It's the melting ice says The Independent : Melbourne Indymedia

"Scientists sound alarm over melting Antarctic ice sheets

By Steve Connor, Science Editor in San Francisco
Published: 16 February 2007

The long-term stability of the massive ice sheets of Antarctica, which have the potential to raise sea levels by hundreds of metres, has been called into question with the discovery of fast-moving rivers of water sliding beneath their base.

Scientists analysing satellite data were astonished to discover the size of the vast lakes and river systems flowing beneath the Antarctic ice sheets, which may lubricate the movement of these glaciers as they flow into the surrounding sea.

The discovery raises fresh questions about the speed at which sea levels might rise in a warmer world due to the rate at which parts of the ice sheets slide from the land into the ocean, scientists said at the American Association for the Advancement of Science in San Francisco.

"We've found that there are substantial subglacial lakes under ice that's moving a couple of metres per day. It's really ripping along. It's the fast-moving ice that determines how the ice sheet responds to climate change on a short timescale," said Robert Bindschadler, a Nasa scientist at the Goddard Space Flight Centre in Maryland, one of the study's co-authors.

"We aren't yet able to predict what these ice streams are going to do. We're still learning about the controlling processes. Water is critical, because it's essentially the grease on the wheel. But we don't know the details yet," Dr Bindschadler said. "Until now, we've had just a few glimpses into what's going on down there. This is the most complete picture to date about what's going on," he said.

The findings, to be published in the journal Science, came from satellite surveillance of the surface elevation of the ice sheets, which found that they rise or lower depending on the amount of water flowing between the base of the ice sheet and the rock beneath.

The scientists identified many regions of the ice sheet either rose or deflated between 2003 and 2006 as a result of water movements below. Water would be capable of this because it is highly pressurised under the weight of the overlying ice, they said.

Glaciologists have known for some time that water exists under the Antarctic ice sheets - which can be hundreds of metres thick - but they were surprised to find how much water is involved and the speed at which it moves from one subglacial reservoir to another, said Helen Fricker at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego.

"We didn't realise that the water under these ice streams was moving in such large quantities, and on such short time scales. We thought these changes took place over years and decades, but we are seeing large changes over months. The detected motions are astonishing in magnitude, dynamic nature and spatial extent," Dr Fricker said.

The West Antarctic ice sheet is the second biggest on the continent, and the rate at which ice flows from it to the Ross ice shelf, and then ultimately into the sea, is critical in assessing the likely impact of climate change on global sea levels.

The study provides evidence that subglacial water is stored in a linked system of reservoirs underneath the ice and can move quickly into and out of those reservoirs. This activity may play a major role in controlling the rate at which ice moves off the continent, Dr Fricker said.

"The links between ice stream activity and the climate are not well understood. To predict how the ice sheets might respond to global warming, this new information is vital as it gives us a more complete picture of what is happening under the ice," she said.

The study was conductedusing the Icesat satellite. It carries a laser altimeter instrument to detect changes as small as 1.5 centimetres in the elevation of the ice sheet's surface, from an orbit of 400 miles above the earth. "From 600 kilometres up in space, we were able to see small portions of the ice sheet rise and sink," Dr Bindschadler said."

Suzuki Climate Interview
by Chris Arsenault
and David Suzuki

February 12, 2007

For the first time in a long time, the environment is getting some major attention, or at least major lip-service, from the powers that be, nationally and internationally.

To try and "turn concern into concrete action" David Suzuki, one of Canada's leading environmentalists, will be crossing the country in February on a 50 city tour, speaking with communities on the theme 'what would you do if you were Prime Minister.'

David Suzuki is author of more than 40 books including From Ape to Super Species and the Sacred Balance. He has a PHD in Zoology from the University of Chicago and was named one of the ten greatest Canadians in CBC's competition.

The following is what transpired when Suzuki spoke with ZNet columnist Chris Arsenault by phone from his office in Vancouver just before deadline last week.

Chris Arsenault: You've been talking about the environment and climate change issues for the last 40-some years. Why do you think world government and business leaders are finally starting to pay attention?

David Suzuki: The Federal government has gone through a change of heart because the public has registered this issue so high in the polls. People know there's something screwy going on with weather and climate.

Here in British Columbia, we've had incredible extreme weather. Storms destroyed 3,000 trees in Stanley Park. We have forests turning red from the pine beetles that aren't killed by cold winters. Tofino, in the rainforest, was shut down in the middle of tourist season because they didn't have clean water. All these things are coming together, and people are freaking out.

In 1988, I want to remind people, the environment was the number one issue.

That's why Brian Mulroney became the 'environmental Prime Minister', because the public was so worried. Very shortly after that, the economy became a concern because it went into a dip and everyone was worried about jobs. The economy is doing very well now so we can look at other things like health and the environment.

CA: If we are talking about the economy, the Alberta tar-sands oil industry is a major engine of growth and Canada's biggest polluter. How are we going to take on an industry with such political, regional and economic clout?

DS: Even [former reactionary Reform Party leader Preston] Manning, is saying that you can't just act as if air and water are free. It takes a huge amount of energy just to melt the tar sands and then you have to use a huge quantity of water. That's a cost which has to be internalized. Right now the oil industry is getting away scotch free. They aren't having to pay for the air and water they use.

If the industry were paying for the pollution, I don't think the tar sands would be economical right now. We've already subsidized the tar stands to the tune of billions of dollars. Those costs have been externalized; they should be internalized by the companies who are doing the polluting.

The reality is what we need right now is strong Federal leadership to set standards, concrete targets and legislate timelines to meet those targets.

We've got to stop subsidizing the fossil fuel industry. They're making windfall profits and we're still subsidizing them to the tune of billions of dollars. It doesn't make any sense. Take that money and use it for green energy, rapid transit and all sorts of other good stuff.

CA: In basic economics, an externality is a negative by-product from a commercial relationship which affects a party who isn't a direct participant in that relationship. For example, if a company pollutes a river which effects a community near its plant, the cost of the pollution is an externality.

When you talk about the fossil fuel industry being subsidized, do you mean they aren't paying the externalities associated with their operations? Or are you talking about direct government hand-outs to oil companies?

DS: They aren't paying their externalities: which is huge. But there are things like oil depreciation allowances. We allow oil companies to write-off costs associated with exploring for new wells and other expenses. If they [oil companies] don't pay the costs: that's a subsidy.

I think the terrible aspect of Canada is that we don't have a national energy policy that looks to long-term sustainability. We are going to need fossil fuels into the future but we have to develop those resources so we don't use them so rapidly and so we husband them for future generations.

Right now, we're rushing to ship them all to the United States and the free trade agreement says we can't step back.

If we decide, 'oh we're sending too much away, we have to save some for future generations', free trade says we can't do that. We're stuck, basically, providing for the United States. That's what the oil sands project is all about: providing the States with a more dependable source of oil than the Middle East.

CA: Realistically, with free trade and the commercial largesses of the U.S., is there any way we can craft independent energy policy? If we ever tried to, say, nationalize the oil industry, do you think they'd send in soldiers; turn Fort MacMurray into Falluja?

DS: I don't know what they would do. However, I think if we started to internalize the cost of water and air then immediately this whole thing would be slowed down a hell of a lot. At the rate we are going, the U.S.

wants to be taking 5 million barrels of tar sands oil per day out of Alberta. That would account for more than half of all the greenhouses gases we produce in Canada; it's just crazy.

They are developing a multi-billion dollar [gas] pipeline from the MacKenzie delta. All of that natural gas is going to be brought down, but not to heat our homes. It's going to be burned in the tar sands to melt the tar sands.

We need a comprehensive energy program that internalizes air and water; that internalizes the costs of what we are doing to the atmosphere. It ought to be a long-term program recognizing that we are eventually going to deplete all of our deposits. We are going to need most of that for our own people.

These resources are a one time gift. Once they're used up, that's it.

CA: In terms of greenhouse gases, George Monbiot, a popular columnist with the UK Guardian, argues the industrialized world must cut their greenhouse gas emissions by 90 per cent by the year 2030.

He says if this sort of drastic reduction is not made, world temperatures will rise to a point where "runaway climate change" could spell the end of civilization. What do you think about this stark position?

DS: Climatologists are saying a rise in temperature beyond two degrees a century is going to introduce so many unknowns they simply can't imagine what's going to happen. We are already melting the permafrost. We know there are massive deposits of methane there, which is 22 times more potent to the atmosphere than greenhouse gas.

Once we start releasing large quantities of methane into the atmosphere, God knows what the hell that's going to do?

We just don't know enough about what we are doing. There's a faith, or a hope, that if we can restrict greenhouse gas emissions so the temperature doesn't rise above two degrees, we can somehow mitigate what's going on and get through it OK.

I think a two degree rise is already a massive rise. We can't stop what we've already done. We've already added one third more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. It's going to take hundreds of years for that to equilibrate.

So, [George] Monbiot is absolutely right: we have to aim for a 90 per cent or more decrease in emissions. Not slowly at first and then do it rapidly later. We have to start rapid cuts now.

CA: If we seriously tried to cut emissions by 90 per cent, everything would have to change. What do you think the country would look like ten years from now?

DS: I think there would be all sorts of huge benefits. People wouldn't be as fat as they are now. I think the air will be much cleaner over our cities. I think there will be a beginning of a decrease in the rate of asthma, which now affects 15 per cent of children. Our cities will be more livable places because we won't be using cars nearly so much.

We'll have a live in a radically different way. We'll basically live, work and play in the same area, we won't need cars to cover that distance. We'll have to have dense pockets of settlement, connected to each other by rapid transit. I think there will be huge benefits.

CA: You've said this environmental craze once swept Parliament in 1988 and then faded. Do you think it will be any different this time?

DS: That's why I am going on this cross-Canada tour in February. We are aiming, not at the coming election, but we're saying, 'whoever gets elected, we have to make sure all of this concern is translated to concrete action'.

All of the parties are going to be singing green in this election. Now the question is: what are you going to do? We have to keep their feet to the fire and make sure there are hard targets and timelines to meet those targets. It has to be legislated.

We've got to start using taxation to encourage the things we want and discourage the things we don't want. We should pull back taxes on personal income and we should be taxing the hell out of pollution and carbon is one of those pollutants.

CA: You've been at this for a pretty long time, what are some of the most inspiring victories you have witnessed and participated in?

DS: It comes down to grassroots people and things that happen.

There are so many things at the level of individuals and their communities.

I wrote a book called, Good News for a Change: Hope for a Troubled Planet and it's filled with examples of what can be done by individuals, corporations, organizations and governments.

I'll be honest, when I started researching for it, I thought I might get a comic book sized book. To my amazement, I probably could have filled five books.

The good news is there's a lot of good news out there.

The bad news is that our so called leaders in business and government aren't interested, they just want to keep doing things the same old way.

Oh, lookit, Ethel! Bitter cold and ice is caused by "warming". Hot damn, am I glad I'm stupid!

National Guard troops used Humvees to ferry in food, fuel and baby supplies on Thursday to the lines of motorists caught in a 50-mile traffic jam on Interstate 78. Friday morning, the troops were busy towing away the remaining vehicles while road crews struggled to melt ice that had built up four to six inches in places....

I really have. I believe what Brainiac says, that excessive warmth causes hard winters.

I'm not an Unbathed mentally crippled Gore parishioner, but that doesn't mean it's not true, and if you don't believe me, then you're not who I'm talking to.

Climate change is going to harm the ECONOMY!

I saw it in THE AGE today.

Don't you know?

I can see that it sounds ridiculous, that warmth causes cold.

But you only have to think of "homeostatic systems" to realize that this is what exactly happens when the value of one variable increases.

When it is cold our bodies respond by initiating mechanisms to make us warm - so cold causes warming.

When our body is warm the reverse happens - so warmth causes coolness.

This system of negative feedback operates in all living systems AND in weather systems.

Anyone who thinks they're smart by ridiculing those who make the link between the record low temperatures in the northern hemisphere and global warming is not so smart at all.

I can see that it sounds ridiculous, that warmth causes cold.

