The glaciers are melting! The glaciers are melting! The glaciers are…uhhhhh…never mind.
Turns out the IPCC’s chicken little story that all the Himalayan glaciers are melting is just another exaggeration. Or fraud. Take your choice. You know, like the stats coming out of East Anglia CRU. And its claim that Antarctica is melting. And that Greenland’s ice cap is melting. And that sea levels are rising. And that the polar bears are dying. Fact is, some glaciers are retreating, but many others around the world are growing.
“But how is that possible? How can glaciers be growing when the world is warming up like a package of Jiffy-Pop in a microwave?”
Here are a dozen glaciers (or groups of glaciers) around the world that are growing almost as quickly as global warming skepticism.
1. Himalayan glaciers are growing, not shrinking
Things are not as they seemed to be in the IPCC report. Not only are the Himalayan glaciers not shrinking, they’re growing. Discovery reports:
Perched on the soaring Karakoram mountains in the Western Himalayas, a group of some 230 glaciers are bucking the global warming trend. They’re growing. Throughout much of the Tibetan Plateau, high-altitude glaciers are dwindling in the face of rising temperatures. The situation is potentially dire for the hundreds of millions of people living in China, India and throughout southeast Asia who depend on the glaciers for their water supply.
But in the rugged western corner of the plateau, the story is different, according to a new study. Among legendary peaks of Mt. Everest like K2 and Nanga Parbat, glaciers with a penthouse view of the world are growing, and have been for almost three decades.
“These are the biggest mid-latitude glaciers in the world,” John Shroder of the University of Nebraska-Omaha said. “And all of them are either holding still, or advancing.”
Source: Discovery
2. Alaska’s Hubbard Glacier. Growing. A lot.
Alaska’s Hubbard Glacier is advancing moving toward Gilbert Point near Yakutat at an average of seven feet per day.
The Army Corp of Engineers’ Hubbard Glacier website for has some great photos of the advancing behemoth.
Source: CDApress.com
3. Norwegian glaciers. Growing again.
IceAgeNow.com reports on the growth of Norwegian glaciers:
“After years of decline, glaciers in Norway are again growing, reports the Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate. The actual magnitude of the growth, which appears to have begun over the last two years, has not yet been quantified, says NVE Senior Engineer Hallgeir Elvehøy.”The developments were originally reported by the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation (NRK).
Source: IceAgeNow.com
4. Glaciers growing on Canada’s tallest mountain
Canada.com tells the tale of glaciers growing on Canada’s tallest mountain:
“Canada’s tallest mountain, the Yukon’s towering Mount Logan, may have experienced a growth spurt.
“The University of Alaska aerial survey, conducted last summer with a laser altimeter by Fairbanks-based geoscientist Sandy Zirnheld, pegged Canada’s geographic zenith at 5,966 metres. That’s seven metres (23 feet) higher than the official height of 5,959 metres, determined in 1992 after a celebrated climb to the top by a team of Canadian researchers led by Mike Schmidt of the Geological Survey of Canada.
“Snow and ice accumulation is the most likely explanation,” Chris Larsen, the scientist leading the University of Alaska’s research on the continent’s northwest mountain ranges, said.”
Source: Canada.com
5. North to Alaska and more growing glaciers
Alaska’s glaciers have been in retreat for nearly 200 years. But now they’re advancing again.
MichNews.com reports the cold, hard facts:
“Unusually large amounts of Alaskan snow last winter were followed by unusually chilly temperatures there this summer. “In general, the weather this summer was the worst I have seen in at least 20 years,” says Bruce Molnia of the U.S. Geological Survey, and author of The Glaciers of Alaska. “It’s been a long time on most glaciers where they’ve actually had positive mass balance (added thickness).”
“Overall, Molnia figures Alaska had lost 10–12,000 square kilometers of ice since 1800, the depths of the Little Ice Age. That’s enough ice to cover the state of Connecticut. Climate alarmists claim all the glaciers might disappear soon, but they haven’t looked at the long-term evidence of the 1,500-year Dansgaard-Oeschger climate cycles. During the Little Ice Age—1400 to 1850—Muir Glacier filled the whole of Glacier Bay. Since then, the glacier has retreated 57 miles.
