Earth's lakes warming as well

[Big Fitz]

What a ridiculous study. They surveyed 167 lakes and were able to use data from 104 of them. Of that total 41 had "statistically significant" results. That's a 39% hit rate on the lakes that were used. I wonder where they were located? Near nuclear power plants? All lakes were in the northern hemisphere and 193 square miles or larger in extent. It's amazing the level to which NASA has sunk.

When you hit 10,000, you've covered Minnesota. When you reach 22,000, you've added Wisconsin to your total. I'm sure that speaks for all lakes around the world.

Love it. Selected changes in less than 0.0001% of all lakes worldwide, and you've got global warming.

You morons are bragging about how the math proves your insanity all the time. How about we start expanding your sample?

This is like awarding an Oscar based on 2 frames of film, a song title, the names of 3 of the crew, a 30 second clip of the score, and no preview from a 20 hour mini-series.

Yeah... that'll be accurate.

 

[Chris]

The North American Great Lakes are as much as 15 degrees Fahrenheit above normal this summer, approaching record warmth in some areas due to a shortened winter season with scare ice, followed by a hot spring.

“They’re already at what we would have expected to be their peak temperatures for the summer, and we have several more weeks of warming to go,” University of Minnesota physics professor Jay Austin told The Detroit News.

Lake Superior commercial fisherman Ralph Wilcox told the paper that whitefish have become much harder to catch since they fled the warmth near shore for cooler, deeper waters.

Those fish that are still swimming near shore aren't biting. "It makes the fish lethargic and they stop feeding during the day," said Lakeside Fishing Shop co-owner Dan Chimelak.

Great Lakes May Reach Record Warmth

 

[Chris]

KIGOMA, Tanzania (AlertNet) - Fishermen in Tanzania's Kigoma region are searching for new ways to earn a living as climate change reduces fish stocks in Lake Tanganyika, squeezing food supplies and household budgets.

The lake has experienced unprecedented warming during the last century, reaching a surface temperature of 26 degrees Celsius (78.8 Fahrenheit) when it was last measured in 2003, the highest level in 1,500 years, according to a paper published in the journal Nature Geoscience in May.

"Our data show a consistent relationship between lake surface temperature and productivity such as that of fish stocks," the study's lead author, Jessica Tierney of Brown University in the United States, said in a statement. "As the lake gets warmer, we expect productivity to decline, and we expect that it will affect the fishing industry."

Reuters AlertNet - Warming lake leaves Tanzanian fishing families short of money, food

 

[marksinvirginia]

Dinosaurs, after falling into hot bubbling tar pits, were reported to have blamed Bush.

 

[Old Rocks]

SpringerLink - Climatic Change, Volume 75, Number 4

Abstract. Records of hydrologic parameters, especially those parameters that are directly linked
to air temperature, were analyzed to find indicators of recent climate warming in Minnesota, USA.
Minnesota is projected to be vulnerable to climate change because of its location in the northern
temperate zone of the globe. Ice-out and ice-in dates on lakes, spring (snowmelt) runoff timing,
spring discharge values in streams, and stream water temperatures recorded up to the year 2002 were
selected for study. The analysis was conducted by inspection of 10-year moving averages, linear
regression on complete and on partial records, and by ranking and sorting of events. Moving averages
were used for illustrative purposes only. All statistics were computed on annual data.
All parameters examined showtrends, and sometimes quite variable trends, over different periods of
the record.With the exception of spring stream flow rates the trends of all parameters examined point
toward a warming climate in Minnesota over the last two or three decades. Although hidden among
strong variability from year to year, ice-out dates on 73 lakes have been shifting to an earlier date at a
rate of −0.13 days/year from 1965 to 2002, while ice-in dates on 34 lakes have been delayed by 0.75
days/year from 1979 to 2002. From 1990 to 2002 the rates of change increased to −0.25 days/year
for ice-out and 1.44 days/year for ice-in. Trend analyses also show that spring runoff at 21 stream
gaging sites examined occurs earlier. From 1964 to 2002 the first spring runoff (due to snowmelt)
has occurred −0.30 days/year earlier and the first spring peak runoff −0.23 days/year earlier. The
stream water temperature records from 15 sites in the Minneapolis/St Paul metropolitan area shows
warming by 0.11 ◦C/year, on the average, from 1977 to 2002. Urban development may have had a
strong influence. The analysis of spring stream flow rates was inconclusive, probably because runoff
is linked as much to precipitation and land use as to air temperature.
Ranking and sorting of annual data shows that a disproportionately large number of early lake
ice-out dates has occurred after 1985, but also between 1940 and 1950; similarly late lake ice-in has
occurred more frequently since about 1990. Ranking and sorting of first spring runoff dates also gave
evidence of earlier occurrences, i.e. climate warming in late winter.

