FightingArts Estore
Pressure Points
From a medical professional, straight facts on where and how to hit that can save your life.
Stretching
Limber or not, anyone can add height and speed to their kicks with this method.
Calligraphy
For yourself or as a gift, calligraphy is special, unique and lasting.
Karate Uniforms
Look your best. Max snap. low cost & superior crafted: “Peak Performance Gold” 16 oz uniforms.

MOTOBU
Classic book translation. Hard to find. Not in stores.
Who's Online
0 registered (), 41 Guests and 3 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
ksusanc, kellypnik123, leyinn, Ron_Cooley, businns
22902 Registered Users
Top Posters (30 Days)
Dobbersky 12
cxt 7
trevek 6
JKogas 5
TaekwonDoFan 2
July
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31
New Topics
centerline concepts
by futsaowingchun
07/14/14 10:49 PM
language of syllabus
by trevek
07/11/14 03:36 PM
ITF TaeKwonDo or Shotokan Karate????
by Dobbersky
07/10/14 07:14 AM
10 San Sik drills-Wing Chun's foundation
by futsaowingchun
06/30/14 11:20 AM
"Ip Man" and "Ip Man 2" the movies.
by TaekwonDoFan
06/30/14 11:02 AM
Anderson Silva - Leg Break
by Dobbersky
12/30/13 08:32 AM
Where Are They Now?
by Dobbersky
05/30/13 08:08 AM
Gi or no Gi Grappling?
by Prizewriter
04/16/12 02:48 PM
MMA - A passing Fad
by Dobbersky
04/12/12 11:16 AM
Forget all that health stuff
by MattJ
10/28/10 08:51 AM
Recent Posts
ITF TaeKwonDo or Shotokan Karate????
by cxt
07/24/14 11:35 AM
centerline concepts
by Dobbersky
07/18/14 06:14 AM
language of syllabus
by trevek
07/14/14 04:50 PM
Gi or no Gi Grappling?
by Dobbersky
07/10/14 07:38 AM
MMA - A passing Fad
by Dobbersky
07/10/14 07:35 AM
Anderson Silva - Leg Break
by Dobbersky
07/09/14 06:13 AM
Throwing
by JKogas
07/03/14 07:40 PM
10 San Sik drills-Wing Chun's foundation
by futsaowingchun
06/30/14 11:20 AM
"Ip Man" and "Ip Man 2" the movies.
by TaekwonDoFan
06/30/14 11:02 AM
Forget all that health stuff
by TaekwonDoFan
06/29/14 03:18 AM
Forum Stats
22902 Members
36 Forums
35563 Topics
432450 Posts

Max Online: 424 @ 09/24/13 10:38 PM
Page 15 of 20 < 1 2 ... 13 14 15 16 17 19 20 >
Topic Options
#377096 - 01/18/08 07:56 AM Re: Ice returns as Greenland temps plummet [Re: JAMJTX]
Blackrainbow Offline
Dragon

Registered: 09/14/06
Posts: 220
Loc: Brandon Fl.USA
What actually happened in Sweden was that they had an unusually wet snowfall. The wet snow then froze into solid ice. Reindeer survive the winter by eating lichens. When the snow turned to ice the animals could not get to the lichens which they usually reach by just pawing through the loose snow. Sweden had no more precipitation ice or otherwise than normal. In fact the wet snow was caused by unusually warm air masses for the season.
_________________________
You cannot defend against that which you do not understand

Top
#377097 - 01/18/08 09:43 AM GLOBAL WARMING [Re: Blackrainbow]
MattJ Offline
Free Rhinoplasty!
Prolific

Registered: 11/25/04
Posts: 15634
Loc: York PA. USA
OK, I must be missing something. JAMJTX is actually SUPPORTING that global warming is having negative environmental effects, even if localized ice melt is not one of the problems (ie; deer are dying from lack of food to unusual ice formation)?

That still seems like a bad thing to me, and a result of the global warming trend, right?

Even increase of ice at points is related to the warming trend:

http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000/a010100/a010152/index.html

"In a warming climate, both melting around the margins and precipitation in the interior increase, causing the ice sheet to grow in the middle and shrink at the edges."


But other studies do seem to indicate that ice loss is occuring:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v443/n7109/full/nature05168.html

http://www.newsvantage.com/perl/p/wed/ce...qy&g=tw.top

http://www.ocean.us/news
_________________________
"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin

Top
#377098 - 01/18/08 10:26 AM Re: A related issue [Re: wristtwister]
ToddR Offline
Member

Registered: 10/04/05
Posts: 148
Loc: York, PA
"No, but things that are sold to the public with skewed information are."