Source: MichNews.com
6. Glaciers are growing in California. California?
You might be surprised to learn that the Golden State has glaciers. And the Associated Press says they’re growing:
“Global warming is shrinking glaciers all over the world, but the seven tongues of ice creeping down Mount Shasta’s flanks are a rare exception: They are the only known glaciers in the continental U.S. that are growing.”
Source: FoxNews.com
7. A glacier is growing on Washington’s Mt. St. Helens.
Mount Saint Helens has glaciers? But it’s an active volcano. But, but, but…
KATU-TV reports the details:
“On May 18, 1980, the once bucolic ice-cream cone shape that defined Mount St. Helens in Washington state disappeared in monstrous blast of ash, rock, gas, and heat.
“Inside the volcano, which was once a soft dome of snow but is now a gaping, steaming menace with an unpredictable streak, an unexpected phenomenon is taking place: a glacier is growing.
“In these days of global warming concerns and scientists showing alarming then-and-now images of glaciers disappearing from mountainsides, it may be the only growing glacier in America – or maybe the world.
Source: KATU.com
8. Glaciers are growing in France and Switzerland, too
Another continent has reported in. According to an article in the Journal of Geophysical Research, glaciers are growing in France and Switzerland, too:
The research was conducted by six scientists from leading agencies and departments in France and Switzerland that deal with hydrology and glaciology. The research was funded by Observatoire des Sciences de l’Univers de Grenoble (OSUG), the European Programs ALPCLIM and CARBOSOL, and by the city of Chamonix Mont-Blanc.Vincent et al. collected a variety of datasets that could help them understand how the high-elevation glaciers of Mont Blanc were impacted by variations and trends in climate. Among other findings, they found that the mass balance of the glaciers is strongly controlled by precipitation, not temperature.
Vincent et al. state “The most striking features of these figures are the small thickness changes observed over the 20th century. For both areas, thickness variations do not exceed ±15 m. The average changes are +2.6 m at Dôme du Goûter (please note that this glacier is growing) and -0.3 m (-12 inches) at Mont Blanc.
“Considering the uncertainty interval, i.e., ±5 m, it can be concluded that no significant thickness change is detectable over most of these areas”. “All these results suggest that the SMBDôme du Goûter and Mont Blanc did not experience any significant changes over the 20th century.”
Source: World Climate Report
9. New Zealand’s largest glaciers are growing
Growing may not be a strong enough word. They’re surging. IceAgeNow.com reports the story:
Guides say the Franz Josef and the Fox glaciers continued advancing down their valleys in the past year and may soon be close to positions reached 40 years ago.
That (supposedly) contrasts sharply with the plight of many glaciers elsewhere on the planet, which are (supposedly) shrinking three times faster than they were in the 1980s, according to the World Glacier Monitoring Service (WGMS).
…
Franz Josef Glacier Guides base manager Tom Arnold estimated the Franz Josef and the Fox had advanced hundreds of meters in the past year.
Source: IceAgeNow.com
10. Russia’s glaciers are growing, too
The Russians don’t believe the IPCC forecasts, but they do believe their own eyes.
In 2002, a 22-million ton piece of ice broke off the gigantic Maili Glacier and crashed down a steep gorge into the village of Kami. It killed more than 150 people and injured hundreds more.The 500-foot wall of ice had been growing for six years. The Maili Glacier is just one of several glaciers in the North Caucasus Mountains that have been expanding at an alarming rate.
Other towns in the region have been partially buried by these advancing walls of ice. One local scientist in southern Russia said, “We may be seeing the beginning of a new great ice age!!!”
Source: IceAgeNow.com
11. Argentina’s Perito Moreno glacier is, you guessed it, growing
Is there a continent where glaciers aren’t growing? If so, South America isn’t one of them. Consider Argentina’s Perito Moreno glacier:
Nourished by Andean snowmelt, the glacier constantly grows even as it spawns icebergs the size of apartment buildings into a frigid lake, maintaining a nearly perfect equilibrium since measurements began more than a century ago.
