It looks as if Archbishop Kraus, who started this thread, has flown the coop for good.
Click on his name. He’s been here today but didn’t post. No big loss. He has some interesting thoughts scattered amongst his off-topic ramblings. At least he wasn’t looking for $3 million.
Click on his name. He's been here today but didn't post. No big loss. He has some interesting thoughts scattered amongst his off-topic ramblings. At least he wasn't looking for $3 million.:red: I feel a wee bit bad, I jumped on him pretty hard, over at the inner fish post - I could have been a wee bit more diplomatic, but it just pissed me off. Perhaps there was a little venting for having so little time for writing these days. All in a day at the Forum.
Click on his name. He's been here today but didn't post. No big loss. He has some interesting thoughts scattered amongst his off-topic ramblings. At least he wasn't looking for $3 million.:red: I feel a wee bit bad, I jumped on him pretty hard, over at the inner fish post - I could have been a wee bit more diplomatic, but it just pissed me off. Perhaps there was a little venting for having so little time for writing these days. All in a day at the Forum.
Click on his name. He's been here today but didn't post. No big loss. He has some interesting thoughts scattered amongst his off-topic ramblings. At least he wasn't looking for $3 million.:red: I feel a wee bit bad, I jumped on him pretty hard, over at the inner fish post - I could have been a wee bit more diplomatic, but it just pissed me off. Perhaps there was a little venting for having so little time for writing these days. All in a day at the Forum.
Click on his name. He's been here today but didn't post. No big loss. He has some interesting thoughts scattered amongst his off-topic ramblings. At least he wasn't looking for $3 million.:red: I feel a wee bit bad, I jumped on him pretty hard, over at the inner fish post - I could have been a wee bit more diplomatic, but it just pissed me off. Perhaps there was a little venting for having so little time for writing these days. All in a day at the Forum. Everyone needs to develop a thick skin to engage in a forum, especially one where topics are volatile. This should be understood at the get-go. Lois
DarronS - The citizens of California who rely on Sierra Nevada snow pack for water, and the farmers in Kansas rely on the Ogallala Aquifer which is replenished by Rocky Mountain snow melt. Without mountain glaciers two of our country’s most important farmland regions will dry up and blow away.We get our water from precipitation, not glaciers. Glaciers just delay the movement of water from the atmosphere to the ground. Only the precipitation that lands on the glacier contributes to the ice in the glacier. If the glacier was not there the precipitation would still fall. It rains and snows in Kansas and in California. Glaciers do not create water, they only delay a tiny percentage of precipitation from entering groundwater tables or running off. Glaciers are not "essential".
The rest of your post is so shallow and short-sighted that I cannot make myself reread it to respondDon't stress my friend, the sun rises each new morning, just work the issues and enjoy the short time you have in this life.
CC - with the promise of complete systems collapse in the not too distant future.Oh yes, the end is nigh. No, our global ecosystem is not going to collapse because some smelt died in the delta of California, or some species in a rainforest went extinct. Have you ever traveled the USA? It is truly beautiful, alive, healthy, vibrant. Try touring our national parks some time if you have not. Doomsday is for guys walking around in sandwich signs.
CC - Excuse me a moment - fuk off,Thanks for the lovely pics, they only prove my point. Humans have not turned Earth into a hell hole.
Have you ever traveled the USA? It is truly beautiful, alive, healthy, vibrant. Try touring our national parks some time if you have not.Go to Glacier National Park and ask the people who work there what is happeneing. There is a big difference between a snapshot and a time lapse movie. psik
hackr - Go to Glacier National Park and ask the people who work there what is happeneing.I've been to Glacier, Yellowstone, Yosemite, Grand Canyon, Joshua Tree, and many other places in our beautiful country. Our nature is being preserved, the parks are vibrant living places, the snow, lakes, and rivers are beautiful. And in between the parks are vast expanses of agriculture to feed us all. I don't buy the alarmist fantasies of doom because I have been there. Go here, lots of snow, water, sky, happy healthy people, a beautiful place. Reality. https://www.facebook.com/GlacierNPS
I’ve been to Glacier, Yellowstone, Yosemite, Grand Canyon, Joshua Tree, and many other places in our beautiful country. Our nature is being preserved, the parks are vibrant living places, the snow, lakes, and rivers are beautiful.I did not ask about anything other than Glacier National Park. You did not say anything about any changes in the park over the last 30 years. I did not see any glaciers in Yellowstone when I was there. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/23/us/climate-change-threatens-to-strip-the-identity-of-glacier-national-park.html?_r=0 http://video.nationalgeographic.com/video/news/151021-glacier-national-park-melting-vin http://ecowatch.com/2015/11/05/glacier-national-park-melting/ http://cnsnews.com/news/article/penny-starr/doi-climate-change-will-melt-glaciers-montanas-glacier-national-park-next http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/national/2015/11/26/ice-worlds/
I don’t buy the alarmist fantasies of doom because I have been there.I get the impression that anything which does not help you ignore obvious facts must be what you regard as "alarmist fantasies of doom". psik
Doomsday is for guys walking around in sandwich signs.Or chronic hop heads like CC who have become paranoid after years of heavy marijuana use. Paranoid, drug addled.
