"Now back to New Technology: Horizontal Stone-Circle Requires Work.
Posted on 01/22/2007 10:07:29 AM PST by cogitator
Does this mean the earth is warming up as it has in the past?
Damn those prehistoric SUV's
"Now back to New Technology: Horizontal Stone-Circle Requires Work.
Yes.
as it has in the past?
Probably not.
The author's use of words like "might" and "clues" will draw much ire from the Heidi Cullen crowd.
I suggest that a correlation of these sediment deposits be compared to the deep sea sediment deposits that have been collected from oil explorations as well as the project Mohole activities which attempted to "dig deep" into the past during the 1968 IGY(International Geophysical Year I think).
Compare these findings to volcanic eruptions and see if there is a correlation since volcanic activity adds much more CO2 to the atmosphere.
Once its clear that this correlation exists I suggest that AlBlore be arrested for inventing CO2 and volcanos!!!
Among people with half a brain, global climate change is neither new nor controversial.
What's the "news"?
"The Arctic as a region is an excellent harbinger of future change, Briner said, because the signals or clues that signify climate change are so much stronger in the Arctic than elsewhere on the planet."
Who are these people (I refuse to call them "scientists") trying to fool?
Google "Jason Briner" and see what you find. I'd give the kid a break; he's only had his Ph.D. since 2003 and his page only lists six first-author peer-reviewed articles.
The ice gets pretty deep there, and for a much longer time than in "outlying regions".
Once the cap is gone, the Earth's surface rebounds. This process is sometimes called isostatic rebound. Although the average rise is about 1 or 2 cm per year (where it occurs), it should be sufficient to register as a temperature differential in the bedrock.
Anyone know how much heat is generated by moving vast quantities of dirt and rock the size of Baffin Island 1 cm further from the center of the Earth?
Archeological evidence indicates that the Eskimos of the central Canadian arctic prior to 1400 lived primarily on whales, which passed freely between the Atlantic and Pacific through this area. The climate changed and most of the Eskimos in this area starved. The survivors had to try to survive on caribou and seals.
So prior to 1400 those pesky SUVs provided a positive benefit for the 'skimos and whales!
Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on or off the
"Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list or GGG weekly digest
-- Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)
Probably not, you say?
For example, during the 'Holocene thermal maximum,' the warmest period of the past 10,000 years, the Arctic average temperature was two to three degrees warmer than it is today, while the global average was only a degree or so warmer.
It's been warmer. In the past. Apparently.
Am I missing something?
Frequently. Think mechanistically here.
I think the question was pretty straight-forward. He's asking if this means it's warming, and if that has happened before.
The answer, according to the article, is yes. You say probably not.
I understand your twist on his words is that you mean you believe the mechanism is different this time. But that's not what was asked. Your answer was spin, misleading and a change of topic -- from "is it warming again" to "how is it warming again".
Y'see my point?
Depends on the meaning of "as". This is taken from www.m-w.com; examples of usage got knocked out by similarity to HTML and I'm not inclined to take the time to fix it.
1 : AS IF
2 : in or to the same degree in which -- usually used as a correlative after an adjective or adverb modified by adverbial as or so
3 : in the way or manner that
4 : in accordance with what or the way in which
5 : WHILE, WHEN
6 : regardless of the degree to which : THOUGH
7 : for the reason that : BECAUSE, SINCE
8 : that the result is
I used meaning 7. Pretty straightforward, I think:
Does this mean it is warming up for the reason that it has in the past?
Answer: Probably not.
Transmission ends here.
Well, we all know it's Bush's fault.
(It's all the hot air the Dems are blowing in his direction when he says something.)
:-D
Oh, my goodness. Look at that post. "Depends on the meaning of 'as'". You're just funnin me by using the most famous 'hair splitting' words in recent history, aren't you? You wouldn't accidentally say something so close to the Clinton response, I can't believe.
Well thanks for the giggle! The original question was relating to a simple statement of fact, very straightforward and direct. "Warming now, happened before."
You answered with an opinion, "I believe this warming is probably caused by something different."
You didn't answer the original question, probably because you knew that to answer honestly "yes, it has been warmer in the past", would be damaging to your pre-conceived agenda.
Y2K all over again.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.