“We’re not sure why this happens,” said Andres Rivera, a glacialist with the Center for Scientific Studies in Valdivia, Chile. “But not all glaciers respond equally to climate change.”
Source: IceAgeNow.com
12. Iceland’s Breidamerkurjokull glacier. Yup, it’s growing, too.
The Daily Mail UK ran a story on July 31, 2009 about the horrors of global warming. It was accompanied, for some inexplicable reason, by contradictory photos that showed the remarkable growth of Iceland’s Breidamerkurjokull glacier.
Their headline screamed, “How global warming is changing the face of the northern hemisphere.” The photos and caption told a story that was, you’ll pardon the expression, the polar opposite of what the article described.
Source: Daily Mail UK
” Don’t be. They only talk to Libs.
{ 47 comments… read them below or add one }
Like or Dislike:
It’ll be a cold day in…what?…nevermind.
Like or Dislike:
Very nice. BUT you need to create a YouTube video…. can you connect with noteviljustwrong on Youtube?
Like or Dislike:
Glaciergate–A relatively tame Hitler parody video
Glaciergate: Hitler’s Last Straw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1b-6U5MwyDM
Like or Dislike:
At face value, excellent bit of referenced research, worth disseminating.
…hang, on….glaciers advancing … is the recovery from little ice age turning around into renewed glaciation ….and I’m happy to hear it?
I guess the story would be more complete to add confirmed reports of retreating glaciers and make a net calculation. But then that’s what IPCC was paid big money to do, to review literature and make a scientific conclusion instead of one sided advocacy.
Like or Dislike:
Actually, the IPCC was chartered for the very purpose of one sided advocacy. It was designed from the beginning to find support for AGW.
Like or Dislike:
Advancing glaciers? Ok, but then let’s put things straight first. An advancing glacier CAN also mean it’s melting fast, because it’s resources higher up are rapidly shrinking. It get’s longer, but it also get’s (a lot) thinner, losing more of it’s mass/magnitude by flowing faster!
This may well apply to no. 1,2,3, 6, 8. Only no. 5 clearly states it has a positive mass balance, so it’s actually growing thicker too.
But let’s have another sobering message: in Austria in the last 10 years only 2 out of 130 glaciers have been reported growing or stable. So maybe these 12 are the only ones growing worldwide??
Like or Dislike:
In the case of 5, 6 and 8, all the summaries say the glaciers are either thicker, or the thickness is unchanged. I haven’t dug any deeper regarding the others.
Like or Dislike:
PeterB January 25, 2010, 2:11 pm at 2:11 pm
Advancing glaciers? Ok, but then let’s put things straight first. An advancing glacier CAN also mean it’s melting fast, because it’s resources higher up are rapidly shrinking.
No. Glaciers advance when their mass increase due to precipitation (e.g. snow or freezing rain) exceeds mass loss due to evaporation, melt, calving, etc. They are static when mass gained (precipitation) equals mass loss due to evaporation, melt, calving, etc. They recede when mass loss to evaporation, melt, calving, etc. exceeds mass gain due to precipitation.
Please, no more of the “every change proves AGW” pseudo science.
Like or Dislike:
Sorry to say John, I did some glacier research and I happen to know a few things about how they work.
I agree you first need accumulation of snow and ice before it can start flowing faster and getting longer, especially when the temperatures are higher. And once this happens it gets thinner, which can cause more rapid melting off because of that: the surface is larger because of “flowing out”, also causing higher evaporation, and because it’s thinner higher temperatures affect the ice even more.
Like or Dislike:
You did some glacier research? Really? What did this consist of? Are you a glaciologist?
More directly, John W. is correct and you are incorrect.
What you’re describing would require a massive rapid melting along the entire length of the glacier. I hope that you’re not making that claim unless you can tell us where the enormous mass of floodwaters thus created has gone. Further, when such rapid melting has occurred (as at the retreat of the last Ice Age) water outflow is often blocked by an ice dam creating a glacial lake.
More directly relevant to Global Warming is that the major factor in glacial retreat is a decrease in “upstream” snow and ice accumulation — NOT an increase in temperatures at their terminus.