Doomsday is for guys walking around in sandwich signs.Or chronic hop heads like CC who have become paranoid after years of heavy marijuana use. Paranoid, drug addled.There you go, having to create fantasies to justify yourself. What is it with Right Wingers - Perhaps the cognitive dissonance has rupture too many brain cells, eh Vyazma? :blank:
Yes we do live in America and have been blessedly spared so far. Also I know, it's quite easy to travel well insulated so you only see what you want to see and keep to the good neighborhoods. I have the feeling your sample set is rather limited. Not to even mention that you seem unaware of history and what their was in recent decades and centuries. Time moves fast. But you are cozy in your certitude, and when that gets thin, there's always trash talk to turn to. ________________________________________________________________________________________________ How closely did you actually look? Come on? Didn't notice anything untoward?hackr - Go to Glacier National Park and ask the people who work there what is happeneing.I've been to Glacier, Yellowstone, Yosemite, Grand Canyon, Joshua Tree, and many other places in our beautiful country. Our nature is being preserved, the parks are vibrant living places, the snow, lakes, and rivers are beautiful. And in between the parks are vast expanses of agriculture to feed us all. I don't buy the alarmist fantasies of doom because I have been there. Go here, lots of snow, water, sky, happy healthy people, a beautiful place. Reality. https://www.facebook.com/GlacierNPS
http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/mbr/home/?cid=stelprdb5139168 Mountain pine beetle infestations continue to grow on public and private lands in Colorado and Wyoming. More than 1.5 million acres of forest in northern Colorado and southern Wyoming are affected by the mountain pine beetle epidemic, which was triggered by an extended drought in the late 1990s and early 2000s. By about 2012, beetles will have killed nearly all of the mature lodgepole trees in northern Colorado and southern Wyoming. Besides affecting watersheds, future timber production, wildlife habitat, recreation sites, transmission lines, and scenic views, beetle-killed trees also present a fuels build-up situation that could result in catastrophic wildland fires. Facts Mountain pine beetles are killing pine and spruce trees throughout the Rocky Mountains and western U.S. at an unprecedented rate. Extended droughts, warm winters, and old, dense forests have enabled this epidemic to become vast. Although bark beetle outbreaks are natural, the current outbreak is a major threat to regional economics and public safety. The mass of dead trees following beetle epidemics create severe falling and fire hazards. This infestation cannot be stopped. The Forest Service and numerous partners are working to reduce hazards in affected areas and to promote healthy forests in areas that have not yet been impacted. ...
Why Bark Beetles are Chewing Through U.S. Forests http://www.climatecentral.org/news/why-bark-beetles-are-chewing-their-way-through-americas-forests-15429 The conifer forests of the North American west have been under a massive assault over the past decade by bark beetles: one species alone, the mountain pine beetle, has killed more than 70,000 square miles’ worth of trees, equivalent to the area of Washington State, and two recent studies have shed some light on how climate change is helping fuel the assault, and what’s likely to happen in a world that continues to warm. The first, published in the journal Ecology, shows how intense drought can bring on a population explosion in the voracious insects — and how this creates a vicious cycle of tree-killing even when drought subsides. The second, published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) reveals that warming lets beetles move to higher elevations, where they’re encountering trees that are unusually susceptible to infestations. ...
What’s Killing the Great Forests of the American West? http://e360.yale.edu/feature/whats_killing_the_great_forests_of_the_american_west/2252/ Now, says Six, the field rules have changed. Instead of just two weeks, the beetles fly continually from May until October, attacking trees, burrowing in, and laying their eggs for half the year. And that’s not all. The beetles rarely attacked immature trees; now they do so all the time. What’s more, colder temperatures once kept the beetles away from high altitudes, yet now they swarm and kill trees on mountaintops. And in some high places where the beetles had a two-year life cycle because of cold temperatures, it’s decreased to one year. ...Try driving through that landscape sober next time :long: Take your blinders off.
