January 04, 2006
Ancient Global Warming Discovered
From Breitbart.com via The Drudge Report:
Comments are disabled.
Post is locked.
An extraordinary burst of global warming that occurred around 55 million years ago dramatically reversed Earth's pattern of ocean currents, a finding that strengthens modern-day concern about climate change, a study says.But wait. Mankind was certainly not around 55 million years ago, and as we know from environmental activists, only evil, greedy capitalists cause global warming.The big event, the Palaeocene/Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM), saw the planet's surface temperature rise by between five and eight degrees C (nine and 16.2 F) in a very short time, unleashing climate shifts that endured tens of thousands of years.
What unleashed the PETM is unclear. Most fingers of blame point to volcanic eruptions that disgorged gigatonnes of carbon dioxide, or coastal reservoirs of methane gas, sealed by icy soil, that were breached by warmer temperatures or receding seas.You know, I could have sworn that Rush Limbaugh was excoriated as a Neanderthal for suggesting that volcanoes could cause global warming.
Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto .
Posted by: Bluto at
07:22 PM
| Comments (43)
| Add Comment
Post contains 177 words, total size 1 kb.
1
You mean that dinosaurs and palm trees living in Antarctica, and glaciers in Ohio had nothing to do with my pickup truck? Damn, imagine that.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 04, 2006 07:31 PM (0yYS2)
2
Mars could be undergoing major global warming
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn1660
Looks like those SUVs aren't just warming the earth-- they're warming the whole solar system!!!
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 04, 2006 09:10 PM (8e/V4)
3
Damn, I better go shut that engine off on my truck. Well, I was watching the game and forgot about it. Piss on Mars!
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 04, 2006 09:24 PM (rUyw4)
4
I've got gas heat n' so far this winter its been quite mild here in NY - 52 today - no need for heat!
so JJ - turn that engine back on - please!
Posted by: hondo at January 04, 2006 10:19 PM (3aakz)
5
A meteor, perhaps?
Posted by: Guess at January 05, 2006 05:39 AM (lGolT)
6
OR that huuuuge volcano under Yellowstone, that is scheduled to blow up again within the next 500 years.
Posted by: No need to say at January 05, 2006 05:42 AM (lGolT)
7
Or the Sun's output.
Someone turn that damn Sun off!
Posted by: Oyster at January 05, 2006 05:58 AM (YudAC)
8
And they did,nt have factories or SUVs back then it was cuased by volcanos and burping dinosuars and perhapes some dino fetulence as well eeeuuwww the dipldocus just cut one
Posted by: sandpiper at January 05, 2006 08:43 AM (4pkrX)
9
Of course, there weren't billions of people living along coastal areas 55 million years ago, either.
Hence, the concern now. Unless, of course, you're willing to billet some of these people out of the goodness of your heart.
Posted by: Venom at January 05, 2006 09:15 AM (dbxVM)
10
Venom,
the point is not a lack of "concern" about all those people on the coasts. We all know they're up shit creek. The point is WHAT is causing global warming. Is it the evil corprayshuns or is it a natural cycle. Warming on Mars would suggest the latter.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 05, 2006 09:49 AM (8e/V4)
11
I'll billet a few of them coasties if they got the money, but I didn't take 'em to raise. Last time I checked(this AM) land was available here in Texas, and there's still plenty of room. Except for liberals. We don't need or want any more liberals down here.
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 05, 2006 10:18 AM (rUyw4)
12
Well, Mars is a little different from Earth...but that's neither here nor there.
Besides, who cares if volcanos contribute to global warming? They're beyond the scope of humanity's control. The fact is that emissions caused by corporations, cars, etc. can be controled and/or dealt with. Since they contribute to global warming (notice I didn't say "are the main cause of"), why not try to reduce them?
Posted by: Venom at January 05, 2006 10:21 AM (dbxVM)
13
THE END IS NEAR - REPENT NOW!
Sorry, not interested - but you are absolutely free to live in a grass hut and make your own butter.
Posted by: hondo at January 05, 2006 10:31 AM (3aakz)
14
>>>Well, Mars is a little different from Earth...but that's neither here nor there.
Actually that statement is neither here nor there given that the warming on Mars suggests that our own warming isn't "global", but SOLAR. And switching to hybrids and shutting down the corprayshuns isn't going to change that.
As far as reducing emissions, I'm sure that's a worthy cause (I guess), but not if other polluters don't also participate. I don't think whitey should be penalized, while China and India, and all the 3rd worlders get a pass. Eff that.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 05, 2006 11:12 AM (8e/V4)
15
Vote for Rush.
