Entire Antarctic Shelf splitting away from Continent.

[RiversideGator]

I received my degrees before the advent of wikipedia "professor" midway (what was your field again?) so I am not really concerned with that policy.  And, please dont tell me how much you hate wikipedia again - this is established.  Please give me facts to attempt to refute what I am saying.  I am always open to having my mind changed.   

[RiversideGator]

None that I know of.  But at what level is CO2 toxic to humanity?

20,000 ppm is toxic to a human.

385 ppm is toxic to humanity.

Nice play on words. 

[RiversideGator]

midway:  Wikipedia has been shown to be at least as accurate as a published encyclopedia.  Wikipedia uses sources also.  Wikipedia is not the basis of my knowledge in almost all case but it is just a quick reference.

BTW, I deleted your offensive post in this thread (or elsewhere perhaps).  Try to stick with the facts rather than getting into personal invective or extreme sarcasm.   

[gatorback]

Riverside:  You think he's going to do it?  He hasn't yet, and that's over 400 posts.

[RiversideGator]

Probably not.  But, hope springs eternal.   

[gatorback]

You are a true christian. god bless you brother     

[Lunican]

What would you and RiversideGator do all day without National Politics?

[gatorback]

Midway:  Do you have AIDES?  Not HIV, but full blown AIDES?

[gatorback]

It's a glad deficiency that manifests itself as in highly concentrated protien in the pineal gland of man, mammalian species and vertebrates.  It makes you dumb from what I've been reading on the wiki.

[RiversideGator]

I am assuming that you took umbrage to my calling you an ambulance chaser? That's a commonly accepted term for lawyer.

How's that different than you calling me a troll?

As ye sow, so shall ye reap.

When you start cleansing posts because YOU don't like them, then your whole little kingdom here becomes irrelevant. Then You lose, and I win.

Maybe Metrojacksonville should not run a national politics thread, as it is really not relevant to Jacksonville issues, and promotes neo-con fanaticism, and thus dilutes the primary message of the site.

So, what do you think, Lunican?

I warned you that personally insulting posts would be deleted.  Yours was.  It is as simple as that.

And, I never delete posts containing substance, just those containing vitriol.

[RiversideGator]

Please do let me know.  I will remove and/or alter them accordingly.

[gatorback]

When is he putting solar panels up on that old White House?  And at Christmas time he could not have christmas trees in every room, the South and North lawns, etc.

[RiversideGator]

So much for settled science:

Lorne Gunter, National Post   Published: Tuesday, May 20, 2008

You may have heard earlier this month that global warming is now likely to take break for a decade or more. There will be no more warming until 2015, perhaps later.

Climate scientist Noel Keenlyside, leading a team from Germany's Leibniz Institute of Marine Science and the Max Planck Institute of Meteorology, for the first time entered verifiable data on ocean circulation cycles into one of the U. N.'s climate supercomputers, and the machine spit out a projection that there will be no more warming for the foreseeable future.

Of course, Mr. Keenlyside-- long a defender of the man-made global warming theory -- was quick to add that after 2015 (or perhaps 2020), warming would resume with a vengeance.

Climate alarmists the world over were quick to add that they had known all along there would be periods when the Earth's climate would cool even as the overall trend was toward dangerous climate change.

Sorry, but that is just so much backfill.

There may have been the odd global-warming scientist in the past decade who allowed that warming would pause periodically in its otherwise relentless upward march, but he or she was a rarity.

If anything, the opposite is true: Almost no climate scientist who backed the alarmism ever expected warming would take anything like a 10 or 15-year hiatus.

Last year, in its oft-quoted report on global warming, the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicted a 0.3-degree C rise in temperature in the coming decade -- not a cooling or even just temperature stability.

In its previous report in 2001, the IPCC prominently displaced the so-called temperature "hockey stick" that purported to show temperature pretty much plateauing for the thousand years before 1900, then taking off in the 20th Century in a smooth upward line. No 10-year dips backwards were foreseen.

It is drummed into us, ad nauseum, that the IPCC represents 2,500 scientists who together embrace a "consensus" that man-made global warming is a "scientific fact;" and as recently as last year, they didn't see this cooling coming. So the alarmists can't weasel out of this by claiming they knew all along such anomalies would occur.