Like or Dislike:
John W: “Please, no more of the “every change proves AGW” pseudo science.”
You mean “Voodoo Science” as ole “Birdbrain” Pachauri put it?
Like or Dislike:
yippee more evian water for everyone…
Like or Dislike:
This is an expected effect of “climate change”, there may be a short period of glacial growth, before they disappear completely by this time next year….
We’re doomed Captain Mainwaring….
Doomed.
Like or Dislike:
“Fact is, some glaciers are retreating, but many others around the world are growing” Things are turned around here. Of course this should read:
“Fact is, some glaciers are growing, but many others around the world are retreating.”
Everyone is free to produce a scientific analysis to prove that the current scientific views on globally receding glaciers are wrong. If they really were, certainly by now there would have been papers published. Until then these kind of blogs say more about the authors political frustration then about the current state of the cryosphere.
Like or Dislike:
hear hear!
Like or Dislike:
Papers written? Sure.
Papers published? Not so sure. See “Climategate” and the scientific collusion to use the peer review process to silence their rivals.
Like or Dislike:
Where have you been? Such papers WOULD NOT get published. The entire “peer-reviewed” “scientific” journal industry has been co-opted by activists who take definite — and PROVABLE — steps to prevent contrary views from ever being published.
Moreover, how can anyone do such independent research if they cannot receive funding — which they cannot unless their results are pre-determined and support the global warming hoax.
Like or Dislike:
Right on !
Like or Dislike:
It is silly to claim the St Helens glacier as significant. There was no ice left after the eruption, so of course ice will accumulate on the shady side of the mountain. The important figure is “glacier mass balance” which you can find at Google. Here is just one link:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/05/glacier-mass-balance-equilibrium-or-disequilibrium-response/
Like or Dislike:
realclimate?? The same realclimate (M Mann) The Hockey stick inventor who is being investigated for data falsification lies and scientific interference?
Like or Dislike:
So, you’ve found **12** glaciers that are allegedly growing?! Do you know what ‘confirmation bias’ means? How about ‘cherry picking’?
* World’s glaciers continue to melt at historic rates. Latest figures show the world’s glaciers are continuing to melt so fast that many will disappear by the middle of this century. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jan/25/world-glacier-monitoring-service-figures + http://www.geo.unizh.ch/wgms/mbb/sum08.html
You’re citing Fox News and the Daily Fail?! What a joke!
Like or Dislike:
Gee, “confirmation bias” and “cherry picking”. Isn’t that the modus operandi of the glorious, omnipotent and wise prophets of the IPCC? (Not to mention CRU, NASA, ad nauseum)
Like or Dislike:
So is someone with some Rep going to Digg this baby? Getting thousands of hits an hour on it.
Like or Dislike:
Various glaciers worldwide have been in retreat since the 1800s or the end of the little ice age and thus cannot be caused by man-made CO2. Glacial melting is also a good thing because it increase the available amount of fresh water.
