There is also this happening at the same time..
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...ia-earth-core/
Nobody is saying that all we need to worry about are greenhouse gasses and the like. You're arguing against a position that doesn't exist. Taking a position on one subject, like anthropogenic climate change, doesn't prevent you from simultaneously having a position on, say, water pollution that's harming fragile ecosystems.
You can be against both. It's not like the moment we have a second position on any topic, the first position vanishes.
The correct answer is "plate tectonics and continental drift".
While the Earth was warmer, the reason you see the fossils you do in Antarctica is because it wasn't anywhere near the South Pole at the time.
Has nothing at all to do with that.
The drifting of the magnetic pole has no effect whatsoever on the position of the geographic pole. In theory, the magnetic "north" pole could be on the equator, and the ice caps would still be where they are today.
Real time graph can be found here.
http://keelingcurve.ucsd.edu/
Currently JUST over 400ppm, but the value goes up and down constantly. It's the overall trend that needs to be paid attention to, not what it's at right this second.
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning.
-Kujako-
Ah, here's a up-to-current graph
Warning : Above post may contain snark and/or sarcasm. Try reparsing with the /s argument before replying.
What the world has learned is that America is never more than one election away from losing its goddamned mindMe on Elite : Dangerous | My WoW charactersOriginally Posted by Howard Tayler
Global warming being stressed is a political move to try to win support for a certain agenda in order to enhance the view of a party. Instead stress what almost all humans know and can see is happening. Manmade pollution. You do not need a scientist to confirm that. Just go to a oil slick and see how it impacts life. :P
And from that chart of the one single large continent, Antarctica is fairly close to the south pole still. :P Even under present conditions, any land that close to the south pole would not have tropical vegetation unless the Earth in fact was much warmer than it is now.
Warning : Above post may contain snark and/or sarcasm. Try reparsing with the /s argument before replying.
What the world has learned is that America is never more than one election away from losing its goddamned mindMe on Elite : Dangerous | My WoW charactersOriginally Posted by Howard Tayler
FYI, that world map is so wrong it's not even funny. Notice how in that map the area of the lower 48 states of the United States combined with Canada is almost as big as Africa, and you could fit 1.5 Africas in the area of North America? We really ought to start using the real world map so people learn the true sizes and shapes of countries and continents.
This, for example, is the true size of Africa:
(Click to enlarge.)
You can basically fit North America almost twice inside Africa.
Last edited by mmoc3ff0cc8be0; 2014-05-14 at 08:49 PM.
Warning : Above post may contain snark and/or sarcasm. Try reparsing with the /s argument before replying.
What the world has learned is that America is never more than one election away from losing its goddamned mindMe on Elite : Dangerous | My WoW charactersOriginally Posted by Howard Tayler
I'm going to keep repeating this point.
Science is not political. We aren't talking about adaptation strategies or responses. That is arguably political. The science itself is not.
If a building's about to collapse, you can debate whether it's better to demolish it or repair it, and you can make political-agenda arguments either way. Disputing gravity itself to claim it won't fall down is not a political position, it's just ignorance.
In the same sense that New Zealand or Argentina are "fairly close to the South Pole", today.And from that chart of the one single large continent, Antarctica is fairly close to the south pole still.
You know Canada, Alaska, and Mexico are part of North America too right?
North America has an area of 9.54 million sqmi.
Africa is 11.67 million sqmi.
Google is amazing!
And apparently you don't understand maps.
Last edited by Ahhdurr; 2014-05-14 at 05:15 PM.
You can do a decent job. Different projections such as http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...on_rotated.svg
There's still distortion, of course.
Fair enough. I did mean only the lower 48 and Canada, the main, central land mass of the continent. Should've said so. The US without Alaska, together with Canada are around 6. Edited my earlier post to reflect this.
I understand that there are plenty of things wrong in the map the world currently uses. Not just concerning North America.
Last edited by mmoc3ff0cc8be0; 2014-05-14 at 08:49 PM.
1 and 2 are the same thing, 2 is just a misunderstanding/intentional misinterpretation for the purpose of misleading people.
Earth breaths in and out 774 and 778 gigatons of carbon each year, respectively. Humans breath out 32 gigatons.
What people, who are intentionally trying to misinterpret the data to mislead, point out how utterly puny the human contribution "looks" in the grand scale. But when you look at our history, and no past climate change events have ever exceeded more than 5 gigatons per year naturally in our entire earth's history, that 32 number becomes a lot bigger. It aligns with our projections and models.
3 is just straight up denialism, and deliberately attempts to ignore all data and studies. It's like saying we can't measure temperatures. It's just that global climate change has a much more complicated model. But every bit of it is measurable.
"We" is correct if you're talking about those people who have been intentionally misled away from the data and facts. Again, it's like saying we don't know how to measure temperature.We have no clue who of those people is right, because calculating global warming is pretty much impossible with our current assets.
2014 Gamergate: "If you want games without hyper sexualized female characters and representation, then learn to code!"
2023: "What's with all these massively successful games with ugly (realistic) women? How could this have happened?!"
Science has been used before to push a political agenda. And I want to say, it is not just one party which is guilty of this. Both major political parties are in the US.
And yeah, New Zealand is a fairly long island, which is why you will not see tropical plants at the end of the South Island. Same for Argentina. But according to that map presented, Antarctica is closer to the South Pole than those two mentioned are. With the exception of the northern part. But then why do they find fossilized tropical plants on areas of Antarctica which should not have had them?
I guess you missed the part where they were blocking the sale of Tesla cars because they didn't go through a dealership. Or several western states running smear campaigns against solar panels, saying that those who use them are stealing from everyone else, which is of course utter bullshit.
- - - Updated - - -
You said this before and I explained it. Plate tectonics. If you don't understand that Antarctica was once AT THE EQUATOR either because it is too difficult a concept or because it's inconvenient for the point you're trying to make, I don't know how to help you.
2014 Gamergate: "If you want games without hyper sexualized female characters and representation, then learn to code!"
2023: "What's with all these massively successful games with ugly (realistic) women? How could this have happened?!"
All misleading as well. Almost all your electric car ban links are about states that arent allowing Teslas to be sold by the factory directly. They are free to sell as many as they want through a dealership. I dont agree with it, but its likely backed by unions that dont want non union people selling cars.
The solar bans arent even states doing it. Mostly just small municipalities so dont act like all republicans want to ban the stuff. In addition they arent even banning solar panels, they are just requiring them to be on the back side of the roof or yard so they dont make everything look ugly. Personally I dont agree because i believe its your property and should be able to do whatever you want with it, but when you live under a stupid HOA youre stuck with the rules. Ill never live in one because of that