But you only have to think of "homeostatic systems" to realize that this is what exactly happens when the value of one variable increases.

When it is cold our bodies respond by initiating mechanisms to make us warm - so cold causes warming.

When our body is warm the reverse happens - so warmth causes coolness.

This system of negative feedback operates in all living systems AND in weather systems.

Anyone who thinks they're smart by ridiculing those who make the link between the record low temperatures in the northern hemisphere and global warming is not so smart at all.

You gotta be fucking kidding, right? And you're making my case for me. Global "warming" will reverse itself. Why, we'll be in another Ice Age in no time at all, according to your kind's "logic". So what's with the constant bedwetting and Gloom and Doom, unless it's just an obsessive-compulsive defense mechanism of mental cripples?

the reactionary response to climate change, for example, or for another example is also analagous with the feedback systems you describe... although the uber-patriotic response to declining anglo-saxon power in Australia is an even better social analogy.

but with the vapid creatures who call themselves 'the right' you'll never get past the idea that you want an apparent contradiction accepted..

contradiction is cognitive dissonance for these people, leaves them fog-headed and confused..

"There's plenty of moisture in North America, you Unbathed hand wringing bedwetter. Send a few empty tankers."

"move to where the moisture is"

"move to where the food is"

Good work tanker boy. You've really thought long and hard about this haven't you?

Fundamentalist deniers aren't interested in science and rationality. They just want to yell and scream and demand mummy's titty.

And I'm too stupid to anthropomorphize a ball of dirt and rock and magma too, ain't that right, Nazi? I just don't have sense enough to wonder why that hellish planet Venus isn't now a ball of ice, considering how hot it is and it's proximity to the sun. Why hasn't it cancelled itself out?

And as for Brainiac's childish retort about Mummy's titty, you're not very original. The comment has already been damningly made about you bedwetters and your constant Doom and Gloom when, according to your "logic", there's nothing to fear because it's all gonna cancel out. Try harder, you brain dead asswipe.

Oh, and I'm going into business, selling microwaveable ice trays and champagne buckets, etc. Wanna buy some stock, Brainiac? I'm sure to get rich, thanks to.... AHEM.... *hot* tips from mental cripples like you.

well we'll just start going round in circles if we all call each other fascists again, and the genocidal part of the imputation of 'nazi' fairly laughable when aimed at people with Jewish grandparents

in general, though, yes.. your post demonstrates the fogginess and confusion we were discussing. For example, you don't think you're the fascist.

"There's plenty of moisture in North America, you Unbathed hand wringing bedwetter. Send a few empty tankers."

"move to where the moisture is"

"move to where the food is"

Hot off the press from that hotbed of anti-left "logic"...News Ltd...................

January smashes record

February 16, 2007 11:00pm

IF you thought January was hot – then you were right.
Scientists said last month was by far the hottest January recorded.

US scientists, who have kept records on the planet's temperature since 1880, reported that the world's land areas last month were 1.9C warmer than a normal January.

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,21239675-5007200,00.html

When are you going to organise our exodus to Venus moonbat?

I was hoping you mental cripples could organize an exodus to somewhere, but you're of course too fucking stupid to know how to tie your shoes. Are you upset, asswipe? Can't handle the ridicule of your cult religion? Am I the Devil himself, who waltzed into the middle of your little congregation of drooling microcephalics? I get the feeling that you're at best a 14 year old female, Brainiac. (Your mental age is of course another argument entirely). You haven't even the most basic of critical thinking skills. According to your Fundamentalist dogma, if heat causes cold, then Venus should be a ball of ice, and volcanos should spew ice water. sigh But you keep shilling for Jesu.... oops, Mother Gaia. You keep hanging human attributes on a big ball of mud. Keeps you off the streets, at least. Now run along to your Al Gore and Michael Moore scrapbook, sweetie. As for the Nazi, the terrorist fellating Appeaser, and his pathetic defense of Jewish heritage, we know of the Ordenienst.

I think we're getting a look at your psychopathology now. Somehow you have managed to bring "cult religion" and "Judaism" into a debate about climate change.

So, who's dogmatic tankerboy? You've turned up here and started an argument and think you can challenge the empiricial evidence supporting climate change without producing a scrap of research, let alone peer reviewed research, that challenges the observed physical reality. I think we all know where the dogma, fundamentalism and cult religion is coming from don't we tankerboy? Here's a clue...

"There's plenty of moisture in North America, you Unbathed hand wringing bedwetter. Send a few empty tankers."

"move to where the moisture is"

"move to where the food is"

Okay, little schoolgirl, first we'll dispense with my lambasting the Nazi. No, on second thought, you're too fucking stupid to understand, so never mind.

Now, as for "psychopathology", and your overuse of "fundamentals", you obviously can't debate your way out of a flaming shithouse, so you resort to being a copycat. Which is fine, of course. It explains the mental status of a highly suggestive moron who mewls one minute of widely accepted theories and of empirical data (from highly politicized asswipes) the next.

And Global Warming is a cult religion, Brainiac. What's the matter, is this the first time you've heard of that? More proof of your adolescence, (or perhaps you're severely isolated).

As for producing "a scrap of research", I have produced tons of rationality and common sense, but you're too fucking stupid to see it. Only mental cripples would believe that warming causes cooling, and as I've said a thousand times to you microcephalics already, according to your "logic", all will balance out. As for peer review, the general consensus, among thinking folks, that is, is that heat causes warmth, and cold causes cold. There is no liquid oxygen on Mercury or Venus, asswipe, and I don't have to produce a Masters Degree or used Kleenex to such narrow minded cultists anyway.

See ya around, shitferbrains. And please forgive my not treating you like a lady. Must have something to do with womyn's rights and all that shit you mental cripples fought so hard for, thanks to the pioneering efforts of butt-ugly hags like Andrea Dworkin ("consenting sex is still rape") who couldn't get laid if they took out two mortgages for it. You want equal status? Then I'll bat you around like I will any leftist pinko male. Damn, I screwed up again. The left has no real men.