Growing – 50 Glaciers reverse the trend and grow in south New Zealand (Taipei Times)
Growing – Bolam Glacier, Mount Shasta Glaciers Defy Global Warming, Grow (FOX News)
Growing – Briksdal Glacier, Norway’s glaciers growing at record pace (Agence-France Presse)
Growing – Dôme du Goûter Glacier, Permanent Ice Fields Are Resisting Global Warming (Science Daily)
Growing – Fox Glacier has been advancing since 1985 (Alpine Guides)
Growing – Franz Josef Glacier, A Glacier Grows, Undeterred by Heated Kyoto Debate (CNSNews)
Growing – Guyot Glacier, Icy Bay Glaciers get up and go (SitNews)
Growing – Himalayan Glaciers Are Growing … and Confounding Global Warming Alarmists (The Heartland Institute)
Growing – Hotlum Glacier, Mount Shasta Glaciers Defy Global Warming, Grow (FOX News)
Growing – Hubbard Glacier, Alaska: Growing and Advancing in Spite of Global Climate Change (USGS)
Growing – Johns Hopkins Glacier is advancing and moving 3000 feet per year (Glacier Bay National Park)
Growing – Jostedalsbreen Glacier, Norway’s glaciers growing at record pace (Agence-France Presse)
Growing – Kolka Glacier is growing again (NTV, Russia)
Growing – Konwakiton Glacier, Mount Shasta Glaciers Defy Global Warming, Grow (FOX News)
Growing – McGinnis Glacier, Alaska Range Glacier Surges (Science Daily)
Growing – Meares Glacier, an advancing glacier tearing up trees and rocks in its path as it grows (Alaska Tours)
Growing – Mont Blanc Glacier, Global warming makes Mont Blanc grow (The Daily Telegraph, UK)
Growing – Mount St. Helens Glacier, Glacier Grows in Mount St. Helens’ Crater (FOX News)
Growing – Glacier resumes growing in Mount St. Helens crater (The Seattle Times)
Growing – Mud Creek Glacier, Mount Shasta Glaciers Defy Global Warming, Grow (FOX News)
Growing – Nigardsbreen Glacier is growing by 25 to 50 meters per year (Jostedal Glacier National Park)
Growing – Perito Moreno Glacier, Defiant Argentine Glacier Thrives Despite Warming (Reuters)
Growing – Pio XI Glacier, The biggest glacier in South America keeps growing every year (Visit Chile)
Growing – Rockies: Colorado: 100 More Glaciers Are Discovered (The New York Times)
Growing – Trinity Glaciers, Small Glaciers In Northern California Buck Global Warming Trend (Science Daily)
Growing – Tsaa Glacier, Icy Bay Glaciers get up and go (SitNews)
Growing – Watkins Glacier, Mount Shasta Glaciers Defy Global Warming, Grow (FOX News)
Growing – Whitney Glacier, Mount Shasta Glaciers Defy Global Warming, Grow (FOX News)
Growing – Wintun Glacier, Mount Shasta Glaciers Defy Global Warming, Grow (FOX News)
Growing – Yahtze Glacier, Icy Bay Glaciers get up and go (SitNews)
Why would the Guardian and the WMS only publish retreating glaciers and not the advancing/growing ones?
On the other hand David.. What would the world look like if Glaciers would never retreat and always advance?
Somethings tells me the word ” unprecedented ” is coming up.
Like or Dislike:
So the IPCC’s accepted gospel of dissapearing glaciers is refuted by facts, and the warmists respond with “This proves that there IS AGW!”
Alrighty then.
Like or Dislike:
Phil Jones, head of the Climate Research Unit, to his colleagues in one of the emails leaked through Climategate:
“PS I’m getting hassled by a couple of people to release the CRU station temperature data. Don’t any of you three tell anybody that the UK has a Freedom of Information Act!”
Like or Dislike:
But these are facts, damn it! Don’t you know the agw true-believers thrive on rabid and blind faith?
Maybe you’ve seen these Yale documents, but Al Gore via Yale univ (maybe others, too) and churches, is right this moment promoting climate change as religion. I know, I know… the agw hysterics already act like crazed zealots, but Gore is doing his best to ensure that the future generations are indoctrinated in Climatism – complete with prayers. I kid you not!
And I’ve got links to prove it:
http://aprilbaby.typepad.com/a_california_life/
Like or Dislike:
Considering I work in the global warming and pollution controls industry, this may be bad for business! Glad to finally hear some sense coming out of the science though!
James
Like or Dislike:
Really? Undocumented reports that a glacier is moving down slope refutes all the climate evidence… I guess next the Right will want to interfere with my right to arm bears (or something like that).
I was at Franz Joseph in 2007 – there are some really nice signs as you approach with the year the glacial face was at that point. The same is true for the Fox Glacier. For over 100 years they have been retreating, and very quickly in more recent years.
I’ve also been to Alaska and watched the calving of the glacial face – not a good thing if one is interested in maintaining current ice volumes. Balance is where they are matched by accumulation. We aren’t at balance. (And, no, I couldn’t see Russia.)
Lastly, I know that I’ve been flip with my comments, but seriously – say the science and all those years of research and schooling are wrong. Would it hurt to take the bus or carpool every once in a while?!