Posted by: greyrooster at January 05, 2006 11:19 AM (XioYD)
16
You miss the point, Carlos. Who gives a shit if it's warming on Mars? Do Volcanos contribute to global warming here on Earth? Sure. Do emissions from factories, cars, etc. contribute to global warming, too? Yes. Can something be done about volcanos erupting? No. Can something be done about the latter? Yes. Soooo....maybe, um, reducing emissions could have a positive impact for you and I? It's not really that kwazy an idea.
Oh, and sure, China and India contribute a lot of greenhouse gasses. But I don't see why the West can't continue to reduce said emissions even if other countries won't. Unless, of course, you don't consider the West to be better than third-world countries. Besides, they're in the middle of their Industrial Revolution, so they're not going to stop. That doesn't mean the West should hold off on further reductions until they're ready.
Posted by: Venom at January 05, 2006 11:49 AM (dbxVM)
17
>>>"Yes. Soooo....maybe, um, reducing emissions could have a positive impact for you and I? It's not really that kwazy an idea.
You're going to have to do better than "maybe" if you intend on putting people out of jobs and getting folks's homes foreclosed when you slow down our economies because of "maybe". Maybe "maybe" just aint gonna cut it.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 05, 2006 12:55 PM (8e/V4)
18
>>>But I don't see why the West can't continue to reduce said emissions even if other countries won't.
Venom,
you're a perfect example of why I think Liberalism is so idiotic. If other countries don't reduce-- especially China and India-- then it won't make a difference whether we reduce. It just becomes a Liberal exercise in feel-good and self-loathing.
If you REALLY cared about global warming you Libs would INSIST that China and India, and all the little brown people's of the world sign onto Kyoto. But you don't. It's all targeted at the West.
And what does this prove? That Kyoto is more about self-loathing and Liberal notions of "fairness" than it is about global warming.
And in the meantime, Solar warming progresses and China's and India's billions pump out more pollution in one year than the West would in 10, but Libs FEEL GOOD ABOUT THEMSELVES!!! YIIIPEEE!
Liberalism is a mental disorder.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 05, 2006 01:09 PM (8e/V4)
19
Went the "solutions" to a "problem" happen to be identical to the same "solutions" they have been advocating for "other problems" for the past many decades - one wonders.
The lib/left's position - we need to change the socio-industrial-economic-political structures because .....
Posted by: hondo at January 05, 2006 01:26 PM (3aakz)
20
REPENT! (er, change - less it sounds like some new kind of religion) THE END IS NEAR!
CONFESS YOUR SINS! (er, crimes - same problem)
Don't you all just love all the religious analogies found in the Evironmental movement. quite apocalyptic - isn't it?
Posted by: hondo at January 05, 2006 01:33 PM (3aakz)
21
Once again, Venom takes a swing and misses completely. Of course, it's hard to hit a ball coming over the plate when you're in the parking lot.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 05, 2006 01:34 PM (0yYS2)
22
IM,
everyday the evidence mounts-- Liberalism is a mental disorder. It's a scourge upon Western civilization. A civilizational AIDS virus.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 05, 2006 01:42 PM (8e/V4)
23
Carlos, are these the same jobs that have already gone to China and India? I mean, most true American companies have abandoned their patriotism to secure higher profits in those countries already. Especially those manufacturing jobs that can take advantage of the lower emission standards in those countries you already stated. Please, don't play the job card. It's already been done.
And Carlos, appreciating the environment isn't liberalism. I'm a Conservative. Maybe not of the douchebag variety you've succumbed to, but a conservative nonetheless. Oh right, anyone who doesn't think like you is a raving lib. Gimme a break. It's dumbasses like you who continue to marginalize middle-of-the-road conservatives that are going to get the Dems back in power.
Oh, and I'd really like to see your science that says that the West reducing emissions would have no measureable impact on global greenhouse gas emissions. Or, is it that you're talking out of your ass again? Ah, thought so. Sure, India and China spout more, but you don't seem to get it that we're all on this planet together and that any kind of progress is GOOD PROGRESS.
Get India and China to sign on to Kyoto? Who gives a fuck. Why doesn't the U.S. sign it outright? Oh yeah, that "jobs" thang. The ones that have for the most part, are already gone. Right. Why do you need a third-world country to go first? America is going to lose jobs to those countries regardless of if they sign on or not. Maybe if America signed on, it could flex its muscles and get others to sign on.