By the way, shitferbrains, let's all hear the observed physical reality of how it's been in North America, especially the last couple of weeks. Are you an Aussie asswipe who will dare lecture anyone about physical reality? And even if you're from here, can you with a straight face point out all the "warmth" of a 40 plus mile stretch of Pennsylvania highway where people have been stranded going on, what, 3 days and counting?

lol 'organize an exodus to somewhere' was exactly my proposal for Israel... saying fook Israel and all who sail in her is in no way an anti-jewish comment - similarly you're not a traitor to the West just because you'd like to see Western armies and governments slightly trounced for their own good.

should relax - all this high-pitched squealing demonstrates the desparation and redundancy of your cause

reads like maybe youre heat afflicted, or something..

"40 plus mile stretch of Pennsylvania highway"

What!? Are the tankers stuck in the snow?

"The left has no real men."

Neither does the right by the look of things. If they have to rely on a pimply, demented 12 year old to defend Fundamentalist denial...

Its a global problem, David. Taking Israeli’s out of the Middle East will just cause another problem somewhere else. We could set them up with land nearby but in a few years they will demand more, they will infiltrate local government, they will corrupt ministers and spread hate in our communities. Not because they are Jews but because the effort would be worth it and is exactly what any other religious group has done. Look at Family First or Catholics.

Global warming has some of the same constraints as jews, no one can move away from it and everyone hates it. The idiot who keeps on proving how stupid he is fails to understand that weather is not global warming, there have been record high's and low seasonal temperatures,, but overall across the years since the 80’s an increase in temperature has been recorded globally. This is called global warming while Climate change is something else.
Climate change is where a region becomes changed by global warming, because it has become warmer for longer or indeed wetter or dryer. Australia is losing its outer rim of habitable climates because the arid interior is moving south by a couple of klics each year. Added to this rising acidity in the ocean and raising salinity in fast drying rivers, the coastal land is becoming less viable for agriculture. While inland tinder dry conditions have increased the incidence of bushfires which are more severe.

As this climate change forces Australians to seek better options elsewhere economic forces will push up living costs and force down real estate prices especially those near the beach

Most Australian asset are tied up in real estate so poverty will follow when the enviroment can no longer support city living.

If asked idiots probably think that the drought is over because they have noticed there is water in the sea.
I would give up the argument because your adversary is so far behind and so fucking stupid that he will never be able to comprehend the link between global warming and the coming ice age.

Everyone could spend time trying to teach him but no one would ever find the effort worthwhile.

No mention of Islam? How very interesting. They call leftists terrorist fellators and Appeasers for a reason.

If asked idiots probably think that the drought is over because they have noticed there is water in the sea.
I would give up the argument because your adversary is so far behind and so fucking stupid that he will never be able to comprehend the link between global warming and the coming ice age.

What is incomprehensible is that the Gloom and Doom bedwetters talk out of both sides of their necks. We hear their constant cries of the poor widdle polar bears and penguins, stranded on melting ice, of glaciers that are rapidly melting, blah blah blah. But then they say that all this warming is bringing on another Ice Age, which created those very same glaciers the bedwetters are saying is "disappearing". So, if it's all balancing out, then what's the problem? Why can't obsessive leftists give a straight and logical answer?

Just tell those poor widdle polar bears to be patient. Help is on the way! And all those Venusians better break out the parkas too.

I'm not a Fundamentalist terrorist fellator, nor an Al Gore groupie, nor an Unbathed U.N. propagandist fuckwit, but that doesn't mean it's not true.

I mentioned this shocker last Friday in commenting on the "Arctic Ice gone by 2020" story, and now have the links :-

Talk about a "man bites dog" story!! ROTFL. Prof Ian Lowe will dine for years on telling this story in his uniquely humerous, excoriating way. Things are going to be entertaining. Watch Beatty wriggle. Nevertheless, this nastiest of the nasty, Xstrata, must be brought to account in Ozfailure at least.

Queensland Conservation Council features their Xstata action and updates on their home page:
http://www.qccqld.org.au/index.htm

Don't see it yet at Mackay Conservation Group Inc:
http://www.mackayconservationgroup.org.au/Home/tabid/36/Default.aspx

Here's where I heard it lunch time Friday, ABC "The World Today":
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2007/s1849776.htm

Murdoch had it Saturday:
http://townsvillebulletin.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,7034,21233281%255E462,00.html

An appeal?
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21239700-5006786,00.html

Other coverage:
http://news.google.com.au/news?hl=en&ned=au&q=coal+tribunal+queensland&ie=UTF-8&scoring=d

on and on he rants about his fictional enemy 'the left'. It makes a kind of psychopathic sense to invent names that are opposites of one another - right, left - but it means very conveniently he's decided to call himself 'the Right'. A bit unsubtle.

Who are these lefterners? Nobody's seen one for a century or more. We can only assume they're mythic invention, like leprachauns. If I was a psychotherapist I'd call it the externalisation of 'the Wrong'.

The left? No such animal. See early last century.

'Terrorist fellators' and 'appeasers' also amusingly quaint language. Course I'd call a terrorist fellator anyone who sucks the cock of an American, and an appeaser someone who doesn't want to make war on Israel cause they're worried about a couple of shonky little nukes.

You'd think the Zionistas would be pleased the water-level's rising - at this rate Tuvalu might go into the sea before Israel does.

It's very illuminating how those "fundamentalist believers" of global warming seem to hold dear the belief of , American's as terrorist, Iraelis as "undesireable sub-humans", and that somehow it's not unpatriotic to hope that their own countrymen die in service because of what they view as oppression of "troglodyte Arabs".

It's the 30's all over again.

Yes, you people are quite proggressive indeed!

spoken like a true Zionist,

no need to worry about rising sea levels, Israel/Palestine will be nuked well b4 it goes into the sea ... when you beg for something long enough you finally get obliged .. good riddance!

there ya go searcher, you've found a pragmatic solution to the Midlle East problem, who will lament the loss of fanatics and killers, not the secular world!

