lawrocket 3 #1 March 5, 2008 http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2008/20080303175301.aspx Here's his full statement. http://media.kusi.clickability.com/documents/REMARKS+OF+JOHN+COLEMAN.pdf John Coleman, now a weatherman in San Diego, founded the Weather Channel. Here are some snippets: "I am holding a document. At this point, I believe this is last remaining cornerstone document of the global warming advocate's case. This 113 page scientific paper is titled: Understanding and Attributing Climate Change. It is the much debated chapter nine of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. I wonder how many people who are disciples of Global Warming have actually read it. I wonder how many understand it. This paper portends to explain how carbon dioxide, CO2, drives a radiative forcing multiplier that turns this minor trace compound in the atmosphere into THE force behind uncontrollable global warming. When the global warming hype was beginning, it was that hockey stick chart of average temperatures over the millenniums, the chart featured in Al Gore's book and movie that grabbed everybody's attention. That chart was reproduced everywhere. It was the centerpiece of Global Warming. Thank goodness for Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick. They lead the charge to expose this chart for what it is; a scientific fraud. Their papers were widely published and prompted others to conduct studies, as well. After a few years of debate, the hockey stick chart is dead and buried." "much is made of the IPCC panel of 2,500 scientists being in consensus on Global Warming. But get this. We now know how few scientists actually reviewed that key chapter of the IPCC report, the one that concludes that it very highly likely that greenhouse gas forcing has been the dominant cause of the global warming over the past 50 years. Dr. John McLean has issued a detailed report on IPCC reviewers. He reveals that there were as few as 23 independent reviewers of that chapter and that only 4 explicitly endorsed the hypothesis. That’s a long way from 2,500 and a long way from consensus." ... "Debate among scientists is the healthiest condition possible in our society. From disagreement is born study, serious considerations and re-considerations. To declare the debate about Global Warming to be over is anti-science, regressive and, in a word, dumb. Let the debate flourish." ... "here are things we should not expect: The UN will never withdraw its report. Al Gore will never admit he is wrong. The scientists who have developed the case for CO2 forcing and global warming will not admit they erred. Environmental extremists will never relent." ... "Here is one question from me; a question, not a charge. If CO2 is not the culprit in global warming, is the selling of carbon credits a financial fraud?" I particularly liked the part where he linked the GW debate to anti-rationalism. Let the debate continue. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FreeflyChile 0 #2 March 5, 2008 I'm curious to see if in the relatively distant future (be it 100 years/500 years/whatever), this argument will be seen as asinine because it will be obvious in a polar cap-less world that it existed or asinine in the same way that we consider the 'world is flat' argument from hundreds of years ago to be asinine. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Channman 2 #3 March 5, 2008 The current New Religion of Global Warming will soon be replaced with a New and more pressing concern. The alignment of the planets that is to occur sometime late in the year of 2012, which will cause the Earth's poles to shift and kill us all. I will be watching all this from my home on K-PAC. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #4 March 5, 2008 QuoteI'm curious to see if in the relatively distant future (be it 100 years/500 years/whatever), this argument will be seen as asinine because it will be obvious in a polar cap-less world that it existed or asinine in the same way that we consider the 'world is flat' argument from hundreds of years ago to be asinine. I am sure that after the ice on Greenland melts.. and Antarctica is just an archipelago of islands with all the ice gone.. and the attendant rise in sea level of about 75 ft or so.. that Florida and a LOT of the gulf coast will provide excellent dive sites for the people inhabiting the much smaller eastern states. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FreeflyChile 0 #5 March 5, 2008 I once heard that if all the ice in the northern areas and antarctica melted, it wouldn't raise the sea level more than a few feet...don't remember where i heard it so I dont' have a source, but I was wondering if you had a source for your '75ft' assertion because i honestly don't know. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #6 March 5, 2008 QuoteThe main ice covered landmass is Antarctica at the South Pole, with about 90 percent of the world's ice (and 70 percent of its fresh water). Antarctica is covered with ice an average of 2,133 meters (7,000 feet) thick. If all of the Antarctic ice melted, sea levels around the world would rise about 61 meters (200 feet). But the average temperature in Antarctica is -37°C, so the ice there is in no danger of melting. In fact in most parts of the continent it never gets above freezing. At the other end of the world, the North Pole, the ice is not nearly as thick as at the South Pole. The ice floats on the Arctic Ocean. If it melted sea levels would not be affected. There is a significant amount of ice covering Greenland, which would add another 7 meters (20 feet) to the oceans if it melted. Because Greenland is closer to the equator than Antarctica, the temperatures there are higher, so the ice is more likely to melt. source (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Channman 2 #7 March 5, 2008 QuoteQuoteI'm curious to see if in the relatively distant future (be it 100 years/500 years/whatever), this argument will be seen as asinine because it will be obvious in a polar cap-less world that it existed or asinine in the same way that we consider the 'world is flat' argument from hundreds of years ago to be asinine. I am sure that after the ice on Greenland melts.. and Antarctica is just an archipelago of islands with all the ice gone.. and the attendant rise in sea level of about 75 ft or so.. that Florida and a LOT of the gulf coast will provide excellent dive sites for the people inhabiting the much smaller eastern states. Dame, I just built a new home in League City which is closer to the coast and only 42 feet ASL. I better get intouch with my Insurance guy and purchase a flood insurance policy. You have a date as to when this may occur, because I think I have like a 30 day window to get this done. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #8 March 5, 2008 I, too, would be curious to see this. But the guy hit on something I've been saying all along - this has been a fantastic money-making opportunity. He hit on another truth - bureacrats don't solve problems, because it will put them out of a job. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FreeflyChile 0 #9 March 5, 2008 So assuming that the 6-8 inch rise is true, how much of it was caused by people? How does it compare to previous 100-year periods? I can't imagine that the amount of greenhouse gasses in 1908 affected very much. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #10 March 5, 2008 My thoughts too and the same goes for previous centuries..... not so many cars and a/c units then but still there were warm periods (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #11 March 5, 2008 Actually if you melt it ALL... sea level would rise from 60 to 70 meters.... Geologically there are dead coral reefs from previous warm periods between glaciation about 6 meters above current sea level and some as much as 25 meters above the current sea level. http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Could_Global_Warming_Melt_All_Ice_On_Earth_999.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FreeflyChile 0 #12 March 5, 2008 QuoteActually if you melt it ALL... sea level would rise from 60 to 70 meters.... Geologically there are dead coral reefs from previous warm periods between glaciation about 6 meters above current sevel and some as much as 25 meters abocve the cureent sea level. http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Could_Global_Warming_Melt_All_Ice_On_Earth_999.html Right, I read that in the source that was provided, but I was going on the 6-8 inches from the previous years. Also, as stated in the article, the temperature would have to REALLY increase to melt ALL of it, so I don't see it as a source of concern...moreso what could happen if GW was true w/respect to Greenland. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,111 #13 March 5, 2008 Repost. Originally posted in November. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #14 March 5, 2008 Quote I am sure that after the ice on Greenland melts.. and Antarctica is just an archipelago of islands with all the ice gone.. and the attendant rise in sea level of about 75 ft or so.. that Florida and a LOT of the gulf coast will provide excellent dive sites for the people inhabiting the much smaller eastern states. Assuming that scenario: Florida diving takes a big hit - most of the existing reefs will be too deep and die off, and it takes time for the new shallow waters to build up. OTOH, all the sunken trees and buildings would make good protection for bigger fish and the algae life. I've always wanted to dive on a city - there are many lakes above dams with old cities underneath, but I've never gone to one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #15 March 5, 2008 I didn't recall ever seeing it, but a search reveals it in the recycle bin. Sorry, bill. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #16 March 5, 2008 There are some lakes in the high Cascades where landslides have blocked off a valley and formed the lake. It is very eerie to dive down to the tops of the skeletons of 200 ft plus fir and cedar trees that were growing in those valleys. The water is VERY cold clear and can be very deep. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrewwhyte 1 #17 March 5, 2008 Quote I'm curious to see if in the relatively distant future (be it 100 years/500 years/whatever),... Hate to brake the news to you buddy, but you aren't going to see. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FreeflyChile 0 #18 March 5, 2008 bad wording on my part.... how about "I would love to know if in the future..." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kschilk 0 #19 March 5, 2008 QuoteI, too, would be curious to see this. But the guy hit on something I've been saying all along - this has been a fantastic money-making opportunity. He hit on another truth - bureacrats don't solve problems, because it will put them out of a job. Whenever Al "the attention whore" Gore gets involved, ya' know it's a con."T'was ever thus." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dannydan 5 #20 March 6, 2008 Alright kidz here is your lesson/project for the day.... Get yrselves a 12 pack of beer or a fifth of tequila and set either of those beverages aside for the moment! PROJECT; Go grab a glass, FILL it with ice cubes, then add water, over the next few hours watch it all melt and liquify together! While you are watching, have a drink from the bevs that you earlier set to the side! OBTW, just in case you get bored and decide you have to go take a dump or leave to go out on a date, PUT a saucer/pan underneath as a "catch basin".... just in case!Get back to us here with your results of wether or not the glass with the cubes and water overflowed!!! Lets solve another problem with this same glass of cubes and water, weigh the cubes and water separetly before you conduct this "melting" test... After all the cubes melt weigh the now all water again... Is there a difference in weight? Ask yourselves why did the glass overflow? Why didn't the glass overflow? Why did the weight change, why didn't the weight change? Let us know if this project cost you billions of dollars to come to a result! edited to add my project pic! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,594 #21 March 6, 2008 You really don't seem to understand the concept of of Ice Sheets, do you? Here's a clue - they aren't floating.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dannydan 5 #22 March 6, 2008 Did this thread start off with Polar caps or glaciers? Dude I understand about ICE SHEETS!! This was just another chance at me touching the bottle before the sunrise and melts all of us into high heaven!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dannydan 5 #23 March 6, 2008 Quote Dame, I just built a new home in League City which is closer to the coast and only 42 feet ASL. I better get intouch with my Insurance guy and purchase a flood insurance policy. You have a date as to when this may occur, because I think I have like a 30 day window to get this done. You are probably still too late!!! Quote The alignment of the planets that is to occur sometime late in the year of 2012, which will cause the Earth's poles to shift and kill us all. This will be the real killer! Hope there is enuf window time for me to get my scopes out and watch this happen before I freeze my butt off sitting on the bucket!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Royd 0 #24 March 6, 2008 QuoteYou really don't seem to understand the concept of of Ice Sheets, do you? Here's a clue - they aren't floating. Apparently, at one time, there was no ice on Greenland. The bottom layer had to come from somewhere. What was the sea level at that time? Quite funny that people of your bent mock the whole Armegeddon idea, but wring your hands over a few inches of water. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,594 #25 March 6, 2008 QuoteApparently, at one time, there was no ice on Greenland. The bottom layer had to come from somewhere. What was the sea level at that time? Irrelevant. What was the state of human civilisation back then? What position were the continents in? QuoteQuite funny that people of your bent mock the whole Armegeddon idea, but wring your hands over a few inches of water. Quite funny that you think you have a point!Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites