Ship stuck in the ice was studying global warming, haha

19 comments

• mikeya02

  •

  11 years ago

  Haha! Classic headline. At least nobody burst into flames.
• sharkhunter

  •

  11 years ago

  Oh, I forgot to add for all you guys up north like in the movie the Day After Tomorrow, it's already too late for you guys. You are already too cold, haha. Unless you have a big truck. And of course just forget about Florida. If a weather forecast calls for an inch of snow here in the South, people here will raid grocery stores like it's the end of the world.
• rockstar666

  •

  11 years ago

  When arctic air invades North America, that means the Arctic is a bit warmer than it otherwise would be. The more times in a season this happens, the warmer the Arctic is on average. Why this isn't happening at the S. Pole is what scientists are risking their lives to find out. Those are brave men who put themselves in extreme danger in the name of expanding our knowledge of our environment and how it's changing. I think the choppers should have a few strippers on board to express their thanks.
• Clubber

  •

  11 years ago

  sharkhunter says, "Just in case you did not hear." Well, if you listen to just the ostrich media, you wouldn't hear. That would be completely against their narrative. Still that is funny as S%&#! I love when these wackos get whacked by nature.
• sofaking87

  •

  11 years ago

  The day after tomorrow was a cool movie.
• farmerart

  •

  11 years ago

  "........that means the Arctic is a bit warmer than it otherwise would be." Hmmm? Dunno about that. It is -32C at camp right now with a wind chill of something like -45C. I just checked the High Arctic weather reporting stations.....temps in the high -30s and low -40s. One station reported wind chill of -55C. I return to civilization tomorrow. Predicted temp in Calgary on Sunday?......a tropical -21C. Sounds like I can wear shorts to the office.
• rockstar666

  •

  11 years ago

  Don't confuse weather with climate. The average Arctic temps are much higher recently than in years past, and it's the standard deviation of this rate of change that is scaring climatologists the most.
• dallas702

  •

  11 years ago

  rockstar666, perhaps you should check actual figures instead of the "tweaked" numbers the pseudoscientists pushing manmade warming are using. A few actual facts they "forget" to mention: Global temperatures have NOT risen in the last 17 years. Antarctic sea ice (the stuff that trapped the Russian ship full of pseudoscientists) has covered more of the ocean than ever before - for the second year in a row. This is summer down there and where they were has in the past been open water year round. Melting Alaskan glaciers (supposedly caused by manmade global warming) have revealed forests and even dry land villages dating back over 1,000 years. If manmade warming is melting glaciers why was part of Alaske warmer 1,000 years ago than it is today? Arctic sea ice, after about 22 years of steady reductions in the 80s and 90s, has apparently begun to increase in coverage. Carbon emissions from industry, autos and power plants, blamed for much of the manmade global warming - actually amount to about 1/100th of 1% annually of the average total (chemically IDENTICAL) output of volcanoes. It is certain that the planet has been in a (generally) warming phase for about 12,000 years. That warming significantly predates any possible human cause. It is also reasonable to guess that modern human activities have some impact on climate. But it is far too early, and we have far too little real evidence, to claim manmade warming is a risk. Note that the major proponents of manmade warming ALL have a financial interest in either "proving" human cause or providing "green solutions." I think that explains much of the "evidence" offered to date.
• spoonie

  •

  11 years ago

  Just read this today, coincidentally - [view link]
• joker44

  •

  11 years ago

  “We can be absolutely certain only about things we do not understand.” Eric Hoffer
• londonguy

  •

  11 years ago

  Have you guys heard about that rock hanging off a cliff on a Spanish island over near Africa? Apparently when it falls into the ocean it's going to wipe out 100 miles of the eastern seaboard of the USA.
• londonguy

  •

  11 years ago

  I mean 100 miles inland for most of the whole length of the eastern seaboard.
• Clubber

  •

  11 years ago

  dallas, Never confuse a liberal with facts.
• sharkhunter

  •

  11 years ago

  I did not hear about a rock. I heard when part of a volcanic island crashes into the sea, it will create a mega tsunami wiping out the east coast of the US many miles inland. I suggested the US could develop directional blast nuclear weapons and position them underwater to minimize the damage on another site but I doubt anyone did anything. However the Pentagon might think that could be a great new weapon without the radioactive side effects so who knows. I don't really like giving away weapons of mass destruction ideas.
• dallas702

  •

  11 years ago

  There are a number of "high risk" natural disasters lurking on our planet. Vesuvius may blow again sometime soon and over a dozen other volcanoes have been identified as potential "Krakatoa" eruptions. Fault lines in California, the Aaain Pacific rim, Europe and the Middle East could cause terrible earthquakes. The Azores and Canary Islands pose both fault risks and potential volcanic eruptions that could cause the tsunami Londonguy mentioned. And don't forget solar flares and meteor bombardments. We are living on the edge of total extinction every day = so do not put off your next trip to the SC, it could be your last chance!
• sharkhunter

  •

  11 years ago

  I believe in being prepared. Have the nukes already developed and that can be deployed in seconds that can direct the blast waves in one direction and have them set up to create opposing waves to any tsunami. Increase the number and already calculate the timing of all of them to create bigger opposing waves to counteract any mega tsunami. I liked Captain Kirk, a little preparation goes a long way to get you out of any situation. It could also save millions of Americans and save trillions of dollars in collateral damage. Unfortunately, other nations might already be developing these weapons of mass destruction to launch attacks against coastal nations and cities. They might not have time to see the wave coming until it was too late and it would inflict massive damage if you merely had a 50 foot tsunami sweep through a coastal city. If you could generate something like this over a hundred miles offshore, I bet no one is thinking it is possible. Iranians could be working on it now.
• sharkhunter

  •

  11 years ago

  For asteroids, more drastic weapons will be needed. Or maybe some new shield technology. I like the idea I saw in a recent sci fi show of using an artificial gravity well to draw away some of the sun's energy into a blast wave. Of course if someone had a method to create a large gravity well, that would be awesome. If they had a way to control it to create large blast waves, I hope they don't misfire and fry the Earth.
• rentz2

  •

  10 years ago

  I bet you guys are a blast at the club. I can't believe how many still don't believe in climate change in this country
• Clubber

  •

  10 years ago

  rentz, I think most know there was, is, and well always be "climate change". There was an Ice Age. What most don't agree with is the there is man made climate change. Nature itself does more to change the climate then man could even think of doing were it man's only goal. If only liberals would be truthful as to their goals (control), they would cease to exist.