'tipping point' re: global warming has already been reached/passed ... i have a text which made no sense when i first read it, but today is uncanny ... states that Siberia and the arctic regions of Canada will be the bread basket of the world .. also states that people will attempt to trade all their gold and jewels for a potato ...

the world will return to real values (very) soon ... it'll be quick the leets are prepared .. death to all gutless lamers, the sheeple are fit for their fate

dems da facts .. if u read this thing u'd shit yourself cos 70% has come true ... without the need for flowery language, spells it out as stated

at the end of the end less than 2% of humanity survives BUT it does survive and so does the earth .. puts a great perpective on the mindless arguments of Bush, relgious fanatics, Howard and all the other meaningless fleas ..

and don't say you weren't told LOUD AND CLEAR for the past 5 years

you can't stop the melting ice or the rapid decline ... ITS ALREADY OVER .. mankind has lost it, bigtime!

where have all the values gone?

the cocksucker who wrote "subdue the earth" rather than the trad approach of RESPECT the earth is responsible

one source is Edgar Cayce on prophecy

it's not a matter of 'belief'

Some people interpret the slaughter in Iraq by the US (for example), or by Israel in the Palestinian territories, as terrorism. That is - it's violence that is partly DESIGNED TO FRIGHTEN AN ENEMY INTO SUBMISSION.

But youre the only one suggesting the Israeli people are 'sub-human' ... I'm talking about states and their actions.

It's amusing when American soldiers die in Iraq - roadside bombs particularly comedic. But that's because it's the ultimate pratfall - the idiots are getting what's coming to them, after a massive display of hubris.

If Australian soldiers die in Iraq, to be fair, the same applies. As an individual any soldier who agrees to go to war has agreed to the POLITICS of what s/he is about to do... if they don't agree they shouldn't go. So it's a deserved death, or at least an ironic and misguided one. Not very tragic.

Global warming - again, it's not about 'beliefs'. It's about acting prudently on the basis of a fair probability

What does it matter to us to change our technology, our industries? We'll do it anyway. Given ANY prospect of global disaster - and I think there's evidence of the POTENTIAL - then we should do what we can to avert it.

No certainty required.

The mistake is made when you think its all going to happen in the distant future. Try looking at it, as happening now, over the course of your life, depreciating lifestyles across the board.
The realization is that things are slowly getting worse, droughts are already feared to be permanent and quick fix solutions are not being found, but we still pay the super fund and believe that when we need it our income is as safe as houses.

How safe is a house?

why would anyone deny global warming?, do they manage super funds or sell real estate or are they supported by mining interests?. Conflicting isn’t it? Do they value the economy above all other things?

I know John Howard does, as he has said as much, so why are we still listening? Does Democracy give us no choice with Rudd.

Howard might focus on the River Murray to get a vote, but as Hawk set aside 1 billion 20 years ago for that same promise; the promise can easily live on while the river dries up. He may talk about geosequestering, but that will only contain co2 in 20 years. All his promises will be empty because he will not advocate the needed economic changes that might off set climate change threats. He will no introduce a pollution tax that may fund environmental repair projects. He will however fund industry so that they can afford to fight these changes

These changes will not be introduced by any politician but they will happen by default. Global; warming is happening but there is no interest in fighting back.

I seem to recall it was industry that preferred the terminology "climate change" compared to "global warming".

My understanding is that as the atmosphere warms and ice melts the ocean currents shift including vertical patterns.

Somehow these currents including cold layers at depth upwelling to the surface affect not only sea and coastal life but atmospheric weather patterns too.

At Bondi we had very strange intensely cold current for a week no one had ever noticed before winter or summer.

Recently a tropical species of fish was found dead off the south of Tasmania when an unusual finger of warm current petered out.

Yesterday I heard about an unusually dead zone (apparently about 70 globally) in the Atlantic if memory serves off the USA with excessive warmth and nutrients causing one of those toxic algae infestations over a very big region of water.

2 weeks back it rained down near Dalgety south east NSW, only it rained so hard it killed the stock, and 12 foot pile of ice built up in a pile in the dam according to the local mayor on 702 radio Trioli show. He was no greenie accolyte and HE thought 'there must be something to this climate change'. He said local farmers were shocked at the intensity of the rain/ice storm and sad for their stock including 2 calves "washed off the hill". He said never seen it in his lifetime.

So you can call it statistical anomaly distilled by the internet, but I think its probably common sense the weather is getting very temparemental and intense, just like any bubbly pot of frozen vegies (not the most expert form of cooking I freely admit) mixed in with the fish fingers.

Then there is melting 'perma' frost, blooms weeks ahead of schedule, Greenland literally melting the lines on maps.

And finally 60 Minutes last Sunday. But for the religously minded try these references (I think George Pell was asleep or too busy looking in the mirror when these were on) in 2005:
http://catholicearthcareoz.net/conference.html
And in 2006
http://www.melbourne.catholic.org.au/ccjdp/ClimateChangeConference.htm

Have a look at the speakers lists. Good scientific voices there.

There is no doubt now that Nazi Boy is institutionalized.

"why would anyone deny global warming?, do they manage super funds or sell real estate or are they supported by mining interests?. Conflicting isn’t it? Do they value the economy above all other things?"

The question should be; Why would anyone believe in Global warming? Do they manage a network newsroom at NBC, or do they sell co2 offsets to fat cat politicians trying desperatly to hide their hipocrisy , or are they supported by a socialistic form of government assistance like welfare in some way or other? Confictiong isn't it? Do they value Al Gore and Oprah above all other things?

How weird is that? Zionist loons take up the torch for climate change deniers and turn the debate into a left/Islam bashing excercise.

Yeah, well I think we all know where the public mood is heading on all this stuff. They're sick of all your bullshit and now it's being reflected in polls. Even the media owning rats know when it's time to desert the sinking ship. Everyone is sick of your fear mongering, killing, hate, lies, antagonism to science and truth, racism and thieving. Is this why you have aligned with cc deniers? Birds of a feather stick together.

How weird is that? Zionist loons take up the torch for climate change deniers and turn the debate into a left/Islam bashing excercise.

You're forgetting something, Brainiac. Someone else threw in the gratuitous Christian bashing. And you had to throw in your little Nazi jabs at "Zionists", right?