You mean, like the run-up to the Iraq war?

Top
#377099 - 01/18/08 10:42 AM Re: GLOBAL WARMING [Re: MattJ]
JAMJTX Offline
Enthusiast

Registered: 12/01/02
Posts: 585
Loc: Fort Wayne, IN
Quote:

OK, I must be missing something. JAMJTX is actually SUPPORTING that global warming is having negative environmental effects, even if localized ice melt is not one of the problems (ie; deer are dying from lack of food to unusual ice formation)?

That still seems like a bad thing to me, and a result of the global warming trend, right?

Even increase of ice at points is related to the warming trend:

http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000/a010100/a010152/index.html

"In a warming climate, both melting around the margins and precipitation in the interior increase, causing the ice sheet to grow in the middle and shrink at the edges."


But other studies do seem to indicate that ice loss is occuring:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v443/n7109/full/nature05168.html

http://www.newsvantage.com/perl/p/wed/ce...qy&g=tw.top

http://www.ocean.us/news




Localized ice loss is occurring. There is no doubt about that. What there is also no doubt about is that there is no reason to be alarmed about it. It's part of a natural cycle and it will come back. Just as it always has.

Warming is not causing ice increaes in other areas. It is getting colder in other areas, thus more freezing. Warming does not cause ice - freezing does. That's why we make ice cubes in freezers and not in ovens.

What I have been pointing out in my posts is how science disproves the "threat of global warming".

Climate change has always occurred and has always had negative effects. Plants and animals die off. Maybe even people. The geography changes and other things dissappear as well.

But there is also good that comes. In some places they are reporing new species of animals and plants. These could not come about without climate change.

Without change, our continent would not exists. There would be no Grand Canyon, no Yellowstone. There never would have been rain forest. All of the things that the "global warming crowd" are trying to preserve by trying to bring about an un-natural end to the natural cycles of climate change only exist because the climate changed in the past allowing them to come into existence.

If not for climate change, the North American continent would still be covered with glaciers and we would not have the rich farmland in the midwest.

Top
#377100 - 01/18/08 11:39 AM Re: GLOBAL WARMING [Re: JAMJTX]
Blackrainbow Offline
Dragon

Registered: 09/14/06
Posts: 220
Loc: Brandon Fl.USA
For all of those saying that the ice sheets are actually growing please post some proof. I have access to data that proves otherwise. Bring up a satellite pic of either pole or the Greenland ice sheet spanning the past 10 years and the proof just jumps out in your face. All of the major glaciers in Europe many which the people depend on for drinking water are almost gone. Same in the Andes. Same in the U.S. And how is that ice being replentished since snowfall in these areas are at altime record lows. The snow is not falling and where it is it's the wrong type of snow. Yes there are different types of snow. Even in the Himalayas the snow and ice are going bye bye and villages that have been standing for over 2500 years are going to be deserted because of lack of water. Where is there more ice? I have a satellite pic up on the monitor right now of a piece of the Anarctic ice sheet the size of a small country that recently broke off. Of course this has all happened before. And there are a lot of factors contributing to the changes now. For one thing we are actually just coming to the end of the last ice age. It ain't quite over just yet so we are warming. Also, volcanic activity is now at the highest level it has been in thousands of years. Yes we can check on these things. It's not at all hard to do so. But there is no way that anyone can say that having billions of humans pumping out billions of tons of pollutants has no effect. The fact that it is a natural process is no comfort to me. There have been many mass extinctions that have occured during the earths history for many reasons. But this is the first time in the history of the planet that any animal species on the planet has had the power to effect such change. The Grand Canyon took hundreds of millions of years to create. But the scientific data shows that although this is indeed a natural process that has occured before it is happening way too fast this time. Death is a perfectly natural event in every human life too. So if you get sick and there is a cure do you just ignore the cure and throw up your hands and say "oh well, lets just let nature take it's course"? We may not be able to stop the natural processes that are warming the earth. But why not clean up our act and at least not speed up the process? The technology is there. Most of it is old technology. But the corporate greed driving the worlds economy is not going to be easily dealt with. The U.S. economy is in a shambles and we are going to drag down the rest of the world when our economy collapses. The people driving this runaway train flat out don't care. They are mostly greedy and corrupt old men who are just living for today. Until the everyday ordinary people rise up in rightous indignation and scream "stop" and take back their lives things will continue on a downhill slide to extinction. The chances of a worldwide human revolution is slim and none. We are a unique species. We are absolute geniouses at making war but low leval idiots when it comes to making peace. We are a predatory species. We are natural born killers. And we don't really care too much who or what we kill as long as there is a profit to be made from it.
_________________________
You cannot defend against that which you do not understand

