Skip to comments.
Global warming doubles rate of ocean rise
Eurek Alert ^
| 11.24.05
| Carl Blesch
Posted on 12/31/2005 6:28:17 PM PST by Coleus
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81 next last
To: hiredhand
Yep - and ask those people in Europe now ... super cold ...
21
posted on
12/31/2005 6:50:47 PM PST
by
SkyDancer
("Talent Without Ambition Is Sad - Ambition Without Talent Is Worse")
To: Dr Stormfist
I just finished reading Michael Crichton's "State of Fear"...there is no global warming...period. I agree. At least no human caused global warming. Mars has a "global warming" problem too. I guess there are too many SUVs on Mars.
I'll be long gone when my house is beach front property...
22
posted on
12/31/2005 6:52:13 PM PST
by
69ConvertibleFirebird
(Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.)
To: Coleus
"During the Late Cretaceous period (the most recent age of dinosaurs)"
Thanks for reminding us how "accurate" scientific theory was re those too. LOL.
Its all Rovian Mothership Delta's doing. Only 2 million more years and the Blue Coastal Cities will be wiped off the face of the map. Mwau-hahahha.
23
posted on
12/31/2005 6:52:48 PM PST
by
Fenris6
(3 Purple Hearts in 4 months w/o missing a day of work? He's either John Rambo or a Fraud)
To: Coleus
Meanwhile, Mars is warming without human help.
To: Abcdefg
There can be only one possible solution to this terrible delima we face: international socialism as dreamed of by Karl Marx! Yup, Global Socialism. Our only hope is to buy emmission credits from the UN...
25
posted on
12/31/2005 6:59:48 PM PST
by
Fenris6
(3 Purple Hearts in 4 months w/o missing a day of work? He's either John Rambo or a Fraud)
To: Coleus
26
posted on
12/31/2005 7:06:33 PM PST
by
preacher
(A government which robs from Peter to pay Paul will always have the support of Paul.)
To: Dr Stormfist
Aliens Cause Global Warming Caltech Michelin Lecture ^ | January 17, 2003 | Michael CrichtonPosted on 12/11/2003 1:44:39 PM PST by Dan Evans
Edited on 01/02/2004 6:36:11 PM PST by Sidebar Moderator. [history]
My topic today sounds humorous but unfortunately I am serious. I am going to argue that extraterrestrials lie behind global warming. Or to speak more precisely, I will argue that a belief in extraterrestrials has paved the way, in a progression of steps, to a belief in global warming. Charting this progression of belief will be my task today.
27
posted on
12/31/2005 7:09:21 PM PST
by
streetpreacher
(If at the end of the day, 100% of both sides are not angry with me, I've failed.)
To: All
Hmm 2mm = .080 inches. We will all drowned in no time.
28
posted on
12/31/2005 7:11:50 PM PST
by
Nalu
To: Coleus
Human induced global warming is now proven scientific fact?
To: Retired Chemist
Has that ever stopped them before?
30
posted on
12/31/2005 7:13:55 PM PST
by
streetpreacher
(If at the end of the day, 100% of both sides are not angry with me, I've failed.)
To: Coleus
31
posted on
12/31/2005 7:24:34 PM PST
by
BenLurkin
(O beautiful for patriot dream - that sees beyond the years)
To: Coleus
While the speed at which the ocean is rising almost two millimeters per year today compared to one millimeter annually for the past several thousand years may not be fodder for the next disaster movie, it affirms scientific concerns of accelerated global warming. This is bogus. There are no standard measurement records from "several thousand years" ago. There is no way to demonstrate this. BALONEY!
32
posted on
12/31/2005 7:29:32 PM PST
by
LiteKeeper
(Beware the secularization of America)
To: Retired Chemist
"The findings establish a steady millimeter-per-year rise from 5,000 years ago until about 200 years ago."
Two hundred years?
The researchers seem to have overlooked the obvious...if their findings are correct, then global warming began around the time that Congress first convened.
To: hiredhand
You are certainly correct in one sense. Your thesis is a true analogy to radio listeners believing hucksters like Limbaugh, Hannity, Ingrham, and the rest of the cast of thousands who, at one moment repeat what you say in your post and then, in their crass commercial posture ask us to have faith in their assurance that the product du jour is the best, the brightest, the---(fill in the blank). Similarly, their ''personal'' endorsement (vis-a'-vis the product merely buying time for an ad) is intended to convince you upon your total faith in their trustworthiness.
Thus, when the product or service is later found to fail, injure users, or any similar factual establishment that your consumer's faith was misplaced, it is not merely rhetorical to ask: Does that failure justify the listener's future doubt when the talking head is repeating yet another assurance of a fact relating to public policy, political integrity or the purported truthfulness of one person, himself (herself) or another? And, with regard to the future faith of the listener when still another product or service is hawked by the host, what level of trust is reasonable for the listener to have for that product specifically and all representations, assurances and interpretive conclusions as a universal matter?
34
posted on
12/31/2005 7:31:40 PM PST
by
middie
To: Coleus
I have great difficulty believing any of this especially when the same climatologists can't tell me correctly what the weather will be like this week. Add to that the fact that when ever it has flood here they have been unable to even guesstimate the amount.
Could it be that the hot air being emitted by the "chicken little" "we're all going to die because of the SUV" crowd are the ones that are the cause of all this. I think so.
35
posted on
12/31/2005 7:37:40 PM PST
by
styky
(All the great things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom; justice; honor)
To: middie
Now THAT is a very good point! Whenever I hear the talk show host "plugging" for a mattress, or some health suppliment, I can only think of ONE thing (whether I'm correct or not!).
...and that one thing is -
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Credibility is extremely valuable, and should be more closely guarded by those who claim to be the "voice of liberty".
Unfortunately, for the most part this doesn't seem to be the case!
36
posted on
12/31/2005 7:41:00 PM PST
by
hiredhand
(My kitty disappeared. NOT the rifle!)
To: styky
Exactly. They can't tell you if it's going to rain 72 hours from now without stating a given margin of error, but we're supposed to take them for their word about something that was suppose to have happened 100 million years ago?!
37
posted on
12/31/2005 7:42:50 PM PST
by
hiredhand
(My kitty disappeared. NOT the rifle!)
To: SkyDancer
38
posted on
12/31/2005 8:02:47 PM PST
by
Dallas59
(“You love life, while we love death"( Al-Qaeda & Democratic Party)
To: Coleus
Their grants are about to run out, so they damn well better come up with
something. That's why they have to keep issuing a stream of
"scary scenarios" (their own exact words) to keep this on the front burner.That's why these "reports" keep trickling out in a preplanned manner.
As funding dries up they will only become more shrill.
Liberalism is ruining science!
39
posted on
12/31/2005 8:11:49 PM PST
by
capt. norm
(Headline: "Energizer bunny arrested, charged with battery")
To: middie
That's some pretty heavy navel-gazing. You need to get out more (or lighten up on the refreshments).
40
posted on
12/31/2005 8:17:48 PM PST
by
capt. norm
(Headline: "Energizer bunny arrested, charged with battery")
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson