of. Today’s arctic ice is now 4000 miles to the north of my house. That’s a glacial retreat of about 20 miles per century, far fast than any glacial retreat we see today.

        If you’re looking for proof that humans caused that warming, you’re not going to find much.

    • Feargal
  • Alex

    Weird that so many of you readers doubt the overwhelming amount of science and yet
    accept that a man and his kids built a boat that could hold TWO of every land-based
    creature as well as the food they needed, sailed around for several weeks, and did not lose
    a single one of the hundreds of thousands of creatures on the big boat. Ridiculous.

    • Doc Sarvis

      Thanks for pointing this out Alex.

      • Alex

        My pleasure….

    • Stephen Keith

      Alex, there are not hundreds of thousands of landbased creatures to put on an Ark. There easily would have fit two of every “kind” of species into the Ark. Please read to get informed not just reactionary. Whose Science are you reading and believing? How can warming make more ICE> not a very good Scientific Theory!

      • Alex

        Well, there are appx 800,000 types of insects alone. I do not know how many would need
        to remain airborne for several weeks. Let’s just assume that the vast majority of them were able to remain airborne for several weeks—say 700,000—that leaves 100,000 that would need to get onto that ark.

        Birds-of-flight might be okay for a few days, not all of them have the capacity to fly for such an extended time.

        Most reptiles and mammals, aside from the Cetacea, could not remain water-bound for an extended period of time.

        C’mon, Stephen–there is just no way!

        When Christian fundamentalists say one must accept the bible AS IS—no questions asked—then they lose all credibility. Christians, and really, followers of all other religions,
        should try to distinguish between actual “spiritual” occurrence–of which one may make a rather strong case—and the rantings of MEN who wish to tell YOU what GOD wants, always done in a play for power and money.

        Really, now—-two chinchillas, two rhinos, two gerbils, two sheep, two armadillos, two Black Widows, two chimpanzees, two gorillas, two auks, two oxen, two scorpions, two
        rabbits, two meerkats, two antelope, two pigs, two potato bugs, two orangutangs, two gophers, two cows, two giraffes, two spider monkeys, two ………

      • GALT

        Well Stephen if you are in fact scientifically informed, then the statement that claims
        the “giant ozone hole is caused by humans increasing global temperatures” should
        have struck you as being FALSE ……immediately………cfc’s are the cause of the hole
        which destroy the ozone when the polar ice mass is isolated, a seasonal cycle which
        is obviously repeated”………and which creates the hole……..

        http://ozonewatch.gsfc.nasa.gov/

        The other mysteries…….can be solved by reading the link above…….but here is
        another mystery for you………how do eskimoes manage to live in igloo’s made of ice,
        I mean it’s freezing in there, right?

        “and there you have it”?

      • TIME

        Dear Stephen,

        Its now quite well know in certain well informed circles that the ARK that Noha build was not quite what we wish to bend into a mind set that we can handle.
        Noha more than likely had an ARK that was a { genome vessel.} YES ~ It was more than likely quite large.
        Please try and think about the Technology that was more than likly used ~ and that it was not what we think it was ~ Or ~ what has been sold to us by the “Control Grid”

        From all of the {solid in hand evidence} that has been unearthed over the last 50 years – that is oddly still being shuned by not only the ” Religious” groups but also many within the Archaelogy communitys. So the question is ~~ Why is that?
        With all the evidence thats now available, in a real court of law, this case could not only be won; ~ but also ~ set forth new standards by its very existance.

        I ask that you explore deeper into the vast pool of evidence that is out there.
        I understand ~ its very hard to let go of long held beliefs ~~ but, afterall what did GOD give us brains for, if not to explore to learn and to expand our knoledge base.

        *** (PLEASE do ~~ Keep this in mind ) the fused “Genome block” that all humans have ~~ that no other animil on this earth has ~~ the first three letters in that fused block ~ are YAH, ~~ that means GOD, ~~ so you see science is not all bad,

        Saddly its just a case of whats been found and what LIES are being used to keep humans ignorant of such solid science backed evidence ~~ BTW ~ thats all out there for the viewing for anyone who dare step out of the pre made box’s within the noted control grid we are all told to stay within.

        We all have to open our minds when it comes to the BIBLE, don’t take the words in a Literal meaning, ~ open the scope of view to a larger base of view, ~ as in think out side the box. Also Please do keep in mind that the very word: BIBLE ~ comes from the root word “TO CONFUSE.” So this begs the question, Who wants you to be Confused?
        Let alone: for what reason is that?

        Peace and Love be with you.

        • RichE

          I thought its roots were in papyrus

      • TIME

        Dear Rich,

        Now thats really clever, thank you so much, that really made my day, :-)
        The better quality were written on linnen, only to be replaced by velum later on.

        For all of you; here are a few folks who’s works you may find of great interest as well aid you all in a better understanding of deeper thinking on all the issues we face now and will face in the very near future.,
        Again also what our ancestors long ago saw, as well experienced then tried to write in a way that they could understand.

        Klaus Dona,
        Richard C. Hoagland
        Richard Dolan, you may wish to start with Richards lecture at the Secret Space Program Conferance 2011 – this should rock your socks off ~~ Its on youtube.

        These folks are really just the tip of the ice burg in this venue, but are really great speakers and writers, I truly believe you will enjoy their work’s.

        Peace and Love be with you.

    • eddie47d

      What a silly article of coarse warming equals melting. Warming and melting together creates moisture which means more rain and snow at certain times of the year. That rain and snow equals more ice. The trick though is that eventually increased warming will lead to less ice and then fewer rains. Almost all glaciers have been going through that process for a few years now. Every year there is new ice but less of it. Over time its obvious where that will lead to.

    • Cwms2005

      Actually Alex it was 7 pairs of clean both male and female, one pair of unclean. And the Ark was rebuilt showing it was possible. But since the Bible is a foreign book to you and you are what is termed a “Scoffer” you would not understand.

      • Alex

        Just read the book and then do the math, Cwms2005.

        The Biggest Problem—-let me rephrase that—one of the many Biggest Problems with the
        bible (which I do read on occasion) is the reliance so many superstitious people have on OTHER superstitious people to “explain” what the book says—the book that has been
        rewritten from scraps, translated and hyper-analyzed by “experts” over millennia, and finally filtered to you by a guy who wants you to listen to HIS idea of what God wants while YOU pay for HIS home and lifestyle. What a racket!!

        I sure wish that more “Christians” would read, REALLY READ, the Sermon on the Mount
        —the ONLY words we know HE spoke because HE had them recorded. If you false Christians would listen to Jesus–to what Jesus said and not some self-appointed mortal point man for God—you would realize that Jesus, the sexually ambiguous Socialist with an over-achieving Father, would scorn those who would deny ANYONE from ANYWHERE medical treatment or food. And you better believe—IF you believe—that Jesus would
        offer no quarter to the War Profiteers who draw lines in His Father’s yard and drop explosives on the people on the other side….

    • Randy131

      Alex, there is no real argument that there is some global warming going on, which has happened down through history in what we describe as weather cycles, but the argument is what some today say is the cause for it. Some atmospheric scientist, just over 10 years ago, went to Geenland and Antartica to do ice borings on glaciers there, to determine the consistancy of the atmospheres during the last two great ice ages, since glaciers have yearly levels of snow, consistant to rings in tree trunks, which shows the make-up of the atmosphere of each yearly level. They discovered that the amount of carbon based gases in the atmosphere during those two great ice ages, shown by the yearly levels of snow during those ice ages, were 10 times the amount that they were when they had done the ice borings, and since the carbon based gases in our atmosphere has doubled since the time they did the ice borings, the carbon based gases in our atmosphere today is 5 times less than during those great ice ages. This indicates that carbon based gases in the atmosphere is not the reason for global warming, which now some embarassed scientist call climate change, and the only effect of the increase of carbon based gasses in our atmosphere, is an increase in plant growth and a natural increase in crop yields per acre because carbon based gasses are actually an airborne fertilizer. Another fact debunking the theory that increasing carbon based gasses in our atmosphere is causing global warming or climate change, is the reports put out by NASA and the Russian Space Agency, just 3 months ago, that their electronics they sent to Venus and Mars has consistently recorded increases in atmosphere temperatures on those two planets, consistent and correlated to that of the increase on Earth, yet there has been no increase of carbon based gasses recorded by their instruments on Venus or Mars, man-made or otherwise. Since only 19% of Earth’s atmospheric scientist buy into the theory that global warming or climate change is being caused by the man-made increase of carbon based gasses in the Earth’s atmosphere, means that the other 81% of Earth’s atmospheric scientist, who believe global warming or climate change can only be attributed to the Sun and its sun spot cycles, causing those historic cyclic weather changes on Earth, are probably correct and true. The shame of what is going on is that the theory postulated about global warming has never been proven true, but the poor people of the Earth are suffering from the increase in carbon based energy costs by those trying to stop global warming or climate change by limiting the use of carbon based energy through increase costs of said energy, with only much higher costs of alternative energies, therby the attempt to decrease a natural airborne fertilizer in our atmosphere, which helps feed the poor by increasing the crop yields per acre around the entire Earth, which also increases other plant life that increases the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere, given off by that plant increase. But all this global warming and climate change nonsense is being forced upon the people of the world for the sake of a scam, that makes these people pushing it very rich, through the sale of carbon credits from the undeveloped countries to the developed countries, with the people doing the barter getting a percentage of the sale, making them very rich and creating wealth distribution to those who do not produce anything, while the useful idiots the marxist always refer to, help the perpetration of this scam.

      • RichE

        Randy131,
        Which came first carbon credits or global warming? I find it hard to believe global warming is someone’s get rich scheme.

        Personally, I consider global warming and global polluting to be one in the same. The amount of litter in the USA amazes me. The biggest baddest dudes on the planet are a bunch of slobs.

      • David169

        Randy131, I agree with you 100% but you left out one thing.
        The “hole in the ozone” is as big of a fraud as the rest of their bunk. The earth is a huge bar magnet. The south pole is negatively charged. Ozone O3, is negatively charged; this causes the ozone to be repelled from the south pole and concentrated at the north pole. The proof this has existed since humans first walked the earth comes from our skin colors. Every race that evolved in the northern hemisphere is light skinned and every race that evolved in the southern hemisphere is dark skinned to protect them from the additional UV that the ozone in the north blocks.

    • http://boblivingstonpl.wordpress.com Bob Livingston

      Dear Alex,

      The God who spoke the universe into existence would have no problem putting his creatures on a boat. Whether you understand how he did that is irrelevant to Him.

      Best wishes,
      Bob

      • Alex

        Mr Livingston, I would just repeat my point that History shows that every time Reason puts a portion of the bible in an unkind light, the bible people start singing a new tune.

        And if you really think that the Earth is approximately 9000 years-old, then you can not be reasoned with. The moon is not made of cheese, nor does the Sun revolve around us, and
        no small family ever built a boat big enough to hold two of every creature and the food necessary to keep them from devouring each other—that is just science fiction, a pretty tale to tell when the shadows of our own mortality cause us to seek meaning beyond our Earthly lives.

        Is there anything else out there, beyond the limits of our mortal being? I think so, I hope so, but for me or anyone to try and quantify or explain the ineffable is as futile as trying to describe the very first meal, who sat where, and who said what, and what they had for dessert….

        • http://boblivingstonpl.wordpress.com Bob Livingston

          Dear Alex,

          You write: “Reason puts a portion of the bible in an unkind light, the bible people start singing a new tune.” True “bible people” stand by the Bible regardless of “Reason.”

          You write: ” The moon is not made of cheese, nor does the Sun revolve around us…” Non sequitur.

          You write: “…no small family ever built a boat big enough to hold two of every creature and the food necessary to keep them from devouring each other—that is just science fiction, a pretty tale to tell when the shadows of our own mortality cause us to seek meaning beyond our Earthly lives. Is there anything else out there, beyond the limits of our mortal being?” Yes. And just because you can’t grasp a thing does not mean it does not exist. The God who spoke the universe into existence and created all creatures can put them on a boat of his design.

          Best wishes,
          Bob

      • box-bb-car

        I always love how those who choose dispute God’s existence immediately want to limit him to the laws of nature as WE understand them. Matter to energy and energy to matter is something which we understand, however currently can only control a very limited version thereof. Why is it impossible for one to believe that an advanced being could not have control over a much broader range of such conversion. As such, creation of a world or a universe might not be such a far fetched idea. Nor would the creation of life. A much harder line to swallow is that Man, without intending to do so, could destroy his world. Nature, on it’s own, would extinguish Man, repair herself and continue on long before Man extinguishes her.

        This is not to say that none of what the Global Warming crowd desires to shove down our throat is good. I believe that there are many things that are desirable to do, just from a desire to be more efficient. Where many of us get into dispute with the ‘greenies’ is in the timeline, and thier desire to abridge liberties to get their way. I have found that the nature of most Americans, when told they ‘must’ do something is to dig in their heels and reply, ‘like helll i do’. This is especially true of intruding into one’s home, which the greenies do on a regular basis, getting products outlawed, or regulated out of existance. If this were a woman wanting an abortion we would hear all about a right to privacy and how it is her body (though, at the moment of fertilization it becomes genetically unique and not truly her body), however the same people who will defend her right to an abortion think nothing of violating the privacy rights of other americans in their homes to push thier agenda.

        If you choose not to have faith in a diety, so be it Alex, Galt. However Do not diminish our belief and cloak it in science. It does both you and science a dis-service. I likewise will not diminish your belief and use my own faith to justify it. We each will answer for our own decisions, right or wrong, and it will not be until we are gone that we will discover who was correct.

    • Created by God in HIS image

      I prefer to believe that God created man in his image and I descended from that man. Alex you can believe that you descended from a monkey along with the 0′bomb and algore and I’ll believe that you believe it but don’t expect me or others to believe the big bang theory is anymore plausable than intelligent design. There are too many liars in politics and science trying to make their mark in the world by achieving peer recognition or wealth to believe such nonsense. My ancestors were Adam and Eve, if you wish to believe you evolved from an ape that’s your problem only you have a long way to go before you have really achieved Adam and Eve’s status.

      • RichE

        God created man in his imagination makes more sense since he thought everything else up.

      • Chester

        The Bible says God created Man in his image, true, but it says very little about how long this took, or what route God used to accomplish it. Take a look at God’s concept of time when you have a chance and it will open doors you would probably rather leave closed. For someone or something that always was, always is, and always will be, what matter if it took a second, or a million years to get something done to Its satisfaction?

      • Dennis48e

        God spoke and BANG it happened.

      • Karolyn

        Man made God in HIS image. How else could he ever make any sense of anything? God has no “image”. That is, uness God is really of an alien race, which may very well be likely.

        • RichE

          God does too have an image! It’s the tiki rum mug and sense becomes a blured image after two.

    • klem

      Um Alex, its a story, a metaphor, perhaps a record of a past flood. Alot of us doubt the story AND climate science. Its ok.

    • T. Jefferson

      Please take into consideration the very large debris field which is floating towards the U.S. as we speak. During a global flood couldn’t a massively larger field exist? Couldn’t several massive fields have existed? Could these fields have supported many more animal species than one small boat? Then take into consideration the massive insect population existing on this rotting mass of vegetation.