Top
#377101 - 01/18/08 03:15 PM Re: GLOBAL WARMING [Re: Blackrainbow]
floatfishski Offline
Member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 88
Loc: Danver for now.
I don't know what this "data" is that you have access to but it isn't accurate. So let's start with this;

Davis, C.H., et al., 2005. Snowfall-driven growth in East Antarctic ice sheet mitigates recent sea-level rise. SciencExpress, May 19, 2005.
[1] Raper, S. C. B., and R. J. Braithwaite, 8 March 2005, "The potential for sea level rise: New estimates from glacier and ice cap area and volume distributions," Geophysical Research Letters, 32:L05502.
[2] National Snow and Ice Data Center, 14 March 2005, "State of the cryosphere: Is the cryosphere sending signals about climate change?", NSIDC, on line [http://nsidc.org/sotc/glacier_balance.html].
[3] Dyurgerov, M., 2002, "Glacier mass balance and regime: Data of measurements and analysis," Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research, on line [http://instaar.colorado.edu/other/occ_papers.html].
[4] Dyurgerov, M. B., and M. F. Meier, 2005, "Glaciers and the changing earth system: A 2004 snapshot," Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research, on line [http://instaar.colorado.edu/other/occ_papers.html].
[5] U.S. Geological Survey, 31 Jan. 2000, "Sea level and climate," USGS, on line [http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs2-00/].
[6] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2001, Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis, section 11.2, on line [http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/].
[7] Greve, R., 2000, "On the response of the Greenland Ice Sheet to greenhouse climate change," Climatic Change, 46:289-303 [http://hgxpro1.lowtem.hokudai.ac.jp/~greve/publist.html].
[8] Hulbe, C. L., 11 April 1997, "Recent changes to Antarctic Peninsula ice shelves: What lessons have been learned?", on line [http://naturalscience.com/ns/articles/01-06/ns_clh.html].
[9] Bamber, J. L., R. L. Layberry, S. P. Gogenini, 2001, "A new ice thickness and bedrock dataset for the Greenland ice sheet 1: Measurement, data reduction, and errors," Journal of Geophysical Research, 106(D24):3177-3180 [http://nsidc.com/data/docs/daac/nsidc0092_greenland_ice_thickness.gd.html].
[10] Krabill, W. et al., 21 July 2000, "Greenland Ice Sheet: High-elevation balance and peripheral thinning," Science, 289:428-430.
[11] Johannessen, O. M., K. Khvorostovsky, M. W. Miles, and L. P. Bobylev, 11 Nov. 2005, "Recent ice-sheet growth in the interior of Greenland,", Science, 310:1013-1016.
[12] Box, J. E., and D. H. Bromwich, 26 Aug. 2004, "Greenland ice sheet surface mass balance 1991-2000: Application of Polar MM5 mesoscale model and in situ data," Journal of Geophysical Research, 109:D16105.
[13] Hanna, E., et al., 2005, "Runoff and mass balance of the Greenland ice sheet: 1958-2003," Journal of Geophysical Research, 110:D13108 [http://www.awi-bremerhaven.de/Publications/Han2005a_abstract.html].
[14] Velicogna, I., and J. Wahr, 30 Sept. 2005, "Greenland mass balance from GRACE," Geophysical Research Letters, 32:L18505.
[15] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2001, Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis, section 11.2, on line [http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/].
[16] Goosse, H., R. Gerdes, F. Kauker, and C. Koberle, 2004, "Influence of the exchanges between the Atlantic and the Arctic on sea ice volume variations during the period 1955-97," Journal of Climate, 17:1294-1305.
[17] Linacre, E., and B. Geerts, July 1998, "The Arctic: the ocean, sea ice, icebergs, and climate," Univ. of Wyoming Dept. of Atmospheric Science, on line [http://www-das.uwyo.edu/~geerts/cwx/notes/chap17/arctic.html].
[18] Lindsay, R. W., and J. Zhang, 2005, "The thinning of Arctic sea ice, 1988-2003: Have we passed a tipping point?", Journal of Climate, forthcoming [http://www.uwnews.org/relatedcontent/2005/September/rc_parentID12459_thisID12461.pdf].
[19] Lythe, M. B., D. G. Vaughan, and the BEDMAP Consortium, 10 June 2001, "BEDMAP: A new ice thickness and subglacial topographic model of Antarctica," Journal of Geophysical Research, 106:B6:11335-11351.
[20] Davis, C. H., Yonghong Li, J. R. McConnell, M. M. Frey, and E. Hanna, 24 June 2005, "Snowfall-driven growth in East Antarctic Ice Sheet mitigates recent sea-level rise," Science, 308:1898-1901.
[21] Cazenave, A., and R. S. Nerem, 2004, "Present-day sea level change: Observations and causes," Reviews of Geophysics, 42:RG3001.
[22] Thomas, R., et al., 8 Oct. 2004, "Accelerated sea-level rise from West Antarctica," Science, 306:255-258.
[23] Stone, J. O., et al., 3 Jan. 2003, "Holocene deglaciation of Marie Byrd Land, West Antarctica, Science, 299:99-102.
[24] Drewry, D. J., 1983, Antarctica: Glaciological and Geophysical Folio, Scott Polar Research Institute, Univ. of Cambridge.
[25] Sandhager, H., D. G. Vaughan, and A. Lambrecht, 2004, "Meteoric, marine and total ice thickness maps of Filchner-Ronne-Schelfeis, Antarctica," FRISP Report no. 15 on line [http://rai.ucsd.edu/~helen/Annals_2001/PDF/34A125_Padman_etal_2002_2col.pdf].
[26] British Antarctic Survey, 9 May 2000, "The loss of ice shelves from the Antarctic Peninsula," British Antarctic Survey, on line [http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/Key_Topics/IceSheet_SeaLevel/ice_shelf_loss.html].
[27] British Antarctic Survey, May 2005, "Antarctic Factsheet Geographical Statistics," British Antarctic Survey, on line [http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/Resources/schoolzone/resources/Factsheets/factsheet_geostats_screen.pdf].
[28] Geerts, B., June 1998, "Antarctic sea ice: seasonal and long-term changes," Univ. of Wyoming Dept. of Atmospheric Science, on line [http://www-das.uwyo.edu/~geerts/cwx/notes/chap11/sea_ice.html].
[29] Rothrock, D. A., and J. Zhang, 4 Jan. 2005, "Arctic Ocean sea ice volume: What explains its recent depletion?," Journal of Geophysical Research, 110:C01002.
[30] Bassett, S. E., G. A. Milne, J. X. Mitrovica, and P. U. Clark, 5 Aug. 2005, "Ice sheet and solid earth influences on far-field sea-level histories," Science, 309:925-928.
[31] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2001, Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis, section 11.5.4.3, on line [http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/].
[32] Jacobs, S. S., 5 Nov. 1992, "Is the Antarctic ice sheet growing?", Nature, 360:29-32.
[33] Sugden, D. E., 1996, "The East Antarctic Ice Sheet: unstable ice or unstable ideas?", Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 21:443-454.
[34] Alley, R. B., and I. M. Whillans, 15 Nov. 1991, "Changes in the West Antarctic Ice Sheet", Science, 254:959-962.

