# A real alarmist viewpoint



## Old Rocks (Jun 24, 2012)

Global Extinction within one Human Lifetime as a Result of a Spreading Atmospheric Arctic Methane Heat wave and Surface Firestorm 


Global Extinction within one Human Lifetime as a Result of a Spreading Atmospheric Arctic Methane Heat wave and Surface Firestorm


Abstract


Although the sudden high rate Arctic methane increase at Svalbard in late 2010 data set applies to only a short time interval, similar sudden methane concentration peaks also occur at Barrow point and the effects of a major methane build-up has been observed using all the major scientific observation systems. Giant fountains/torches/plumes of methane entering the atmosphere up to 1 km across have been seen on the East Siberian Shelf. This methane eruption data is so consistent and aerially extensive that when combined with methane gas warming potentials, Permian extinction event temperatures and methane lifetime data it paints a frightening picture of the beginning of the now uncontrollable global warming induced destabilization of the subsea Arctic methane hydrates on the shelf and slope which started in late 2010. This process of methane release will accelerate exponentially, release huge quantities of methane into the atmosphere and lead to the demise of all life on earth before the middle of this century.


Introduction


The 1990 global atmospheric mean temperature  is assumed to be 14.49 oC (Shakil, 2005; NASA, 2002; DATAWeb, 2012) which sets the 2 oC anomaly above which humanity will lose control of her ability to limit the effects of global warming on major climatic and environmental systems at 16.49 oC  (IPCC, 2007). The major Permian extinction event temperature is 80 oF (26.66 oC) which is a temperature anomaly of  12.1766 oC above the 1990 global mean temperature of 14.49 oC (Wignall, 2009; Shakil,  2005

Arctic News: Global Extinction within one Human Lifetime as a Result of a Spreading Atmospheric Arctic Methane Heat wave and Surface Firestorm


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 24, 2012)

I think that the estimate of the effects of the Arctic release are too high, but, given what we have already seen from the clathrates, something to consider.


----------



## daveman (Jun 24, 2012)




----------



## Oddball (Jun 24, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPL7nN99jno]Gloom, Despair and Agony on Me - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Douger (Jun 24, 2012)

The Script calls for destruction by fire. It's adherents will see to it.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 24, 2012)

Sorry Ray.......but for this thread, its definately necessary................


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tibLjnn_Nf4]Midget - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 24, 2012)

Oddball said:


> Gloom, Despair and Agony on Me - YouTube





HOLY MOTHER OF GOD...............I damn near split my sides laughing at that one............


----------



## Intense (Jun 24, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> Global Extinction within one Human Lifetime as a Result of a Spreading Atmospheric Arctic Methane Heat wave and Surface Firestorm
> 
> 
> Global Extinction within one Human Lifetime as a Result of a Spreading Atmospheric Arctic Methane Heat wave and Surface Firestorm
> ...



This may have happened before, huh? Part of the Natural order? How about developing a harvesting technique for this great energy source?


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 24, 2012)

Intense said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Global Extinction within one Human Lifetime as a Result of a Spreading Atmospheric Arctic Methane Heat wave and Surface Firestorm
> ...



Were you to actually read the home site to this article, you would find that is part of their suggestions dealing with clarthrate outgassing.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jun 24, 2012)

Calm Down ye OleRocks --- There's a truth here that probably hasn't dawned on you.. IF YOU'RE right and WE are responsible for releasing that Methane, then we are living on an EXTREMELY unlivable ticking bomb of a planet.. 

Because if 1 or 2degC is all it took to trigger Armageddon --- It was gonna happen anyway.. And now you know that warmists MUST organize and call for the mothership to evacuate the deserving before this Mother blows up right under our asses.. 

you can't even fart or exhale around here anymore without being cited for planetcide.. what kind of flimsy spaceship Earth is this?? I think there must be a FIAT hood ornament at the North Pole...


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 25, 2012)

Now Flats, I don't think that we will get an extreme release event on the order the author hypothesizes. However, it would not take an extreme release to really mess up the climate.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jun 25, 2012)

I'd be reauthorizing the manned spaceflight program just in case we ARE sitting on a volatile fuel-air bomb.. 2degC as trigger for the kaboom means we have bigger problems than CO2..


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 25, 2012)

Well now, Flats, if you want to read a careful and thoughtful essay, book length, on clathrate outgassing and it's affects, here is an excellant presentation.

Methane catastrophe


----------



## flacaltenn (Jun 25, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> Well now, Flats, if you want to read a careful and thoughtful essay, book length, on clathrate outgassing and it's affects, here is an excellant presentation.
> 
> Methane catastrophe



Why OleRocks: After such a celebrated and authoritative science buff as yourself ASSURED ME that ugly scenario wasn't gonna happen ---- Why the hell would I want to read that crap?? If I want nightmares, I'll watch Sharktopus or PirahnaConda.

I am somewhat interested in why BP had to take Deep Horizon down more than a MILE before getting blasted out of the water by methane.. A mile of mud and rock is a pretty huge insulator for a couple degrees of temp.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 25, 2012)

flacaltenn said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Well now, Flats, if you want to read a careful and thoughtful essay, book length, on clathrate outgassing and it's affects, here is an excellant presentation.
> ...



OK. I overestimated your scientific background. I hope this is not too advanced for you.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jun 25, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



No you overestimated my giveashit quotient for imagined catastrophes..


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 25, 2012)

Ray........I'll tell you something science related I'm far more worried about = the island of LaPalma off the northern coast of Africa. For centuries, steam has been building up inside the northernmost quadrant of the cone. If it blows, half the island falls into the sea and a 1,000 foot tsunami is coming my way with an arrival time of about 6 hours on the eastern seaboard. These scientific realities are not a matter of if...........they are a matter of when from all Ive read.


If you're not aware of this Ray, you're focusing on the wrong thing my friend...........

What are people going to say if that happens, the scientists knew about it and we were spending trillions on fucking windmills!!!


----------



## percysunshine (Jun 25, 2012)

Old Rocks is a geologist. They know alot about women, but not much about science. Which sort of makes sense...


----------



## bobgnote (Jun 26, 2012)

_I'll be darned.  *Sucksassandballs* actually knows something, interesting.

Yep, sucka, La Palma is going to calve a big piece, right into the Atlantic, and NYC, DC, DDD, and Florida all get swamped, by the resulting tsunami.

DC was once a swamp, it's full of alligators and other swamp-critters, anyway, so when La Palma blows, go surfin.'  La Palma and Yellowstone are probably the volcanoes, posing the worst disaster scenarios, for FEMA, but Mammoth Mountain will probably be the first, to blow._


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 26, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> _I'll be darned.  *Sucksassandballs* actually knows something, interesting.
> 
> Yep, sucka, La Palma is going to calve a big piece, right into the Atlantic, and NYC, DC, DDD, and Florida all get swamped, by the resulting tsunami.
> 
> DC was once a swamp, it's full of alligators and other swamp-critters, anyway, so when La Palma blows, go surfin.'  La Palma and Yellowstone are probably the volcanoes, posing the worst disaster scenarios, for FEMA, but Mammoth Mountain will probably be the first, to blow._





Should we all invest in big plastic life raft bubbles?


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 27, 2012)

skookerasbil said:


> Ray........I'll tell you something science related I'm far more worried about = the island of LaPalma off the northern coast of Africa. For centuries, steam has been building up inside the northernmost quadrant of the cone. If it blows, half the island falls into the sea and a 1,000 foot tsunami is coming my way with an arrival time of about 6 hours on the eastern seaboard. These scientific realities are not a matter of if...........they are a matter of when from all Ive read.
> 
> 
> If you're not aware of this Ray, you're focusing on the wrong thing my friend...........
> ...



Actually, the same is true for the West Coast, and Hawaii.

Hawaiian Landslides


----------



## editec (Jun 27, 2012)

What can a layman say about such a methane disaster scenario except: 

_Gee, I sure hope they're wrong._​


> In an article published in the* September issue of Geology*, *Gregory Ryskin, associate professor of chemical engineering, suggests*that huge combustible clouds produced by methane gas trapped in stagnant bodies of water and suddenly released *could have* killed off the majority of marine life and land animals and plants at the end of the Permian era -- long before dinosaurs lived and died.
> 
> The mechanism also *might explain* other extinctions and climate perturbations (ice ages) and even the Biblical flood, as well as be the cause of future catastrophes.
> 
> Ryskin calculated that some 10,000 gigatons of *dissolved methane could have accumulated* in water near the ocean floor under high pressure. If released quickly, perhaps triggered by an earthquake, the resulting cloud of methane would have an explosive force about 10,000 times greater than the world's entire stockpile of nuclear weapons. The huge conflagrations plus flooding and overturned oceans would cause the extinctions. (Approximately 95 percent of marine species and 70 percent of land species were lost.)


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 27, 2012)

Methane: the Great Dying?

What caused the worst mass extinction in Earth's history 251 million years ago? This event is one of the most catastrophic in life's history: the P/T extinction.


----------



## daveman (Jun 27, 2012)

editec said:


> What can a layman say about such a methane disaster scenario except:
> 
> _Gee, I sure hope they're wrong._​
> 
> ...


