Washington Post Article: Icebergs Melting

Yes didn't we swap mainly from coal to less polluting oil based energy shortly after that time ?
Ever read about londons pollution level when coal was the primary energy source? many died.
 
uscitizen said:
Yes didn't we swap mainly from coal to less polluting oil based energy shortly after that time ?
Ever read about londons pollution level when coal was the primary energy source? many died.
Click to expand...
If you mean the deathly London fogs, that occured in the 1950's, that was more of an aberration as coal was already in drastic decline. Switch to oil as a primary heating source, instead of wood, occured in America in the 1920's.
The highest temp results shown in the article were from the 1930's.
It's interesting how history repeats itself and gives a lot more creedence to the notion that temp and climate change is normal and natural.
 
umm the polloution from the coal fired industrial revoloution did not have an immediate impact, the ecosphere is massive and changes direction slowly.

this article is politically motivated cherry picked speculation and has no more validity than my speculation in this post.
 
TheDanold said:
If you mean the deathly London fogs, that occured in the 1950's, that was more of an aberration as coal was already in drastic decline. Switch to oil as a primary heating source, instead of wood, occured in America in the 1920's.
The highest temp results shown in the article were from the 1930's.
It's interesting how history repeats itself and gives a lot more creedence to the notion that temp and climate change is normal and natural.
Click to expand...


What is more interesting is that the people who have scientific training and study this stuff think you are an idiot.

Are we back to the old there is no warming argument?
 
"Are we back to the old there is no warming argument?"

That was my 1st thought. Dano tries to play a little game with that; he says he accepts global warming, but not man's role in it, but then backtracks to the old talking point that there isn't even really warming. Then, when you call him on it, he'll say his position is "complex"...
 
DH, I think the point he is pathetically to make is that it is his belief that warming and cooling cycles happen and man has nothing to do with it.
And to a limited extent he is correct. But in my and most experts opinion man is also now having an impact.
 
Last edited:
Dano is just hoping to clloud the issue and catch one of us in a contradictory viewpoint so he can jump on that one contradiction and crow that we are totally wrong becuse of the one discrepancy. It is the Republican way.
 
Two problems with this article:

"D.C. resident John Lockwood was conducting research at the Library of Congress and came across an intriguing Page 2 headline in the Nov. 2, 1922 edition of The Washington Post: "Arctic Ocean Getting Warm; Seals Vanish and Icebergs Melt."
Click to expand...

"D.C. Resident"? What are the "resident's" scientific qualitications? They can't even quote a real climate scientist?


Mr. Lockwood: "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."
Click to expand...


Well, this betrays "DC resident" Mr. Lockwood's lack of understanding of the issue.

Global climate change, involves global mean temperatures. The U.S. is a very small part of the earth. The global mean temperatures are accelerating, and are much higher than they were in the 1930s.
 
Cypress said:
Two problems with this article:



"D.C. Resident"? What are the "resident's" scientific qualitications? They can't even quote a real climate scientist?





Well, this betrays "DC resident" Mr. Lockwood's lack of understanding of the issue.

Global climate change, involves global mean temperatures. The U.S. is a very small part of the earth. The global mean temperatures are accelerating, and are much higher than they were in the 1930s.
Click to expand...
Says San Fran resident Cypress, based on his research. That we can't call Cypress a scientist negates everything he has ever said about science, because that's how it works now.
 
Cypress said:
Two problems with this article:

"D.C. Resident"? What are the "resident's" scientific qualitications? They can't even quote a real climate scientist?

Well, this betrays "DC resident" Mr. Lockwood's lack of understanding of the issue.

Global climate change, involves global mean temperatures. The U.S. is a very small part of the earth. The global mean temperatures are accelerating, and are much higher than they were in the 1930s.
Click to expand...

New record? Completely lame on your entire post..:pke:

What possible relevance does it have about who digs up an article from 1922...why must he have scientific qualifications...he can read and thats about it takes to research news archives.
--------------------------
AND...you're wrong on count 2....

Nobody was talking about global mean temperatures.....they were talking about the hottest years in the US....

http://www.thestar.com/News/article/246027

In the United States, the calendar year 1998 ranked as the hottest of them all – until someone checked the math.

After a Toronto skeptic tipped NASA this month to one flaw in its climate calculations, the U.S. agency ordered a full data review.

Days later, it put out a revised list of all-time hottest years. The Dust Bowl year of 1934 now ranks as hottest ever in the U.S. – not 1998.
 
Damocles said:
Says San Fran resident Cypress, based on his research. That we can't call Cypress a scientist negates everything he has ever said about science, because that's how it works now.
Click to expand...

That's kinda lame, Damo. We're talking about the difference between personal, layman-type observations & scientific study & conclusions....
 
Dano is totally right we have learned nothing about climates and such since 1922. well the republicnas have not anyway. Science is a liberal subject.
 
uscitizen said:
Umm I thnk cypress is basing his opinion on the works of other experts. Disingenuity does not become you Damo.
Click to expand...
So was the guy who was researching it at the Library of Congress. Man, you really have dumbed yourself down today to a level of total miscomprehension of any reading material.
 
Onceler said:
That's kinda lame, Damo. We're talking about the difference between personal, layman-type observations & scientific study & conclusions....
Click to expand...
Yet, it is as it is.... It's a joke onceler, and it was fun to poke him back with the same stick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top