    • jj

      Alex you are what the Bible calls the scoffers in the end days.You are a small proof that the Word is true.Get in the ark alex,before the door closes,Take Jesus as savior.

    • John Woodbury

      Why can’t damocraps at least admit others might be right? Oh, yes they have never been in a combat zone. Go to one and I assure you, you will be believing in Him.

  • Alex

    You will probably really freak when told that in most circumstances boiling water
    will freeze to ice faster than cool water.

    Tanzanian scholar Erasto Mpemba proved this.

    Ain’t science weird?

    • Gary L

      Who is in Antarctica boiling all this water?

      • Alex

        Most likely the Koch brothers….

      • GALT

        Hey, Gary L. here is a mystery question for you……..using the word manipulation trick…

        How do you get FIRE from…….ICE?

        That is way more powerful than warming…….

        But the answer is quite simple………P.S. the ice is frozen H2O, not tricky ice…….

    • klem

      I tried that experiment in high school but the cold water froze faster. I tried it several times, the cold water always froze first. It was actually a trick, my cold water was almost frozen to begin with, so of course it froze first. it was a joke but It upset my teacher a bit.

      • Dennis48e

        I tried it with tap water and hot water. They froze at the same rate.

  • Doc Sarvis

    The article fails to note how ice is rapidly dissappearing from the arctic.
    The southern hemisphere pole also started out as a much colder environment and so the melting effects of the warming are delayed there.

    • http://www.chandostransportsolutions.com GraemeB

      There is now green vegetation on Antarctica for the first recorded time. You note that I said 1st as it may have happened before.
      Also in Norman Wells, above the arctic circle in Canada, they are now growing 30,000lbs of potatoes out in the open, as the perma frost is no longer “perma”. And yet they say there is no global warming. I heard an “educated” guy say last week that not to worry as we will invent solutions to offset the effects of warming.
      If you are having prolonged heat waves in the 110F range and no bees, you will have no food, no water, and you can invent all you want. It isn’t going to save the planet

      • Ted Crawford

        I’m not aware of any, reasonable source that claims, ” There is no Global Warming”! I am aware of many that state there is no ” Anthropomorphic” Global Warming! I am also, unfortunately for the Progressives, old enough to remember the last time they tried to pull this “Anthropomorphic Global Climate Change” ruse!
        In the ’1970′s’, armed as now with volumes of “peer reviewed” data, Organizations, such as the National Academy of Sciences, World Meterologic Society, even NASA and John Holdren, frantically warned of Catestrophic World Crop failures, the lose of Coastal Cities and Port facilities, ETC.! We were about to be overtaken by a devastating Anthropomorphic climate change event, “The New Ice Age” ! According to them, even as we speak, New York City is suffering under an Ice Sheet over a half a mile thick!
        Climate change is cyclic! It has been occuring for eons and will continue to occur, with or without mankind as long as the Planet exists! The current phenomenon, Artic V Antartic, is scientifically explained by the Earths tilt on it’s axis, and several thousands of years from now, just the opposite phenomenon, will occure!

      • Alex

        Ted Crawfish– One could see your use of the word “Artic” as a typo, I suppose, but when you follow that immediately with “Anartic” you cast serious doubt on your intelligence….

      • Ted Crawford

        I should have known that I could never fool you! The missing ‘C’ gives me away! Everyone is well aware that the validity of any factual data is always predicated by the appropiate usage of the letter ‘C’! Oh well I had too try! Oh MY ! Is that too many ‘O’s or not enough? I get sooooo confused!

      • Feargy852

        You have hit on a very important point !! We know that maps and charts of Antarctica exist that demonstrate the land mass before it became a frozen expanse, so on this basis we know that Antarctica was not always frozen. We also know that the polar caps have shifted position possibly many times during the history of the planet. I speculate that Global warming does indeed exist however it is more likely to be caused by more powerful forces at play withing our solar system and universe. It is by no means a stretch of the imagination to suppose that activities on our own sun are having huge effects on our planet. I cannot say what is effecting our sun in such a way, however something is having a massive effect on the suns gravitational and electrical fields. This in turn has huge consequences on the earths electrical field and thereafter the weather patterns. All these events are a major influence on global warming effect on our planet. I also suggest that these events are cyclical and happen over a period of time like clockwork. Our planet is but one part in a vast cosmic mechanism and as our solar system and universe goes through this cosmic cycle it undoubtedly experiences huge physical changes which impact on our planets environment creating the Global warming effect. I also suggest that this fact is well known however certain powerful interests have pulled off the biggest con in the history of mankind by laying the blame on the human race. The reason for this is based solely on economics and the means to create huge wealth for the vested interest groups in charge. How come all homes in the world do not have solar heating and electrical systems installed ? The suns energy is without doubt possible the greatest free resource we have yet to install even a basic system will cost an exorbitant amount of capital, Why is that the case ? All these areas of alternative energy are profit driven and all green energy legislation is designed to facilitate this industry. Like most things in the world today ‘greed’ is the over-riding factor !! There are thousands of scientists with alternative answers to the global warming event, however if they as much as open their mouths they have their research grants and funding cut or terminated. What does this tell you ? Well it tells me that the so called accepted view on global warming is a crook of Sh.t and that its sole purpose is to allow the vested groups to extort vast amounts of wealth !!! Also any so called evidence put forward by the green lobby groups is merely conjecture, it has not been proven in anyway whatsoever !!!

      • klem

        “above the arctic circle in Canada, they are now growing 30,000lbs of potatoes out in the open, as the perma frost is no longer “perma”.”

        It was never really that Perma to begin with. You’ve got to remember, only 15k years ago that permafrost extended all the way down to the 43rd parallel, that’s 4000 miles to the south. Permafrost has been thawing in a northerly direction since that time, it continues to do so today. Eventually it will begin to freeze again in a southerly direction once more. I’m glad I won’t be around for that.

    • T. Jefferson

      Antarctic ice increases in winter. (It is winter there now) When it is winter there it is summer here. The biggest threat to arctic ice formation are ice breakers which constantly break up arctic ice keeping it from forming thicker sheets. Dont believe it? Try keeping them in port during the next winter period in the north. Use the “Ice road truckers” to get supplies to those who demand the right to remain in the north or have them stock supplies to last the winter.

  • John

    Amazing that the ozone is STILL opening decades after CFC’s were eliminated by changing EVERY air conditioner to ‘ save the ozone layer’! IF chlorine and bromine are NOW to blame, could the same scientists be WRONG about the effect (global warming) instead of just what is causing it??? Duh!!!

    • GALT

      No, John………not enough decades have passed………to have eliminated the cause of
      the hole, even if the cfc’s ban had been immediate and complete………due to brownian motion, atmospheric distribution of various gases takes time…….the expected disappearance of the hole was around 2050, assuming all cfc’s had been eliminated.

      The same time lag is true for CO2 trapped in ice cores………….there is a fifty plus year
      time gap between the avg concentration of CO2 at the equator, to make the journey,
      to the poles, and be trapped there………and this is also made further complex by the
      fact that the “ocean cycle” which absorbs CO2 at the poles and releases it at
      the equator, fluctuates in it’s ability to do so, based on “ocean temperatures”, the
      colder the ocean, the greater the absorbtion properties……

      But you are right, the FACTS that science reveals ARE AMAZING……..once
      you get past the need for simplistic and false explanations………and the use of
      “words” used to manipulate you…….

      • Ted Crawford

        ” not enough decades have passed to eliminate the cause of the hole” is Progressive speak for ” We still do not have total control of all the Earths Industries. As soon as we achieve that our Glorious Leaders will explain that all is well, and we can once again return to our assigned task for the betterment of the Commune”

      • GALT

        Why do the “mushrooms” get stupid and more even ignorant when their “meals” are interrupted?