Sounds like there's not a damn thing we can do about it, huh?


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 27, 2012)

daveman said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> > What can a layman say about such a methane disaster scenario except:
> ...






How come there are people out there who cant see this? If we're going down, we're going down! Not much sense in getting angst about it. What Ive always found most fascinating about the way the warmers think is not about the passion related to the greenhouse gas effect on temperatures........but rather, this idea that mankind could actually do something about it........dictate to nature. Sorry..........I have a better chance of scoring with Katie Perry tonight!!!


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 27, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> Methane: the Great Dying?
> 
> What caused the worst mass extinction in Earth's history 251 million years ago? This event is one of the most catastrophic in life's history: the P/T extinction.



Cow farts killed the dinosaurs


----------



## flacaltenn (Jun 27, 2012)

daveman said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> > What can a layman say about such a methane disaster scenario except:
> ...



Drill Baby, DRILL!

  Quickly.. *Gee I thought we had depleted all those fossil fuel sources OleRocks??? *


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 27, 2012)

Well Flatulance, here is what we know at present;


Arctic Methane Emergency Group - AMEG - Home

For sure, what we don't know is how much methane will outgas from present GHGs in the atmosphere. What we do know is that the outgassing we have seen in the last two years was totally unexpected, and as the amount of ice decreases, we are going to see more. How much more, and in what time frames are the big questions now.


----------



## bobgnote (Jun 27, 2012)

_A guy named Dr.Pinna offers the most succinct reflection:_

Dependency of SLRDs on time series lengths for averages of NEH gauges. : Hotspot of accelerated sea-level rise on the Atlantic coast of North America : Nature Climate Change : Nature Publishing Group

The Earth today is vastly overpopulated with Human animals who operate under the force of the Conservation of Energy. Humans are compelled to use external energy in the form of heat, which produces electricity or moves engine parts.

Human animals will not reduce their numbers, nor will they use their own internal energy for movement or work. They will always use external energy in the form of hydrocarbons in order to move or work. As a consequence the Planet Earth must undergo accelerated Global Warming.

At a certain point the heat will destroy the human species and probably all other species.

--------------------------

_We are locked into a course, where warming and SLR will accelerate, at least until 2050, no matter what we do.  What we should do is re-green deserts and polluted areas, particularly.  But how to do this, past all the zombies in Zombieland is a matter of waiting until zombies start to burn._


----------



## flacaltenn (Jun 27, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> Well Flatulance, here is what we know at present;
> 
> 
> Arctic Methane Emergency Group - AMEG - Home
> ...



No look -- you're the expert on outgassing..   Just tell me which it is.. Have we depleted the fossil fuel reserve or are we just discovering that we live on top of a giant fuel-air timebomb? I want to make investments based on the answer..


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 27, 2012)

flacaltenn said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Well Flatulance, here is what we know at present;
> ...





Dude......I always thought "outgassing" was a term derived from peoples opinions of the Bill Maher show.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 27, 2012)

flacaltenn said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Well Flatulance, here is what we know at present;
> ...



Perhaps you should invest in an education, first.


----------



## Moonglow (Jun 27, 2012)

surely we can adapt to being a creature with low water solubility


----------



## flacaltenn (Jun 27, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



Arrogant elitist chicken-shit... 

Must be an adversion to drilling the earth.. Here's the OldRocks way of harvesting methane.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 28, 2012)

More information on the present state of methane emissions in the Arctic

Arctic News: Striking increase of methane in the Arctic


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 28, 2012)

Potential for methane release 
The potential for methane releases in the Arctic to cause runaway global warming

What are the chances of abrupt releases of, say, 1 Gt of methane in the Arctic? What would be the impact of such a release?

Arctic News: Potential for methane release


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 28, 2012)

Arctic News: Arctic Methane Alarm

A 2009 study by Drew Shindell found that increases in global methane emissions did cause a 26% hydroxyl decrease. Because of this, methane now persists longer in the atmosphere, before getting transformed into the less potent carbon dioxide. 

A Centre for Atmospheric Science study suggests that sea ice loss may amplify permafrost warming, with an ice-free Arctic featuring a decrease in hydroxyl of up to 60% and an increase of tropospheric ozone (another greenhouse gas) of up to 60% over the Arctic. This lack of hydroxyl means that methane will persist in the atmosphere for longer at its high global warming potency.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 28, 2012)

Myths and facts about methane

Methane hydrates: Myths


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 28, 2012)

Heard a radio report late last night from a scientist who studies the sun ( The JOhn Bachelor Show is awesome).......says we know so little about the sun AND its impact on our planet. Just recently, scientists have discovered that solar tornado's happen all the time across the surface, not caused by wind, but by changes in magnetic forces. 

Solar Tornadoes Dance Across Sun's Surface in NASA Video | Sun Tornado & Solar Flares | Space Weather, Sun Eruptions & Solar Dynamics Observatory | Space.com

Guy talked about us not understanding why these forces are changing and that the frequency of tornados in cyclical. Hmmm..........I thought there is a pretty good chance all these changes are not a result of SUV"s roaming across the surface of the sun.


I think it is fascinating that the science oriented board members have no interest about the effects of the sun on our planet. Quite compelling.


Even minor fluctuations in sunspot activity have significant effects on our atmosphere..............but the environmentalits are not at all interested. Hmmmmm................


http://theresilientearth.com/?q=content/scientists-discover-sun-does-affect-earths-climate


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 28, 2012)

Interestingly.............here is the take by the IPCC scientists on the suns effects.................

_Over the time-scale of millions of years the change in solar intensity is a critical factor influencing climate (e.g., ice ages).  However, changes in solar heating rate over the last century cannot account for the magnitude and distribution of the rise in global mean temperature during that time period and there is no convincing evidence for significant indirect influences on our climate due to twentieth century changes in solar output._

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/effect-of-sun-on-climate-faq.html


The article never defines "convincing evidence". Accordingly, its an opinion.......but many easily led folks see "no convincing evidence" being reported by a scientist and they invariably believe it BECAUSE IT IS A SCIENTIST saying it.


Thats the whole BS of all this "science". Its as open to interpretation as political science for Christsakes...........in other words, none of this shit is provable.............as its always been.


----------



## bobgnote (Jun 28, 2012)

skookerasbil said:


> Interestingly.............here is the take by the IPCC scientists on the suns effects.................
> 
> _Over the time-scale of millions of years the change in solar intensity is a critical factor influencing climate (e.g., ice ages).  However, changes in solar heating rate over the last century cannot account for the magnitude and distribution of the rise in global mean temperature during that time period and there is no convincing evidence for significant indirect influences on our climate due to twentieth century changes in solar output._
> 
> ...



_Of course science fucked up.  Were you born, in a hospital?  Some doctor, who had to study biology missed a very important chance, to keep the fucktard population to a minimum.

What was said is "no convincing evidence for significant indirect influences on our climate due to twentieth century changes in solar output."  What do you suppose that means?  Your shit-rants against warming and related phenomena are shit!  The sun couldn't do ACC, all by itself!  Fucktards were breeding, cutting trees, burning coal and oil and shit!

You convinced me, *sucksassandballs.*  Science missed one, and like a little alien-phage, looking to get in some astronaut's face, that little problem is rolling around._


----------



## bobgnote (Jun 28, 2012)

_The Permian/Triassic extinction was characterized by extreme volcanic events, as Pangea split.

As SLR accelerates, concurrent with methane out-gassing, heavier tides may force eruptions.  It seems both the conditions present, in the P/T extinction are ripening, toward Mass Extinction Event 6, which will possibly rival the top 5, even the number one, the P/T extinction.

Humans really can eat shit and die, which should lead to some sort of alarm.  I wonder if the House Investigative Committee will try to get Holder, to bust himself?

Do you think the pubs will sound an alarm and clone Trakar?  About all of them but Trakar are tardies._

Tidal Lunacy

The idea is that if a volcano is full of magma, the squeezing at the fortnightly tidal maximum might be just enough to overcome the resistance of the crust, push magma out, and get an eruption going. Once started, the eruption would continue on its own.

More than 25 years ago, a pair of earth scientists compared the records for 680 eruptions that occurred since 1900 and found that "the probability of an eruption is greatest at times of maximum tidal amplitude." In plainer language, volcanoes are more likely to erupt at the fortnightly (or 14-day) "high" tide.

A specific look at 52 Hawaiian eruptions since January 1832 shows the same sort of pattern. "Nearly twice as many eruptions have occurred nearer fortnightly tidal maximum than tidal minimum." HVO scientists have noted that the Pu'u 'O'o fountaining episodes each occurred remarkably close to fortnightly tidal maximums and that the first set of eruption pauses in 1990 (periods where the eruption turned off for up to a few days) occurred remarkably close to fortnightly tidal minimums.


