It's enough to make you cry...

[LavaSurfer]

Had to throw that one in.

Good Move, SWEEEEEEET! :monkeydan

 

[H2Andy]

Heck if it didn't recover from natural causes the parrot fish
would have wiped out the reefs eons ago.

i don't think you've taken much time to read about the realtionship between
parrot fish and coral. or if you did, you missed the part where they talk about
the parrotfish being BENEFICIAL to coral, as they clean the reef of "bad" algae which would otherwise kill the coral.

in fact, without parrotfish around, coral dies.

this type of misunderstanding of basic facts is what makes the rest of your post
re/ global warming completely off-base. you just don't seem to have understood
the basis before you started building theories on them.

this applies to me as well:

a little knowledge is a dangerous thing

also, unlike past bleachings, this time around there's been a lot of mortality
in corals in the caribbean. coral can only bounce back so much. after
a few bleachings, the "good" algae it needs doesn't come back and the
coral dies.

check out the latest news form the Caribbean re/ coral.

 

[Dragon2115]

Relax people, by the time GW becomes a major problem we'll be extinct from the next asteroid that hits us. When's the one they're watching now due, 2028? If that turns out to be true, then go ahead and super size them SUV's because we only have 22 years left to enjoy them. Of course that probably won't be the one that gets us since we're far more likely to get hit by one that we didn't see than one we did. Boy wouldn't it be a ***** if we finally figure out GW and how to reverse its effects in only 50 years, only to realize that we're all going to die in an impact with an asteroid we just discovered is going to hit us in 6 months.

 

[LavaSurfer]

i don't think you've taken much time to read about the realtionship between
parrot fish and coral. or if you did, you missed the part where they talk about
the parrotfish being BENEFICIAL to coral, as they clean the reef of "bad" algae which would otherwise kill the coral.

in fact, without parrotfish around, coral dies.

this type of misunderstanding of basic facts is what makes the rest of your post
re/ global warming completely off-base. you just don't seem to have understood
the basis before you started building theories on them.

Attack as you will but come on man, can't you detect a joke when you see one?

My thoughts on Global warming are just as valid as yours and all thoughts are theories. The FACT is that nobody really knows for sure. Every time you find one piece of "proof" (Theory) that supports human participation in global warming I can find "proof" (Theory) that contradicts that theoretical research. We as humans are notorious for our opinions and even worse spending tons of money to support them. Investors and governments spend money to "Prove" something and they want the answer they were looking for.

Do you know that Hershey paid for a research project to "Prove" chocolate was a cavity preventative? Guess what they discovered? I bet you can. USA today reported the findings and everyone believed it. Now let me ask you, is chocolate going to prevent cavities in the form Hershey sells chocolate? Unfortunately I cannot find the article so you will have to take my word or search for yourself.

BTW, I am very aware of the relationship between Coral and Parrot fish as well as other coral dwelling creatures.

Sorry to have upset you. Like I said I never should have dipped into this thread.

 

[Storm]

http://www.snowjapan.com/e/gallery/index-snowy-japan.html
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/news/1999/wsnorcrd.htm
http://www.micmacmedia.com/Weather/Sierra_Snowfall/sierra_snowfall.html
http://www.uspressnews.com/articles/1081[/QUOTE


The llinks were interesting,(especially the last one ) but the one thing I keep getting more of a laugh out of, is from folks who live in the temperate zone (and being a scientist) making claims baseed on a few ancecdotal new articles, and not from established monitoring agencies. (Enviroment Canada, for example)

First off, for those who do not deal with cold weather on a regular basis, incressed cold and snow have no correlation after the temp hits and maintains its self below 0 degrees Celsuis. Increased cold tempratures will not cause more precipiation, it will only guarantee that it falls as snow. Increased precipation in nodric zones is moslty casue by warmer and moister air from warmer regions being dragged up into the colder regions buy cnahing pressure systems and jet stream movement. (Climatology 101).

So basically when the warm lower pressure systems get sucked up here, they bring moisture which falls as snow. We had a milder, temprature wise, winter this year (- mid teens mostly), but it was accompanied, as it always is when the rempratures are mild) with an increase in snowfall. Two years ago, we got very little snow, but it was cold as the devils heart. (minus twenty to thirties).

In nordic countries warmer temp = more snow. But before everyone start yelling becasue we had more snow this year, just as with everything on the planet, it cyclical.

Glaciers advance and recede regularly within their own timeframe. We cannot stop, nor effect their progress. We just aren't that powerful (although some seem to arrogantly think we are).

 

[www.scubamazing.com]

yeah, definitely sad.

 

[Skull]

I do realize that this is sarcasm, but within this statement lays the big issue with many who jump onto the GW bandwagon.