Like or Dislike:
Did you carpool to New Zealand and Alaska? Or did you take the bus? Surely, a concerned environmentalist like you wouldn’t have taken one of those horrible CO2 spewing jets.
Like or Dislike:
Oh please. So now anyone who’s concerned with the environment can’t travel abroad? That’s about as big a cop-out as saying, “if you don’t like it here, why don’t you move to another country?”
Like or Dislike:
I lived in Alaska from 1961 to 1964. Alaskan glaciers were calving then just as they are now. I also experienced the great Alaskan earthquake. As some would want you to believe, that earthquake was not caused by AGW either. The fact is glaciers have been retreating for thousands of years. We have been observing them for what, maybe the last 100? The fact that some glaciers are growing while others are shrinking tells us nothing of real value about climate except it is variable.
Like or Dislike:
I’m going to have a nice fire and a cigar tonight. I for one enjoy a warm evening, if we all had a fire and cigar, maybe fire up the Yukon so the battery wont die while the radio is on; then we could all feel guilty for killing those nice little glaciers. When they are small enough, I wonder how many wiseguy school boys will go looking under them for the Cavemen that got squished, might find something to write about.
Like or Dislike:
On the other hand ..it is sad to read what this Hoax as done to some people.
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/story.html?id=2456777
Like or Dislike:
Someone earlier mentioned there are “facts” against AGW and that IPCC and Gore don’t use facts.
Sorry, but in what dreamworld are you living? The IPCC/Gore use numerous facts, though they may have misinterpreted a FEW of them. Against AGW are some (less) “cherry-picked” facts, such as a few (out of thousands) glaciers and a few (out of thousands) weather stations that show figures against the global trend. Yes, they are facts too, but so much less numerous.
I must admit, I don’t believe everything the AGW believers say. And I laugh about the “religious” believers, who link AGW with 2012 and other bullshit. And I am actually not happy at all that AGW believers keep using “Carbon” as main issue, where everyone digging deeper knows there is much more going on.
But fact is oil and coal are being used up more rapidly than new sources being found. Fact is also that worldwide forest cover is being reduced, despite new plantations being set up here and there. Fact is fresh water reserves are not growing according to the world population and the industrial use, especially in fast growing economies such as India and China (and the extra run-off from melting glaciers are not managed well, they tend to cause floods, not extra storage).
Fact is we need to do something to be able to allow a liveable earth for our (grand)children. And we shouldn’t only rely on the government, but rather start ourselves with solar, growing our own (fruit) trees etc. We don’t have to stop flying or using our hummers altogether, just reducing the number of trips and doing something to compensate (more solar less oil, planting trees) already helps!
Like or Dislike:
Against the wealth of examples of retreat you identify 12 to the contrary – within your twelve I feel there is doubt on the relevance of at least one, since I live less than 60km from “glacier number 8″.
Whilst the very top of the very tallest mountain in Europe may be maintaining its thickness (within an acceptable range of uncertainty) the multitude of glaciers coming from it certainly are not.
The photo used is of the glacier de argentierre (mer de glace), which is sort of connected to the ones talked about in the paper; it has retreated over 1km in the last 130 years and is 150m thinner. It now has a cable car to get down to it from the train that used to serve up tourists.
The Bosson glacier that comes off the other side, into the chamonix valley, within living memory reached to the road. Now it’s more than 1.2 km up the mountain side.
The conclusion of the original paper is that at these high altitudes it is precipitation that drives thickness, not temperature since the 1degree seen so far has not raised the melt point to these altitudes. They the mention the concern that further potential increases would bring it above 4300m for much of the year, and so greatly accelerate the ice loss.
Ps. the guys you quote helpfully offer “If your geography on the Mont Blanc region is a bit rusty, the map below will help” and then proceed to list the wrong two countries that it forms the boarder of. It’s France and Italy not France and Switzerland
)
Like or Dislike:
This has all become rather sad. There is a LOT of hard science out on these issues. A majority of the thoroughly verified and reviewed research supports an anthropogenic source to the recent warming trend. (note: majority means more, not nearly all) It has become a sociopolitical hellion for all causes. For example, there is mounting evidence that the last (real) ice age was caused by a substantial and rapid ice melt possibly caused by 1 to 10 years of rapid warming. There’s no sense trying to have a real discussion in a forum like this, so there’s my 1 line firebrand fact.