----------



## bobgnote (Jun 28, 2012)

Fartman. This is Mr Methane.  - YouTube

Howard Stern, Fartman, 1992 - YouTube


----------



## bobgnote (Jun 28, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fa160yRN7l4]Mr Methane - the real Fartman! - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bZaAomW7ik&feature=related]Mr. Methane Letting It Rip in Norway. - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1Flr7JhPow&feature=related]Hippo gets explosive diarrhea. - YouTube[/ame]


_*Sucksassandballs*, do you have any idea what could happen, if Mother Earth started up a load of out-gassing and vulcanism?  Nothing as funny as this:_

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Deib3zFjojg&feature=related]Fart and Fire Fart Montage - YouTube[/ame]


_Beware the big ass, of Mother Earth, which has many times the killer ass-capacity, of any clowns, walking around on her surface.  

NO SPECIES was exempt, from P/T phenomena.  ALL SUFFERED.  Many became extinct._


----------



## flacaltenn (Jun 28, 2012)

skookerasbil said:


> Interestingly.............here is the take by the IPCC scientists on the suns effects.................
> 
> _Over the time-scale of millions of years the change in solar intensity is a critical factor influencing climate (e.g., ice ages).  However, changes in solar heating rate over the last century cannot account for the magnitude and distribution of the rise in global mean temperature during that time period and there is no convincing evidence for significant indirect influences on our climate due to twentieth century changes in solar output._
> 
> ...



They always stop at "solar irradiance" which as a total is well understood. But they OMIT all the science that we've gained from 30 years of SPACE observation of OTHER solar parameters.. NEver a mention of solar SPECTRUM stability.. We shouldn't expect that the sun is same exact color distribution over time. In fact, WE KNOW that all stars progress in frequency shift from blue to red over their lifetimes. And all the GHG gases absorb in very narrow bands. Would NOT be unreasonable if SMALL shifts in relative solar frequency power swamped the increasing contribution of man-made CO2 to the atmosphere.


----------



## IanC (Jun 28, 2012)

flacaltenn said:


> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> > Interestingly.............here is the take by the IPCC scientists on the suns effects.................
> ...



exactly! the solar effects variable is essentially set to zero in the climate models leading to an over estmate of the influence of CO2


----------



## bobgnote (Jun 28, 2012)

IanC said:


> Fatass:  "They always stop at "solar irradiance" which as a total is well understood. But they OMIT all the science that we've gained from 30 years of SPACE observation of OTHER solar parameters.. NEver a mention of solar SPECTRUM stability.. We shouldn't expect that the sun is same exact color distribution over time. In fact, WE KNOW that all stars progress in frequency shift from blue to red over their lifetimes. And all the GHG gases absorb in very narrow bands. Would NOT be unreasonable if SMALL shifts in relative solar frequency power swamped the increasing contribution of man-made CO2 to the atmosphere."
> 
> Ian:
> exactly! the solar effects variable is essentially set to zero in the climate models leading to an over estmate of the influence of CO2



_The sun hasn't varied, DDs.  The CO2, CH4, and other GHGs have varied, in a way, which, via accelerating warming, from the known and accepted greenhouse effect heads us past the PETM outcome, toward the #1 mass extinction event, the Permian/Triassic extinction.

What you two amount to is still a *Fatass*, with a *Crapforbrains* chasing, looking for something to eat, such as shit._


----------



## flacaltenn (Jun 28, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> IanC said:
> 
> 
> > Fatass:  "They always stop at "solar irradiance" which as a total is well understood. But they OMIT all the science that we've gained from 30 years of SPACE observation of OTHER solar parameters.. NEver a mention of solar SPECTRUM stability.. We shouldn't expect that the sun is same exact color distribution over time. In fact, WE KNOW that all stars progress in frequency shift from blue to red over their lifetimes. And all the GHG gases absorb in very narrow bands. Would NOT be unreasonable if SMALL shifts in relative solar frequency power swamped the increasing contribution of man-made CO2 to the atmosphere."
> ...



You got a personal orbiting Solar Observatory there at the institution do ya? 
Maybe a 500 yr history of Solar Spectral Stability?

Even understand the diff between TSIrradiance and Spectral Shifts?

Does anyone know the name of the character in Idiocracy that was the lawyer watching "ouch, my balls"?? Reminds me of someone.


----------



## daveman (Jun 28, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> > Interestingly.............here is the take by the IPCC scientists on the suns effects.................
> ...


[ame=http://www.amazon.com/How-Win-Friends-Influence-People/dp/0671027034/ref=tmm_pap_title_0]Amazon.com: How to Win Friends & Influence People (9780671027032): Dale Carnegie: Books[/ame]


----------



## bobgnote (Jun 28, 2012)

Response of climate to solar forcing recorded in a 6000-year

Previous studies have shown that the oxygen isotope ratio (&#948;18O) of plant cellulose can serve as a sensitive proxy indicator of past climate, but its application has mainly been restricted to tree-rings. Here we present a 6000-year high-resolution&#948;18O record of peat plant cellulose from northeastern China. The&#948;18O variation is interpreted as reflecting changes in regional surface air temperature. The climate events inferred from the isotope data agree well with archaeological and historic evidence. The record shows a striking corre spondence of climate events to nearly all of the apparent solar activity changes characterized by the atmospheric radiocarbon in tree-rings over the past 6000 years.

Spectral analysis of the&#948;18O record reveals the periodicities of around 86, 93, 101, 110, 127, 132, 140, 155, 207, 245, 311, 590, 820 and 1046 years, which are similar to those detected in the solar excursions. We consider these observations as further evidence for a close relationship between solar activity and climate variations on timescales of decades to centuries. Our results also have implications for distinguishing between natural and anthropogenic contributions to future climate change.

------------------

Role Of Solar Radiation In Climate Change

Decrease in solar radiation discovered

The initial findings, which revealed that solar radiation at the Earth&#8217;s surface is not constant over time but rather varies considerably over decades, were published in the late 1980s and early 1990s for specific regions of the Earth. Atsumu Ohmura, emeritus professor at ETH Zurich, for example, discovered at the time that the amount of solar radiation over Europe decreased considerably between the 1950s and the 1980s. It wasn&#8217;t until 1998 that the first global study was conducted for larger areas, like the continents Africa, Asia, North America and Europe for instance. The results showed that on average the surface solar radiation decreased by two percent per decade between the 1950s and 1990.

In analyzing more recently compiled data, however, Wild and his team discovered that solar radiation has gradually been increasing again since 1985. In a paper published in &#8220;Science&#8221; in 2005, they coined the phrase &#8220;global brightening&#8221; to describe this new trend and to oppose to the term &#8220;global dimming&#8221; used since 2001 for the previously established decrease in solar radiation.

Only recently, an article in the journal Nature, which Wild was also involved in, brought additional attention to the topic of global dimming/brightening.

*
It is particularly unclear as to whether it is the clouds or the aerosols that trigger global dimming/brightening, or even interactions between clouds and aerosols, as aerosols can influence the &#8220;brightness&#8221; and lifetime of the clouds. The investigation of these relations is complicated by the fact that insufficient &#8211; if any &#8211; observational data are available on how clouds and aerosol loadings have been changing over the past decades. The recently launched satellite measurement programs should help to close this gap for the future from space, however.

&#8220;There is still an enormous amount of research to be done as many questions are still open&#8221;, explains Wild. This includes the magnitude of the dimming and brightening effects on a global level and how greatly the effects differ between urban and rural areas, where fewer aerosols are released into the atmosphere. Another unresolved question is what happens over the oceans, as barely any measurement data are available from these areas.

A further challenge for the researchers is to incorporate the effects of global dimming/brightening more effectively in climate models, to understand their impact on climate change better. After all, studies indicate that global dimming masked the actual temperature rise &#8211; and therefore climate change &#8211; until well into the 1980s. Moreover, the studies published also show that the models used in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change&#8217;s (IPCC) fourth Assessment Report do not reproduce global dimming/brightening adequately: neither the dimming nor the subsequent brightening is simulated realistically by the models. According to the scientists, this is probably due to the fact that the processes causing global dimming/brightening were not taken into account adequately and that the historical anthropogenic emissions used as model input are afflicted with considerable uncertainties.

-----------------------

Solar Radiation and Climate Experiment (SORCE) Fact Sheet : Feature Articles

The launch of the Nimbus-7 satellite in 1978 changed all that. It enabled us for the first time to detect sunlight without interference from the atmosphere. The Earth Radiation Budget (ERB) instrument on the satellite measured levels of solar radiation just before it strikes the Earth&#8217;s atmsophere. Through subsequent satellite missions, scientists have gathered a wealth of information on the Sun and the solar energy that drives our world&#8217;s climate system.

Today researchers know that roughly 1,368 watts per square meter (W/m2) of solar energy on average illuminates the outermost atmosphere of the Earth. They know that the Earth absorbs about only 70 percent of this total solar irradiance (TSI), and the rest is reflected into space. Perhaps most intriguing, researchers have affirmed that the TSI doesn&#8217;t stay constant, but varies slightly with sunspots and solar weather activity. In particular, by analyzing satellite data, scientists have observed a correlation between the Sun&#8217;s output of energy and the 11-year sunspot cycle, which physicists have known of since Galileo&#8217;s time. These data show that TSI varies just as regularly as the sunspot activity over this 11-year period, rising and falling 1.4 W/m2 through the course of the cycle (0.1 percent of the TSI). There are also longer-term trends in solar weather activity that last anywhere from years to centuries to millennia and may have an impact on global warming.