Posted by: Venom at January 05, 2006 01:48 PM (dbxVM)
24
Once again, Clueless Maximus types away, but no one really cares. Of course, it's hard to be taken seriously when most posts are about killing off all the Muslims and liberals.
Posted by: Venom at January 05, 2006 02:05 PM (dbxVM)
25
>>>Carlos, are these the same jobs that have already gone to China and India?
And Kyoto will only turn that outsourcing of our jobs into an unstopable flood. Is that what you mean by "positive impact"? Please, LIBS, don't do us any favors.
>>>And Carlos, appreciating the environment isn't liberalism.
I didn't say it was. But I prefer the term "conservation" because it doesn't carry all the mental disorder Liberal wacko baggage that environmentalism does. The former entails sound policy and common sense, the latter is nothing but feel-good religion for otherwise atheistic Leftists looking to fill that hole in their lives.
>>>Oh, and I'd really like to see your science that says that the West reducing emissions would have no measureable impact on global greenhouse gas emissions.
Is science really the issue for you? And yet you glibly dismiss warming on Mars, or ancient global warming. You're a religious nut, and no conservative, you little phony.
>>>Get India and China to sign on to Kyoto? Who gives a fuck.
hahaha! proof this isn't about global warming. Just more Liberal self-loathing.
Liberalism is a mental disorder.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 05, 2006 02:08 PM (8e/V4)
26
Hahaha, what an absolute dumbass you are. Please, tell me why 1) I'm a liberal, 2) I'm a religious nut, 3) you have any credibility. You're completely closed-minded to anything that doesn't "jive" with your neocon bullshit. You give the rest of us conservatives a black eye, and then you wonder why liberals and democrats continue to get the support they do.
What unstoppable flood? The flood of what meagre manufacturing jobs are still here? Dude, did you just come out of a coma or something? The vasy majority of American manufacturing jobs have already left. To Mexico, China, India, and more. Maybe to you the leaving of a scant few percent of what American jobs used to be here consists of a "flood," but if that's the case, then you're provervially wet behind the ears.
Ok, so you prefer the term "conservation." Good for you, give yourself a pat on the back. Maybe I could split hairs, too. I prefer conservatism, you prefer neo-conservatism. The former harkens back to a day of fiscal responsibility, love of one's country, family. The latter, unfortunately, is a philosophy adhered to by those of myopic tunnel vision who see a boogeyman behind everything. Can you see which side you fit on? (hint: it's the latter!)
I'm dismissing warming on Mars because I prefer to compare apples to apples, and also because it has no bearing on the here and now. Did Mars experience some kind of warming event? Sure. Did Earth? Sure. Are circumstances different between then and now? Yes. Are volcanos having a measureable impact on global warming now? Maybe some. Do manmade emissions have a measureable impact? Of course. Can we do something about said manmade emissions. Yes. So, why don't we?
Carlos is a mental disorder. Read his posts with caution.
Posted by: Venom at January 05, 2006 02:27 PM (dbxVM)
27
>>>"neocon bullshit."
You just gave yourself away. Only moonbats use that word.
And what a complete fucking moonbat moron you must be if you don't realize that more regulation under Kyoto wouldn't excacerbate the outsourcing of jobs. If that simple fact is beyond your tiny brainwashed Liberal mind then you're completely hopeless.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 05, 2006 02:35 PM (8e/V4)
28
Nope, us conservatives use it also to distance ourselves from frothing-at-the-mouth dumbasses like yourself. If you were able to poke your head out of your cocoon once in a while, you might have noticed. But, since you're unable to distinguish between neo-conservatism and conservatism, you're almost a waste of breath to even attempt to discuss with. I mean, even the president called himself a "compassionate conservative." In your mind, he might as well have called himself Chomsky, right?
And hey, at least I've figured out that there aren't a whole lot more jobs (from a Kyoto) standpoint to outsource anymore anyways. But, like I said, you don't seem to get out a whole lot so maybe your ignorance is excusable. Maybe. And like I said, fuck Kyoto. America shouldn't need a pact to see the benefits of a cleaner environment. But you can't figure that out, either.
Interesting article, by the way. Too bad it doesn't add to your point. CO2 emissions come from a variety of sources. On Mars, it comes from CO2 ice. On Earth, a lot of it is manmade. Nice try. Would you like to keep trying?
Posted by: Venom at January 05, 2006 02:45 PM (dbxVM)
29
>>>On Mars, it comes from CO2 ice.