      • Ken Young

        There are two major errors in the “scientific” arguments for global warming producing more ice. First, the ozone hole REQUIRES very cold stratospheric temperatures. That is why it only appears in the Antarctic winter. Global warming, assuming that it would also affect the upper stratosphere, would be expected to SHRINK or even PREVENT the ozone hole, not to increase it.

        Second, the loss of heat thru radiation to space is in the infrared (IR) band. Ozone (or the reduction thereof) primarily absorbs ultraviolet (UV) radiation. The amount of IR absorbed by the ozone layer is minuscule compared to that absorbed by carbon dioxide and water vapor in the troposphere. Hence, the ozone hole does not produce more cooling in the Antarctic.

        Back in the early days, soon after the discovery of the ozone hole over the Antarctic during the winter, I served on a PhD committee for a graduate student (on leave from NASA) whose thesis was on the various processes that cause the ozone hole to form.

        As a scientist who has spent years working in the field of atmospheric physics, I find it appalling that such egregious errors are being advanced to defend the religion of “anthropogenic global warming” by people who obviously do not have the background to evaluate or understand the science involved.

      • GALT

        Well that was exciting Tim……..unfortunately, we don’t know who you are talking to, and
        we don’t know who you are referring to……..and you might not know either…..

        Experts say that the increase in ice is the result of a giant ozone hole. And the giant ozone hole is there because humans are causing an increase in global temperatures. So there you have it, the ice is a byproduct of global warming.

        “A warming world can have complex and sometimes surprising consequences,” said researcher Ted Maksym.

        According to researchers, the huge hole is caused by man-made pollutants like chlorine and bromine, and the hole has a cooling effect this time of year. The cooling effect causes the wind to be stronger and more constant which results in the expansion of ice.

        Researchers also say that climate change makes the air carry more moisture.

        This is the product of the article’s author…….and there is only one quote…….all
        the rest is subject to question……..we have no source by which to judge the accuracy
        of what or who the author is referring to………..but there is clearly a problem between
        that which precedes the quote and that which follows it…………..because the cause of
        the hole is first “global warming”…..but then later he directly contradicts this by
        citing the cause as “man made pollutants”……….yet these experts and researchers
        are unidentified……….and the same………

        http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/03/110321-ozone-layer-hole-arctic-north-pole-science-environment-uv-sunscreen/

        When you figure out who you are arguing with and why or about what, please let
        us know……..

      • jj

        Hey Galt.why is Greenland named Greenland,what covered it with ice after the Vikings discovered it?It was green then ice covered,duhhhhhhh you mean climate changed without man?Yes victoria there is a power greater than man.

      • GALT

        Because Eric the Red had a jewish refugee on watch who spotted it from the pigeon’s
        nest whose name was Greene…….

  • Howard

    I actually believe that the Earth is warming. We are coming to the end of the last iceage, and will probably for sometime, be much warmer then when we were influenced by that event. Science wasn’t around during the start of the iceage, and therefore has to speculate about what caused it. Whatever caused it was probably a cataclysmic event that we don’t really want to see again. What is a fact however, is that not only scientist, are shortsighted. Politicians and some commentors, are much more myopic then they. Humanity as a whole are woefully limited by are short life span, when it comes to making absolute statements. Myself included.

  • rendarsmith

    A hole in the ozone is causing more ice to form? That doesn’t make sense, plus it totally contradicts Al Gore’s movie. His concern was that the ice caps were melting. It is true that air will carry more moisture at high temperatures, that makes more sense. A hole in the ozone would mean more UV rays passing through, that makes more sense than CO2 causing the globe to heat up. But wouldn’t that also mean more ice melting? This seems very speculative and theoretical. I don’t think these Global Warming alarmists truly have it figured out, and I don’t see how I can be expected to believe them when I don’t see them practicing what they preach (using private jets and limosines). If someone can shed more light on this I’m all ears.

    • GALT

      http://www.skepticalscience.com

      Should be all the light you need……..unless you’re a mushroom……..

      • John Woodbury

        Why is it that AGW fools er scientists get all huffy when their gravy train is threaten. He and almost everyone says there is global warming, some do not buy the bull. Ok people nothing to see here just leave your money and move on.

  • TIME

    Dear People,

    What is happening is really quite simple, we are in a “cycle” of what happens over and over again.
    Saddly as we also have a “Profit driven” Power hungry gang of Criminals who run the world. So the question is what can you expect but mindless rhetoric to confound the mass’s into allowing these special CRIMINAL to rape you for yet one more insane criminal act.

    Oddly ~ these special people have in fact created a small part of this problem themself, that being ” Chemtrails” they have been spraying these since Bill Clinton started the program back in 1993 (JFTR) its all very well doucmented ~ this has been going on now for just shy of 20 years.

    Yes its has had an effect on the global temps, – so the questions are:
    Why did they start with the chemtrails?
    Whats the end result they are looking for?

    We know that these chemtrails do a number of things, First they keep the suns rays out, thus changing the overall weather world wide, such as lacking rains where it normaly rains, {{ think about the crops that keep failing year after year.}}

    Another point is that the compounds within this special mix are TOXIC to humans. Also keep in mind ~~ whats up ~~ has to come down, ~~ where it comes down is in your water supply, your fields where crops are grown and the very live stock you eat is consuming, also the very air you breath.
    As well it can clearly be seen – that over the last 19 years Cancer rates are growing in an upward levels ~~ by leaps and bounds.
    So what this presents is a very direct as well clear case of ~ “Cause and Effect”

    What was the “STARWARS” project really about?

    Something else that very strange is that well over {{ 100 now DEAD SCIENTEST }} who oddly just keep dropping like flys all over the world, keep in mind that many are involved with “astronomy” Oddly this would make astronomy a very hazardous job..
    Who would have ever thought ~ that looking at starts was such a dangerous job.

    Oddly whats the single thread they have all had in common?
    Well the Evidence is what it is, its very strong that all of these people had a common thread of finding something out in space thats coming toward us.
    Oddly its something that has a natural cycle according to many like: Zecharia Sitchin, oddly there are countless other scientest who agree with Mr. Sitchen on his findings, amoung them are 100 now Dead Scientest ~~ many by very strange and unique ways of passing.

    Thus one is left with a vast void of Intel yet we have enough by way of what was written by the Sumerians who again oddly wrote accounts of this 3500 year event and its ramifications.
    Any of you who have the corurage to explore these works will find that most of what you think you know ~ may quite well not be what really is. Who knows I can’t say, nor can most of you, ~ what I have seen in so far as in ” solid physical evidence” is quite compelling

    The quote: “History Repetes its self,” is not just a random mindless statment, there is a very good reason for it.

    Peace and Love be with you.

  • FreedomFighter

    One thing about experts, they are paid, whom are they, whom is paying these so called experts?

    A paid expert will say what the boss wants.

    Laus Deo
    Semper Fi

    • GALT

      Bush was paying Hanson…….for some reason, Hanson must have not understood
      the rule you seem to understand?

    • Karolyn

      So there are no “experts’ who are really only looking for facts? They are ALL corrupt? I highly doubt that.

      • TIME

        Dear Karolyn,

        Do a search for { dead scientist } over the last 12 years ~ I think what you will find is some rather interesting proof that if you’re a wistle blower within this noted community ~ you don’t last long. BTW ~ you don’t even have to be a WB, all it takes is a simple email. or phone call from someone who’s on a list.
        Some really strage things seem to happen to these folks: like being run over by your own car ~ in your own garage, now that one really sticks out!
        Or falling off a caged 8 foot tall platform area and landing on a bullet in the head, that one is also rather odd ~ but I am sure its very reasonable in some circles

        By the way the “NEW LAWS” on {{ Wistle blowers }} places them in direct harm and possible jail time, and hefty FINES too, thats if they don’t fall prey to perhaps hanging themself with a rope of what no other types of noted rope is within the home of the person who is alledged to have hanged themself. And the rope has no trace of the persons hands ever being on it where it was tied. Again I am sure thats within the norm in many circles.

        Peace & Love be with you.

  • USAF VET

    One of the main reasons for the lack of ice in the polar regions is the larger amount of saline content in the water. Therefore it has NOTHING to do with “Global Warming/Climate Change. Another reason they have found is the layer of soot that has been found. Gee, maybe there is something about carbon after all. But NOT CO2.

    • GALT

      Except that when ice melts it produces fresh water……in the antarctic it is the land ice
      which is decreasing which would be lowering “salinity” not increase it………the same
      would be true for Greenland, and all other land based glaciers whose “ice melt” ends
      up in the ocean………..

      http://www.skepticalscience.com/antarctica-gaining-ice-intermediate.htm

      As for your declaration regarding CO2………wrong again!!!!

      • RichE

        GALT,
        Wouldn’t that be the reason, the melting land ice lowers the salinity of the surrounding water?

      • GALT

        Not sure what the point of your question is? My answer was in response to:

        “One of the main reasons for the lack of ice in the polar regions is the larger amount of saline content in the water.”

        There is no saline content to land based antarctic ice………saline content would make
        ice slightly harder to form……..but the fresh water melt would make it easier, which explains the seasonal increase in sea ice……….which completely disappears in
        the antarctic during the summer……..

        The arctic ice is undergoing the same process……..but the long range effect here
        is that the depth ( thickness ) of the ice cap has been steadily thinning……..as a
        result in the summer, the edges of the cap are moving northward each year, exposing
        more water to sunlight……..and warming it, rather than reflecting it ( albedo ) as the
        ice cap would……..

  • Howard

    It is astounding to notice how many people seem to need a conspiracy theory to make their lives complete. We all thrash about blindly, but some seem to be concentrated on theories that make their fellowman into booggie men. They seem to forget that those same people are confined to this planet with the rest of us. Their offspring will have to contend with any conditions that they might initiate with their actions. I am sure that some people don’t care about their descendants, but any long range conspiracy that takes decades to install, defies any kind of logic at all.

    • eddie47d

      Not sure who you were poking at Howard since conspiracy plots are brought up on this site on a weekly basis. Kate 8 leads the charge and she endorses every conceivable one out there. Were you talking about corporations who pollute and ignore what they leave behind for their descendants?

    • Ted Crawford

      I understand your point of view Howard and I usually give very little attention to talk of hugh Conspiracies. However, in this case, I have first hand experience with this one! This one has been going on in it’s various phases , in my experience, since about 1971! At that time Organizations such as NASA, and individules such as John Holdren, began to sound an alarm, by 1975 the MSM had picked it up, Newsweek and Time for example. That time it was an Anthropomorphic Ice Age!
      As to the fact that they, and their decendants must share the same Planet, of course thay are aware of that! What they and I know is that there is little man can do, on a planetary level, that will have any kind of long term effects!

      • Howard

        Ted, 1971 was 40+ years ago. Given that most people don’t accumulate power enough to affect the world, until at least the age of 40, that would be very long range planning for something to take place in their 80′s. Not only would they be old, but probably not even alive. There isn’t any ageless booggie men running around, trying to turn the world into an uninhabitable chunk of space debris. Stupid men who are trying to turn a possible event into a way to make money? Yes. That is about as far into conspiracies as I will venture.

      • Dennis48e

        “Given that most people don’t accumulate power enough to affect the world, until at least the age of 40, that would be very long range planning for something to take place in their 80′s.”

        Howard I am not to big on conspiracy theories but you are ignoring something rather obvious. Those who were 40-60 in the 70′s would be mentoring 20 somethings who in theeir 40s and 50s eould mentor a new group so the possibility for that kind of long range planning is there.

  • Steven Savoye

    Guys, don’t loose any sleep over the theory of global warming, Obama’s debt. will kill us much sooner!!!

  • Algore’s Folly

    One need not look further than Algore’s embrace of global warming as a “fact.” This is the imbecile who attributed Obozo’s laughable, dismal performance at the first Romney debate to Denver’s altitude. But then again, Algore invented the internet, so he says. Democrats need to learn that they are just to stupid to lie and get away with it.

    • eddie47d

      Conservatives claim that there is no proof that there is global warming and say that
      their version is a fact. So the issue is who is right not whether Al Gore is wrong. Besides Al Gore never said he “invented” the Internet. Another Republican lie. Now he did say he had a part in getting it off the ground which was within our DOD. .

      • Dennis48e

        eddie the conservatives say there is no proof MAN CAUSES global warming not that it does not occur. In fact the variations in the sun spot cycle, variations in the tilt of the earth, and variations in earths orbit among other things we have no control over contribute more the the warming and cooling of the earth than man ever can.

    • http://gmail Harald A Smedal

      How about putting a second o in “to stupid to “, otherwise one might wonder who is more stupid.

    • Average Joe

      Al Gore may not have invented the Internet, but he did make up Global Warming….. ;)

    • http://www.sullivanhomeservice.com steve

      Are you so stupid you say “to stupid”? Next time try “too stupid”. Isn’t it nice to have mastery of your native language?

    • G.D. Wollesen

      Is Algore still around?

  • Stephen Keith

    Alex you need to read the book put out a few years ago by John Woodmorappe , Noah’s Ark: A Feasible Study. It shows well outlined facts how the creatures noted in Genesis could fit into the ARK. There are many other books out there also if you get on the Internet and put in those Questions you are throwing out to me and others. You can find “Scientific based ” answers for each that do not contradict the biblical account of the flood. I hope you will take the time with an open mind to read. Thanks for the dialogue.

    • Alex

      Eye will look into that book right now, Stephen. I’m skeptical, but I will go find out what I can and will do so with as open a mind as possible. Thanks.

    • Alex

      Stephen, I have read some things by and about John Woodmorappe but there is not a whole lot on his book “Noah’s Ark: a Feasibility Study”. Maybe I can find it in the library.

      I also looked into or reviewed a number of theories about Noah, his boat, and the flood, and it seems that, like so much of bible thought, the Judeo-Christian philosophy changes the rules each time things in the bible are shown to be completely ludicrous.

      That is the human problem—people interpreting this great historical novel, meant to be read as the Word of God, to fit reality or the interpreter’s personal views.

      While I, personally, believe in a God or some Gods, I think that it is ridiculous to imagine that I, or anyone else, can describe the ineffable.

  • Rennie

    Listen up you stupid manmade global warming trolls, IT’S STARWATER, not man made, not reversible by man, the planet has been warmer and the artic has been more ice free, they just ignore stats of those years (1889). suspiciousobservers vid on ytube to get started understanding as our atmosphere weakens you get holes and the water particles discharged by teh sun that normally enter at the poles, and build up ice, enter at other points and you get a “pop up” storm over dry land with three inches of rain in half an hour no one on teh weather channel, or even Al Gore, can explain. As for melting ice flooding NYC, put ice cubes in a full glass of water and let them melt, you will note the ice is mostly air bubbles and hardly effects water level. You should be more concerned what happens when another Carrington Event hits us because of said weakness in the atmosphere, that, like Fukushima, the BP gulf spill getting worse, or the Assumption Parish salt dome, three miles wide, eventually collapsing from pressure of crude oil invading it, flushing out the hazardous and radioactive wastes that had been dumped in the cavern years ago, it’s not a newstory they are allowed to talk about on the major networks. You govt and “powers that be” want you to stay distracted while they fleece the taxpayers and treasuries of every nation on earth to preserve themselves at our expense, WAKE UP! Trolls are TOOLS. Stop being used, start thinking for yourself.