*

In 2003, Earth scientists will move a step closer to a full understanding of the Sun&#8217;s energy output with the launch of the Solar Radiation and Climate Experiment (SORCE) satellite. SORCE will be equipped with four instruments that will measure variations in solar radiation much more accurately than anything now in use and observe some of the spectral properties of solar radiation for the first time. Robert Cahalan of NASA Goddard Space Flight Center serves as SORCE Project Scientist, and the four instruments are being built at the University of Colorado under the direction of Gary Rottman, SORCE Principal Investigator, with participation by an international team of scientists. SORCE will be launched in January 2003 from Kennedy Space Center on a Pegasus XL launch vehicle provided by Orbital Sciences Corporation. With data from NASA&#8217;s SORCE mission, researchers should be able to follow how the Sun affects our climate now and in the future.

-----------------------

_What I SHOULD HAVE WRITTEN, solar radiation has not increased, but rather, in addition to the 11 year cycles, which I knew about, solar dimming has affected climate, which is known.

It turns out, the sun has dimmed, by 2% per decade, since 1950, and it started brightening, in 1985.  Since temperatures are rising steadily, the principal forcing factor for long-term rises AND falls in Earth's average temperature is still CO2, while out-gassing of methane is the leading runaway-rise forcing factor, which will do more damage, during times of brightening, either in the long-term or short-term bright periods.

But solar radiation has still been consistent, even if my former statement was inaccurate.  The fact remains, long-term climate change is occurring, relative to increasing GHG concentrations in the atmosphere.  Action must be taken, to reverse forcing factors, via reducing variable GHG emissions, while increasing metabolization, of CO2.  Temperatures will continue to increase.

The sun isn't the main forcing factor, in modern, long-term climate change, *Fatass*.  Temperature rise has been steady, and it is accelerating, during 2% brightness per decade increase or decrease, of course, more during bright periods, see Trakar's relevant hockey sticks:_


----------



## flacaltenn (Jun 28, 2012)

Your first paper says that there are Many periodic IRRADIANCE cycles that DO affect warming.. 



> We consider these observations as further evidence for a close relationship between solar activity and climate variations on timescales of decades to centuries. Our results also have implications for distinguishing between natural and anthropogenic contributions to future climate change.



That one is limited in accuracy because they're studying PEAT BOGS --- not satellite data. 

Second paper is also ground-based readings "clouded" by atmospheric interference. 

Third paper talks about what we learned by satellite up to about 2000 -- ten years old.. But it makes ONE of my points.. 



> Prior to 1979, in fact, astronomers and Earth scientists did not even have accurate data on the total amount of energy from the Sun that reaches the Earth&#8217;s outermost atmosphere. Variable absorption of sunlight by clouds and aerosols prevented researchers from accurately measuring solar radiation before it strikes the Earth&#8217;s atmosphere.



We didn't know much about the sun's interaction with the atmos and surface, and could only wildly guess as to the SPECTRAL content and stability. 

*NONE of these references say anything that I could see about SOLAR SPECTRAL SHIFTS or stability.. * Something you can only accurately measure from space. And we've only had that ability to periodically get a glimpse of this by satellite for about 20 years.. NOT long enough to observe cyclical changes. 

Even up to 1994 or so -- only a couple observations of solar spectrum had been done by packages hoisted by the Shuttle.. *We don't have a long-term reliable survey of Solar spectral stability yet..*


----------



## bobgnote (Jun 29, 2012)

_Solar spectral shifts will affect weather, more than they climate change.  Solar intensity will affect climate change, but this is not driving the current acceleration, of warming and acidification problems.

When you aren't advanced enough to figure out what atmospheric molecular composition does, and how changes affect climate, don't expect to be able to think your way out of a bag, by noting spectral shifts or even Milankovitch cycles, or any other stuff, which isn't going to kill us.

Unmitigated climate change is going to land us, at Mass Extinction Event 6, well past the destructive level, of the PETM event.  M.E.E.6 will likely be almost as nasty, as the Permian/Triassic Extinction, number ONE, on the scale, of five previous mass extinctions.  I don't see how we could knock off number one, by simply cutting down lots of trees, clearing brush and grasses, failing to grow hemp, and burning all the fossil fuels, but keep your eye, on developments, in the "nukuler" arena and religious zealotry, mixing with this.

On the way, new weather data will come in, with data, relevant to climate prediction.  The Earth keeps turning and circling the sun, in the meantime.  The economy will fuck up, but we'll still have some kind of science.  Black Obamney says, if he's re-elected, he'll focus on climate change.

I personally think the Obamney sack race is boring.  I'd rather look at O.R.'s and Trakar's posts.  I like cussing wingpunks at environment threads, more than I like sorting white Obamnists and black Obamnists._


----------



## flacaltenn (Jun 29, 2012)

Who's sock are you really? You really should take a bow and end this..


----------



## bobgnote (Jun 29, 2012)

flacaltenn said:


> Who's sock are you really? You really should take a bow and end this..



_It seems Bill Buckley is dead, so I don't care to be anyone's sock, you goddamned queer neo-con wingpunk, from a Log Cabin Club daisy chain.  In your face, from me to you!_


----------



## flacaltenn (Jun 29, 2012)

I guess I should wink and bow out, but there is the strangest coincidence here.. You'll never guess who has these posts AND MORE in just the past month.... 




> http://www.usmessageboard.com/5503977-post23.html
> Read and enjoyed William *Buckley *for decades. Now, when we speak of 'Conservatives', that is a differant animal. But then, they consider Buckley to be a liberal.
> 
> http://www.usmessageboard.com/5421063-post113.html
> ...



I'd call that pretty good circumstantial evidence -- wouldn't you sock? Since even the most CONSERVATIVE on this board don't rave about Buckley 10 or 12 times a month..  Good Job... 

Now the next thing is -- what are the USMB rules pertaining to socks?


----------



## percysunshine (Jun 29, 2012)

What is the difference between a real alarmist and a fake alarmist?


----------



## flacaltenn (Jun 29, 2012)

percysunshine said:


> What is the difference between a real alarmist and a fake alarmist?



One has a "snooze" button???


----------



## bobgnote (Jun 29, 2012)

flacaltenn said:


> I guess I should wink and bow out, but there is the strangest coincidence here.. You'll never guess who has these posts AND MORE in just the past month....
> 
> 
> 
> ...



_Now the next "thing" is, since you suck, what do you expect?  I'm not a sock, *Fatass*.  However, you are obviously queer and paranoid.  Compare my writing, to other posting styles.  My style is pretty much unique.  Why don't you ask *sucksassandballs*, about how he always puts "0" up, instead of "O?"  Maybe he's a sock, that sucks!   

I mentioned Buckley once, and you introduced links, to unrelated posts, delusional bitch.  I'd read the one I pasted, only, but why don't you tell us who pasted those, since I'm not going over there, you intrigue-sucking queer?

I don't know why you think anybody into science would go to that amount of trouble, to initiate a sock-account, to post stuff, where queers like you predominate.  Do you feel, like you are losing something, to me?  Get *sucksassandballs* to post some more smilies, if you are too queer, for graphs and tables.  See if somebody pasted, what Buckley said, to Gore Vidal, on TV, before Buckley got dumped and died.

USMB is a Log Cabin Club runway, compared to other forums.  Good thing, we get to cuss you bitches out, or getting good posts suddenly trashed would be too much, to endure.

Aren't you worried how that guy who fixed your BMW might be my sock, you psychotic queer?_


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 29, 2012)

flacaltenn said:


> I guess I should wink and bow out, but there is the strangest coincidence here.. You'll never guess who has these posts AND MORE in just the past month....
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Now Flatulance, you are just once again proving what a dumb fuck you are. All my posts are under Old Rocks, no other screen names at all.


----------



## bobgnote (Jun 30, 2012)

_*Sucksassandballs* actually didn't suck, when he loaded the UCSUSA-link, above.  So let's huzzah, for *sucksassandballs*, he's a horse's ass, who doesn't get it, climate change is happening because GHG concentrations are running away, from any sort of controlled scenario.

Sun's Affect on Climate FAQ | Union of Concerned Scientists

Remember when *Fatass* gave a rat's ass, a month or so ago, and he loaded the 400,000-year climate cycle graph, from Wattsupwiththat, which comes from Brighton-UK?  That graph of CO2 vs. temperatures was really interesting, even if *Fatass* couldn't read it, for shit.

*Sucksassandballs* loaded lots of cartoons, in the last months, but he didn't load the following graph:_







_Note that the Hansen-graph describes both solar dimming AND GHG proliferation, which put side-by-side, with temperature gives us a good idea, how GHG concentrations are the driving forces, behind_:

1. Global warming;
2. Runaway global warming.

_UCS also included the following graph, which clearly shows 11-year solar cycles:_


----------



## flacaltenn (Jun 30, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > I guess I should wink and bow out, but there is the strangest coincidence here.. You'll never guess who has these posts AND MORE in just the past month....
> ...