 

[Old Rocks]

Evidence of recent warming and El Niño-related variations in ice breakup of Wisconsin lakes

Résumé / Abstract
Ice breakup dates from 1968 to 1988 were examined for 20 Wisconsin lakes to determine whether consistent interannual and long-term changes exist. Each ice record had a trend toward earlier breakup dates, as demonstrated by a negative slope with time, indicating a recent warming trend. The average change in breakup dates was 0.82 d earlier per year for the lakes in southern Wisconsin, which was more extreme than that for the northern Wisconsin lakes (0.45 d yr-1). Interannual variation in breakup dates was related to the warm phase of El Nino/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) episodes. El Nino events occurred five times during this period (1965, 1972, 1976, 1982, and 1986). Average breakup dates were significantly earlier than average (5-14 d) during the mature phase of El Nino. This variability was affected by the location of the lake : El Nino-related variation was more evident for the southern lakes than the northern lakes. This difference was caused by the average date of breakup for the southern lakes being in late March directly following the period when air temperatures were strongly related to El Nino events, whereas the average dates of breakup of the northern lakes was in mid- to late April following a period when air temperatures were not significantly related to El Nifio events. Overall, the interannual and long-term patterns across Wisconsin were relatively consistent, indicating that recent warming and El Nino-related variation are regional climatic responses.

 

[antagon]

Evidence of recent warming and El Niño-related variations in ice breakup of Wisconsin lakes

Résumé / Abstract
Ice breakup dates from 1968 to 1988 were examined for 20 Wisconsin lakes to determine whether consistent interannual and long-term changes exist. Each ice record had a trend toward earlier breakup dates, as demonstrated by a negative slope with time, indicating a recent warming trend. The average change in breakup dates was 0.82 d earlier per year for the lakes in southern Wisconsin, which was more extreme than that for the northern Wisconsin lakes (0.45 d yr-1). Interannual variation in breakup dates was related to the warm phase of El Nino/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) episodes. El Nino events occurred five times during this period (1965, 1972, 1976, 1982, and 1986). Average breakup dates were significantly earlier than average (5-14 d) during the mature phase of El Nino. This variability was affected by the location of the lake : El Nino-related variation was more evident for the southern lakes than the northern lakes. This difference was caused by the average date of breakup for the southern lakes being in late March directly following the period when air temperatures were strongly related to El Nino events, whereas the average dates of breakup of the northern lakes was in mid- to late April following a period when air temperatures were not significantly related to El Nifio events. Overall, the interannual and long-term patterns across Wisconsin were relatively consistent, indicating that recent warming and El Nino-related variation are regional climatic responses.

note the late nineties pedigree for most of these studies considering ocean tides. i think there's an injustice in ignoring their implications in modern data or foregoing the establishment of a correlation between anthro-factors and these tides by making an off-hand attribution to their proceeds to man made sources. this is the non-science i'm concerned about.

here's the full study you've abstracted: http://www.aslo.org/lo/toc/vol_41/issue_5/0815.pdf

i've yet to read all that.

on a different note, does anyone know why there's a northern hemisphere bias in the lakes data? jpl said in their release that this was 'expected'. there is moderate cooling in southern hemisphere and tropical lakes, but concentrated warming in the north.

could this also be ENSO/PDO/ADA-effected?

 

[Big Fitz]

20 Wisconsin lakes

Yeah. Approximately 0.001% of Wisconsin lakes.

That's an acurate sample?????

Wake me when you reach at least triple digits.

What next? Determining climate for the last few centuries based on 3 selected trees in Siberia?