Like or Dislike:
Facts: Global warming & cooling happen: climate changes are a part of earth’s history. What drives these changes that is the real question correct? It is quite silly to argue whether or not the earth is warming/cooling etc; fact is one or the other does occur. Is global warming–if that is the current cycle–driven by man-made disturbances. Well, what has caused it in the past? People should take a close look at the current climactic areas on earth as a whole and research why each region has the weather/climate that it has: e.g. the Polar regions why are they so cold? Further from the Sun based on Earth’s axis tilt/rotation/orbit right? What makes the Tropics…tropical? How much of the earth is covered by land vs how much by water? The ratio I was taught is at least a 3-to-1 ratio of water to land. Now, how much of that land is devoted to either agricultural/industrial use or just plain urban/suburbanized? Think carefully about these ratios and percentages and apply some God given (whether you choose to believe that or not does not matter one iota–except of course to you eventually) critical thinking/reasoning skills and logic. Now start comparing. Perhaps do a little research on what drives weather patterns too… Next, another question: should we be good stewards of the planet we live on? Would you or do you poop in your own house–not on the toilet–but say in a corner or in the middle of any room? I am not proposing that there is no global warming I am merely stating that when climate change happens man-driven causes for that change are negligible when all other factors are also considered.
Like or Dislike:
seen this video yet?
http://wwwacadia1755.blogspot.com/
Like or Dislike:
For those who come here acting superior with your allegiance to “the majority of scientists” – you’ve been duped.
This climate hysteria is not about the science or the environment; That’s simply the device used to tweak your compassion, get you tangled up in details. Climate hysteria is being hocked by activists, politicians, corporations, the media, unethical scientists for their own gain. It’s no hidden conspiracy. Those who will profit have the info all over the place for you to see. They just know you’ll trust what they tell you. You gobble up the excuses of bad science, hidden science, scientists that even admit the falsification for political purposes. I’ve never heard such justifying and making excuses as I have from true-believers in “climate change”.
There’s simply nothing that can open your eyes to the fact you’ve been duped.
You’re simply useful idiots, parroting the very sources who will gain much – and help the environment little. Yeah, I know, you’ll just shrug: “Well, I’d rather risk believing in order to protect the environment.”
Do your research: carbon trading is a massive scam that will not help the environment and will bring all of us many regulations (many govts even have documents stating they’ll need carbon policing. In the link below, read the end of the first bullet point.)
Policing for: “…the enforcement of the anticipated Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme.”
http://www.ag.gov.au/www/ministers/oconnor.nsf/Page/MediaReleases_2009_FourthQuarter_18December2009-ReformstoenhancePolicecapability
Austrailia’s Rudd is really gung-ho on this climate crap. But he’s not alone. The UN talks about how we citizens will all be taxed, regulated, policed.
Sound great, huh? For some of you true-believers it probably sounds fine.
Yeah, that attitude is what the world leaders are counting on, the masses who will trust, not question, quote science out their asses that they can’t really verify – even the freaking scientists who plugged the info in the models, and others are scuttling away like roaches and NASA who has been hiding and readjusting info can’t verify it. But they you’ll believe all their excuses.
So go ahead, act smug. Pretend tin-hatters are just making stuff up, when information is all over the place – ignore it at all our “peril” (to use a word that provokes you climate-change hysterics so well) .
Like or Dislike:
Through your hatred of the global warmists, you seem to overreact even on the sentence that seems so obviously true to you:
“…the enforcement of the anticipated Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme.”
This is, if at all, referring to using police force against those (heavy industry) entrepreneurs who keep polluting, despite all regulations. Nothing wrong with that, especially if all others stick to the rules, you should not let the pollution cowboys have their way!
This sentence however mentions nothing at all about so-called carbon taxes (don’t know why all climate sceptics keep howling about them) and definitely not about enforcing such taxes on citizens.