THen you wouldn't mind if we checked that out would ya? Given that massive coinkydink of references to ole Bill Buckley.. and the fact that there IS so much harrassment in science now-a-days? The sock was cute for awhile, now it's obvious that SOMEONE is not taking this seriously..


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 30, 2012)

flacaltenn said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...



LOL. Check away. Then check out your sanity. 

Sheesh, so there are more than just a few people that remember that Bill Buckley was fun to read even when you disagreed with him. That surprises you?


----------



## flacaltenn (Jun 30, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > I guess I should wink and bow out, but there is the strangest coincidence here.. You'll never guess who has these posts AND MORE in just the past month....
> ...



Well you better stay in character, because there is other "sock-like" evidence as well. And those buckley quotes were ALL from OldRocks. Not one was yours.. So I hope you didn't get confused with your OTHER sock when you reacted to them. But if you want one OF YOURS from a political thread -- here it is.. 



> http://www.usmessageboard.com/tea-p...the-poor-or-the-middle-class.html#post5528171
> 
> Then I met a LOT of Republicans. It took until years after that experience, to meet any Republicans, at all, who are worth knowing. William F. Buckley is dead. Ike is dead.



Guess I'll ask around and see if any of our peers considers this strange. Kinda like a peer reviewed indictment..


----------



## flacaltenn (Jun 30, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



If I'm wrong -- I'll strongly apologize and give you back those 3 lbs of knockwurst and kosher franks you left in my driveway to intimidate me...


----------



## flacaltenn (Jun 30, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> _*Sucksassandballs* actually didn't suck, when he loaded the UCSUSA-link, above.  So let's huzzah, for *sucksassandballs*, he's a horse's ass, who doesn't get it, climate change is happening because GHG concentrations are running away, from any sort of controlled scenario.
> 
> Sun's Affect on Climate FAQ | Union of Concerned Scientists
> 
> ...



Still NO MENTION of any other solar measurement than TSI.. Is that ALL you know about the sun and it's effect on climate???

Why the hell would we need SO MANY Solar Observatories with so many different measurement tools if all you wanted to study was TSI? Bunch of folks wasting money and rocket fuel if that's all we need to know..


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 30, 2012)

flacaltenn said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...



No, you won't. You will not even mention it when you find that the only screen name that I have ever posted under is Old Rocks.

So, I would drive from Portland, Oregon, to Tennessee to leave some groceries in your driveway? Are you in need of food donation?


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 1, 2012)

flacaltenn said:


> Still NO MENTION of any other solar measurement than TSI.. Is that ALL you know about the sun and it's effect on climate???
> 
> Why the hell would we need SO MANY Solar Observatories with so many different measurement tools if all you wanted to study was TSI? Bunch of folks wasting money and rocket fuel if that's all we need to know..



_Be reasonable, *Fatass*, you zombie-queer.  You are so living-dead queer, you want me to go chase something irrelevant, AGAIN, when the only thing you posted was two graphs, and one was completely crip-useless, and you couldn't read the good graph.

I know *YOU* think spectral shifts affect bloody everything, but that depends on what part of the globe you live on and how the rotation and orbit functions are happening, which is largely irrelevant, since I am not trying to micro-predict every last solar effect, when there is a long-term intensity cycle, which we are starting to understand, with the known 11-year intensity cycle.  

Both the long-term solar cycles affect weather, and they are climate change forcers, AFTER CO2 concentration, and AFTER CH4, then H2O force runaway warming.

But *YOU* don't post good studies or link graphs or text, since you are a homosexual zombie-bitch, trying to eat brains.  Watch out for African-Americans, who find out about you and your kind, rambling down the road, to your Log Cabin Club meetups, dodging *sucksassandballs* driving on meth, but I guess you know about THIS, already_:


----------



## flacaltenn (Jul 1, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Still NO MENTION of any other solar measurement than TSI.. Is that ALL you know about the sun and it's effect on climate???
> ...



I just want to make sure that you're following along here jackass. When IPCC talks about TSI they throw up the 12 year cycle graph that you posted above.. 

I want you to look very closely at the Y axis and the magnitude of that effect. It's less than 0.25 watt/m2 and IS pretty negliable (tho still important) to measuring warming.. 

How much of a watt/m2 effect are we looking at in AGW debate? About 1.25 to 1.50watt/m2. What PERCENTAGE of the TSI is that? It's miniscule correct? 

NOW --- let's look at the LONGER historical record... 






THAT -- is not miniscule compared to the heating effect we're looking for in AGW theory is it? In fact -- it's quite worrisome when you look at it that way isn't it?


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 1, 2012)

flacaltenn said:


> I just want to make sure that you're following along here jackass. When IPCC talks about TSI they throw up the 12 year cycle graph that you posted above..
> 
> I want you to look very closely at the Y axis and the magnitude of that effect. It's less than 0.25 watt/m2 and IS pretty negliable (tho still important) to measuring warming..
> 
> ...



_Why are YOU worried?  Did your ass get too fat, and then it got even fatter?

Oh, wow, before and since the Maunder Minimum, all sorts of sunspot cycles issued:_







_I'm already following, and I know, your ass is big, so what?  Don't you have a comment, worth noting?  This IS the second decent graph you've loaded.  Congrats, *Fatass*.  If my version of the same data won't load, we'll have to make do, with yours, which looks like it's just not laid out the same, but it's similar.  Maybe NASA will get it on, and it will be up, by Monday.

You don't offer any inference or a complete report, since you are still a fat-assed anal-retard, *Fatass*.

Here is a modern instrument record graph, which is better, since it plots TSI, against average global temperatures:_


----------



## flacaltenn (Jul 1, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > I just want to make sure that you're following along here jackass. When IPCC talks about TSI they throw up the 12 year cycle graph that you posted above..
> ...



You know sock -- you're owner must be heartbroken.. You should really go get paired.. 

The INFERENCE IS -- that whenever the AGW truth squad dismisses solar involvement, they trot out a 36 yr record of ONE of the suns' TSI cycles (12 year) and completely forget to mention that since the Industrial Age began -- the sun has been on a 1+ w/m2 rise in TSI. Which is curiously the same order of magnitude as the expected anthropogenic contribution from the greenhouse. And this is JUST ONE solar parameter for which we have only RECENT satellite measurements to study. It's NOT that easily dismissed.. 

Certainly -- one would want to know the SPECTRAL DISTRIBUTION of that additional solar output and how the distribution interacts with GHG absorption spectra.. But we only have a less than 20 yr continous record of that parameter..


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 2, 2012)

flacaltenn said:


> You know sock -- you're owner must be heartbroken.. You should really go get paired..
> 
> The INFERENCE IS -- that whenever the AGW truth squad dismisses solar involvement, they trot out a 36 yr record of ONE of the suns' TSI cycles (12 year) and completely forget to mention that since the Industrial Age began -- the sun has been on a 1+ w/m2 rise in TSI. Which is curiously the same order of magnitude as the expected anthropogenic contribution from the greenhouse. And this is JUST ONE solar parameter for which we have only RECENT satellite measurements to study. It's NOT that easily dismissed..
> 
> Certainly -- one would want to know the SPECTRAL DISTRIBUTION of that additional solar output and how the distribution interacts with GHG absorption spectra.. But we only have a less than 20 yr continous record of that parameter..



_You know, *Fatass*, you goddamned queer, we have to review Bill Buckley:_

"I won't insult your intelligence by suggesting you really believe what you just said."

_That being said, I will make sure I let you know, how your ass is wicked, deadly fat.

The sun is an important climate forcer, *Fatass*.  I think the sun was number one, at forcing, until the end of the 18th Century, when humans got really busy, at defoliating and burning both cellulosic and fossil fuels.  If GHGs weren't human-affected, the sun would still be number one.  But you never were number one, at anything, so you don't know shit or shinola, about number-fucking-ONE!

Today's top climate forcers, IMHO:

1. CO2
2. CH4
3. The SUN
4. NO2 and the rest of the GHGs

ENSO and other temporary cycles could be considered, but short cycles affect weather, more than they affect climate change.

We are releasing CO2 at 10x the rate of the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, and we are exceeding the rate of CH4, preceding the Permian/Triassic Extinction Event, which we will challenge, for the number one place, of killer events, of all geologic time.

We will hit P/T emissions levels, for methane, and we are out-gassing CO2, faster:_







_With extinction rates already over 100 times normal, we are projected, to officially start mass extinctions, after 2020, which is right around the corner:_







_Humans weren't around, to jack up the CO2, during the P/T extinction, so methane out-gassing was natural, probably accompanying the split of Pangea.  But NOW, humans are messing with the gas:_







_You SUCK, *Fatass*.  Shove a sock, in yourself._


----------



## flacaltenn (Jul 2, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > You know sock -- you're owner must be heartbroken.. You should really go get paired..
> ...



You're falling out of character here sock.. The show will soon be over...


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 2, 2012)

flacaltenn said:


> You're falling out of character here sock.. The show will soon be over...



_That's intriguing, *Fatass*.  I guess you'll be leaving, or something, since you aren't offering a whole lot of media, per post.  Don't you queers do your own laundry?_


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 2, 2012)

_See that big spike, in the middle of the graph?  That happened 251 m.y.a.  

