The Information Age

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Tempest

That is not even close to the entire thing melting.

You are going to be very surprised. I believe that the melting is underestimated. I seriously doubt that a lot of thought has gone to how much energy the "Latent Heat" of ice absorbs as it melts. As I have said before: Notice how warm your drink gets once the ice melts .

The Latent Heat (for those of you scientifically inclined) that the ice is absorbing is keeping the ocean and weather temps under control. Be prepared to find some ice for your own personal ice vests when its (polar ice) is gone.
 
Originally Posted By: moribundman
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Originally Posted By: moribundman
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Originally Posted By: MarkC
Might be slightly exaggerated, but there will eventually be ice-free passage where there isn't now, assuming things continue on this trend.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20080627/sc_livescience/northpolecouldbeicefreethissummer

What a load of excrement.


Eight years ago: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/888235.stm

That is not even close to the entire thing melting.


And the article doesn't claim "completely melted" anywhere.

So why did you post it in ref. to my response?
 
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Originally Posted By: moribundman
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Originally Posted By: moribundman
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Originally Posted By: MarkC
Might be slightly exaggerated, but there will eventually be ice-free passage where there isn't now, assuming things continue on this trend.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20080627/sc_livescience/northpolecouldbeicefreethissummer

What a load of excrement.


Eight years ago: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/888235.stm

That is not even close to the entire thing melting.


And the article doesn't claim "completely melted" anywhere.

So why did you post it in ref. to my response?


Perhaps he thought you might actually comment on the offered information instead of being a contrarian. Debate and denial are two very different things. Contradictions are not arguments.

as always, though, ABUSE is two doors down on the left...
 
Ah ..we get closer to "truth in coaxing opinion and the dissemination of misinformation"

Quote:
A UN panel is supposed to decide on control of the Arctic by 2020. Last year, Canada's Conservative government announced plans to acquire up to eight Arctic patrol ships and to build an army base in Resolute Bay and a naval station in Nanisivik.

Under the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, Arctic countries have 10 years after ratification to prove their claims under the largely uncharted polar ice pack. All countries with claims to the Arctic have ratified the treaty, with the exception of the United States.
 
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Ah ..we get closer to "truth in coaxing opinion and the dissemination of misinformation"

Quote:
A UN panel is supposed to decide on control of the Arctic by 2020. Last year, Canada's Conservative government announced plans to acquire up to eight Arctic patrol ships and to build an army base in Resolute Bay and a naval station in Nanisivik.

Under the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, Arctic countries have 10 years after ratification to prove their claims under the largely uncharted polar ice pack. All countries with claims to the Arctic have ratified the treaty, with the exception of the United States.


What I find Ironic is that the Canadian Conservative government are climate change obstructionists yet their defence policy recognises that the polar ice will disapear in the near future.
 
Originally Posted By: MarkC
Originally Posted By: buster
One thing we can't deny at this point and that is our climate is changing.


You'd be surprised at what people can deny.


Yeah but those people that refuse to look at evidence really are not worth debating. People are free to believe whatever they want even if it is wrong.
 
Originally Posted By: Duffman77

Yeah but those people that refuse to look at evidence really are not worth debating.

Really true. I am really trying to understand what makes them cling to a belief system that is clearly wrong..trying to understand their motive for sticking with a Model T Ford.
 
Originally Posted By: Al
Originally Posted By: Duffman77

Yeah but those people that refuse to look at evidence really are not worth debating.

Really true. I am really trying to understand what makes them cling to a belief system that is clearly wrong..trying to understand their motive for sticking with a Model T Ford.


Oh ..you're trying to see what makes them tick? Don't assume that they REALLY believe (or disbelieve) what they rhetorically fight or defend. That would be really odd for an alleged intelligent person to just replay a version of The Emperor's New Clothes. What you're seeing is the rhetorical propaganda designed to stifle meaningful debate and the attempt to "stay the course".

Now the REAL question is why would anyone want to stay the course and move closer to self destruction and extinction?? There's where the true convoluted and warped concepts exist.
 
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan

Now the REAL question is why would anyone want to stay the course and move closer to self destruction and extinction?? There's where the true convoluted and warped concepts exist.

Yea..that clarifies my question.
cool.gif
 
More likely, the desire of not being wrong and not wishing to lose an argument.

Like Rush Limbaugh...he has pretty much staked out his claim (to fame) against it. So he really can't change his tune and lose his credibility. Of course even as a conservative he has zero of that with me anyway.

Guess I'm just jealous that he is a Bazillionaire and I'm not. But I guess if you can rail against drugs and be a druggie yourself, credibility isn't a problem (to his listeners)
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: moribundman
Fear of change may be the answer.


I'd say that's true for the masses. A shocking paradigm shift just doesn't work well due to disenchantment.

..but I think that there's more to it for those who are trying to effectively (in appearance) handle the grand preponderance of evidence that is counter to their rhetorical stance.

That is, it's an effective deception to mask another, even less defensible, philosophical stance.

I really sensed a "race" ..or at least the anxiety level that a race can generate, with the rhetorical counter campaign of our current pending crises. It appeared like a multi-axis effort.

Seeding a carbon intensive emerging economy ..stifling enlightenment on environmental issues, accumulation of insurmountable debt, extending false euphoria via a unsustainable economy..etc..etc.

..all appeared to be a all out attempt to reach some point of no return.

I really think that we've turned a very dark corner in human history.
 
Speaking of Ice. Relatively simple calculation. As the ice melts..it seems logical to suspect that the ocean will warm up quicker. Like when ice melts in your drink. If the average depth of the ocean is 12,400 ft and the volume of water expands about 2/16000 for each degree F. One degree translates into 18.6 inches.

Get your boots.
 
That's one aspect most don't consider. Many cite the floating ice cap (and tend to ignore the land masses that surround it which will also lose ice) ..but don't consider the expansive part of the equation.

I'd say an investment in the Northwest Territories and Alaska (and Siberia for that matter) are in order. I'd plan on flattening some mountain tops too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
  • Locked
Tax Propoasal Raises Tax on Domestic Companies
Replies
0
Views
32
Trvlr500
buster
  • Locked
ExxonMobil CEO defends high profits
Replies
11
Views
4K
ekpolk
T
  • Locked
Cuba to drill five new oil wells
2
Replies
27
Views
14K
Silverado12
T
  • Locked
Oil will dominate for decades and why
Replies
13
Views
4K
MarkC
P
  • Locked
U.S. Energy Independence Soars To Highest Level In Over 70 Years
Replies
10
Views
3K
Astro14
Back
Top Bottom