DougC - like the psychopath you so obviously are.Did you call me a psychopath? Sorry, didn't realize that, wasn't paying attention.
DougC - effects of global warming are here alreadyIndeed, such as retreating glaciers on the inhabited continents. Fortunately, that particular effect is not very important because glaciers on the inhabited continents are not essential for human water supplies.
Exactly, you're incapable of caring what anyone thinks, feels, needs, etc... to you the rest of us humans are pieces to play with and then discard. Like I said you're a psychopath, and see right above, still trying to play down an issue that is already a disaster. You're just not worth any effort at all...DougC - like the psychopath you so obviously are.Did you call me a psychopath? Sorry, didn't realize that, wasn't paying attention.
Look asshole, you are the one slandering SkepticalScience - but you got nothing to support your garbage. Nothing, beyond your empty opining and faith that everything you don't like can be dismissed with a wave of an arrogant ideology driven, yet profoundly ignorant gut feeling - of course you never provide any substantive support, you are incapable of doing so. Another fail for dusty the intellectual coward.CC - please sir, can you defend your words with actual links and rational complaintsYou had some goofy link with the usual drivel about glaciers. I don't recall where it is because I don't spend effort memorizing nonsense. Tell you what, find the link from that site that somehow in your mind refutes my assertion that glaciers on the inhabited continents are not essential to human water consumption and I will debunk it.
Those of us posting on how concerned we are about this issue aren't doing so because it might be a serious disaster at some point in the future. We're doing so because the effects of global warming are here already. It's deeply insulting to be basically told to shut the hell up by assholes who have no evidence to back up their arrogance when many of us are talking about matters of life and death...already here. Not giving a damn about anyone else isn't the virtue deniers have obviously convinced themselves it is.Well said Doug.
Sorry, didn't realize that, wasn't paying attention.So true, so profoundly true. But will you ever wake up? :blank:
Look asshole, you are the one slandering SkepticalScience - but you got nothing to support your garbage. Nothing, beyond your empty opining and faith that everything you don't like can be dismissed with a wave of an arrogant ideology driven, yet profoundly ignorant gut feeling - of course you never provide any substantive support, you are incapable of doing so. Another fail for dusty the intellectual coward. The deniers aren't here to discuss anything, they have a set script they follow to disrupt anyone else who genuinely wants to discuss what is already a matter of life and death for millions of people worldwide. About 300,000 of us will die this year alone due to this catastrophe and that is only going to increase.CC - please sir, can you defend your words with actual links and rational complaintsYou had some goofy link with the usual drivel about glaciers. I don't recall where it is because I don't spend effort memorizing nonsense. Tell you what, find the link from that site that somehow in your mind refutes my assertion that glaciers on the inhabited continents are not essential to human water consumption and I will debunk it.
The deniers aren't here to discuss anything, they have a set script they follow to disrupt anyone else who genuinely wants to discuss what is already a matter of life and death for millions of people worldwide.Yeah, tell me about it. This road of engaging contrarians leads down the rabbit hole.
Poptech's hermetically sealed echo-chamber, case in point. http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot.com/2016/06/poptechs-hermetically-sealed-echochamber.html {intro and such} … Now to the funny, but sick, irony I want to share. Dave NC-20 Burton, runs to Poptech in order to excitedly complain about how awful I am and that I've deleted his responses. (Some background on that, I posted NC-20 Burton's first three comments without interfering with his tricky dick coding, which blossomed into cookie cutter spam that had nothing to do with my specific complaints. Then in an effort to explain to NC-20 Burton, what was so irritating and that I would no longer tolerate. I reproduced the next couple of his rapid fire comments, replacing his objectionable coding with "????", boy did that send the dude ballistic. Instead of getting the message and recognizing how superficial, devious and unacceptable his method of debate was, he's chosen the cry-baby route, running to his clubhouse to bemoan how horrible he believes I am.) After reading NC-20 Burton's comment at Poptech, I did an experiment and submitted a comment of my own. Today I took a look and no surprise, my comment has not appeared. Apparently, Poptech decided to delete it. So much for a "debate." I might point out, if I choose not to publish a comment, I will acknowledge said comment and explain why I've chosen not to publish. But then, I'm actually into pursuing a constructive dialogue. Even if I'm not as nicie about it as most would like.But, we can't leave the stage to them either - they must be opposed and exposed. That's the other side of this coin we need to consider.
The deniers aren't here to discuss anything, they have a set script they follow to disrupt anyone else who genuinely wants to discuss what is already a matter of life and death for millions of people worldwide.Yeah, tell me about it. This road of engaging contrarians leads down the rabbit hole.