Our extinction event will challenge the P/T, for top spot, as all-time leading killer, depending on how much volcanism gets going, during our event, which will last quite awhile, since it'll take a long time, to clear the CO2 and CH4, from the atmosphere, depending on whether humans re-green and develop mechanical CO2-respiration machines, while the SLR peaks, and then subsides, only after polar ice re-forms:_







_Up go the GHG concentrations:_







_See how CO2 just shot up, as people started burning not only cellulosic fuels, but burning of fossil fuels became widespread, while proliferation of chainsaws accelerated clearing, of forests?_








_The show goes on, psycho-queerboy *Fatass*, ranting about what happens, to your stupid, queer face, which sucks._


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 2, 2012)

LOL.....now we're talking "mass extinction events"...............


The AGW nutters saw too many movies on the ScyFi Channel


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 2, 2012)

*M  A  S  S  I  V  E

E  X  T  I  N  C  T  I  O  N  S*





Obviously its about that time..................put a call out to................


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 3, 2012)

_Just a few more years to go, *sucksassandballs*!  You will find out, since the ocean will fuck with NY.  But before that ocean screws up YOUR goofy life, it will fuck up a lot of creatures, who are supposed to live in the fucker, but they won't be able to.  The question is, when will the plankton blooms fuck up?  When that happens, the major oceanic food chain dies out._


----------



## conservationism (Jul 3, 2012)

I'm not scared of global warming.

I'm scared of overpopulation.

When we finally make too many people, they'll all be starving, and they're going to come after those of us with the food...


----------



## daveman (Jul 3, 2012)

flacaltenn said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Well Flatulance, here is what we know at present;
> ...


Whichever is scariest and forces you to make an emotional decision to follow his civilization-destroying agenda.

You'll live in a yurt and LIKE it.


----------



## daveman (Jul 3, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Who's sock are you really? You really should take a bow and end this..
> ...



Rep power 0?

That's too great a burden.  Let me relieve you of some of it.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 3, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> _Just a few more years to go, *sucksassandballs*!  You will find out, since the ocean will fuck with NY.  But before that ocean screws up YOUR goofy life, it will fuck up a lot of creatures, who are supposed to live in the fucker, but they won't be able to.  The question is, when will the plankton blooms fuck up?  When that happens, the major oceanic food chain dies out._




meh


Alarmist Psychology &#8211; Why They Need Doomsday Scenarios


----------



## daveman (Jul 3, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...


No conservatives consider Buckley to be a liberal.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 3, 2012)

daveman said:


> bobgnote said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...




Dave bro...........lets not chase the k00ks out of here. This forum would suck without them to make fun of. Place is tailor made for me. Coming in here is like a comedy club visit, sometimes 2 or 3 times/day. Who cant love that? The k00ks come in here to vent their pent up anger and misery because they all know they are losing. I'm in here to laugh and do lots of it!!


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 3, 2012)

skookerasbil said:


> bobgnote said:
> 
> 
> > _Just a few more years to go, *sucksassandballs*!  You will find out, since the ocean will fuck with NY.  But before that ocean screws up YOUR goofy life, it will fuck up a lot of creatures, who are supposed to live in the fucker, but they won't be able to.  The question is, when will the plankton blooms fuck up?  When that happens, the major oceanic food chain dies out._
> ...



_So, *sucksassandballs*.  Do you have any shit, written at that link, which you want to discuss?  If you don't have any issues over there, I wouldn't go up your asshole, either, just because you are queer as flaming shit.  Paste something, from that site.

Raise an issue, BITCH, or go out and parade._


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 3, 2012)

Tell us more about how the oceans are turning to gastric juices!  Let's hear about that 30% increase in acidity again!


----------



## HUGGY (Jul 3, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> I think that the estimate of the effects of the Arctic release are too high, but, given what we have already seen from the clathrates, something to consider.



So...this firestorm?  If you think the fuel for your firestorm will be methane..you are in error.  Methane is lighter than air.  It just rises up and cannot ever get dense enough to be flammable.  Now natural gas..which was the culprip in the BP explosion in the gulf IS heavier than air and once released in a closed environment is very dangerous.  If say huge amounts of natural gas erupted from the ground it would form pools of highly explosive fuel at low points in our geography.  Thing is though it would burn off quickly and only do the same kinda damage as a forest fire.  No way it could cause a world wide firestorm.  There just isn't enough of it.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jul 3, 2012)

daveman said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



THAT'S the financial advice I was seeking Daveman.. Any idea of how to put together a representative YURT portfolio??


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 3, 2012)

HUGGY said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > I think that the estimate of the effects of the Arctic release are too high, but, given what we have already seen from the clathrates, something to consider.
> ...



_Let me 'splain sumpn' to you, Lucy:

CH4 is out-gassing, from warming tundras and bodies of water, including from the bottom, of the Arctic Ocean, from melting glaciers, from Siberia, from Canada, from Alaska, from anywhere, but a lot comes from warming Arctic areas.

CH4 is 24 times as potent a greenhouse gas, as CO2, IF CH4 breaks down, to CO2 and H2O, on its normal timeline, which you can look up.  But some studies indicate CH4 will be impaired, at breaking down, maybe by more H2O in the atmosphere, I forget, but I'll look it back up, and you can look it up, NOW.

The point is, CH4 will radically increase heat retention, in the atmosphere, greatly increasing likelihood, of wildfires, even if one of those mile-wide bubbles, from the bottom of the Arctic Ocean doesn't go BOOOOOOM, which one might do, someday.

If the exchange to CO2 and H2O is impaired, CH4 has a GWP (global warming potential)  of 72 or even more.  CO2 has a GWP of 1, but it is more common, in the air.

And natural gas is mostly CH4, but also:_

Typical Composition of Natural Gas
Methane	CH4	70-90%
Ethane	C2H  60-20%
Propane	C3H8
Butane	C4H10
Carbon Dioxide	CO2	0-8%
Oxygen	O2	0-0.2%
Nitrogen	N2	0-5%
Hydrogen sulphide	H2S	0-5%
Rare gases	A, He, Ne, Xe	trace


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 3, 2012)

HUGGY said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > I think that the estimate of the effects of the Arctic release are too high, but, given what we have already seen from the clathrates, something to consider.
> ...



Natural gas is mostly methane, Sparky


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 3, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



Actually, the effects of CH4 outgassing is much worse than the figure of 24 times as effective as CO2 indictates. For that is the figure for the effect spread over a century. In the first decade, before much of it has oxidized into CO2 and H20, the figure is 60 to 100 times as effective of a GHG as CO2. As the amount of CH4 increases, the rate of reduction decreases because of the lowering of the amount of hydroxyl in the atmosphere. So the worse it get, the worser it gets LOL


Atmospheric methane - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



[edit] Removal processes

Any process that consumes methane from the atmosphere can be considered a "sink" of atmospheric methane. The most prominent of these processes occur as a result of methane either being destroyed in the atmosphere or broken down in soil.





A pie chart demonstrating the relative effects of various sinks of atmopsheric methane. 
Reaction with the hydroxyl radical- The major removal mechanism of methane from the atmosphere involves radical chemistry; it reacts with the hydroxyl radical (·OH) in the troposphere or stratosphere to create the CH·3 radical and water vapor. In addition to being the largest known sink for atmospheric methane, this reaction is one of the most important sources of water vapor in the upper atmosphere.

CH4 + ·OH &#8594; ·CH3 + H2O

This reaction in the troposphere gives a methane lifetime of 9.6 years. Two more minor sinks are soil sinks (160 year lifetime) and stratospheric loss by reaction with ·OH, ·Cl and ·O1D in the stratosphere (120 year lifetime), giving a net lifetime of 8.4 years.[1] Oxidation of methane is the main source of water vapor in the upper stratosphere (beginning at pressure levels around 10 kPa).

The methyl radical formed in the above reaction will, during normal daytime conditions in the troposphere, usually react with another hydroxyl radical to form formaldehyde. Note that this is not strictly oxidative pyrolysis as described previously. Formaldehyde can react again with a hydroxyl radical to form carbon dioxide and more water vapor. Note that sidechains in these reactions may interact with nitrogen compounds that will likely produce ozone, thus supplanting radicals required in the initial reaction.[24]

Methanotrophic bacteria in soils- Methanotrophic bacteria that reside within soil use methane as a source of carbon in methane oxidation.[25] Methane oxidation allows methanotrophic bacteria to use methane as a source of energy, reacting methane with oxygen and as a result producing carbon dioxide and water.

CH4 + 2O2&#8594; CO2 + 2H2O


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 3, 2012)

People have to remember..........

Those who get hysterical about every weather event that happens also tend to get hysterical over just about everything else too. Thats the way it is with these people.

I deal with life and death decisions every day at work and have been for over 30 years now. These people, to a preson, would be peeing their pants on a daily basis. Guys like Bobnote..........these people see a raindrop and thunder in the distance and they are running for cover!!! Then are checking afterwards, are checkiing the news to see if the world ended!! We all know the type.........snow in the forecast and they are down buying hundreds of dollars worth of food, two baskets piled a mile high with supplies. Im not saying these alarmist people were dropped on their heads but something went afoul somewhere along the way.