    • GALT

      Really……..did you do all that thinking by YOURSELF?

    • JCfromDC

      Obviously a fan of Art Bell and George Nori (sic) and America Coast-toCoast at night.

  • Alex

    It is so revealing of the Conservative mindset that they so often whimper about “all the
    money ” being made by Al Gore and his Treehuggers, when the ones really raking it in—not just their own record profits, but BILLIONS in subsidies from YOU—the oil companies!!

    My God, you people are so stupid! Do you seriously think that the Green Energy people
    stand to make more many off of the wind and the Sun than the Koch Bros. do by despoiling the Earth? REALLY?

    The Oil Companies—the REAL American Welfare Queens—pocket the billions you so gladly give them AND year after year record record profits and you blame President
    Obama for the price of gasoline? Complete idiocy. Seriously, just complete idiocy….

    • Howard

      It would appear that all the liberal mind can think of, is how someone else is making money when they can’t. The man with the money becomes the booggie man for them everytime. They don’t have what it takes to make money without doing it illegally, and constantly scream because others accept the fact that some will always have more then the rest of us. Jealousy is the prime directive rather then actually working to accumulate a living for themselves. I just get tired of your mindless attacks on those who believe in God, and try to do the things that are good for everyone. I am not holding up for oil companies, but they found a niche in the progression of the world which made them very rich. It isn’t unusual for anybody to try and keep their golden egg from losing it’s value. How about go get a job and leave the rest of us retirees to do the gripeing?

      • Dennis48e

        “It would appear that all the liberal mind can think of, is how someone else is making money when they can’t. ”

        Its called envy. They are jealous of those more successful than them and envious of what they have.

    • http://jmcgraphicdesignworks.wordpress.com jcfromdc

      Ummm, sir:
      … so why did Ozone Al just recently buy a $9MILLION carbon footprint (read mansion) only 9 feet above sea level, when he’s “assured” all of us the seas will rise by 20 feet? And WE, not he, are all supposed to use less and go without? Remember, HE said there is NO DEBATE about any of this! Please.
      Drill here, drill NOW!

      • RichE

        Yeah, we should show Al Gore and the rest of them we don’t believe in their CO2 BS. We should have a national, “Breath Hard” day, when you answer your phone breath hard.

    • Jefferson Thomas

      Actually the bigger theft is going to the “green energy” companies. In the last 4 years the money stolen from the tax payers and given to Obummer cronies is equal to 50 years of subsidies given to oil companies. Most of the tax breaks go to oil companies who are drilling for new energy sources. Of course, I do not agree with government subsidies for either one of them.

      What do you mean by record profits? Do you mean the gross profit adjusted for inflation? Did you factor in inflation and the devaluation of the dollar? Did you factor in that it costs more to recover oil now? Do you mean the net profit which has stayed basically the same for many years? Perhaps you forgot to factor in the amount per gallon that is taken by federal, state, and local agencies that adds up to more than the profit per gallon the company makes?

      Despoiling the earth? You mean like wind generators and batteries for electric cars?

  • RichE

    What’s the purpose of the Arc story? Wouldn’t it’s meaning be of more import than trying to figure out how God got a square peg in a round hole?

  • klem

    You realize of course that more Antarctic ice means less ocean rise. This study goes against alarmist dogma, it means the end of the threat of ocean rise. Its the last thing the alarmists want to hear.

    This is a skeptic paper.

    • GALT

      and you should realize that this research pertains to “more sea ice”…….in the antarctic.

      sea ice is already in the ocean as is arctic ice and has no effect on sea rise…..

      ocean levels rising is caused by land based glacial ice which is decreasing……..and the
      stored water is being added to the ocean……..

      melting sea ice’s contribution to warming is that it is no longer available to reflect
      sunlight…….which means the ocean absorbs the heat……..antarctic sea ice completely
      disappears in summer……..and arctic sea ice is both thinning and receding each year….

      the same problem with understanding the effects of adding stored water to the ocean’s
      also applies to the increased CO2 being added to the atmosphere from burning
      stored carbon based fuels…………and methane 20x more warming than CO2, and Nitrous
      Oxide 5x more powerful than that……….but it is increased greenhouse gases that
      are the driving force……….

      Nature doesn’t burn stored carbon fuels for energy…..this is man’s contribution….
      but nature will adjust accordingly…….

      The only argument you have doesn’t concern whether this is happening or what
      the cause is……..your argument is that it doesn’t matter…….and nature will disabuse
      you of that notion in short order……….as it is already doing……

      ironically biblical because the effects are disease, famine, war and pestilence, no
      god required…….and no escape……

      feed on, mushrooms, feed on……

  • cerebus23

    Humans beings have only 200 years of “accurate” temperature data, and of that in the last 20 or so years we have seen how some of that can be suspect, U.N. studies falsifying numbers to make the temperatures drastically higher, so tell me when the earth itself has been heating and cooling for several hundred million years, with an ice age about 50,000 and regular periods throughout history of the earth icing up for periods of around 40,000 to 100,000 years in length with varying degrees of hot during the warm periods.

    when i was in high school at lest they were still teaching us that we were still coming out of the last ice age. was not until a few years later that the whole ozone global warming craze got going.

    70s they were still blathering about how global freezing was going to kill us all.

    the weatherman cannot even predict the local weather accurately, we have zero clue how lightning, tornadoes etc work or form. but now we can predict with a sliver of data exactly what the earth is doing and why it is doing it.

    the earth will get warmer and the earth will get colder and the plates will continue to shift and the volcanoes will continue to erupt, you know nature will do what nature will do no mater what we morals try and do to the planet. and it will do it naturally if we were not even here imagine that.

    if we do somehow shift the balance however all it would do is just accelerate natures counter balances, which has an amazing ability to bounce back from utter ruin time and time again,

    And at any rate no matter what we do one day the human race will end, be it super volcano, meteor, humans nuking each other, next ice age, and law of averages say some of those have a odd tendency to happen within certain intervals some of those are well within their can happen any day range even now, just by going on how often it has happened in the past.

    and imagine this if one of those does manage to take each and every one of us off off the face of the planet, and crush our citivilzation to dust the universe and the earth will keep going on, life will spring back up and so on.

    or to look at it another way, there is nothing humans can do that can top nature, nothing at all, nothing will match the amount of devestation of a sizeable rock slamming into the earth and liquifying part of the surface and creating nuclear winter and triggering other volcanoes to fire off with all the impact shock to the planet, or yellowstone national park going out with a big bang, some massive super volcano eruptions have killed off 90% of all life on the planet before.

    in short there is way too much money in all this garbage from studies to research to carbon offsets way way too much money and you do not get money if your one of the few saying this stuff is b.s.

    • GALT

      The “the whole ozone global warming craze ” as you say, is a figment of your imagination……..

      There is the “ozone hole” and “ozone depletion” at the poles……which occurs seasonally
      due to air mass isolation and the effect of cfc’s……..

      Then there is global warming due to the increase of green house gases…….

      They are not the same thing……….but thanks for sharing.

      • cerebus23

        they both kicked up about the same time is what i was saying but thanks but reading sort of.

      • GALT

        yeah, global warming is the clear path to tons of money………that is why we are fighting
        those war’s in the middle east……..we need those desert’s……

        Anybody know why Warren Buffet bought BNSF?

        Anybody know what a Master Limited Partnership is?

        No? Too bad because if you are unfortunate enough to experience the
        wonderful world of willard, these things which are already in motion will be
        unleashed to their maximum potential and you ain’t seen nothing yet…..
        unfortunately…..you will still be clueless and wondering what happened.