We get our water from precipitation, not glaciers. Glaciers just delay the movement of water from the atmosphere to the ground. Only the precipitation that lands on the glacier contributes to the ice in the glacier. If the glacier was not there the precipitation would still fall. It rains and snows in Kansas and in California. Glaciers do not create water, they only delay a tiny percentage of precipitation from entering groundwater tables or running off. Glaciers are not "essential".What simplistic bullsh!t. http://www.aspenideas.org/session/“rivers-ice"-vanishing-glaciers-greater-himalaya But then only the United States and Americans matter. Oh, sorry. This thread is about Mars. Won't getting to Mars require brains? psik
I grew up at the dawn of manned space flight and it was all very exciting, but now, well, been there done that. For X dollars we will get far more science data and far more technology spinoff with continued programs such as the James Webb telescope, missions to Earth, interplanetary probes, and unmanned sample return missions to mars.Agreed. i'm all for space exploration, but sending people to Mars is a waste of money and resources because Mars has no magnetic field. Astronauts and cosmonauts require shielding from cosmic rays. That means either building underground or some sort of magnetic generator to protect them. That ignores the problem of getting them there alive and transporting the food and water they will need. The smart way to explore Mars is to send robotic spacecraft and develop our AI technology.About that whole radiation thing, the folks over at Der Spiegel aren't terribly convinced that its as big a deal as many folks make out: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/nuclear-exaggeration-is-atomic-radiation-as-dangerous-as-we-thought-a-519043.html Mind you, if someone called me up and said that I could go to Mars, but would die a year or two after I got back to Earth because of radiation exposure, I'd still be more than happy to go. Granted, I don't have the qualifications to be an astronaut, but every astronaut who goes into space knows that they're strapping themselves on to a frickin' bomb that's about as powerful as what we dropped on Japan, so I think that they'd be okay with a "little" radiation. It wouldn't be a "little" radiation if it would kill you a year or two after exposure.
We get our water from precipitation, not glaciers. Glaciers just delay the movement of water from the atmosphere to the ground. Only the precipitation that lands on the glacier contributes to the ice in the glacier. If the glacier was not there the precipitation would still fall. It rains and snows in Kansas and in California. Glaciers do not create water, they only delay a tiny percentage of precipitation from entering groundwater tables or running off. Glaciers are not "essential".What simplistic bullsh!t. http://www.aspenideas.org/session/“rivers-ice"-vanishing-glaciers-greater-himalaya But then only the United States and Americans matter. Oh, sorry. This thread is about Mars. Won't getting to Mars require brains? psik Well that brings us full circle, spending outlandish amounts of energy and treasure to send a few humans to Mars, while our biosphere is being degraded from every direction, is an example of a lack of brains and a severe disconnect from our various dependences on our biosphere.
We get our water from precipitation, not glaciers. Glaciers just delay the movement of water from the atmosphere to the ground. Only the precipitation that lands on the glacier contributes to the ice in the glacier. If the glacier was not there the precipitation would still fall. It rains and snows in Kansas and in California. Glaciers do not create water, they only delay a tiny percentage of precipitation from entering groundwater tables or running off. Glaciers are not "essential".What simplistic bullsh!t. Simplistic is too soft a word here. Ignorant comes closer, but still does not convey the extent of the bullshit in Stardusty's post. Anyone with a better than double-digit IQ should be able to figure out the problem; glaciers disappear when snow does not fall. If the precipitation does not fall then glaciers disappear. It is that simple. Actually, figuring this out doesn't take a higher than average IQ. All one has to do is pay attention to the news. Perhaps Stardusty is too busy playing around in his fantasy world to realize the drought that California is experiencing, among other places where glaciers are disappearing around the world. Let's take another scenario (this is a thought experiment, so run with me here). What happens if global temps rise but precipitation patterns do not change? Won't the water just collect in underground aquifers instead of glaciers? Well, no. Acquires are slow moving rivers, and the water in them flows toward the nearest sea or gulf.
If the glacier was not there the precipitation would still fall.I had to call this out again because it is one of the most ignorant, idiotic, ridiculous statements I have seen posted on these forums. I am shaking my head reading it again. Then again, this one is right up there.
Glaciers do not create water, they only delay a tiny percentage of precipitation from entering groundwater tables or running off.Tiny percentage? You need to study the Earth's hydrological cycle. Glaciers hold huge amounts of water and hundreds of millions of people around the globe depends upon glaciers for water.
I had to call this out again because it is one of the most ignorant, idiotic, ridiculous statements I have seen posted on these forums. I am shaking my head reading it again. Then again, this one is right up there.Case in point http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/viewthread/18673/ :cheese:Glaciers do not create water, they only delay a tiny percentage of precipitation from entering groundwater tables or running off.Tiny percentage? You need to study the Earth's hydrological cycle. Glaciers hold huge amounts of water and hundreds of millions of people around the globe depends upon glaciers for water.