Poptech's hermetically sealed echo-chamber, case in point. http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot.com/2016/06/poptechs-hermetically-sealed-echochamber.html {intro and such} … Now to the funny, but sick, irony I want to share. Dave NC-20 Burton, runs to Poptech in order to excitedly complain about how awful I am and that I've deleted his responses. (Some background on that, I posted NC-20 Burton's first three comments without interfering with his tricky dick coding, which blossomed into cookie cutter spam that had nothing to do with my specific complaints. Then in an effort to explain to NC-20 Burton, what was so irritating and that I would no longer tolerate. I reproduced the next couple of his rapid fire comments, replacing his objectionable coding with "????", boy did that send the dude ballistic. Instead of getting the message and recognizing how superficial, devious and unacceptable his method of debate was, he's chosen the cry-baby route, running to his clubhouse to bemoan how horrible he believes I am.) After reading NC-20 Burton's comment at Poptech, I did an experiment and submitted a comment of my own. Today I took a look and no surprise, my comment has not appeared. Apparently, Poptech decided to delete it. So much for a "debate." I might point out, if I choose not to publish a comment, I will acknowledge said comment and explain why I've chosen not to publish. But then, I'm actually into pursuing a constructive dialogue. Even if I'm not as nicie about it as most would like.But, we can't leave the stage to them either - they must be opposed and exposed. That's the other side of this coin we need to consider. Hmmm....let's see. On the one hand hand we have CC, seems pretty rational, reasonable and shows little to none of the sociopathic tendencies of the worms who slither through the conservative muck. On the other hand we have those conservative worms who do and say anything to preserve their, "GOD GIVEN RIGHT" to crawl into anyone's orifices whenever they want no matter how offensive and unwelcome they obviously are. Hmmm, who to believe and respect, such a quandary...such a quandary...
Hmmm....let's see. One the one hand hand we have CC, seems pretty rational, reasonable and shows little to none of the sociopathic tendencies of the worms who slither through the conservative muck. On the other hand we have those conservative worms who do and say anything to preserve their, "GOD GIVEN RIGHT" to crawl into anyone's orifices whenever they want no matter how offensive and unwelcome they obviously are. Hmmm, who to believe and respect, such a quandary...such a quandary...That was metaphor by the way, conservative worms please do not actually try to do this at home.... or anywhere...
CC - Look asshole, you are the one slandering SkepticalScienceWhen did say that exactly?
When are you going to answer the original question? You slandered Skeptical Science (CC included in his opening post) and now you're changing the topic like you always do. I expect you'll come back and argue the definition of slandered instead of explaining why you accused Skeptical Science of being a scare site.CC - Look asshole, you are the one slandering SkepticalScienceWhen did say that exactly?
http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/viewthread/18673/P60/#223984 So are you ready to retract since you don't seem to have anything substantive to complain about? Or there's thisCC - Look asshole, you are the one slandering SkepticalScienceWhen did say that exactly?
Of course, you don't have the integrity to come out and say which links you mean. Then again, I understand your type labels everything that you don't "garbage" - so that you can run and hide for said valid info. It's the supporting your words that you never muster the integrity for.CC - It’s as though you’ve totally rejected all that fantastic informationWhat "fantastic information"? A bunch of scare panic sites with vague and shallow assertions. Yes, I reject that kind of internet garbage.
DarronS - When are you going to answer the original question?I have, many times. Glaciers on the inhabited continents are not essential for human water supply because 1. Only a small percentage of rivers even have glaciers as their headwaters. 2. On the few rivers where there are glacial headwaters "source" only means headwaters, not the source of the mass flow of the river, which comes almost entirely from precipitation over the entire watershed, not the relative trickle from the glacier. 3. Even if the glacier disappears the precipitation that used to fall on the glacier will still enter the river just at a little different seasonal rate. 4. Snowpack will still provide some water storage. 5. All the major rivers are already dammed, so the infrastructure to even out seasonal flow is already in place. 6. Most of the regions you guys are so worried about have summer floods due to summer rains and the glaciers only make things worse. As a side benefit to the exit of glaciers on the inhabited continents life will move in when the deadly glaciers move out. This will open up new lands for wildlife habitat and timber farming. Any site that comments on the effects of glacial retreat on the inhabited continents yet fails to deal with these obvious and thoroughly documented facts is a scare site on this subject.
What a load of complete bullshit…
Do glaciers affect people? Today, glaciers often are tourist attractions in mountainous areas. But glaciers are also a natural resource, and people all over the world use the meltwater that glaciers produce. Glaciers provide drinking water People living in arid climates near mountains often rely on glacial melt for their water for part of the year. Many of the rivers coursing through China, India, and other parts of the Asian continent are fed largely by snowmelt from the Himalaya, but in late summer a significant part of riverflow comes from melting glaciers. In South America, residents of La Paz, Bolivia, rely on glacial melting from a nearby ice cap to provide water during the significant dry spells they sometimes experience. Demand for glacier water has increased in other, perhaps less expected ways, too. Some beverage companies sell bottles of glacial meltwater, and ice cubes made of glacier ice are popular in some specialty drinks. In fact, a Chilean man was arrested in 2012 for stealing five tons of ice from the Jorge Montt Glacier. He had planned to sell the ice to restaurants in the capital, Santiago. Glaciers irrigate crops Over a thousand years ago, farmers in Asia knew that dark colors absorb solar energy. So they spread dark-colored materials such as soil and ashes over snow to promote melting, and this is how they watered their crops during dry periods. Chinese and Russian researchers tried something similar by sprinkling coal dust onto glaciers, hoping that the melting will provide water to the drought-stricken countries of India, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. The experiment proved to be too costly, and they have abandoned the idea. But in Ladakh, India, an engineer has successfully created several small, artificial glaciers to provide more water for crops and drinking during seasonal dry periods. These man-made glaciers are situated in areas to catch large amounts of water that would otherwise flow away, and will have temperatures low enough to freeze that water over the winter. Warm summer weather slowly melts these glaciers, releasing a steady supply of water. In Switzerland's Rhone Valley, farmers have irrigated their crops for hundreds of years by channeling meltwater from glaciers to their fields. Glaciers help generate hydroelectric power Scientists and engineers in Norway, central Europe, Canada, New Zealand, and South America have worked together to tap into glacial resources, using electricity that has been generated in part by damming glacial meltwater.It's called climate CHANGE for a reason, which means that there are no longer any stable weather patterns and depending on regular rainfall to keep rivers flowing all year long is asking for disaster. At the same time that glaciers around the world that do in fact provide drinking water, irrigation for crops and electricity are rapidly disappearing. Once again all this poster is communicating is how little he actually cares about the millions of people being absolutely hammered by the effects of burning billions of tons of fossil fuels a year. He's a denier and is full of denier crap. As has been pointed out repeatedly...
cc - So are you ready to retract since you don’t seem to have anything substantive to complain about?That link is just a base URL, no mention of glaciers on the inhabited continents in connection with human water supply. Therefore, irrelevant to my assertion. My assertion stands.
Of course, you don’t have the integrity to come out and say which links you mean.Every link you guys have posted that address glaciers on the inhabited continents in conjunction with human water supplies. They have all been idiotic scare pages.
DougC - But glaciers are also a natural resource, and people all over the world use the meltwater that glaciers produce.So? If the glacier wasn't there they could use the precipitation runoff.
but in late summer a significant part of river flow comes from melting glaciersSo? Glacier melt is only a "significant part". Without the glacier the majority part will continue to flow plus the snowmelt will continue to flow. Glaciers are not essential to human water supplies.
ome beverage companies sell bottles of glacial meltwater, and ice cubes made of glacier ice are popular in some specialty drinksHa Ha Ha. What a stupid point. What sort of moron is actually impressed by this sort of drivel?
Glaciers help generate hydroelectric powerSo that means there is a dam which means the runoff will still generate power once the deadly glacier is gone.
It’s called climate CHANGE for a reason, which means that there are no longer any stable weather patternsOMG, the weather is going to run amokkkk!!! Nothing will ever be stable again!!!! I am just frightened to my core!!!
He’s a denierI deny that glaciers on the inhabited continents are essential to human water supplies. In all your histrionics you have only reinforced this obviously true conclusion. Now, if you want to talk about a few different subjects, fine. For example, the greenhouse gas effect is a real scientifically incontrovertible effect. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas and it has increased dramatically since the industrial revolution due to human burning of fuels. If all the land ice in the world melts sea levels will rise hundreds of feet and a great deal of coastal land and coastal cities will be destroyed. See, making demonstrably true statements is not so hard, give it a try some time, OK?
This article may be of interest and is intended for those people (except stardusty) who are interested in the part glaciers play in the earth’s ability to sustain life for millions of people and the entire ecosystem on earth.
[PDF] Why are Ice and Snow Important to Us? www.unep.org/geo/geo_ice/PDF/GEO_C2_LowRes.pdfp.s. I am excluding stardusty because he refuses to look at the overall picture and makes meaningless statements about snowmelts, which may last a few weeks at most and precipitation being sufficient for direct human consumption, ignoring the rest of water dependent life on earth, especially in the Polar glacial environments for ocean life and those PEOPLE who depend on Alpine glacial for a CONTINUAL water supply even during periods of long draughts, forcing water imports from areas which do have Alpine glaciers and a year round supply of fresh water from those glaciers.
Write4U - Ice and snowIce and snow are not the same thing as glaciers. Irrelevant to my point, that glaciers on the inhabited continents are not essential for human water supplies. Next...
Your point is false, irrelevant and meaningless to begin with . I say fresh water, including Alpine and Polar glacial water is essential to human and other animal consumption. Do you see the meaninglessness in that statement?Write4U - Ice and snowIce and snow are not the same thing as glaciers. Irrelevant to my point, that glaciers on the inhabited continents are not essential for human water supplies. Next...
We’re giving this troll way too much food…