  • RichE

    The fact that hot water freezes faster than cold has been known for many centuries. The earliest reference to this phenomenon dates back to Aristotle in 300 B.C.

    Obviously Aristotle had a lot of time on his hands.

  • TML

    An ozone hole over Antarctica caused by man-made pollutants? I guess it must have drifted a long way and gathered together in a remote continent, hah

    Manmade global warming is pseudo-science.

    That “overwhelming amount of science” coincidentally never takes into account the single largest factor: the Sun.

    • GALT

      Yes, it is.

      No, it is NOT.

      http://www.skepticalscience.com

      Find all your questions ( if you actually have questions ) regarding the SUN, or any
      of the facts you believe are TRUE ( and which you will find are not true ) in the
      above link………..

      Of course, mushrooms won’t bother……and I don’t expect you will either…..

      • TML

        GALT says, “Yes, it is.”

        Perhaps you can point out where all this chlorine and bromine is coming from and how it affects the ozone…. Since obviously you have researched all this yourself.

        GALT says, “No, it is NOT.”

        Um, yes it is. It starts with the presupposition, the assumption within the hypothesis, that man-made CO2 or other pollutants are the primary effect on global climate change. In the entire history of the earth, ‘through earthquakes, volcanoes, plate tectonics, continental drift, solar flares, sun spots, magnetic storms, the magnetic reversal of the poles, hundreds of thousands of years of bombardment by comets and asteroids and meteors, worldwide floods, tidal waves, worldwide fires, erosion, cosmic rays, recurring ice ages’, and in just 200 years of industry (even less years of collecting data) man-made global warming is conclusive? Sorry friend, I remain skeptical.

        And to have a politician (Al Gore) be the one to adamantly pursue it for the sole purpose of taxing the air we breathe makes me even more so.

        GALT says, “Find all your questions ( if you actually have questions ) regarding the SUN, or any
        of the facts you believe are TRUE ( and which you will find are not true ) in the
        above link………..”

        Actually no, I don’t have questions. If I did I would have asked them. Your arrogance to immediately presuppose that any facts I have about the Sun will be found to be untrue, is amusing.

        Btw, I checked you link and about the Sun on that page was the following sentence…

        “Sun is the fireball in the sky that controlled Earth’s climate until mankind took the control.”

        So apparently the Sun just stopped to take time off since mankind took over the job as climate destroyer. Get real

        GALT says, “Of course, mushrooms won’t bother……and I don’t expect you will either…..”

        Don’t get your panties in a wad just because I don’t accept man-made global warming as fact.

      • GALT

        Dear Mushroom……the link provides the actual science behind for 179 misconceptions
        that “denier”s have tried….with basic and intermediate explanations…….all in one place
        although the common one’s are right up front……

        Your belief is probably that the sun is getting hotter……which is not true…..

        If an actual scientist has made the argument ( for denial ) you will find him/her/them prominently listed at the top…….and then the reason they are wrong following it…..so
        this could be useful for you as a “mushroom”, since you can quote the denying
        scientist and omit the “other side”……thereby making yourself appear intelligent,
        unless you get caught………

        Man made influences to warming/climate change are in addition to any and all natural
        cycles that may be in play…….and the result of using carbon based fuels for energy,
        which is warming the oceans the PRIMARY carbon sink on earth, and this will trigger
        other effects over time………but since you have no desire to understand and no
        questions……no further time need be wasted……

        As for the source of those chemicals……cfc’s, that is covered above, scroll up if
        you have the strength……

  • Josey Wales Sr.

    I ALWAYS heat my water to get ice … don’t you, you silly heads?

    • klem

      Me too, I also freeze my water before making coffee in the morning. It’s my excuse to go out and get my morning joe at Starbucks.

  • Kinetic1

    A lot of the posts responding to this article ask either a) How can you read this article and still believe in global warming? or b) How can you base anything on the “facts” presented in this article? The answer: Bryan Nash.

    • GALT

      hhhhhmmmmm I saw one actual quote……..two contradictory “causes”, for the ozone
      hole………and no support to establish any connection between the ozone hole and
      global warming……….some stuff about ice and warming……and a couple of “declared
      conclusions” which are reached with out any scientific support……..

      the mushrooms did seem to like the simplistic and naive realism that is permitted when
      one tries to suggest that warming leads to greater ( sea ) ice……unfortunately that
      is NOT the scientific reasoning…….since the sequence and elements involved are not based on warming = greater ice………

      unfortunately while the author is responsible for all of the above, it has been brought to
      my attention that to point this out……..can and will be interpreted as a violation of
      the host’s policies regarding author’s and slander…….which can result is the “moderation
      of all comments”……..and of course the “ultimate penalty”……..exorcism

      for some reason “mushrooms” are important and they must be fed…….therefor
      mushroom feeder’s are a protected species……..which hopefully, means they
      are not easily replaced? ( small consolation in real terms )

      • Kinetic1

        GALT,
        Clearly you understand. I have never read a BN article that did not cherry-pick the facts (if he bothered with facts at all) and guide the reader to his own preconceived conclusion.

        As for this particular article, it suffers from the same poorly chosen term, “global warming.” Anyone who truly understands the effects of the changing Gulf Stream knows that “Global Climate Change” is a more accurate description.

  • cwms2005

    On the flip side, Global cooling cretaes vast desert expanses.

    • klem

      So does global warming, where’s the flip?

  • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing Jay

    Well well well, listen to Galt the Gaul-able, spends most of his time calling everyone gullible, dupes without understanding, that will believe everything the political-higher-archy tells them, then turns right around and becomes a preacher of global-warminhg, proclaiming the scientific-farce as the Gospel. Oh yes, he claims the science behind it to
    be perfectly legitimate, since it cometh from the mouths of respectable scientists, all of whom are generously funded by the political-establishment he claims we are all fools to trust. ROFLMAO…

    • GALT

      Actually mushroom Jay, I accept the science………was aware of the effects of co2 and reducing atmospheres as early as 1968, ( Asimov ) and global warming in the 70′s from
      R.B. Fuller…….I couldn’t care less what the political agenda,s are and most of what you
      experience and will experience is “human greed” and “business as usual”……and the
      fact that “homo sapiens” in general are not particularly intelligent, are driven by the
      biological agenda’s that evolved in 195, 000 year’s prior to the advent of agriculture,
      which include the practices of deception and self deception as a means of achieving
      those goals……..leaving us ill equipped to deal with our present reality…..which if
      continued will make us the first and only self exterminating species this planet will see,
      since complex life will probably not be possible in the aftermath….let alone another
      self aware and self proclaimed intelligent one…….

      It is this understanding which makes me a P.L.F. and your failure to understand this
      that makes you a FOOL……..all really quite simple, as you can see……

      Of course another recognizable distinction is that the obvious difference in actual knowledge of this reality…….has led me to form further questions regarding human behavior and beliefs……..and to pose them, and for which you seek to characterize
      me as arrogant or superior……..while most of you, already know everything and never
      have any questions……..and like all the fools that have preceded you, the natural
      solution is that you have to die out, giving the next generation a chance, hoping that
      they will have adapted better to the reality they have experienced, and will choose
      to do things differently…….but the rate of change is accellerating, so the
      only real question is……do we have that much time left……..and only time will tell.