Anybody else find, like me, that most of these hyper-science types are social oddballs!! Tell me this Bobnote guy wasnt captain of the Dweeb Club in school........and likely real proud of it too!!!!


You cant take anything these people say seriously..........their life is about bomb throwing.


And nobody cares about this shit while these people are having mental meltdowns. Forst Pew, now Gallup find that nobody gives a rats ass about Climate Change..............


Collide-a-scape » Blog Archive » Collide-a-scape >> Gallup Poll: Climate Change is Least of Concerns


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 3, 2012)

_*Sucksassandballs*, I went to college.

You learned how to shove meth.  See the difference?  I BET you're popular.  But how the hell do you make "life and death decisions," at your "work," when you screw around at USMB, to make 3000 posts, per year?  It seems to me, you might be ranting, out your butthole.  Just sayin' . . ._


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 3, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> _*Sucksassandballs*, I went to college.
> 
> You learned how to shove meth.  See the difference?  I BET you're popular.  But how the hell do you make "life and death decisions," at your "work," when you screw around at USMB, to make 3000 posts, per year?  It seems to me, you might be ranting, out your butthole.  Just sayin' . . ._





Collide-a-scape » Blog Archive » Collide-a-scape >> Gallup Poll: Climate Change is Least of Concerns



At least Im not posting up drivel 95% of the people dont care about...............


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 3, 2012)




----------



## daveman (Jul 3, 2012)

flacaltenn said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...



Yurts R Us | Gadling.com

Say it. Go ahead and say it. I know you can. "I want a yurt!" Yes! Say it again: "I want a yurt!"​
But if Roxy gets his way, you won't want one, but it's the only place you'll be able to live -- except for caves.  

Roxy is desperate to destroy civilization.  Well, for everyone else, that is.  He wants to continue enjoying modern amenities.


----------



## daveman (Jul 3, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> _*Sucksassandballs*, I went to college._


Being the janitor doesn't count.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 3, 2012)

skookerasbil said:


> WINNING!!!



_Yay, *sucksassandballs* is winning.  Yeah, *suck*, you win at:_

1. sucking
2. sucking ass
3. sucking balls
4. sucking ass AND balls, both

_Did you know, suck, the zombies win, against the plants, every goddam game?

What the fuck are you so happy about?  You are:_

1. retarded
2. insane
3. queer, as a three-dollar-bill
4. undead (You're a ZOMBIE, asshole!)


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 3, 2012)

daveman said:


> bobgnote said:
> 
> 
> > _*Sucksassandballs*, I went to college._
> ...



_It was a major university.  All the guys named "Dave" were smarter than you, even the ones who were a little dented.

So *DDD*.  Tell us why you like to keep proving the gene pool of the white race has gone completely to shit._


----------



## flacaltenn (Jul 3, 2012)

daveman said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



They DO look fine on the front lawn.... Well that's it then --- I'm all in on yurts..


----------



## flacaltenn (Jul 3, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > bobgnote said:
> ...



Never doubted that a methamatician like you was highly educated. Bet your diploma is on hemp..


----------



## daveman (Jul 3, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > bobgnote said:
> ...


Whoopty-shit.


bobgnote said:


> All the guys named "Dave" were smarter than you, even the ones who were a little dented.


Uh huh.  Given the fact that you're completely full of shit, I feel comfortable in flushing your opinions down the toilets you cleaned.


bobgnote said:


> So *DDD*.  Tell us why you like to keep proving the gene pool of the white race has gone completely to shit.[/I]


What's race got to do with anything, retard?

Oh, yeah -- you're intellectually bankrupt.


----------



## daveman (Jul 3, 2012)

flacaltenn said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...


Roxy says you can't have indoor plumbing.  But that's okay, since you'll have to burn your own poop for heat.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 4, 2012)

daveman said:


> What's race got to do with anything, retard?
> 
> Oh, yeah -- you're intellectually bankrupt.



_*DaveDDD*, do you deny you, sucksassandballs, Fatass, bigretardedqueenofcalinkey, and any of the other deniers at USMB are WHITE MALES?

Don't you think an accurate recount of denier-background is you are TRASH?

Are you the piece of trash, who wants to pretend he isn't a RACIST?

Aren't you the same piece of trash, who had to be corrected, about RACIALISM?

Do you think I just write about "*DaveDDD*," without knowing how you and the other shitbag white boys you surf with are all really, fucking stupid?_


----------



## daveman (Jul 4, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > What's race got to do with anything, retard?
> ...


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 4, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > What's race got to do with anything, retard?
> ...


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 6, 2012)

_In other news, retards and zombies got their spunk into test-tubes with Gomer and Goober-goo, and look what the fuck happened:

*DaveDDD*, *sucksassandballs*, *Fatass*, and a posse!_


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 6, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> _In other news, retards and zombies got their spunk into test-tubes with Gomer and Goober-goo, and look what the fuck happened:
> 
> *DaveDDD*, *sucksassandballs*, *Fatass*, and a posse!_




s0n.........your shit is so k00k fringe, you might as well be heading for a session in group navel contemplation.















Armies of 5 or 6 dont get it done s0n..........


*Every poll shows........nobody gives a flying fuck >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*





Cult of Global Warming Is Losing Influence - Rasmussen Reports&#8482;


http://www.gallup.com/poll/126560/Americans-Global-Warming-Concerns-Continue-Drop.aspx

http://www.tehrantimes.com/science/99347-global-warming-no-longer-americans-top-environmental-concern-poll-finds?tmpl=component&page=


http://www.iol.co.za/scitech/science/environment/climate-change-no-longer-a-priority-poll-1.1334958


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tim-profeta/the-climate-post-climate-change_b_1651826.html





*TAKE YOUR PICK s0n!!!*


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 8, 2012)

skookerasbil said:


> bobgnote said:
> 
> 
> > _In other news, retards and zombies got their spunk into test-tubes with Gomer and Goober-goo, and look what the fuck happened:
> ...



Rasmussen:  October 2011, not out-dated, if you read fucktards, named Michael Barone

Gallup:  March 11, 2010, getting old

Tehrantimes:  Current 2012 Washington Post-Stanford poll

Scitech:  Same poll 

Huffingtonpost:  Same poll 

_You sure are a dumbshit, *sucksassandballs*.  You posted the same poll, three times.

What is interesting is how Rasmussen I believe used warming and climate change, interchangeably, which indicates incompetence, and then if you read his idiot writer, Barone, you realize Rasmussen is for shit-eaters.

The Washington Post and Stanford University found stupid Americans, polled them, and I write flames, at other stupid Americans, and I should think something is proved?

Hey!  Post and Snodfart!  If you want some more STUPID AMERICANS, we gottum, at USMB.  Poll the bitches; take your pick._


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 8, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> > bobgnote said:
> ...






The content never matters to the far left. Never has........never will. Information to the k00ks is like garlic to vampires. This dolt even cites the fact that the links are dated............but things have only gotten worse for the AGW alarmist crusaders, which is hysterical and 100% provable. The k00ks on this forum do one thing well = call people who dont agree with them retards and shit-eaters. But they still cant post up one single link that displays in any substantive way that all their "consensus science" is relevant in the real world. I put that challenge to the other crock ranter of this forum, Rolling Thunder back in October of last year. What do I get back from these two? Zero links and lots of hystrical mental case obscene rants.


What you got here in this forum s0ns is nothing more than a science hobby on display, frequented by a handful of uber-fringe progressive alarmist nutters who live daily with a gigantic telephone pole smashed up their poopers because all the thousands of hysterical bomb throwing links aint adding up to dick. Understandable when you are experiencing historical levels of LOSING over protracted periods of time.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 8, 2012)

_Hey, *sucksassandballs*!

You pasted up three different links, to the SAME POLL.

You don't have an IQ above two.  So why not just post the same shit TWO times, shitty-idiot?_


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 9, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> _Hey, *sucksassandballs*!
> 
> You pasted up three different links, to the SAME POLL.
> 
> You don't have an IQ above two.  So why not just post the same shit TWO times, shitty-idiot?_





You know you are right s0n...........so I figured I'd go ahead and post up something more recent anyway..................


So.........as I frequently point out in this forum.......for all the thousands of science graphs and links posted up by the alarmist k00ks in the ENVIRONMENT forum, and for all the daily bomb throwing what has happened since 2007 in terms of the public's concern about global warming????

*IT'S FALLEN CLEAR OFF THE LIST!!!!!!*


http://www.people-press.org/files/legacy-pdf/1-23-12%20Priorities%20Release.pdf




Which begs the question yet again s0n........................we're the shit eating retards but where is the science mattering in the real world?????????


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 9, 2012)

skookerasbil said:


> bobgnote said:
> 
> 
> > _Hey, *sucksassandballs*!
> ...



_Hey, you and your party are "shit eating retards." Thank you very fucking much!

What happened since 2007, with regards to your I-fucking-Q?  Nothing positive.

What happened since 2007, with regards to any tardy IQs?  Not a lot.

Get your boss, to help you with your homework, again:_


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 9, 2012)

The Temperature dropped 20 degrees here today!!