 

[westwall]

Evidence of recent warming and El Niño-related variations in ice breakup of Wisconsin lakes

Résumé / Abstract
Ice breakup dates from 1968 to 1988 were examined for 20 Wisconsin lakes to determine whether consistent interannual and long-term changes exist. Each ice record had a trend toward earlier breakup dates, as demonstrated by a negative slope with time, indicating a recent warming trend. The average change in breakup dates was 0.82 d earlier per year for the lakes in southern Wisconsin, which was more extreme than that for the northern Wisconsin lakes (0.45 d yr-1). Interannual variation in breakup dates was related to the warm phase of El Nino/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) episodes. El Nino events occurred five times during this period (1965, 1972, 1976, 1982, and 1986). Average breakup dates were significantly earlier than average (5-14 d) during the mature phase of El Nino. This variability was affected by the location of the lake : El Nino-related variation was more evident for the southern lakes than the northern lakes. This difference was caused by the average date of breakup for the southern lakes being in late March directly following the period when air temperatures were strongly related to El Nino events, whereas the average dates of breakup of the northern lakes was in mid- to late April following a period when air temperatures were not significantly related to El Nifio events. Overall, the interannual and long-term patterns across Wisconsin were relatively consistent, indicating that recent warming and El Nino-related variation are regional climatic responses.

note the late nineties pedigree for most of these studies considering ocean tides. i think there's an injustice in ignoring their implications in modern data or foregoing the establishment of a correlation between anthro-factors and these tides by making an off-hand attribution to their proceeds to man made sources. this is the non-science i'm concerned about.

here's the full study you've abstracted: http://www.aslo.org/lo/toc/vol_41/issue_5/0815.pdf

i've yet to read all that.

on a different note, does anyone know why there's a northern hemisphere bias in the lakes data? jpl said in their release that this was 'expected'. there is moderate cooling in southern hemisphere and tropical lakes, but concentrated warming in the north.

could this also be ENSO/PDO/ADA-effected?

Two reasons come to mind. First off most of the scientists involved in the scam live in the northern hemisphere so it is just easier. Secondly, most of the major urban areas (adjacent to lakes) are in the northern hemisphere so it is easier to get the bias they desire. Anyway you look at it though, 104 lakes is a pathetically tiny sample group for a study trying to support such a grandiose tale.

 

[glew]

Another lie, just five years ago Lake Huron was at a historic low and had been at least the last 20 years. Sorry, I did not look this up on Wiki or Google, like Chris the six figure man does. I was actually there and saw it.

I am not sure where the water level is today

Good Lord! Water level was not mentioned, the aticle concerned the temperature of the water in the lakes.

http://seagrant.wisc.edu/climatechange/portals/0/pdf/Magnuson.pdf

A MINER’S CANARY Every fall, the Center for Limnology (lake science)
at UW-Madison posts a graph of the date each winter when Lake Mendota
has frozen over in the past, and everyone at the center gets a chance to guess
when it will occur in the coming winter. Few even came close last winter
(2006-07), when the lake did not freeze over until January 20—the second
latest date in the center’s 150 years of records.
The center’s ice-on, ice-off records go back to the 1850s, when they were
started by early settlers and Madison residents because the lake’s ice was
important to them—it was harvested for local use in early “icebox” refrigerators,
and after the railroads arrived in the late 1800s, lake ice became a
commodity that was shipped as far away as New Orleans.
This lake ice record shows that in the 1850s Lake Mendota was frozen
over for about four months each winter. By the early 2000s, however, the
ice cover lasted an average of just three months a year. In other words,
the amount of time the lake is ice-covered is nearly 25 percent less than it
was 150 years ago. If this trend continues, the time will come when Lake
Mendota will be ice-free all winter long.

And your point is? Less driving will get it back to 4 months? Stopping industry will get it to 5 months? This is a serious question...What are the draw backs to a 1-2 degree rise in temps in the next 100 years? Will it be time to panic when the earth goes through a cooling phase like it did in the 1970's? And who are you inviro-whackos to say that colder is better? That is a question the green/communists have yet to answer.

 

[westwall]

Another lie, just five years ago Lake Huron was at a historic low and had been at least the last 20 years. Sorry, I did not look this up on Wiki or Google, like Chris the six figure man does. I was actually there and saw it.

