Straight from the news.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20091211/wl … icaiceberg
More mainstream media hype I guess.
Yeah so icebergs are not new. This one has been floating around for 10 years!
I just saw that too. Well ice is heavy and like the shelf of lava in Hawaii every once in awhile the shelf of ice cracks from its own weight and sheds some into the sea.
Yes it has been dislodged for 10 years, this is hardly new, It was also stated in the text it is "a once in a hundred year event" which would imply it must have occured times before. So there it is.
Where did you get the information that it has been dislodged for ten years?
It is in the first sentence of the article I believe maybe the second. right ast the top at any rate
That's because liberals and global warming cultists see only what they want to see.
At least I can see I made a mistake. Your constant chatter and accusatory tone towards others that don't agree with you makes your views too easy to undermine. You only contribute to the decay in the collective thought process that already is in decline.
Yes of course, prejudicial rancor which is what everyone spouts when their views are not in agreement with the left. Very predictable. You must admit, it is telling how you were able to just bypass that little fact about the iceberg being floating around for 10 years. I don't think you're alone in that. I suspect everyone is guilty of the same. We have our beliefs, and we never want to admit we could be wrong so we seize upon that "facts" that support our belief. It's a shame really. Then throw in an economic interest with a desire for a particular outcome and you pretty much have erased any chance of learning the truth.
Another truth which the left fails to admit is that the Bush administration, as bad as it was on the environment had policies in place that will reduce green house gasses by 12% without taxing the American public! Under Obama's plan he will increase that to 17%, but he will do so by punishing us all with a carbon tax.
The left seems to think this is a good idea, as if taxing carbon would solve the global warming problem without any other sacrifice! Scientists will tell you that these planned reduction are meaningless and that drastic measures are needed now to turn things around.
A carbon tax might make you feel good and quiet your guilty conscience, but it won't solve the problem, at least if there really is a problem and it's as serious as the doomsday predictors are espousing!
The funny part about it is I did admit and even asked where it was in the piece.
This is something I have caught you in several times without any apology on your part. Usually at that point you launch a diatribe about all that is wrong with the liberals and how it is destroying your individual rights.
In my case you chose once again to label and place me in one of your cubby holes of convenience to draw on one of your typical insults.
I guess because of this and this and the subsequent dissmissal of the article you think this will quell the sign of change you think you have proven something. The only thing I can say because of your thought process that ignores all he does not agree with is time will tell. And thank you for helping to further seal the fate of open minded thinking with your predjudicial rancor. That is the long version for you.
Where did I label you? I only stated my opinion of what I think the left believes. However, if the shoe fits...
You always label anyone who disagrees with you. You can't help it. It is your MO.
Well I didn't label you here, you're labeling yourself! Besides, what's wrong with labels? All nouns are labels, that's how we know what we're talking about! You really need to be a little less sensitive!
And you need to be a little more caring and accurate with how you are treating this issue. If you separate the politics from the issue you may see something that can be done about it. I think your political views cloud your perspective.
Caring? No one cares more than me about the environment! You talk about labeling and clouded views you accuse me of prejudicial rancor and you fail to see how the issue of global warming has been politicized by the left! You accept only the conclusions of scientists that espouse the left's position. A group that has received 7 billion dollars of research money from the government! You choose to ignore the many, many scientists that have a different view! And you seem to think a carbon tax is what's needed! Sir, it is not my perspective that is clouded, it is yours!
Who ever said I supported a carbon tax? Oh yeah you assumed I did because of your claims of my being a liberal. I on the other hand separate the science from the politics and think we need more concrete agreement between the sides on the data before any effort can be directed or accomplished.
The real area I have contention with you is your insistence that Global Warming is not happening at all and that because of it we should drop the whole issue.
I on the other hand want to attack it in the middle where some common sense can dictate how we should proceed. Do I agree with the Copenhagen meetings if there is compromised data involved? Absolutely not! But should we stop the whole search for information after it is over? Absolutely not.
The biggest shame would be marginalized efforts and extreme expense wasted and let the issue fall into the dealt with category when the conference is over.
It's in the linked article above. Too bad they can't capture the fresh water and put it to good use.
This is of course one small part of a proccess, Without icebergs the ocean would become to rich in minerals, thus causing some species that live in the oceans to no longer exist. It helps to dilute the concentration. Then storms come and take the fresh water and deposit it on the lands in the form of rain. Giving landbearing species the ability to exist. Its a beautiful cycle that brings life wherever it is encountered.
Oh I saw that in the news today, it is going to be cold summer in Australia
Here are some more sky is falling articles you might like to dispell.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 … 154833.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 … 120714.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 … 132029.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 … 105739.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 … 104743.htm
You can't see the ice melting for the Liberals.
But obviously, it has moved closer to Australia in those 10 years or there would not be an alert.
They need to break it up! Wheres the Titanic when you need it?
by Sychophantastic2 years ago
These are results of a public policy poll:Q1 Do you believe global warming is a hoax, ornot?Do ................................................................... 37%Do not...
by TimTurner7 years ago
Ok that subject line sure got your attention, huh? Well, I just read a study that said only 57% of Americans think global warming is really happening: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091022/ap_ …...
by sannyasinman5 years ago
Why don't we hear of "Man Made Global Warming" anymore? Simple. Because global warming is not and never was caused by man and his CO2 emissions. Now even the Royal Society, a staunch man-made global warming...
by MikeNV7 years ago
Turns out there are a few people Al Gore does not want to admit exist.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQKzmHkJfGkMaurice Strong... the guy that most of the people buying into the Global Warming Fraud know little...
by Holle Abee7 months ago
http://opinion.financialpost.com/2011/0 … w-settled/
by My Esoteric5 months ago
There are two major would shaping forces at risk with a Trump presidency; an economic meltdown brought on by a sharp decline in American productivity, and, a much more important one, the environment. I will leave the...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.