Also look at a study published in the Sept. 2006 American Meteorological Society's Journal of Climate that shows that the Hmalayan glaciers are growing.

There is also abundent data to show that glaciers are growing in Wahsington,France, and Switzerland. It is also clear that the Antarctic ice cap elevation is increasing meaning that it is getting thicker. Also a study by Harvard concluded that "we just don't know if the ice mass balance is growing or shrinking" due to the historical variability of the data.

The argument here is not about global warming, it's about the antropogenic forcing and frankly, the data supporting that forcing is not good science!

Top
#377102 - 01/18/08 03:15 PM Re: GLOBAL WARMING [Re: JAMJTX]
MattJ Offline
Free Rhinoplasty!
Prolific

Registered: 11/25/04
Posts: 15634
Loc: York PA. USA
JAMJTX -

Quote:

Warming is not causing ice increaes in other areas. It is getting colder in other areas, thus more freezing. Warming does not cause ice - freezing does. That's why we make ice cubes in freezers and not in ovens.




Ehhhhh........

Freezing rain and ice CAN occur from warming temperatures. Freezing rain occurs from rain falling through warm air aloft, then freezing when it hits colder temps on the ground. If it was cold or freezing all the way down, it would be snow. So the fact that it is turning to ice, instead of snow, indicates WARMING - not freezing.

Can't see how you are missing the big picture.
_________________________
"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin

Top
#377103 - 01/18/08 03:22 PM Re: GLOBAL WARMING [Re: MattJ]
MattJ Offline
Free Rhinoplasty!
Prolific

Registered: 11/25/04
Posts: 15634
Loc: York PA. USA
floatfishski -

Quote:

There is also abundent data to show that glaciers are growing in Wahsington,France, and Switzerland. It is also clear that the Antarctic ice cap elevation is increasing meaning that it is getting thicker. Also a study by Harvard concluded that "we just don't know if the ice mass balance is growing or shrinking" due to the historical variability of the data.




