Key developing nations reject G-8 climate plan
A False Frenzy On Global Warming
Global Warming on Free Republic
Posted on 07/10/2008 10:39:30 AM PDT by Graybeard58
Research funded by NASA, the National Science Foundation and the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution suggests underwater volcanoes up to a mile in diameter have erupted violently in the past decade beneath the Arctic ice cap.
The eruptions coincided with growing hysteria over the unprovable theory that civilization is causing runaway global warming (which among other things is supposedly melting the ice cap), and with research irrefutably confirming that the Antarctic ice cap is growing and that the planet has cooled 1 F in the last decade.
Scientists used to think deep-sea volcanoes dribbled lava because of the weight of the overlying water. But this new research, reported in the journal Nature, determined pockets of magma beneath the oceanic crust build to the point where they pop "like a champagne bottle being uncorked," Imaginova.com reported via Fox News.
Logic dictates such violent discharges of hot magma would warm the water, which in turn would melt the surface ice. Not so, says Robert Reeves-Sohn of Woods Hole. "We don't believe the volcanoes had much effect on the overlying ice."
Alas, this is the way of warmists.
Any time the possibility is raised that natural forces may be responsible for what they ascribe to man-made warming, they respond: "NOPE (No Other Possible Explanation), it's global warming." Categorically ruling out volcanic eruptions as a factor in the melting Arctic ice cap is consistent with their belief that changes in solar radiance do not affect earth's climate.
But if you light a Bunsen burner and place it beneath a beaker of ice, does the ice not melt? And if you light a Sterno container and place it beneath a tray of ice, does the ice not melt? So why can't undersea volcanoes be at least contributing to the melting of the Arctic ice cap?
This does not sound like he has "done the math".
Nor does it sound like he hasn't.
The editorial provides a single sentence, with absolutely no context.
If it were me -- and I am one who is paid to "do the math" in my field of work -- I might well phrase the results of my analysis in similar terms, especially if there were uncertainties involved.
It's irrelevant, however. My complaint, in case you hadn't noticed it the other three times I stated it, is with the editorial board, who are at best guilty of the same sin of which they accuse Mr. Reeve-Sohn.
Key developing nations reject G-8 climate plan
A False Frenzy On Global Warming
Global Warming on Free Republic
SITREP
So why can’t undersea volcanoes be at least contributing to the melting of the Arctic ice cap?
+++++++++++++++++++++
Why is this question even submitted? What’s important and what you need to come to grips with is that the science is settled. End of story. /s
“But if you light a Bunsen burner and place it beneath a beaker of ice, does the ice not melt?”
Just the kind of question you get from non-scientists. (Sarcasm)
I’ve been doing something so that you all don’t have to. I’ve been reading over at RealClimate.org.
Want to talk about your completely brainwashed AGW proponents.
There are a few who are reasonable. I’ve tried telling them that if they keep this “nothing but AGW makes any sense” that they may down the road be proven wrong.
They continue to try to beat me down, but I’m not deterred by their complete unwillingness to see anything outside their blinders.
As far as some scientific background, one poster, who seemed to be a little less attcking than most had the following to say....
I enjoy reading your blog. Regarding the “volcano”, in 1999, a team from Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, led by geophysicist Rob Reves-Sohn, funded by the NSF, discovered Arctic Ocean thermovents along the Gakkel Ridge. The 1800 km Gakkel Ridge runs across the arctic from Greenland to Siberia and is submerged up to 4 km deep. Geologists now know that the Gakkel Ridge is an active zone of slow spreading tectonic plates with massive amounts of activity including explosive emissions of super carbonated magma that have blown the tops off dozens of undersea mountains, produced mineral/metal riches from extensive hydrothermal vents throughout the range and holds sea life around smoker chimneys with abundant hydrogen-sulfide based ecosystems.
It is the focus of scientists from around the world because of:
Governments seeking to stake their sea bottom dominion claims, grant money, greed/wealth, reputations/degrees, adventure, and advancement of human knowledge . The arctic seems to be teeming with researchers (American, Russian, and Canadian), their ice breakers, ships, submarines, and tourist flotillas! See ScienceDaily for info.
www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080625140649.htm
Later, there was another post (#217) that completely did all the math. And after that, the word volcano wasn’t mentioned again in the entire thread.
The phrase “Quite a lot” in regards to the ice melt was used, and they suddenly switched to some other topic.
Paul
No &@#**&@! concept of the heat capacity of water and the huge volume of the oceans. Science illiteracy and innumeracy in print.
Do these idiots have any idea how much energy it takes to heat 1.3 BILLION cubic km of ocean ?
Increased volcanism is a fact. The last time we had this occur the tempature also increased in the 1800’s until Krakatoa erupted, cooling the earth for the next hundred years. Or you could look at the Siberian Flats which caused more global extinction from volcanic carbon emissions then the great comet theory. This of course is the real truth, that we cannot control the self-regulating environment of our weather.
The idea of dumping iron into the ocean is dumb to cool the atmosphere, so is carbon screening panels. They are just drops in the bucket. Just another way for environmentalists and Dems to put there money into industries they promote through public misdirection as a sure fire way to return an investment. Some of us may wonder how Bill Clinton, after closing off millions of acres for ‘environmental reasons’ just as he left office went from $2 M in assets to $100 M today. Guess he must make millions per speaking engagements. DUH.
Just pay attention to the actions of the head vampire of Global Warming hoax Al Gore. In 1999 when running for office stated America needed to be energy independent from the Middle East and coal liquification was a viable solution to this problem, because clean coal had technology drastically reduced emmissions from 30 years prior.
Now coal liquification is bad! It’s evil that kills all the children, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi said so and they run our House so it must be true! Man, Dem followers are like cult worshipers, soooo emotionally charged and stupid.
Yep, just mentioned the Siberian Flat. After millions of years the earth righted itself. Yes the climate is rising and yes, mans contributions are .000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% of the process so I guess we all must die off so nature can takes it course and the ruling elite can govern that a million years from now also.
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.