This is not something any alarmist predicted, and it showed up in none of the UN's computer projections until Mr. Keenlyside et al. were finally able to enter detailed data into their climate model on past ocean current behaviour.

Less well-known is that global temperatures have already been falling for a decade. All of which means, that by 2015 or 2020, when warming is expected to resume, we will have had nearly 20 years of fairly steady cooling.

Saints of the new climate religion, such as Al Gore, have stated that eight of the 10 years since 1998 are the warmest on record. Even if that were true, none has been as warm as 1998, which means the trend of the past decade has been downward, not upward.

Last year, for instance, saw a drop in the global average temperature of nearly 0.7 degrees C (the largest single-year movement up or down since global temperature averages have been calculated). Despite advanced predictions that 2007 would be the warmest year on record, made by such UN associates as Britain's Hadley Centre, a government climate research agency, 2007 was the coolest year since at least 1993.

According to the U. S. National Climatic Data Center, the average temperature of the global land surface in January 2008 was below the 20th-Century mean for the first time since 1982.

Also in January, Southern Hemisphere sea ice coverage was at its greatest summer level (January is summer in the Southern Hemisphere) in the past 30 years.

Neither the 3,000 temperature buoys that float throughout the world's oceans nor the eight NASA satellites that float above our atmosphere have recorded appreciable warming in the past six to eight years.

Even Rajendra Pachauri, the head of the IPCC, reluctantly admitted to Reuters in January that there has been no warming so far in the 21st Century.

Does this prove that global warming isn't happening, that we can all go back to idling our SUVs 24/7? No. But it should introduce doubt into the claim that the science of global warming is "settled."

lgunter@shaw.ca

http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/story.html?id=f6fa4aca-61b4-4824-adb4-78eb8fa9081a

[Charleston native]

Here is a "few" of those "flat-earthers" who have signed a petition:

ADVISORY: Dr. Arthur Robinson (OISM) to Release Names of over 30,000 Scientists Rejecting Global Warming Hypothesis

May 15, 2008 12:39 PM EDT

Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM)

Who: Dr. Arthur Robinson of the OISM

What: release of names in OISM "Petition Project"

When: 10 AM, Monday May 19

Where: Holeman Lounge at the National Press Club, 529 14th St., NW, Washington, DC

Why: the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) will announce that more than 31,000 scientists have signed a petition rejecting claims of human-caused global warming. The purpose of OISM's Petition Project is to demonstrate that the claim of "settled science" and an overwhelming "consensus" in favor of the hypothesis of human-caused global warming and consequent climate damage is wrong. No such consensus or settled science exists. As indicated by the petition text and signatory list, a very large number of American scientists reject this hypothesis.

It is evident that 31,072 Americans with university degrees in science - including 9,021 PhDs, are not "a few." Moreover, from the clear and strong petition statement that they have signed, it is evident that these 31,072 American scientists are not "skeptics."

CONTACT: Audrey Mullen, +1-703-548-1160, for the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine

/PRNewswire-USNewswire -- May 15/

SOURCE Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine

http://www.streetinsider.com/Press+Releases/ADVISORY:+Dr.+Arthur+Robinson+(OISM)+to+Release+Names+of+over+30,000+Scientists+Rejecting+Global+Warming+Hypothesis/3654512.html

I guess all of these people are being paid by Big Oil. 

[Charleston native]

...It was rather sordid really, and ended up seriously pissing off a few of the actual pioneers of climatology, whose work they are now being accused of 'debunking'.

Its embarrassing really, you should have checked out the information more thoroughly.

Imagine getting 31 thousand scientists to suddenly agree on something.

That should have been your first alarm.

Yes, the pioneers of climatology that have said the science is "settled"? Pot, meet kettle.

How does one method of getting scientists' "consensus" differ from another method? OK, instead of meeting with the IPCC (a political group composed of numerous politicians and policy-makers), they assembled a petition that merely stated they disagreed with the "consensus". So what? I find their analysis far clearer and reliable than scientists meeting with politicians; I mean, do you really think those politicians didn't corrupt anything?

The point is that the science is not settled, and there are enough scientists that want to stop the madness of the hoax of man-made climate change.

I find it hilarious that you attack the National Post and my source when your "sources" are mere liberal propaganda mouthpieces like HuffPo.