Yeah, well I think we all know where the public mood is heading on all this stuff. They're sick of all your bullshit and now it's being reflected in polls. Even the media owning rats know when it's time to desert the sinking ship. Everyone is sick of your fear mongering, killing, hate, lies, antagonism to science and truth, racism and thieving. Is this why you have aligned with cc deniers? Birds of a feather stick together.

We're sick of all the bullshit of the Unbathed too. The fear mongering of mental cripples who claim that warming causes cooling,that ignore Al Gore's flying around the globe while his jet churns out ungodly amounts of CO2 (reckon how much contribution to "global warming" there'll be around this July 7 by the shills and dopeheads and degenerates?), that polar bears are in danger and the Unbathed posts fake pictures as their "proof", the killing by the Palestinians, Chi-coms, Pol Pot, Stalin, that little piglet in North Korea, the Butcher of Baghdad, and all the other dictators and terrorists you fellate, lies (see posting of fake images in order to promote an Agenda), antagonism such as the Unbathed and their zealotry over Gloom and Doom and unproven theories, their racism and utter hatred against the Jews and the Whites and the Christians and the Straights, and their thievery ala Socialism and Communism and Fascism.

But turds of an Unbathed feather stick together, ain't that right, you juvenile mentally crippled steaming pile?

Hurry back with more brilliant esophagal flatulence such as in denial of a widely accepted theory. Lord knows we need the comedy.

Take a good look at the heat exchange on the back of your refidgerator.

heat exhange
by thumbing rides on flying saucers Wednesday February 21, 2007 at 09:13 AM

That's not quite the same thing as the Gloom and Doom crowd saying that "global warming" will cause another Ice Age in a period of years or decades which gives their abject idiocy breathing room (ala "global cooling" 30 years ago).

You're talking about the exchange of temperatures of a gas compressed under tremendous pressure. Our atmospheric p.s.i. isn't a fair analogy.

Damn, you think that our resident mentally crippled Al Gore parishioner will be able to handle the Right's grasp of the physical and technical sciences?

"the Right's grasp of the physical and technical sciences?"

Oh, you mean...

"There's plenty of moisture in North America, you Unbathed hand wringing bedwetter. Send a few empty tankers."

"move to where the moisture is"

"move to where the food is"

"Someone else threw in the gratuitous Christian bashing."

No! Who would do such a thing?

"mentally crippled Al Gore parishioner"

Oh it was YOU tankerboy.

I think you're getting a little confused and incoherent. Take a little nap.

wide awake
by in denial of a widely accepted THEORY Wednesday February 21, 2007 at 12:30 PM

You seem very upset, little girl. Do Unbathed pre-adolescents suffer from estrogen crazes?

And please oh please copy and paste this shit more. It only shows just how much I've addled a shitferbrains Gorebot.

"There's plenty of moisture in North America, you Unbathed hand wringing bedwetter. Send a few empty tankers."

Speaking of Gorebots, some university is thinking of giving that Wooden Indian an honorary doctorate. Now you take your Midol and then rush in and tell us that he deserves it, that this isn't some political/publicity stunt. Really, univerrsities are such the hotbed of common sense and logic. Just look at terrorist fellators like Ward Churchill, for example.

Relating to comment about heat transfer in fridge...

"You're talking about the exchange of temperatures of a gas compressed under tremendous pressure. Our atmospheric p.s.i. isn't a fair analogy."

Have you heard of a Coolgardie fridge you yank tosser?

Aussie asswipes
by in denial of widely accepted FAKERY Wednesday February 21, 2007 at 04:39 PM

You're still trying to compare apples and oranges, Brainiac. A swamp cooler is not the correct analogy either. Keep trying to shop that cultist idiocy all the same, Brainiac. Even you mental cripples have to have something to believe in.

concern for the ecology
doesn't translate into concern for Al Gore
who is a yank,
and therefore like all his compatriots is deserving of a little light dirty bombing before breakfast...

Turning the north American continent into slag would be the most constructive contribution anyone could make to ward off disaster to human civilisation. North America IS a disaster, although barely civilisation.

It's dead weight.

lol oye.
Everybody's somebody's nazi.
But you'd have thought the pesky yanks would pull their bad heads in
lay low for a while..

given what's most likely to happen to their children
and their children's children

and Im not talking about ecological disaster anymore.

"You're still trying to compare apples and oranges"

"isn't a fair analogy"

"the Right's grasp of the physical and technical sciences"

"There's plenty of moisture in North America, you Unbathed hand wringing bedwetter. Send a few empty tankers."

"move to where the moisture is"

"move to where the food is"

Obviously science isn't your strong suit. Or sanity for that matter.

Here's a whole bunch of whacky (widely accepted) THEORIES you're going to learn about when you go to "big school" (That would be high school in your case).

http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Heat

Life isn't fair is it tankerboy? Why do they insist on persecuting you with that dastardly science and empirical data when you know that all you really need is fundamentalist faith?

Now, please explain why the principles of heat transference in a coolgardie fridge don't apply to the earth's atmosphere.

See if you can avoid dribbling a whole lot of racism, misogyny and non specific bigotry and ignorance in your answer. Could you do that for me darling boy?

big school is definitely primary school
alycia told me, and she's nearly five

There's absolutely no doubt in my mind that Brainiac will address the faux pas of her Leader with feats of derring logic and rationality.

Last night, Al Gore’s global-warming documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, collected an Oscar for best documentary feature, but the Tennessee Center for Policy Research has found that Gore deserves a gold statue for hypocrisy.

Gore’s mansion, [20-room, eight-bathroom] located in the posh Belle Meade area of Nashville, consumes more electricity every month than the average American household uses in an entire year, according to the Nashville Electric Service (NES).

In his documentary, the former Vice President calls on Americans to conserve energy by reducing electricity consumption at home.

The average household in America consumes 10,656 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, according to the Department of Energy. In 2006, Gore devoured nearly 221,000 kWh—more than 20 times the national average.

Last August alone, Gore burned through 22,619 kWh—guzzling more than twice the electricity in one month than an average American family uses in an entire year. As a result of his energy consumption, Gore’s average monthly electric bill topped $1,359.