It comes from the ice because it's MELTING you fucking moron. HEAT causes the MELTING, moron. SOLAR radiation is causing that HEAT on Mars, moron. Just like it causes HEAT everwhere else in the SOLAR system, INCLUDING EARTH. I can barely stand it how stupid you people are. My GOD you people are stupid.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 05, 2006 02:52 PM (8e/V4)
30
And sorry, cocksucker. You ain't no conservative, "neocon" or otherwise. There's no conservative on the planet that buys into your environmental wackoism.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 05, 2006 02:58 PM (8e/V4)
31
Holy fuck, I didn't think I had to actually spell out that the CO2 ice is MELTED for the greenhouse gas to emit. I didn't think I had to dumb it down and connect every dot for you, but based on you batting 1.000 in MISSING THE FUCKING POINT apparently I did. Good for you, the SUN melts it, whoopitydoo....you get a sticker, smarty. It doesn't change the fact that Mars' warming and Earth's is COMPLETELY FUCKING DIFFERENT! How did you even pass high school, you fucking douchebag? Solar warming. Give me a fucking break. Obviously the SUN plays a part in any kind of global warming. Apparently the issue of CAUSE and EFFECT are two terms you've NEVER FUCKING HEARD OF. Do you get it now, dummy?
And yup, sorry to say, I am a conservative; just not to your clueless kind, dumbfuck. You know, maybe you aren't a neocon. Maybe dumbfuck is your political stripe. You know, no matter how many times proof is shown at them, they close their eyes and believe something else? Yeah, sounds like you.
Posted by: Venom at January 05, 2006 03:13 PM (dbxVM)
32
Are you actually trying to argue that the Sun is warming up Mars-- as evidenced by it's melting ice and release of gases-- but NOT also warming the Earth? You're saying that the Sun is just picking on Mars for some reason and giving Earth the big pass?
Please clarify if that's what you actually think because I don't want to jump to any conclusions about the severity of your mental retardation.
Again, the Sun is warming Mars, but not Earth? And if so, tell me how that's possible. Don't go off on tangents and red herrings please. Just how the Sun can warm Mars but not Earth.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 05, 2006 03:24 PM (8e/V4)
33
>>>And yup, sorry to say, I am a conservative;
Fanfuckingtastic, and I'm a Liberal who objects to how Liberalism got taken over by all you anti-American, self-loathing moonbats, Leftwingers and communists. See how easy that is? moron.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 05, 2006 03:32 PM (8e/V4)
34
Carlos, did I not fucking say "Obviously the SUN plays a part in any kind of global warming."? Please, nice try in attempting to change the goalposts. Or, maybe your comprehension skills are, shall we say, third-world? Obviously the Sun warms any thing under it - Earth, Mars, even Pluto gets a measly degree Kelvin of warmth from it.
The point, which you seem intent on missing, is that global warming happens for a variety of reasons. On Mars, CO2 ice melts (yes, via the Sun) and it's released into what atmosphere Mars has. On Earth, it's released from factories and cars (and yes, from volcanoes). And good golly, the Sun warms it all up and creates a greenhouse effect. Yes, the Sun, because I apparently had to state before, the Sun is integral in global warming. But, as you can maybe fathom, there are no cars on Mars. No factories. Not even a clueless neocon whose best feat so far is converting his oxygen into CO2. So, Mars is warming because of different reasons than Earth. And, because of that, I once again don't see the relevance in bringing Mars into a debate about global warming on Earth.
Get it?
Posted by: Venom at January 05, 2006 03:43 PM (dbxVM)
35
Carlos, please tell me how I'm anti-American. I know you can go on and on about how liberals are anti-american and blah blah blah. But please tell me what I've ever said that makes me a liberal, despite the fact that in the 1 1/2 years I've been posting here, I've maintained by conservative values. Please, because I'm really interested in how your thinking works. Perhaps you make things up so they fit what you want to believe?
Posted by: Venom at January 05, 2006 03:48 PM (dbxVM)
36
>>Obviously the SUN plays a part in any kind of global warming."?
Venom,
progress. So what evidence do you have that given the forces of the universe arrayed against us we can make any noticeable difference by tanking our economies while giving our enemies (China) the big pass? I don't see how that terrible cost can justified the extremely SPECULATIVE benefits.
Re your anti-Americanism, your whole bit about putting America under Kyoto and giving 2.5 billion Chinese and Indians a pass reeks of anti-Americanism. Look what the Chinese are doing to their country right now even as we speak. Now imagine them all driving SUVs. Get it?
