One Of The Biggest Icebergs Has Broken Loose In Antarctica

Post Reply New Topic

Fine. Take this you insufferable prick.

http://www.global-greenhouse-warming.com/glacial-retreat.html

I googled "impact of glacial retreat". This was literally the first result. You didn't even try. Quit being an ultracrepidarian. Stick to subjects that you know about.

Amphibians and other animals such as polar bears are in decline because of climate change.
http://www.amphibiaweb.org/declines/ClimateChange.html

Last edited by Misslizard on 21 Jul 2017, 10:47 am, edited 2 times in total.

The upcoming ice age will be arise due to very slow changes. We will have plenty of time to adapt.
Additionally, the upcoming ice age won't happen for thousands of years. I will live long enough to see the harmful effects of anthropogenic global warming.

Climate "skeptics" don't seem to understand how big numbers work.

HINT: 10 years and 1 million years are not the same thing.

What kind of logic is this? Have I wandered into Wonderland?

"Catastrophic global cooling occurred thousands of years ago, so we should cause catastrophic global warming right now ... just to be safe."

No way is Las Vegas as polluted as a urban area in the third world with no emissions control.A friend of mine was in a large city in Nepal and she said the air was positively thick.
Of corse there are variations in climate.Your cool spell is probably normal for your area.Just like the extreme drough we had here a few years back,no rain for months and temps of 111 for weeks.Id didn't think it was climate change,this area goes thru extremes like that.Climate scientists study the data.We did get bumped from zone 6 to zone 7,so to me that's more relevant than one hot summer.Ive also seen it 15 below zero here and I didn't think a glacier was heading this way.Just anothe extreme this area goes thru.Its the big picture and how the stats add up over years of research.
If you don't believe the scientists ,who would you suggest we get out info from?
The scientist that have studied the data are the minority on this planet.The majority of people are too busy trying to survive to have the time or interest to know what's happening.They are too occupied trying to find a crust of bread,dodge a bomb,or pay the rent.Another group is too young,sick,or old to care.Some have no interest because they have a nice car,home ,etc and they just can't be bothered with unpleasantness.Some have their bread buttered by dirty energy,profit over people everytime.Some can't grasp the science and some are in denial.So yes,that's why I lump you in with the blue pill folks.
Not sure if the Dalai Lama reads comic books,maybe.He is an interesting person.Very pro science.

But that's not a video. I don't want to read all that. Can't you find a viral video narrated by someone like James Earl Jones? Also it would help if the narrator talks slowly and doesn't use big words like ultracrepidarian. Thanx.

Killing a species for food or destroying their habitat is not climate change.

Destroying habit is one of the factors in climate change.Mass burning of land to be cleared adds more carbon to the atmosphere.Becuse of climate disruption more pressure is put on some species since people will resort to wild caught foods if they can't grow their own.
I did not say all the turtles were being driven into extinction by climate change.It was in reference to the Holocene extinction,which climate change is a factor in for some species.

The Holocene is all about Climate Change. Without Climate Change, there would be no Holocene -- we would still be in a period of glaciation.

And you are making one of the biggest mistakes commonly seen by those panicked by Global Warming -- that warmer means less food. In reality, the Earth is far more productive when it is warm than when it is cold. Warmer means more food, not less food. Want to see what happens when it is cooler? Just look a couple of hundred years ago during the period known as the Little Ice Age. In some places, people were having to grind up tree bark to use as flour because they could not grow enough. And that is just mildly cooler.

A major reason why there is very little starvation today like there was during the Little Ice Age is precisely because it is warmer and therefore it is far easier to grow food.

The scary thing about Global Warming is not that it might be happening, but that it might not be happening.

/\I'm not panicked.That will be for those born later.
Warmer can mean more food,but only if it rains.It was warm enough during the dust bowl years,but lack of precipitation meant no crops and topsoil blowing away.
On the flip side too much rain floods crops and delays planting.
Climate change causes climate extremes,too much rain at the wrong time can be just as bad as no rain.
As you most likely know,nobody wants rain when the hay is cut and hasn't dried enough for baling.

Protip For Everyone in This Thread: Potholer54 makes great videos on this subject. Watch them.

While it was dry during the dust bowl, the real problem leading to the dust storms was one of poor farming practices. A number of people in my area who remembered the drought of the dust bowl and the drought of the 1950's said that the drought of the 1950's was worse.

You are assuming that people would still be growing the same crops. In reality, the crops grown would surely change as farmers plant what is best for the climate.

I think others have answered your posts to me but I'll address this one
Drought is often caused by a number of factors. Cyclic weather effects called the El Nino effect are thought to result in unseasonal droughts. Land clearing impacts the transpiration cycle reducing rainfall.

Farmers in the mid west of the US used poor farming practice resulting in loss of valuable topsoil and causing dustbowls that you speak of.

You lump me in with the blue pill folks, which is a term you were taught to use, because I'm not a member of the club you belong to. In order to get away from the stigma of being called a blue pill person, all I have to do is agree with what your club says about climate change. I really don't even have to know much about it, I just have to go along with it. Several of the articles and videos I've seen posted in threads like these aren't even by actual scientists. They're produced by other members of the club.

Also I said the Dali Lama likes the Buddhist leanings of the Matrix because it's a take off of the Invisables which obviously has Buddhist leanings since the protagonist is supposed to be the next Buddha. If you got that I'm saying the Dali Lama reads comic books out of that, then you clearly misunderstood what I was saying.

Oh okay, it was a "joke". It sure didn't seem like one. It might have been a good idea to put a smiley face after it, like this or this or or

Yes, the people who run the 'skepticalscience' website are not exactly impartial when it comes to the examination of the evidence. They will gladly link to other sites that back up the point they are trying to make, the ones that agree with them, but ignore any that express the slightest hint of scepticism (which is rather ironic when you consider what they call themselves).