I refer you to these that I posted earlier:

Quote:

Even increase of ice at points is related to the warming trend:

http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000/a010100/a010152/index.html

"In a warming climate, both melting around the margins and precipitation in the interior increase, causing the ice sheet to grow in the middle and shrink at the edges."


But other studies do seem to indicate that ice loss is occuring:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v443/n7109/full/nature05168.html

http://www.newsvantage.com/perl/p/wed/ce...qy&g=tw.top

http://www.ocean.us/news




Thicker ice at some points can still indicate a trend to loss.
_________________________
"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin

Top
#377104 - 01/18/08 04:45 PM Re: GLOBAL WARMING [Re: MattJ]
floatfishski Offline
Member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 88
Loc: Danver for now.
And that is the conundrum Matt. The issue isn't about global warming, it's about anthropogenic forcing. All indicators, all the data, inform us that we are but a very small contributor. So if we take the draconian measures prescribed by the alarmists we will do next to nothing to change the trend and do a great deal of harm to the people around us. Instead of piddling away good money after weak, and bad science, spend it on something with utility. Spend it on building reactors, fusion research, alternative fuels, etc.

There are two tacks to this discussion. The first is that there is no consensus, and being a scientist, I can tell you first hand that if you ever run into a bunch of scientist having a Stepford moment you better be seriously creeped out.

The second is that the data for anthropogenic forcing is marginal at best. Yet there are those who buy into it hook line and sinker. Then someone like myself comes along and wonders Hmmmm. All of a sudden my credentials mean nothing and I'm told that I'm not "qualified" to even comment on the subject. And most of the people who tell me this would fail my class in physical chemistry. The members of the church Branch AlGorevidians pontificate in absolutes yet science isn't about absolutes. Even in the hard sciences we don't actually know anything. We believe it to be true based on probabilites. To use an analogy that is appropriate to this forum, a young martial artist believes that he/she has found the perfect art. A mature one realizes that "perfect" is in the eye of the beholder.

Be fascinated by the science, but do it from the perspective of what science is. Science is defined by, and progresses, far more because of it's failures than its successes. There are a number of ancillary and auxiliary issues here. Iíve seen nobody in this thread oppose environmental responsibility but only the fact that the science behind anthropogenic forcing of climate change isnít even close to being settled.

Top
#377105 - 01/18/08 05:45 PM Re: GLOBAL WARMING [Re: floatfishski]
wristtwister Offline
like a chiropractor, only evil

Registered: 02/14/06
Posts: 2210
Loc: South Carolina
I relate the global warming debate to someone who discovers that there are sunspots. There is science behind the fact that sunspots exist, but the actual ability to generate an effect on them is non-existant to minimal at best. Where they affect the electrical and electro-magnetic fields of the earth, they have an effect, but it's pretty predictable and well known in the areas of life where the effects are felt. Adjustments are made by those people affected, and the rest of humanity goes on without being alarmed or affected.

Enter the Al Gorvedians, and the mantra would be "sunspots are damaging the electromagnetic fields of the earth" (well known and accepted fact). If we don't do something NOW, all life as we know it is doomed, and the earth is going to have an electromagnetic shift that will destroy the universe. At that point, they will offer you "electromagnetic credits" so you can minimalize your effect on the earth's electromagnetic field, and all the good citizens can go home feeling good about themselves. All you evil people who continue to ignore the electromagnetic crisis and continue living your lives as you have in the past are the scourge of the earth, and should be chastised for your evil behavior.

There is concensus that sunspots affect the electromagnetic fields of the earth, but no single concensus on what those effects actually are... but those that oppose the Al Gorevidian patchwork science view of it's effects can be dismissed as "unknowledgeable", "pursuing the wrong hypothesis", or simply too stupid to see the forest for the trees.

Sound familiar...?

_________________________
What man is a man that does not make the world a better place?... from "Kingdom of Heaven"

Top
Page 15 of 20 < 1 2 ... 13 14 15 16 17 19 20 >


Moderator:  Ames, Cord, MattJ, RazorFoot, Reiki 




Action Ads
1.5 Million Plus Page Views
Monthly
Only $89
Details

Ryukyu Art
Artifacts from the Ryukyu Kingdom missing since WWII. Visit www.ShisaLion.Org to view pictures

Best Stun Guns
Self Defense Products-stun guns, pepper spray, tasers and more

Surveillance 4U
Complete surveillance systems for covert operations or secure installation security

Asylum Images
Book presents photo tour of the Trans-Allegany Lunatic Asylum. A must if you're going to take a ghost tour!

 



Unbreakable Unbrella

krav maga