I remember when they first hit the stage big time with their "polar ice melt is proof of GW and will cause catastrophic flooding as the oceans rise” theory. They first used the North Pole as their model and they got a lot of the uneducated people in a panic. Problem with their theory it is was based on fear mongering and not science. The vast majority of the North Polar cap is a floating ice. IF it al melted tomorrow it would not raise the water level. Archimedes’s theory of displacement comes into play.

So the fear mongers went after the Antarctica next as that pole is most land based and not floating. Well the average temperature in the southern pole is between -20 to - 30 degrees Celsius. In order for that region to melt it would require a sustained 25 degree temperature shift upward, which would mean that the basically the tropics would be averaging around 80 to 100 degrees Celsius. So at that point rising water isn’t the issue to worry about...' the fact that the planet would be on fire would be.

So finally they looked to Greenland to promote the flood theory. Well the ice on Greenland IS land based, but only represents 5 percent of the overall ice ion the planet. That MIGHT raise the water level in the ocean about .5 millimeter.

Now for those of you who are not familiar with the metric system, I have included the conversions

-30 Celsius = -22 Fahrenheit
-20 Celsius = - 4 Fahrenheit
25 Celsius = 77 Fahrenheit
80 Celsius = 176 Fahrenheit (76 degrees above water boiling point)
100 Celsius = 212 Fahrenheit

.5 millimeter = 0.019 685 039 of an inch.

I also question when I hear scientists saying that “during the last ice age…” . Just exactly who did they interview that was alive then? What documentation did they find? Oh yes, that’s right, we rely on other theories (carbon dating, etc) to support current theory. IN short we use theory to justify theory, in order to support speculation, so we can support guesses, in an attempt to prove a hypothesis.

At what point did we elevate a “scientist” from mere human to omniscient being? I’m too much of a skeptic to blindly follow any particular scientist’s dogma. Especiually when they get a large portion of their funding from the groups out there with their own political agenda.

I'm glad someone is getting my sarcasm ... thought I lost my touch. Last I read about greenland and the artic ice sheets is, if they melt enough to delute the salt content of the upper north atlantic it could and most probably would cause the gulf stream to diminish and thus throw europe and parts of asia into an ice age.

Also to Andy ... warming the planet by increasing CO2 would greatly help plant life which breaths CO2 and thus we as omnivours would benefit as well moer plants more food eh? simplistic but beautiful .... just a threory but since we are throwing ideads out there .... why the heck not.

 

[LavaSurfer]

T very well be a natural phenomenon having little or nothing to do with human emissions.

I am going to stop eating Chilli w/ Beans.

 

[Skull]

well... since warming is exactly what would cause your "ice age" then
how can warming be good for animals like us?

you're talking all of the US East Coast freezing as well as Europe,
thanks to global warming disrupting ocean flows (assuming this highly
controversial "ice age" theory is right)

so... again, how is warming "good" for animals like us, since, under
your theory, it's warming that will trigger the mini ice age?




well, as unelfish as i'd like to think i am, honestly, in the long run,
all i care about is my survival and the survival of my family and friends and
our offspring.

which, thanks to global warming, is going to be tested to the outmost.
think famine, population disruption, my house in Jacksonville under 200 feet
of water, refugees, big government getting bigger to "help," meaning
less constitutional freedoms will be respected...

dogs and cats living together

that sort of thing

hopefully, the human species will make it through this.. but... we probably
won't

and that's what i care about.

of course the earth will be here after we're gone. that simply isn't the point.

Andy cool your jets (pun intended) ease off the gas there cowboy ...point was and is global warming is an event which has been occuring by the best estimates for about 20k yrs... I personally like warming ... I grew up in Erie Penna. and believe me from jan-april on lake erie it is one cold mother.... if you followed my posts I am adding sarcasm to the arguement since most people refuse to admit GW is happening and then have the arrogance to assume they can correct it ....again I say keep the warming going till the next Ice Age ... and believe me Andy due to growing up in Erie Pa I assure you I will survive the next Ice Age .... however I must stress in the event of an ice age I will not get an Ice Diving Cert ..from PADI, NAUI, SSI or any abc agency..PERIOD!!!!!

 

[H2Andy]

BTW, I am very aware of the relationship between Coral and Parrot fish as well as other coral dwelling creatures.

Sorry to have upset you. Like I said I never should have dipped into this thread.

you didn't upset me. not sure how you got that idea.

if you are aware of the relationship, then i'm not sure how can you post that
coral reefs have managed to survive parrot fish all this time.

ah well... more proof we're just wasting time arguing about global warming.

it's here, it's a fact, it's gonna hurt

Andy cool your jets (pun intended) ease off the gas there cowboy ...

huh?

... and believe me Andy due to growing up in Erie Pa I assure you I will survive the next Ice Age ....

LOL

oh man... what a waste of time to have taken you seriously.

i was right the first time around: Skull's One Man Show coming to town soon.
tickets are free. step right up!