Since the release of An Inconvenient Truth, Gore’s energy consumption has increased from an average of 16,200 kWh per month in 2005, to 18,400 kWh per month in 2006.

Gore’s extravagant energy use does not stop at his electric bill. Natural gas bills for Gore’s mansion and guest house averaged $1,080 per month last year.

“As the spokesman of choice for the global warming movement, Al Gore has to be willing to walk to walk, not just talk the talk, when it comes to home energy use,” said Tennessee Center for Policy Research President Drew Johnson.

In total, Gore paid nearly $30,000 in combined electricity and natural gas bills for his Nashville estate in 2006.

For Further Information, Contact:
Nicole Williams, (615) 383-6431
editor@tennesseepolicy.org

Is that your best shot tankerboy? Pathetic!

Gore's the spiritual leader of your Cult, little girl. And you dare speak heresy? And I'm still waiting for you to explain how someone can be in denial of a theory.

Sorry to disappoint tankerboy, but I was reading about global warming/climate change years before Gore stuck his toe in the water. The only relevance Gore seems to have is in relation to your pathological obsession with all things "Left", whatever that is. (something to do with your deformed brain I think)

What theory will we deny today? Evolution? That would be fun wouldn't it? Debate creation theory with a fundamentalist loon like tankerboy? Maybe not...

How about we deny music theory? You can just stick your fingers in your ears and go "nayh nyah nyah, I can't hear you"? But that would be the same approach you take to debating climate change. No value there.

Let's deny the theory of relativity. No, too complex for a simpleton like tankerboy.

Better still, let's deny the theory of theory?

Theory : a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory"

Now we have all this data proving climate change, and we have all these climate scientists saying that it is man made (90% likelihood), but tankerboy would rather believe a few duds like Fred Singer who worked for big tobacco before being hired by big oil to deny climate change.

That's denial of a widely accepted theory. Any other explanations and definitions you need?

I'm still waiting for you to produce data that conflicts with the physical evidence and the educated and considered opinion of a vast majority of climate scientists.

So far you have managed to produce about 37 schoolboy tantrums and not one shred of evidence. Are you going to abuse me again diddums? Or will we see some more of your scintillating technical argument...

"You're still trying to compare apples and oranges"

"isn't a fair analogy"

"the Right's grasp of the physical and technical sciences"

"There's plenty of moisture in North America, you Unbathed hand wringing bedwetter. Send a few empty tankers."

"move to where the moisture is"

"move to where the food is"

And after that you may want to address the issues I raised (and you avoided) last time, i.e.,

Now, please explain why the principles of heat transference in a coolgardie fridge don't apply to the earth's atmosphere.

See if you can avoid dribbling a whole lot of racism, misogyny and non specific bigotry and ignorance in your answer. Could you do that for me darling boy?

I won't hold my breath because I know logic isn't your strong point.

Have I got you all aflutter, little girl? Are you in a hate filled rage because someone doesn't believe in UFO's and Bigfoot like mental cripples such as you do? And Brainiac believes in political scams like "global warming" but doesn't know what the Left is? Just what are they teaching you in public school? Be that as it may, the picture will most certainly illustrate Leftists. You damn sure won't find that on the Right. (vomit)

And please, little girl, stop with the pre-school copycat routine. I've called you the religious cultist that you are. In other words, Brainiac, the word Fundamentalist has been taken. But please, feel free to copy and paste those other lines ad nauseum, if it makes idiot cultists feel better.

Oh, by the way, since you're using so much energy posting to a network powered by Big Oil, what are you doing concerning the latest religious idiocy known as "carbon credits" ? Your Mommy and Daddy ought to be flat broke the way you waste so much. So when are you gonna get rid of your computer, created in factories using Big Oil, which actually contains Big Oil, (I'm speaking of plastics, Brainiac), transported from the factorie(s) using Big Oil (across the big pond), transported to the warehouses using Big Oil, from the warehouses to the retailer using Big Oil, and delivered to you using Big Oil, such as UPS or FedEx, (or perhaps you drove to the store? SHAME on you, Brainiac!!!)

We're wating on you fakers to shut the Nazimedia down, considering the strain it and it's scabies are putting on Mother Gaia.

No one is this stupid

Its obviously no longer a theory.

The Global warming theory has now been accepted by a majority of scientist’s politicians and people in general, making the term lose the theory part of its title.

Please find a recent article that talks about climate change and distorts the subject by claiming a supposed theory is causing the global danger.

Deniers are deliberately causing arguments while policy makers are not sure how they should respond to current evidence of climate change.

I'm sure the same problems occurred in another time when there was a Flat Earth Theory. The Pope was opposed to adventurers exploring alternative worlds, because the church feared change. As it was accepted that a round world would confound the faith that heaven and hell held logical places.
Today our leaders cannot support environmental policies because governments are funded by those who cause global warming therefore economic growth maintains priority and changes that need to be made cannot be supported.

EG: close the coal mines!

The Public and governments are caught between fears, fear of losing economic comforts and knowing that life on earth may well end this century.

Were in Deadlock.

We are caught in a no win situation, Reduce global emissions and lose present economic comforts, or maintain economic growth while not even attempting to prepare the nation for the adverse effects of global warming or even try to reduce the future effects.

The Government accepted global warming in principle 10 years ago and as fact 7 years ago but has failed to react in response.

Incidentally right wing groups never let acceptance of these theories change their actions or views. They will try to develop new industrial innovations like desalination, geosequestering and maintain a greater reliance on the technologies that cause greater environmental destruction. Changing the direction of rivers altering tidal flows and planting trees for future bush fire fuel will be the only policies governments are capable of under our system. Backing windmill or solar might seem green by intention but not when we fully expect electricity demand to increase by over 50% in the near future.

Supplying extra demand with renewable energy will not reduce current emissions, or future emissions, these levels have already added to emerging climate change which can no longer be denied.

Rainfall now hits the coast, due to a shifting climate; El-Nino became a stable and permanent state as does national drought conditions. Higher rainfalls in the north and a spread of disease south have already confirmed the threat of climate change that has developed.