I am not sure where the water level is today

Good Lord! Water level was not mentioned, the aticle concerned the temperature of the water in the lakes.

http://seagrant.wisc.edu/climatechange/portals/0/pdf/Magnuson.pdf

A MINER’S CANARY Every fall, the Center for Limnology (lake science)
at UW-Madison posts a graph of the date each winter when Lake Mendota
has frozen over in the past, and everyone at the center gets a chance to guess
when it will occur in the coming winter. Few even came close last winter
(2006-07), when the lake did not freeze over until January 20—the second
latest date in the center’s 150 years of records.
The center’s ice-on, ice-off records go back to the 1850s, when they were
started by early settlers and Madison residents because the lake’s ice was
important to them—it was harvested for local use in early “icebox” refrigerators,
and after the railroads arrived in the late 1800s, lake ice became a
commodity that was shipped as far away as New Orleans.
This lake ice record shows that in the 1850s Lake Mendota was frozen
over for about four months each winter. By the early 2000s, however, the
ice cover lasted an average of just three months a year. In other words,
the amount of time the lake is ice-covered is nearly 25 percent less than it
was 150 years ago. If this trend continues, the time will come when Lake
Mendota will be ice-free all winter long.

And your point is? Less driving will get it back to 4 months? Stopping industry will get it to 5 months? This is a serious question...What are the draw backs to a 1-2 degree rise in temps in the next 100 years? Will it be time to panic when the earth goes through a cooling phase like it did in the 1970's? And who are you inviro-whackos to say that colder is better? That is a question the green/communists have yet to answer.

The greeinies and the socialists are only the tools in the box, the real people running this are wealthy industrialists and banking groups like Goldman Sachs. They just use the greenies and leftists because they are useful idiots.

 

[glew]

the highest level in 1,500 years

These "experts" knew what the lake temp was 1500 years ago? And you environment guys wonder why you aren't taken seriously by people who don't get a paycheck to prove us evil humans are heating the place up.

 

[Old Rocks]

Glew, because you are ignorant of how scientists can determine temperatures from isotopes of oxygen, proxy measurements, does not mean the rest of us are.

http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/han...6E535-90C4-42C2-BA67-92D94EFAF701/0/lec02.pdf

 

[Old Rocks]

Good Lord! Water level was not mentioned, the aticle concerned the temperature of the water in the lakes.

http://seagrant.wisc.edu/climatechange/portals/0/pdf/Magnuson.pdf

A MINER’S CANARY Every fall, the Center for Limnology (lake science)
at UW-Madison posts a graph of the date each winter when Lake Mendota
has frozen over in the past, and everyone at the center gets a chance to guess
when it will occur in the coming winter. Few even came close last winter
(2006-07), when the lake did not freeze over until January 20—the second
latest date in the center’s 150 years of records.
The center’s ice-on, ice-off records go back to the 1850s, when they were
started by early settlers and Madison residents because the lake’s ice was
important to them—it was harvested for local use in early “icebox” refrigerators,
and after the railroads arrived in the late 1800s, lake ice became a
commodity that was shipped as far away as New Orleans.
This lake ice record shows that in the 1850s Lake Mendota was frozen
over for about four months each winter. By the early 2000s, however, the
ice cover lasted an average of just three months a year. In other words,
the amount of time the lake is ice-covered is nearly 25 percent less than it
was 150 years ago. If this trend continues, the time will come when Lake
Mendota will be ice-free all winter long.

And your point is? Less driving will get it back to 4 months? Stopping industry will get it to 5 months? This is a serious question...What are the draw backs to a 1-2 degree rise in temps in the next 100 years? Will it be time to panic when the earth goes through a cooling phase like it did in the 1970's? And who are you inviro-whackos to say that colder is better? That is a question the green/communists have yet to answer.

The greeinies and the socialists are only the tools in the box, the real people running this are wealthy industrialists and banking groups like Goldman Sachs. They just use the greenies and leftists because they are useful idiots.

Wow. It just doesn't get any better than this. Between the two posts, I am a Communist, and a tool of the super capitalists. Talk about a split personality!

Really, all this reveals is that you two haven't a clue as to how to answer to the fact that the whole of the scientific community is in consensus concerning AGW.

 

[skookerasbil]

And your point is? Less driving will get it back to 4 months? Stopping industry will get it to 5 months? This is a serious question...What are the draw backs to a 1-2 degree rise in temps in the next 100 years? Will it be time to panic when the earth goes through a cooling phase like it did in the 1970's? And who are you inviro-whackos to say that colder is better? That is a question the green/communists have yet to answer.

The greeinies and the socialists are only the tools in the box, the real people running this are wealthy industrialists and banking groups like Goldman Sachs. They just use the greenies and leftists because they are useful idiots.

