Hmmmmmmm......

What will all the Global Warming theorists think of this?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,293258,00.html

Washington, D.C. Resident Finds 1922 Article Showing Early Signs of Climate Change
Tuesday, August 14, 2007

A Washington, D.C., resident recently came across a 1922 article that revealed early signs of climate change.

John Lockwood found a 1922 article in The Washington Post when he was conducting research at the Library of Congress. The article's headline read: "Arctic Ocean Getting Warm; Seals Vanish and Icebergs Melt," according to a report in the Washington Times.

The article reports "great masses of ice have now been replaced by moraines of earth and stones," and "at many points well-known glaciers have entirely disappeared."

Click here to read the Washington Times story.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20070814/NATION02/108140063

Lockwood said he's discovered other articles from the 1920s and 1930s on the same subject.

"I had read of the just-released NASA estimates, that four of the 10 hottest years in the U.S. were actually in the 1930s, with 1934 the hottest of all," Lockwood said.

That proves it! Global warming or climate change, whatever you want to call it is a hoax...heck, better yet, just come out and say it: Human's can emit as much CO2 and pollutants as we please without any harm to us or the earth. Is this not the bottom line? Or do conservatives take the ridiculous position of disagreeing with the theory simply because Democrats champion it?

No we disagree with it, because it hasn't ever been proven, just a few years ago, the same scientists were screaming global Cooling.

And the scientists cant come up with a temperature, that is "best" for the earth.

Nwokie, there wasn't an overwhelming scientific consensus just a few years ago about global cooling, the way global warming is accepted today. There was brief attention in the mid-70s and a lot of debate but nothing like the near-unanimous support Global Warming has now.

Nor is any reputable scientist suggesting a "best" temperature for the earth - that's just a right-wing bullshit, a strawman. Scientists don't even agree on the best approach to Global Warming or the severity. What they agree on is that the earth is warming, man is significantly contributing to this, and we should take action to reduce our effect on this warming or risk great consequences later.

Andrew

The bottom line is, can we pollute as much as we want and not have repercussions? The answer is NO!

Therefore, it's prudent to motivate for a change in how we live. Even if it's only a small change, it all adds up!

The global warming deniers of today are on par with the people that used to claim tobacco is not addictive and does not cause cancer years back.

"the same scientists were screaming global Cooling"

Bullshit.

"the same scientists"

The SAME scientists? Care to at least name a few?

The Wikipedia entry is informative:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling

Looks like a Newsweek article was what really got most of the attention.

Andrew

Nwokie said>>>
No we disagree with it, because it hasn't ever been proven.

Neither has the presence of God but you RAM that down everyone's throat's at election time.....

Arctic summer sea ice hits record low:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20316390/

"The summer sea ice in the Arctic is melting at a rate never before seen by experts, setting a record low the last two days that's likely to continue through September, top sea ice experts said in two new reports that suggest mankind's emissions of greenhouse gases are at least partly responsible."

Nah, this can't be!!! I thought global warming was a hoax??? This is what Sean Hannity tells me, and I believe him, damn the facts!

The only thing that article proves is that greedy idiots have known about the damage longer than anyone is willing to admit. If the hottest year was 1934, one could easily backtrack a hundred years from that point and find the seeds of industrialization behind the phenomenon.

We had been spewing shit into the sky, pouring shit into the rivers and feeding shit to our children for well over a century at that point. Coal fired everything is a dirty dirty way to go. Live by the smokestack, and you will die by the smokestack.

How about the Peppered Moths of England? I know, it proves both climate change and evolution, so it might be scary for a few of you to read. Avert your eyes if you think your imaginary friend for adults might not approve:

"Before the Industrial Revolution, the peppered moth was mostly found in a light gray form with little black speckled spots. The light-bodied moths were able to blend in with the light-colored lichens and tree bark, and the less common black moth was more likely to be eaten by birds. As a result of the common light-colored lichens and English trees, therefore, the light-colored moths were much more effective at hiding from predators, and the frequency of the dark allele was about 0.01%.

During the early decades of the Industrial Revolution in England, the countryside between London and Manchester was blanketed with soot from the new coal-burning factories. Many of the light-bodied lichens died from sulfur dioxide emissons, and the trees became covered with soot. This led to an increase in bird predation for light-colored moths, as they no longer blended in as well in their polluted ecosystem: indeed, their bodies now dramatically contrasted with the color of the bark. Dark-colored moths, on the other hand, were camouflaged very well by the blackened trees."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peppered_moth_evolution

"Once Kettlewell had completed his experiments, the question remained: what had changed the moth's habitat in industrial regions enabling darker colored individuals to blend in to their surroundings better? To answer this question, we can look back into Britain's history. In the early 1700's, the city of London—with its well-developed property rights, patent laws, and stable government—became the birthplace of the Industrial Revolution.

Advancements in iron production, steam engine manufacturing, and textile production catalyzed many social and economic changes that echoed beyond the city and altered the future of what had been, until then, a primarily agricultural workforce. Great Britain's plentiful coal supplies provided the energy resources needed to fuel the fast-growing metalworking, glass, ceramics, and brewing industries. Because coal is not a clean energy source, its burning released vast quantities of soot into London's air which settled as a black film over the city.

In the midst of London's newly industrialized environment, the peppered moth found itself in a difficult struggle to survive. Soot coated and blackened the trunks of trees throughout the city, killing lichen that grew on the trees and turning the bark from a light gray-flecked pattern to a dull, black film. The light gray, pepper-patterned moths, that once blended into the lichen-covered bark, instead stood out as easy targets for birds and other hungry predators."

http://animals.about.com/cs/evolution/a/aa090901a.htm

Of course, if you are a strict creationist who would rather see the exploitation of God's one week of hard work for a profit, well, you have bigger problems than climate change to worry about. Delusional thinking will end your life in a gloriously ironic way -- long before the planet does.