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 05, 2006 03:52 PM (8e/V4)
37
Carlos, the jobs are gone. You seem to think that by signing to Kyoto, you sign away these hordes of jobs. They're long gone. And that's why I said fuck Kyoto. America can go it alone, hell even exceed Kyoto. My fundamental point is that there is a lot of room for improvement with respect to greenhouse emissions and reducing them. If that comes across as being anti-American, then I apologize. Perhaps I love America so much, I want to see it exceed everyone else's expectations. As a leader in the world, it ought to have a place front-and-centre. It can use its clout to encourage other countries to get on board, whether it's Kyoto or some other kind of agreement. American jobs have been disappearing for over 20 years. Most are long gone. A few still remain. Without Kyoto, they're going anyways. Is Kyoto the answer to everything? Of course not. But, it's presumptious to assume a "sky is falling" mentality to even consider it, especially when all the economic damage it might have done has already been committed over years and years.
Are the benefits speculative? Sure. But the costs to our planet aren't. It's measureble. I say again, you don't have to be a liberal to love the environment. I know many conservatives like myself who love the environment. We fish, we hunt, we hike. Being environmentally conscious isn't the sole domain of hippies and beatniks. Fuck that. Everyone should see that the environmental damages in the last hundred years could have a monumental impact for centuries, and that we ought to be doing something about.
Posted by: Venom at January 05, 2006 04:11 PM (dbxVM)
38
And if you're really a conservative, I want you to say in all CAPS that Liberalism is a mental disorder. Say it and maybe I'll believe you.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 05, 2006 04:27 PM (8e/V4)
39
Awwww wassamatter venom? Is it irked that I busted it without even having to address its precious little attempt at an argument? Please, you're not smart enough to argue with me, so go grow up, get a job, move out of your mom's basement, and contribute to society, then maybe someone will care what you say.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 05, 2006 05:38 PM (0yYS2)
40
Sniff, sniff, aw gee Mr. Clueless Maximus, please don't make me cry with your big tough words. You're such a powerhouse. lmfao.
What a joke you are, CM. Not even Rusty takes you seriously. Not smarter than you? Fuck, you're one of the most ignorant people that's ever posted here. Anyone is smarter than you. And I should give a shit about what you say? Boo-hoo, cry me a river. Why don't you get fucked, you peenass. lol.
Carlos, your stance on American jobs seems to be the one that ignores reality. For whatever reason, you're ignoring the fact that the job exodus has been occuring for a very long time. According to the Economic Policy Institute, 1.5 million since 1989. And that's just to China alone. They're gone. You seem to think that the scant few percent still here amount to the full 100% that have been here forever. I say it in simple terms because I can't seem to make it any clearer. Are there jobs still here? Sure, but the shifting of American jobs to other countries is a trend that's not going to reverse any time soon, because America is progressing forward. And signing on to Kyoto or staying off of it isn't going to make a lick of difference. Big business is going to do what it wants, it doesn't really matter what kind of administration is in power.
And sure reducing emissions is going to cost money and some jobs. I never said it it wouldn't. But the benefits in doing so could be worth it. Changes often do require a fair bit of expenditure. Just by reducing the dependency on coal, America could reduce it's emissions by 40%. You're saying that's not worth it? It's an ineffecient fuel to begin with. Look, to move forward, change requires a cost. Should we all continue to live in the dark ages because it's expensive to move forward? Job transitioning is part of the business cycle. You can't have change without losing some jobs. It's inevitable. It's realistic.
And Carlos, I'm not going to say that, caps or otherwise (because it's dumb, actually). What I will say is that liberalism is misguided and incongruent with progress. The same as neoconservatism. Conservate thinking (the pure, non-shortsighted kind) is the only kind worth considering in this day and age.
Posted by: Venom at January 06, 2006 09:46 AM (dbxVM)
41
Jesus, that's sad. I almost feel bad for dumbass above for being such a lamer. Almost.
Hey moron, just so you know, I have about as much regard for your opinion as I do for the dog crap I step over in my back yard, so don't waste your time.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 06, 2006 10:45 PM (0yYS2)
42
"Holy fuck, I didn't think I had to actually spell out that the CO2 ice is MELTED for the greenhouse gas to emit."
Actually, CO2 ice sublimates. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sublimation_%28physics%29
/pedant
Posted by: MegaTroopX at January 07, 2006 01:56 PM (yT/Rw)
43
lol, Clueless Maximus, the only thing missing from that last post of yours was the trademark "I know you are but what am I" retort.
Posted by: Venom at January 09, 2006 08:52 AM (dbxVM)
45kb generated in CPU 0.0604, elapsed 0.1956 seconds.
119 queries taking 0.1834 seconds, 292 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
119 queries taking 0.1834 seconds, 292 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
