An ancient forest is back from the ice

[BDBoop]

Your arrogance is unbecoming.

 

[Abraham3]

Oh---kay

 

[jon_berzerk]

So, what was warming the globe 1,000 years ago?

weather shaman al gore would be very disappointed with you

for daring to ask such a question

 

[SSDD]

So there was Global Warming 1,000 years ago?

That would have been about the time of the MWP. You know, that warm period that warmers claim only happened in the North Atlantic region.

 

[SSDD]

So, what was warming the globe 1,000 years ago?

Lightning bolts of Zeus my boy... And Milankovich cycles.. You know, stuff like the globe not spinning right after a night out on the town...

Who hasn't woken up with a case of the Milankovitch cycles eh???

Guess these trees are just more evidence of the MWP which according to warmists was not warmer than the present and only happened in the north atlantic. How much more wrong can they get?

 

[jon_berzerk]

So, what was warming the globe 1,000 years ago?

Lightning bolts of Zeus my boy... And Milankovich cycles.. You know, stuff like the globe not spinning right after a night out on the town...

Who hasn't woken up with a case of the Milankovitch cycles eh???

Guess these trees are just more evidence of the MWP which according to warmists was not warmer than the present and only happened in the north atlantic. How much more wrong can they get?

since most laws of nature can be denied in the advancement of man made global warming

it could be possible that back then trees and grass grew in freezing environments

--LOL

 

[chikenwing]

Lightning bolts of Zeus my boy... And Milankovich cycles.. You know, stuff like the globe not spinning right after a night out on the town...

Who hasn't woken up with a case of the Milankovitch cycles eh???

Guess these trees are just more evidence of the MWP which according to warmists was not warmer than the present and only happened in the north atlantic. How much more wrong can they get?

since most laws of nature can be denied in the advancement of man made global warming

it could be possible that back then trees and grass grew in freezing environments

--LOL

The world is full of mysteries.

 

[whitehall]

A thousand years is considered to be "ancient" only when you are trying to make a political point. A walk in NYC's Central Park reveals deep grooves in exposed rock which is evidence of a 100 foot glacier that dragged itself across the east coast. The point is that 1000 years is not "ancient" in geological terms and the world is still emerging from the ice age that dominated the climate for thousands of years in relatively recent geological time-span. Liberals can't enjoy life without creating some doomsday scenario and the radicals use everything including the weather to advance their revolutionary agenda.

 

[Abraham3]

A thousand years is considered to be "ancient" only when you are trying to make a political point. A walk in NYC's Central Park reveals deep grooves in exposed rock which is evidence of a 100 foot glacier that dragged itself across the east coast. The point is that 1000 years is not "ancient" in geological terms and the world is still emerging from the ice age that dominated the climate for thousands of years in relatively recent geological time-span. Liberals can't enjoy life without creating some doomsday scenario and the radicals use everything including the weather to advance their revolutionary agenda.

I think a more likely analysis is that you are trying to use these events to suppress such change. I don't see the board's AGW supporters participating on this thread much at all. That a glacier buried some trees a thousand years ago means very, very little. It certainly doesn't make me feel my opinions are threatened or that I've based my beliefs on some misconception. It makes me think that a thousand years ago a glacier buried some trees. Big whoop.

What ought to be garnering your attention is that a glacier has now melted back further than its been in a thousand years.

 

[bripat9643]

A thousand years is considered to be "ancient" only when you are trying to make a political point. A walk in NYC's Central Park reveals deep grooves in exposed rock which is evidence of a 100 foot glacier that dragged itself across the east coast. The point is that 1000 years is not "ancient" in geological terms and the world is still emerging from the ice age that dominated the climate for thousands of years in relatively recent geological time-span. Liberals can't enjoy life without creating some doomsday scenario and the radicals use everything including the weather to advance their revolutionary agenda.

I think a more likely analysis is that you are trying to use these events to suppress such change. I don't see the board's AGW supporters participating on this thread much at all. That a glacier buried some trees a thousand years ago means very, very little. It certainly doesn't make me feel my opinions are threatened or that I've based my beliefs on some misconception. It makes me think that a thousand years ago a glacier buried some trees. Big whoop.

What ought to be garnering your attention is that a glacier has now melted back further than its been in a thousand years.

On the contrary, it means a great deal. It means 1000 years ago that land was ice-free. It just recently had ice covering it, so the climate has to be colder now than it was 1000 years ago. Even a kid in grade school could understand that.