C O S M O S and NdGT really pumped out the CO2 Sunday Night 'bout GW/CC. What a bunch of Hot Air. Man 'O Live. Indoctrinate dosz Kiddies watchin'. Make 'em Believe sooz dey can Change Da Vrold.

GreenLand has 3.5 MILLION MORE Sq. Miles of Sheet Ice Added since GW/CC Hype Started. Didn't hear dat mentioned. Scientists are 'Coming Out' in droves Denying the CC/GW Hype. Dat not mentioned. No Change in Global Temp in 18 years. Not mentioned. Except to say 'Cooling' is Expected 'cause 'it's' Weather and Climate 'is' Different. You Know. Long Term.

Sixth Extinction Hooey.

Crunchin' Troll Here.

' '

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

GreenLand has 3.5 MILLION MORE Sq. Miles of Sheet Ice Added since GW/CC Hype Started.

I would like to see a peer-reviewed citation for this, please, as it's complete and utter hogwash. If you can't come up with one, then I would like this retracted, and you to stop denying/spreading falsehoods about peer-reviewed science in anywhere but the Politics forum. Thank you.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/09/080930081355.htm

Greenland lost an average of 195 cubic kilometres of ice per year between 2003 and 2008

http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/reportcard/greenland_ice_sheet.html



Edit: Wouldn't also mind seeing a list of these "scientists coming out in droves" too.

---

Neil DeGrasse Tyson tells MSNBC that it's possible aliens have visited and already concluded that there is no intelligent life on Earth.

Would a skin diver establish diplomatic relations with fish?

---

Though I take no sides in this debate, here is some fodder for discussion:

The AR4 WG1 SPM claims (table SPM.1, page 7) that sea level is rising at 0.21 mm/yr over the period 1993-2003, due to melting of the Greenland ice sheet. But several published papers have found that in fact the Greenland ice is increasing or static:

H.J. Zwally et al, Growth of the Southern Greenland Ice Sheet, Science 281, 1251 (1998). They found an ice sheet thickening rate of about 5 cm/year.

C. H. Davis, C. A. Kluever, and B. J. Haines, Elevation Change of the Southern Greenland Ice Sheet. Science 279, 2086-2088 (1998). They found a small increase (1.5 cm/year) over the period 1978-1988.

R. Thomas et al, Mass Balance of the Greenland Ice Sheet at High Elevations. Science 289, 426-428 (2000). They find that "On average, the region has been in balance".

O. M. Johannessen, K. Khvorostovsky, M. W. Miles, and L. P. Bobylev, Recent Ice-Sheet Growth in the Interior of Greenland. Science 310, 1013-1016 (2005) - They used satellite altimetry over the period 1992-2003, and found the "spatially averaged increase is 5.4 cm per year over the study area".

H.J. Zwally et al, Mass changes of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets and shelves and contributions to sea-level rise: 1992-2002. J. Glaciol. 51, 509-527 (2005) - Found an overall mass gain of 11 GT/yr.

AR4 cites the last two of these (though they incorrectly refer to Zwally et al as 2006) but not the first two. AR4 also incorrectly shows Zwally et al as showing mass loss in fig 4.18. AR4 also attempts discredit Johannessen et al (fig 4.18 caption) by saying that the results were 'without firn densification correction', and by showing it as a dotted line in their figure.

Not to undervalue the effort that you put into that collection of citations, but the data (and conclusions) are rather old. AR4 was from 2007 and the rest are older (back to 1998). The NOAA report I linked is from last year, The ScienceDaily article (directly extracted from journals) was from 2008. A more recent citation in the NOAA:

Nghiem, S. V., and 8 others, 2012: The extreme melt across the Greenland ice sheet in 2012. Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, doi: 10.1029/2012GL053611.

I don't usually chip in one way or another either unless I see factual errors or misrepresentations. As the old saw goes: "You are entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts."

As for the future effects of HCGW, I'm far less concerned about them than I am that the science's detractors are doing so to shackle the entire human race's food supply, economy and mobility to a resource whose own industry estimates will be gone in about forty years.

---

Not to undervalue the effort that you put into that collection of citations, but the data (and conclusions) are rather old.

If SETI stopped crunching the ice cap would return.

---

I learned a long time ago that good statisticians can find data to justify most any position they want to. And that goes for both sides of the global warming, excuse me, climate change argument.

---

Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

Not to undervalue the effort that you put into that collection of citations, but the data (and conclusions) are rather old.

If SETI stopped crunching the ice cap would return.

Now THIS... needs some explanation... LOL

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

Some observations.

The economy of the United States and its past abundance was based, in large part, on a ready supply of cheap energy. Now India and China realize this.

We are not about to run out of coal. We are the Saudi Arabia of coal. We probably have a 250 year supply of coal even if we returned to 50% electric production from coal. We have coking coal in Pennsylvania, medium-sulphur bituminous coal in the midwest and plenty of lignite in the Powder River basin and other places in the west.

Unless we go to a mix full Nuclear. solar, and wind, electricity will require combustion and production of CO-2. Doubling the price of energy will further destroy the economy of the Western World.

Back to the Tyson Interview.

Neil deGrasse Tyson Wants To Know The Answers To These 5 Questions Before He Dies

So, what are these five amazing problems he wants to see answered in his lifetime?