And even if there will be some more energy/climate taxes in the future: you can also avoid them, by placing solar panels, by insulating your homes. Or you can even use these taxes to your benefit, by having your solar panels subsidised, and by placing so many of them that you actually produce more electricity than you use!
By the way, your story about the unethical scientists is the same as the one about the glacier: thousand of scientists have agreed on man-made influence on global warming, just as thousand of glaciers are rapidly melting. Many falsifications have been made deliberately, by the oil industry, to give them so more excuses to keep them oing “business as usual” a bit longer.
Trust me, I am no carbon-believer. But I have been around long enough to distinguish “incidental mistakes” from “diliberate lies”.
Again, as said earlier: it is not just climate change, something is really going on 9and wrong) in this world. And the least we can do is show some respect for future generations!
Like or Dislike:
PeterB, you say we need to show respect for future generations. Yes, something is really going on and wrong in this world. You see, we have a world population that fails to recognize the power, providence and soveriegnty of God. We are supposed to be stewards of this world, we should go to great lengths to avoid poluting our environment. We cannot become slaves of this world. We are called to go forth, and subdue the earth and all that is in it. That is pretty straight forward. Thousands of schollars have also agreed that the bible is not true! I am glad to not have swallowed that lie. When science and schollarship agree with the Bible, in it’s entirety, I agree with them. When they conflict, it shows that science and schollars have some catching up to do.
Is it at all interesting to look at all the money tied to Global warming? does it cause you any concern to hear the PM of Greece say that it is time for countries like America to give back to all the other countries (repatations). As if the United States in the past century, having bailed out the whole world in two world wars, then forgiving debts, then rebuilding economies and nations, again forgiving debts; was that a triffle?
OOHHHH it isn’t about money. (they say with a sancimoious tone and much hand wringing) Do you really believe that crap? I suppose Abortion is not about money either? You may think I am getting on a tangent, no it is all tied together. It is not a conspiracy, these things are the symptoms. They are the sickness of the mind and heart that destroy a soul. You can go on with your fear of destruction (may be well placed), you can santimoniously preach the gloom and doom of civilization; Nothing will end or change until God intends it! Thank God it is not up to us(mortals).
Like or Dislike:
Not sure I get you right, Nate, but here goes: are you really saying that those who follow the Bible and God, are (always) doing the right thing, even if they pollute and distroy (almost the same as subdue) it? Just because they can make money of it, under the name of God?
In that case I my have to revise my opinion, from someone who doesn’t believe but truly respects every (religious) opinion, into someone with more active disappointment towards those who believe, but apparently don’t live according to the intention of the Bible.
Like or Dislike:
Guess you don’t get it do you. You may see the remark about being a steward, I am sure you can look up the meaning of stewardship. You may take some time to read the Bible, God does not offer leagal protection to those that destroy the earth for a proffit. Those who believe the Bible, do so according to the Grace of God. Indeed it is our lack of ability to obey God, that makes necessary the Salvation provided by God! Again, Thank God it is not up to us mortals.
Like or Dislike:
I’m confused…will someone please tell me whether it’s snowboard season or wakeboard season. I’m tired of running to the sports closet, and changing gear after every comment is listed…
Like or Dislike:
Well, this information seems very interesting. I believe that we will have all that is necessary for us on this Earth until the return of God because He has promised such; however, He has made us stewards of this world, which means that we must take care of it. I do not believe the world will end because of the Global Warming hoax (money, politics, slander only come from such a theory), but we do need to use what is given to us wisely. Plus, I think most scientists are in accordance; it is just those who come on the media that are against, which are not sufficient to justify anything. lalala
Like or Dislike:
I keep hearing about all this horrible Co2 stuff causing global warming, despite archeological evidence that we are pretty much right on track, climate-wise. Last time I checked, Co2 was GOOD for the planet, since that’s what plants (trees, wheat, etc) need to survive … excessive oxygen kills them off. Too bad Gore and buddies don’t worry about getting more trees planted and forget their big lawns to even things out, but doing that would impact their incomes!
{ 14 trackbacks }