Holy Fuck!  It was 20 degrees hotter yesterday!

At this rate, the planet will be a ball of ice before the end of July!


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 9, 2012)

_Pretty good UC Davis blog and some NASA:_

The Permo-Triassic (P-T) Extinction



> The P*T extinction was rapid, probably taking place in less than a million years. Although it was much more severe in the ocean, it affected terrestrial ecosystems too. A prolific swamp flora in the Southern Hemisphere had been producing enough organic debris to form coals in Australia, but the coal beds stop abruptly at the P-T boundary. No coal was laid down anywhere in the world for at least 6 m.y. afterward. A large change in carbon isotopes occurred across the P*T boundary, which signifies an important and global drop in photosynthesis that lasted a long time.
> 
> There is some evidence for an impact at the P*T boundary. The continental collisions that formed Pangea in the Permian would account for a major drop in diversity but not for a sudden, enormous mass extinction. Perhaps most important of all, the Permian extinction coincides with the largest known volcanic eruption in Earth history.
> 
> ...



-------------------------

The Great Dying - NASA Science



> But as their methods for dating the disappearance of species has improved, estimates of its duration have shrunk from millions of years to between 8,000 and 100,000 years. That's a blink of the eye in geological terms.
> 
> "I think paleontologists are now coming full circle and leading the way, saying that the extinction was extremely abrupt," Becker notes. "Life vanished quickly on the scale of geologic time, and it takes something catastrophic to do that."
> 
> ...



----------------------

_Well, that's nice to know.  Some body from space almost certainly clobbered the Earth, at the end of the Permian period, to enhance destruction, which was underway.

All we are likely to do is surpass the PETM, since our GHG out-gassing is much more severe, while humans are busy with chainsaws and pollution, to completely thwart forests, of course, with the help of human-caused warming and derivative media, like beetles.

We will see volcanism, as Long Valley, Yellowstone, and other ripe magma chambers mature, while heavier seas press chambers, plates, and faults, to cause eruptions, which tend to occur, at relevant high tide periods.

Since the P/T happened, 251-253 m.y.a., with GHGs and volcanism, we will approach that level of extinction, but we will likely not surpass it, since we might just have some humans left, who can zap asteroids and comets, if one should stray, toward Earth.

But will humans be smart enough, to re-green the planet?  The presence of fucky-ball heads, like *CrosstardPunk* suggests otherwise.  

Some D-rat like black Obamney will neglect his battle order, get on TV, insulated by his cult, and then he will claim he will "fight," ask for money, but he won't have a majority in Congress, while he "fights" himself, like a typical attorney, taking people off, with other attorneys, on whatever side, in whatever courtrooms.  I won't be giving $5 to this bozo.

Meanwhile, I don't see anybody claiming to have found irridium or shocked quartz, such as from the K/T extinction, 65 m.y.a., but if all we need to see is bucky balls, here's how they look:_









> The detection of buckyballs by themselves is ambiguous. They can be made on Earth by forest fires. Analysis of samples from just above and below the boundary in Japan, China, and Hungary indicate that the buckyballs are concentrated there. More importantly, there is a sharp increase in the abundance of helium-3 at the boundary. The ratio of helium-3 to helium-4 is typical of helium trapped in carbonaceous meteorites, and much different from Earth rocks or atmosphere. The ratio of argon-40 to argon-36 is well below that measured in our atmosphere, and trends towards values typical of buckyballs in meteorites. Becker and colleagues conclude that the gases and their buckyball containers are extraterrestrial. A big impact spread them all over the world.



PSRD Hot Idea: Impact at the end of the Permian

------------------

_The Siberian traps eruptions happened, 251 m.y.a., concurrent with a suspected carbonaceous asteroid impact.  The Deccan traps eruptions happened, 65 m.y.a., concurrent with a known asteroid impact.

These major eruptions may have happened, opposite the area of impact.  They squirted their basaltic lava, in a relatively short time, but they continued, for a million years or more, each.

We will eat shit.  Humans will die.  But if we don't get whacked, by an extraterrestrial object, all we will eat is climate change, leading to due eruptions, preceded by the heavier seas and tides.  So re-greening is a very, very good idea.  Somebody tell Monsanto, we need more than blue corn.

But will black Obamney or white Obamney get'r'done?  *Crosstard* sure won't._


----------



## flacaltenn (Jul 9, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> _Pretty good UC Davis blog and some NASA:_
> 
> ----------------------
> 
> ...



Strange -- where'd the mad skills in Geology come from? Eh Gollum?  Did you borrow them for the day?


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 9, 2012)

flacaltenn said:


> Strange -- where'd the mad skills in Geology come from? Eh Gollum?  Did you borrow them for the day?



_WTF are YOU doing all day, watching your own shits, with a mirror, and drawing pictures?_


----------



## daveman (Jul 9, 2012)

flacaltenn said:


> Strange -- where'd the mad skills in Geology come from? Eh Gollum?  Did you borrow them for the day?



Liberalism grants one expertise in any subject.

That's why the left looked to Barbra Streisand and Sean Penn for their views on geopolitics.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 10, 2012)

daveman said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Strange -- where'd the mad skills in Geology come from? Eh Gollum?  Did you borrow them for the day?
> ...



_That's why being DDD made you guys into de-facto conservatives, which we call wingpunk fucktard neo-cons, subject to rule, by an idiocracy, in a tainted republic, which has less and less to protect, all the time.  Conservatism has been pressed, to meaninglessness.

Since you wingpunk fucktards don't know shit, about conservatism, what makes you think you know jack, about "liberalism?"  You know STUPID and QUEER, and you vote for shit or shinola, in an idiocracy._


----------



## flacaltenn (Jul 10, 2012)

How'd you get this way Gollum? Was it nature or nuture? Are you a victim of popular culture or did you do this to yourself? Are you happy you finally got the Ring Back?


----------



## ConzHateUSA (Jul 10, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> I think that the estimate of the effects of the Arctic release are too high, but, given what we have already seen from the clathrates, something to consider.



Baggers value ignorance, so talking to them about science is a waste of time.

THe oil industry itself has finally admitted climate change is real and their product is the primary cause, they say we are smart so we will figure out a resolution before the impact is serious

They lie, dont they...

But there is now NO debate, when the guy that shit in your toilet admits it, you dont argue with the 3rd guy in the room about whether or not you smell shit, do you?


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 10, 2012)

flacaltenn said:


> How'd you get this way Gollum? Was it nature or nuture? Are you a victim of popular culture or did you do this to yourself? Are you happy you finally got the Ring Back?



_*Fecaltoons* loaded a study, from The Roberts Lav, and it was THE shit, wasn't it, *Fekie*?

1.  It studied CO2 concentrations, in water, without cold water breakdown, so we could know thresholds, for H2CO3 affinity, relative to oyster mortality, so no oysters were harmed, until the researches cooked them;
2.  It studied mortality temperature thresholds, without breaking down CO2 concentration or H2CO3 affinity changes, given oyster mortality, from a variety of causes.

I guess the dude who commented global warming is how freaks make profits, on media was correct, about this particular study, *Fekie-freaky*!

I guess you didn't see this, posted:_








_So you just set up camp:_







_Fekie-poo was so happy, when he found the Roberts study, he crapped himself, and all the other fecophiles ranted, with glee.  Fekie-poo had found a shit-study!_







_But it's cleanup time.  *Fecaltoonces*' cartoon-study was a crock, of shit:_







_I don't know why you'd smear all your morons, who were so shit-hot-happy, when *Fekie* posted the Roberts study, but THAT STUDY DIDN'T PROVE SHIT, IN A BAG.  I guess you could say, it was your shittiest load, since that graph, without any labels, for the plots._


----------



## JagOnDaRoad (Jul 10, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...




I'd love to chime in, but I am packing to move to Greenland. Once that massive ice sheet clears there will be oysters and fish unfrozen from WAY back when. I am hoping to develop a new Greenland Oyster company to exploit the situation. In the interim, I hope to find some preserved Wooley Mammoths, Sabertooth Honey-badgers, and maybe I'll happen upon a lost tribe of prehistoric-minded cavepeoples and I'll be able to drag a cavechick home to my crib.


----------



## daveman (Jul 10, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...


----------



## JagOnDaRoad (Jul 10, 2012)

Never really could get interested in fantasy fictional literature. I guess that's why I have little interest in fantasy fictional global alarmism. One day, our existence will change. Perhaps we become cave dwellers, escape the planet to another, or like the dinosaur we are snuffed out. 
Whatever our fate, I would venture a guess that we will not be the cause of our own extinction. We may give it a hell of a try, but even if nuclear holocaust takes most of us, some would likely survive. An asteroid, on the other hand, could wipe the slate clean, and mother earth could once again breath, since the ghastly human no longer chokes her and violates her bowel. 

Oh, and who erased my other post?


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 10, 2012)

_It's *DaveDDD*, *JerkInDaRoad*, and *Fecaltoonces*, all trying to play ping-pong, at USMB:_


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gM_CSj_TLD0]Retards playing Extreme ping-pong - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 10, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...


----------