1. Why is the universe expanding faster?

After the Big Bang, the universe went from being the densest thing in existence to billions of galaxies in a millisecond. The universe expanded swiftly shortly after the Big Bang and was expected to continue expanding although at a slower rate – billions of years later – due to gravity. However, groundbreaking discoveries would reveal that the universe is expanding faster than ever, disregarding the existence of gravity which, as laws of physics would dictate, would slow things down. Dark Energy is a hypothetical energy form scientists use to explain the pressures that aid the quickening acceleration of the expansion of the universe.


2. Where does most of the universe’s gravity come from?

According to Dr. Tyson, scientists can only account for 1/6 of the total gravity in the universe, which would naturally come from black holes, planetary objects and stars. 5/6, or 85 percent of the gravity we observe in the cosmos has unknown origins. Neil DeGrasse Tyson calls these Dark Matter, which according to leading hypotheses, makes up as much as 25 percent of the universe. In comparison, ordinary matter (stars, planets, galaxies) only answer to 5 percent of the totality of the cosmos.

3. What was “before” the Big Bang.

Scientists do not know what was there before the Big Bang. Time nor space wouldn’t have existed during the moments before the Big Bang, which Neil DeGrasse Tyson describes as having a “negative time.” What scientists know is that around the “time” of the big bang, the whole universe was in a very hot and dense state, where no matter or particles would have, or could have existed.

4. How did life begin?

Although the theory of evolution succinctly explains life and our very own existence as a species, scientists still haven’t figured out how life in general really began. Neil DeGrasse Tyson wants to know how self-replicating life came about from organic molecules. Dr. Tyson is pretty optimistic to see the answer to this question since our planet has a pretty good track record of starting and flourishing life.

5. Are we alone in the universe?

With literally billions of Earth-like planets out there in the vastness of the cosmos, Neil DeGrasse Tyson wonders – are we alone in the universe? Because liquid water is a prerequisite for life, Tyson ponders if there are life forms outside Earth’s atmosphere in our very own backyard. Microbes on Mars, and more intriguingly, life forms on Jupiter’s Europa are examples Tyson provided. Although Europa is too far away from the sun to sustain life, Jupiter is “pumping energy” into its moons. This offers the possibility that a life-sustaining surface could be found on the face of Europa.

http://www.inquisitr.com/1277532/neil-degrasse-tyson-wants-to-know-the-answers-to-these-5-questions-before-he-dies/

---

Neil deGrasse Tyson Wants To Know The Answers To These 5 Questions Before He Dies


Smart man he is

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

Loved The Preach NdGT, in last few minutes of C O S M O S. NdGT Spake as J E S U S of The Religion of Science. Beautiful. And I always Loved Carl's Pale Blue Dot Preach. Magnificent.

Had to Look Around and make sure I was not in The Sanctuary of Church. Well Done Reverends. Da Kiddies Watchin' are aGODg and Dreamin' of The Science To Come in Their Lives and Da Vrold Around Them.

Future is Bright fO All da Vrold's Peoples wif deezs Kiddies takin' up The Religion of Science to Guide US Away from The Follies of Our Past, Present and Dwindling Future of Ignorance and Stupidities.

MasterWork is C O S M O S. Thank You for 'it', Producers, Writers, Advertisers, Film Making Crews and Scientists. And of Course, Cartoon Makers.

Brilliant.

da Crunchin' Troll Wannabe

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

I find it strange that when a show like this comes out with some good facts people still don't listen . The episode about GW should worry everyone . you can't get the facts any simpler than the way they put it in that show and relise we are at 400ppm or 4ppm per 100,000 I think he said and we will be at 540 in just 65 yrs or 5.4ppm per 100,000 and remember what he said 6ppm is the danger point. And also remember what he said about solar and wind . WE do not need nuke or coal or gas .

But as all ways ppl don't like hearing the truth

---

I find it strange that when a show like this comes out with some good facts people still don't listen . The episode about GW should worry everyone . you can't get the facts any simpler than the way they put it in that show and relise we are at 400ppm or 4ppm per 100,000 I think he said and we will be at 540 in just 65 yrs or 5.4ppm per 100,000 and remember what he said 6ppm is the danger point. And also remember what he said about solar and wind . WE do not need nuke or coal or gas .

But as all ways ppl don't like hearing the truth

I bought the DVD. Watched one episode.

Glenn, please tell me what episode you are talking about.

Thanks :)

---

Hi Lyn I think it's episode 11 or 12 it's one of the last 2-3 I haven't set the drive up with all the episodes yet so I can just look to check at the moment but i'll try and di it tomorrow

---

You will know when your watching the right one it starts off talking about Venus and professor Keeling

---

GlenN SaVilL said:

But as all ways ppl don't like hearing the truth

The Truth because 'They' said 'it'. I Don't Buy The Truth from Anyone. The "Experience" or Letters after their Names don't add any Cred. Nothing 'bout 'em does.

The Truth is Full of Agendi, Bias, Money Grabs and All Else to Make The Truth total B frakking S.

You've got ppm on The Brain. ppm ppm ppm Run for you Lives! The ppm is coming!.

Got Grip?

' '

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

Gobba gabba the statement was not just about GW it's true people don't like hearing the truth.

Have you watch'd that episode ??? or you just fishing naughty boy

---

Hi Lyn i have checked what Episode it is and it is defenatly episode 12 the second last 1 in the series

---

Hi Lyn i have checked what Episode it is and it is defenatly episode 12 the second last 1 in the series

Thanks :) I will try to watch it later.

---