Wow. It just doesn't get any better than this. Between the two posts, I am a Communist, and a tool of the super capitalists. Talk about a split personality!

Really, all this reveals is that you two haven't a clue as to how to answer to the fact that the whole of the scientific community is in consensus concerning AGW.

Who cares..............nobody apparently. Why? Because the public is on to this crap and they're not at all liking another ginormous tax ( see Cap and Tax legislation), thus, the "consensus" is irrelevant, as in, it's nothing more than a bunch of people with an OCD condition kicking around some scientific data like drunks around a poker table on Friday night................

Barack Obama's Cap and Trade Program Is a Tax on the Working Class - WSJ.com


Who Pays for Cap and Trade? Hint: They were promised a tax cut during the Obama campaign..


Cap and trade is the tax that dare not speak its name, and Democrats are hoping in particular that no one notices who would pay for their climate ambitions. With President Obama depending on vast new carbon revenues in his budget and Congress promising a bill by May, perhaps Americans would like to know the deeply unequal ways that climate costs would be distributed across regions and income groups.

Politicians love cap and trade because they can claim to be taxing "polluters," not workers. Hardly. Once the government creates a scarce new commodity -- in this case the right to emit carbon -- and then mandates that businesses buy it, the costs would inevitably be passed on to all consumers in the form of higher prices. Stating the obvious, Peter Orszag -- now Mr. Obama's budget. Hit hardest would be the "95% of working families" Mr. Obama keeps mentioning, usually omitting that his no-new-taxes pledge comes with the caveat "unless you use energy." Putting a price on carbon is regressive by definition because poor and middle-income households spend more of their paychecks on things like gas to drive to work, groceries or home heating.

The Congressional Budget Office -- Mr. Orszag's former roost -- estimates that the price hikes from a 15% cut in emissions would cost the average household in the bottom-income quintile about 3.3% of its after-tax income every year. That's about $680, not including the costs of reduced employment and output. The three middle quintiles would see their paychecks cut between $880 and $1,500, or 2.9% to 2.7% of income. The rich would pay 1.7%. Cap and trade is the ideal policy for every Beltway analyst who thinks the tax code is too progressive (all five of them).

But the greatest inequities are geographic and would be imposed on the parts of the U.S. that rely most on manufacturing or fossil fuels -- particularly coal, which generates most power in the Midwest, Southern and Plains states. It's no coincidence that the liberals most invested in cap and trade -- Barbara Boxer, Henry Waxman, Ed Markey -- come from California or the Northeast.

Coal provides more than half of U.S. electricity, and 25 states get more than 50% of their electricity from conventional coal-fired generation. In Ohio, it totals 86%, according to the Energy Information Administration. Ratepayers in Indiana (94%), Missouri (85%), New Mexico (80%), Pennsylvania (56%), West Virginia (98%) and Wyoming (95%) are going to get soaked.

Another way to think about it is in terms of per capita greenhouse-gas emissions. California is the No. 2 carbon emitter in the country but also has a large economy and population. So the average Californian only had a carbon footprint of about 12 tons of CO2-equivalent in 2005, according to the World Resource Institute's Climate Analysis Indicators, which integrates all government data. The situation is very different in Wyoming and North Dakota -- paging Senators Mike Enzi and Kent Conrad -- where every person was responsible for 154 and 95 tons, respectively. See the nearby chart for cap and trade's biggest state winners and losers.


Democrats say they'll allow some of this ocean of new cap-and-trade revenue to trickle back down to the public. In his budget, Mr. Obama wants to recycle $525 billion through the "making work pay" tax credit that goes to many people who don't pay income taxes. But $400 for individuals and $800 for families still doesn't offset carbon's income raid, especially in states with higher carbon use.

All the more so because the Administration is lowballing its cap-and-trade tax estimates. Its stated goal is to reduce emissions 14% below 2005 levels by 2020, which assuming that four-fifths of emissions are covered (excluding agriculture, for instance), works out to about $13 or $14 per ton of CO2. When CBO scored a similar bill last year, it expected prices to start at $23 and rise to $44 by 2018. CBO also projected the total value of the allowances at $902 billion over the first decade, which is some $256 billion more than the Administration's estimate.

We asked the White House budget office for the assumptions behind its revenue estimates, but a spokesman said the Administration doesn't have a formal proposal and will work with Congress and "stakeholders" to shape one. We were also pointed to recent comments by Mr. Orszag that he was "sure there will be enough there to finance the things that we have identified" and maybe "additional money" too. In other words, Mr. Obama expects a much larger tax increase than even he is willing to admit.

Those "stakeholders" are going to need some very large bribes, starting with the regions that stand to lose the most. Led by Michigan's Debbie Stabenow, 15 Senate Democrats have already formed a "gang" demanding that "consumers and workers in all regions of the U.S. are protected from undue hardship." In practice, this would mean corporate welfare for carbon-heavy businesses.

And of course Congress is its own "stakeholder." An economy-wide tax under the cover of saving the environment is the best political moneymaker since the income tax. Obama officials are already telling the press, sotto voce, that climate revenues might fund universal health care and other new social spending. No doubt they would, and when they did Mr. Obama's cap-and-trade rebates would become even smaller.

Cap and trade, in other words, is a scheme to redistribute income and wealth -- but in a very curious way. It takes from the working class and gives to the affluent; takes from Miami, Ohio, and gives to Miami, Florida; and takes from an industrial America that is already struggling and gives to rich Silicon Valley and Wall Street "green tech" investors who know how to leverage the political class.





















When's the last time you heard a Democrat besides Barbara Boxer or Henry Waxman talking about slamming the coal companies with billions in taxes? LOL.......you havent because the topic is radioactive on Capitol Hill and the Dems just finished getting their asses handed to them a few weeks ago.

The environmental activist radicals on this forum conveniently ignore the political realities related to the "consensus".........as if the "consensus" means anything in the real world........thus, the discussion on these forums is akin to speculation as to whether Big Foot exists or not.

And now with the other political reality related to this past election, nothing is happening with this carbon credit garbage for the next ten years at a minmum ( the House will be in the hands of the GOP until 2020 due to domination in governorships and the attendent upcoming redistricting)

This concept of redistribultion of wealth is embraced only by the 20%ers in this country like Chris and Old Rocks..........nobody else ( see election results ). A vast majority of Americans rejects radical left public policy like we've seen for the last 2 years. Indeed.........the best chance the environmental k00ks had for advancing their agenda is now gone. FTMFW!!!!


But hey..............knock yourseves out with the jibberish of glacier advances and lake temperatures!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

Post Carbon: NOAA: This year warmest on record so far - David A. Fahrenthold

 

[skookerasbil]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glacier_National_Park_(U.S

 

[skookerasbil]

Melting glaciers force Italy, Swiss to redraw border - CNN.com

 

[westwall]

And your point is? Less driving will get it back to 4 months? Stopping industry will get it to 5 months? This is a serious question...What are the draw backs to a 1-2 degree rise in temps in the next 100 years? Will it be time to panic when the earth goes through a cooling phase like it did in the 1970's? And who are you inviro-whackos to say that colder is better? That is a question the green/communists have yet to answer.

The greeinies and the socialists are only the tools in the box, the real people running this are wealthy industrialists and banking groups like Goldman Sachs. They just use the greenies and leftists because they are useful idiots.

Wow. It just doesn't get any better than this. Between the two posts, I am a Communist, and a tool of the super capitalists. Talk about a split personality!

Really, all this reveals is that you two haven't a clue as to how to answer to the fact that the whole of the scientific community is in consensus concerning AGW.

Becuase they aren't foolish silly person. That consensus is only in the minds of the religious fanatics such as yourself, and the scam artists using fools like you to further their money generating efforts.

Don't fret though as the Earth continues to get real cold the whole religious movement will
continue its inexorable collapse.

 

[skookerasbil]

Note..........the k00ks never have any response for the posts of uber-astuteness thrown up by sk00ks...............

The compelling question is.............why?

The answer, of course, is that with these posts of uber-astuteness, sk00ks confronts the nuts with the utter reality!!!! The utter reality is that for all the "consensus"..........for all the data on icebergs...........for all the graphs on temperature..............for all the "science"................

If its all so crystal clear.................why is it there is not jack-shit being done about it??? Why is it that nobody gives a rats ass except for the radical environmentalists???


Its because in terms of public policy..............this shit is as palatable to the American public as fringe far right BS, like their call for repeal of affirmative action programs or putting certain races in the back of a bus. In America.........people dont go for fringe shit.......in either side.