      But “willful ignorance” is a choice…….and I have no problem pointing it out, nor
      do I care what your opinion is of me or the approach and tactics I have adopted…..
      ‘willfully ignorant” people have no value to me……nor can they be of assistance
      in actually solving the “problems”…….actually intelligent people on the other
      hand would not dismiss me so readily and that is all I am seeking……..from
      that, all things are possible……..that you will not be one of these is not something
      that will cause me to lose any sleep…….that which is inconsequential and irrelevant
      is beneath notice………

      But thank you for the opportunity to actually lay this out for you……I will save it and
      post it again for you and “others” as y’all tend to “forget”….and keep returning
      and repeating that which serves no purpose except to confirm your own status
      as the w.i. A.L.F.s you continue and are determined to be…….and remain.

    • Ken Young

      Amazing. Now I understand why there is such controversy on this topic. None of you have any real knowledge of the underlying science. It is a good thing none of you were enrolled in the lower division college course on Meteorology and Climatology that I taught for many years. You would all have earned a grade of “F.”

      • klem

        Exactly right, disagree with climate alarmism and get an ‘F’. What else is new?

  • auhunter

    I must have missed that class session in physics or chemistry, for some reason I always thought heat melted ice. Now the water from that could move to a different area on a flow or berg and then refreeze but it doesn’t change the mass, at least to any measurable degree of loss.

    • GALT

      well then you should speak with the author, because that was his characterization and
      has nothing to do with the actual scientific point of the research…..nor any of the serious
      discussion that followed in the attempt to correct it……..which is everything in between,
      the initial article and your comment………which contradicts itself and could not
      possibly make any sense to anyone with minimal reading comprehension skills…….

      but thanks for sharing what you thought was “important”……you (sadly ) are not alone,,,,

    • klem

      But that scenario has no climate fear attached to it.

      Is thou a climate denier?

      Blasphemer!!

  • Jimbo

    I keep hearing people say how “hot” it was this past summer. I live in NY State, and am 58 years old. I can remember many summers as a kid which were much warmer than this past summer. All summer long, whenever the local meteorologists announced days which were warmer than average, the scientists said it was “global warming”! When the temperatures were colder than average, the scientists said it was, “global warming”! When we had less rain than average, “global warming”! More rain? “Global warming”!
    I learned the hard way from years of engineering work, that if you go looking for data to support your theory, you can always find data to support your theory. That doesn’t mean your theory is correct. To really confirm a theory, you have to consider ALL data. Even data that you don’t like.

    In the early 80′s the environmental scientists said that children in New Zealand were going to die from skin cancer unless we did something about the “ozone hole”. They insisted we ban the freon in aerosol cans and R12 refrigerant in auto air conditioners. We wound up with CO2 aerosol cans, and less efficient R134 refrigerant. The smaller CO2 molecule leaks out of cans prematurely, and into the atmosphere. Millions of cans of paints, oils, and hair spray go to the dump prematurely, and leak into our water table. Our cars use more gasoline to run their air conditioners. So the Koyoto accords actually INCREASED our carbon footprint. And now the scientists say our CO2 and carbon emissions are causing “global warming”! And the kicker? A few years after they banned freon and R12, other scientists discovered that the ozone hole is a cyclical event that happens every 50,000 years!

    Supposedly, there is a consensus that CO2 and carbon is causing a greenhouse effect. So they tell us we have to worry about the pittance of fuel consumed by our weed wackers. Yet these same scientists think nothing of launching space shuttles with millions of gallons of rocket fuel. All so they can send some tomato seeds into orbit for school kids to play with!

    Maybe the IS earth warming.. But what do they claim? 1/2 to 3/4 degree over the past 100 years. Just how accurate were the temperature meters 100 years ago? Did they make the measurements in rural areas or big cities? How do they weight all the measurements? Are carbon emissions the real cause of warming, or could it be something else? (like an increase in solar radiation or undersea volcanoes) We have had a reduction in the number of sunspots for decades. That should be obvious to anyone who listens to AM radio. (Sunspots are necessary for good AM radio transmission. ) Sunspots are cool spots on the sun. Less sunspots, means MORE solar radiation. Does that account for the measly 1/2 to 3/4 degree warmup?

    If Barack Obama and the environmental scientists are really concerned about global warming, I want to see what sacrifices THEY are willing to make FIRST before I change my life around to accomodate their theories.

    • GALT

      Wow Jimbo you sure put a lot of work into that……..too bad it was a waste of time,
      BUT if you had FACTS or a CLUE as to what the facts MIGHT BE……..one wonders
      what you could possibly have to SHARE…….so start with THIS:

      Montreal Protocol, officially the Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer, treaty signed on Sept. 16, 1987, at Montreal by 25 nations; 168 nations are now parties to the accord. The protocol set limits on the production of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), halons, and related substances that release chlorine or bromine to the ozone layer of the atmosphere. On the basis of increasing scientific knowledge about the effects of CFCs and halons on the ozone layer, the original protocol has been amended several times. At meetings in London (1990), Copenhagen (1992), Vienna (1995), and Montreal (1997) amendments were adopted that were designed to speed up the phasing out of ozone-depleting substances; not all parties to the main protocol are parties to these amendments. The production and consumption of halons was phased out by Jan. 1, 1994, and of CFCs, carbon tetrachloride, methyl chloroform, and hydrobromofluorocarbons by Jan. 1, 1996, subject to an exception for agreed essential users. Methyl bromide was to be phased out by 2005 but a number of users of the chemical have won temporary exceptions from the ban, and hydrochlorofluorocarbons are to be phased out by 2020. (Phaseout dates are later for developing countries.)
      Under the protocol, the ozone-depleting potential, or ODP, of any substance is measured with respect to an equal mass of CCl3F, or CFC-11, which is assigned a value of 1.0. Most other CFCs have ODPs that range from about 0.5 to about 1.3.
      Hydrochlorofluorocarbons, which are being used as transitional replacements (until 2020) for CFCs in refrigeration, have ODPs that are generally less than 0.5.
      Hydrofluorocarbons, which are also replacing CFCs as refrigerants, have ODPs of zero. Ozone-depleting potentials are based on existing scientific knowledge and are to be reviewed and revised periodically.

      Now Jimbo you have some FACTS to work with, although it might HELP if you actually
      were aware that the “ozone hole” and global warming/climate change are separate
      and unrelated issues……..of course this is not entirely your fault, as the “author” of the
      piece, does not understand this either………and he manages to contradict himself
      in his rather short piece…….in the first two paragraphs…….and again at the end…..

      Not that this would matter to you………

  • Rennie

    I would introduce you to the “electromagnetic universe” and “starwater” theories (see online videos), they are more credible and while they support the idea of earth/climate changes they also explain simultaneously observed changes on other planets in the solar system without humans or old buicks and cadillacs on them, it is a natural and unchangeable cycle, we can only adapt, we can not change these forces or events. But these are events which can bring technology crashing down, food shortages, and every fragile nuclear power plant or radioactive waste storage (no such thing as “disposal” as they have tried in Dalgeity Bay, Los Alamos, the russian Artic Sea or a salt dome cavern in Assumption Parish) to become a problem. None of the carbon credit scheme does anything helpful, it only helps loot the national treasuries, destroy taxpayer’s savings and locks down the population so they lack the economic freedom to relocate and prepare for changes, so taht a powerful minority can equip themselves and their families to survive at everyone else’s peril. Man made global warming is a hoax, careful analysis of ice core samples and the solar cycle will confirm this, just consider the way they edit weather statistics to ignore the c. 1859 and 1889 weather/artic ice reports or tree growth rings. We are going to see changes, the foolish can expect govt to save them, or think changing lightbulbs will help, the even more foolish will suggest the failure of “green” technologies will embrace nuclear power even more (which is what Obama is doing, he has had Hillary tell Japan to reverse their anti-nuclear position). Al Gore’s scheme seems to be indirectly promoting more nuclear power when we should be realizing it’s a manmade blight on humanity and a legacy of toxic waste that will live for hundreds of thousands of years, quite possibly beyond our civilization.

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.