We are no closer to doing something about GW/CC than we were when such things were denied as just greeny theories but we can at least accept now that we are trading our comfort for our children’s future. Once that is accepted we can and will continue, nothing will change.

It all begins with Fear

EG.Fear- a few Terrorists -WMD-preemptive war-violence to stop violence - war for any reasons- end result a Global war on terror.

Fear-Global warming/Climate change- minor adjustments made- industry continues, technological develops to offset the effects of technological development end result accelerated Global warming

Fearmongering is what you Cultists do best, isn't it? For shame that the Unbathed always projects and blames the Right. Copycatting again, Brainiac. Tsk tsk.

Now, I have been uncouth and remiss in my not addressing swamp coolers, and in order to reach out in the spirit of Tolerance and Diversity and All That Useless and Boring Sloganeering Shit In Our Times™, here I are to do your bidding. But first, I need to understand just what in the hell are you talking about?

The principle of a swamp cooler, a glass of ice water, or an iceberg/glacier is exactly the same, right? No matter how large or small, you're focusing on the principle? If not, say so, but if so, then explain that the radiating coolness from icebergs and glaciers is causing such fierce weather in the northern U.S. and Canada these last couple of weeks. My point being this - you Cultists say the ice is melting right before your very eyes, polar bears are in a real estate crunch, penguins are in dire straights, blah blah blah.Global Warming is a bona fide catastrophe.

But what about a hundred years ago, or 500, when the religion of Global Warming hadn't been invented yet? Did that mean that because the ice wasn't melting so "horribly" that we never had harsh winters? Let me spell it out so that even an intellectual can understand - what in the hell is your correlation?

"And what about those English vineyards in the Middle Ages, Fraulein Brainiac? " Squeaks our angry little man.

What's that honey? You don't want to answer my questions but you think you might have something clever to say? No cigar for this effort my angry little man, this deceit is history.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/07/medieval-warmth-and-english-wine/

It's kind of funny that you would use a Fred Singer red herring after my last post though. I can feel the heat your angry and flustered little red face is generating from here!

Now where were we? Oh yes,

I'm still waiting for you to produce data that conflicts with the physical evidence and the educated and considered opinion of a vast majority of climate scientists.

And after that you may want to address the issues I raised (and you avoided) last time, i.e.,

Now, please explain why the principles of heat transference in a coolgardie fridge don't apply to the earth's atmosphere. (you were a bit confused about heat transference on Saturday February 17, 2007 at 12:54 PM - see above)

"But first, I need to understand just what in the hell are you talking about?" "what in the hell is your correlation?" Cries our angry little man. Haven't done that bit at school yet? Well you should have looked at my link then before asking silly questions about how heat transference might affect climate, and consequently weather systems, shouldn't you? Here it is again ;

http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Heat

Remember, this whole question came about because you, in your ignorance, mocked people who raised the issue of heat transfer. "Oh, by the way, I make ice in my microwave now. How cool is that?"

See if you can avoid dribbling a whole lot of racism, misogyny and non specific bigotry and ignorance in your answer. Could you do that for me darling boy?

I won't hold my breath because I know logic isn't your strong point.

See if you can avoid dribbling a whole lot of racism, misogyny and non specific bigotry and ignorance in your answer. Could you do that for me darling boy?

copy zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz paste zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz................

utter nonsense
by pure psychobabble Wednesday February 28, 2007 at 04:06 PM

Current theories of climate change do not rely on whether today's temperatures are 'unprecedented'. Instead they examine the physical causes of climate change and match up what we know about their physical effects and time history and see which of the multiple drivers or combination can best explain the observations. For the last few decades, that is quite clearly the rise in greenhouse gases, punctuated by the occasional volcano and mitigated slightly by the concomittant rise in particulate pollution.

Nothing but equivocating psychobabble. "Unprecedented" is exactly one of the mantras of the Unbathed. Never before, they cry. The Industrial Revolution was the beginning of the end, amen.

And I still don't understand your correlation, and I've even considered the temperature coefficient of black bodies, just in case, but still I cannot understand why Venus isn't a ball of ice and Pluto isn't a veritable paradise.

In keeping with the KISS theory (keep it simple for stupid).

What is the evidence that climate change is not occuring?

What is the evidence that climate change is not man made?

Can't make it any simpler than that for you my angry, confused young friend. I'll even let you theorise as I know that will be enjoyable for you.

damn straight... just answer the questions above and we'll proceed... although I'm also interested to hear you define the difference between a 'fact' and a 'theory' without making theoretical and non-factual assumptions that can't be proved.

The action that causes a cold and severe but late northern hemisphere winter confirms global warming.

Gulf Stream currents are clearly an unknown for little man denier. A 30% reduction in the speed of the Gulf Stream in the last 12 years makes it clear that heated tropical water will take longer to flow through the system. This global warming effect has already been caused by melting Arctic Ice. A slower gulf stream delays winter in Europe and North America and makes our summers here warmer.

the Gulf Stream cools as it sweeps north past Europe as its heat is lost , while the returning cool waters on Americas eastern seaboard by November cancel out any warmth from north bound flows and a severe freeze occurs in most northern regions once water temperature no longer affects the weather systems by around January . All at a time when El Nino stops affecting weather systems in both hemispheres.

I know this stuff is hard to understand but it requires no faith just intelligence

God i'm tired of this "racist" childishness.

Have fun blaming other ethnicities/cultural groups, if it floats your boat.

The powerful, who don't give a shit what race they are, are laughing themselves silly with your "zomg u Zionist", "zomg u Islamofascist" & "zomg u lefty" bollocks. Keeps your eyes off them, allowing them their entirely economic and not-at-all racial or theological plunder to continue.

Well done, kiddies. Look forward to your legacy of having lived a life of no real political meaning whatsoever.

As for climate change, which this thread after all was originally about, gravity is also a theory based on observable data. You're still living in the past if you genuinely believe there's any "debate" about our contribution to global climate/weather change; that confabulation has long-since been disreputed.

But hey, if it floats your boat, as i said, carry on. After all, boat-building will be a thriving industry before too long.

At the end of the day, it's a laugh innit.
We don't have control over the envionment or that like, it's just a load of random stuff that there is no God.