Global Warming Triggers an International Race for the Arctic
As the ice melts, national rivalries heat up over oil and gas deposits and shipping routes
Reader Comments
Grab for Arctic
Here's a thought...how bout they all back off and leave it alone? No one owns it except for the Inuit that have lived there for centuries. Has anyone asked them? I bet not. When will the knee-jerk reaction of greed become a thing of the past? How can I teach my child not to be greedy when it exists right in front of his eyes? It might be a simplistic point of view but someone has to start somewhere.
Cheap viagra
Very nice site!
cooling
Man made global warming is a sham. There are now many scientists saying that the earth is actually cooling. You tree hugging idiots better buy a parka.
IT'S GLOBAL ALRIGHT
But is it global warming, or a pole shift??? Or is it just another globalists plot to subdue the Earth??? If in fact, there is an equal and opposite reaction, for every action, than what is the reaction of the thrust of N.A.S.A's...rockets on the poles??? I believe, that this reaction was not only known, but possibly one of the main reasons for the space program, in the first place!!! That is why the rockets are sent from the southern parts of Russia, China, and the U.S.!!! I also believe that a 33 degree tilt is the desired objection!!! Why??? Natural resources, minerals, and real estate, would be one good guess!!! Possibly, to try to stop the global alignment, that is to happen in 2012!!! It could even something as diabolical, as trying to position the universal space station (isiah14:12-14),in alignment with the sun, for it could, block out it sun by turning sideways???
The hole/window in the ozone was man made!!! The space program, could not exist without it!!! All rockets/ space shuttles...exit and enter space through them !!! In 1936/7 when Hitler sent up the first space bound rocket, it could not penetrate the plasma like ozone, and exploded!!! His scientist, being aware, of that possibility, had a plan "B", and introduced refrigeration!!! And tons of fluorocarbons were released into the atmosphere, to form bubbles in the ozone, of which the Russians opened up for sputnik!!! The ozone had to be thinned out, in order to create big enough bubbles, so hemp was outlawed, to force the deforestation of the world in order to produce the worlds paper supply, that was made from hemp!!! The bleaching process, sent tons of chlorine bleach into the oceans, creating oxygen dead zones!!! It was that reduction of oxygen, and the fluorocarbon bubbles, that allowed the space race!!!
Only the legalization of the hemp plant can heal this hole!!! The space race never went to a vote of the people, but if we want to save the earth, we better "VOTE" on ending the space race!!! Global warming is nothing compared to losing the ozone layer!!!
global strategy
To deal with global warming, the government needs to immediately plant more trees, and stop cutting them down. It is a major problem they need to deal with. The importance of trees has been understated by "scientists" that truly don't understand the relevance of trees. Don't criticize the importance of the concept until you know all the facts. On top of deforestation, we are polluting the environment. Another contributing factor is modern day energy systems rely on explosion rather than implosion, and this generates heat. Every systems need to be more efficient and work on implosion, so they stay cool. The non-profit energy research organization at http://www.universalsymbiosis.org (also http://www.genuinewinner.com) is active in these areas which will help reverse effects of global warming. I suggest everyone also read "Living Energies" by Callum Coats which explains the work of Victor Schauberger and the importance of trees to our planet. Don't rely on information from the authorities as their advisors don't fully understand the life cycle of the planet. We need to push the authorities to develop forest management and sustainability plans, and this will solve at least part of the problem.
Planetary Cycles yes and global warming yes
There is global warming as measured by numerous studies. There is also the impression there is no warming. It depends on the scope of your data. Global conditions average out to be almost null as pointed out in Josh's response. Locally however, dramatic differences can be seen as in the ice cap melting. Yes, there are many cycles and periods of temperature climb and decent in our history. Yes, we do not understand all there is to understand, but that does not make us wrong or ignorant. Climate is an energy system. The system ocillates between extreems. The more energy we put in the bigger the extreems. Basically, you may never find evidence of warming by looking at averages but you may find it at the fringes, at the extreems. Bigger and more numerous hurricanes, tornadoes, drought and rainfall. Whatever weather you have is just going to get more interesting. The question is, how interesting do you want it to get?
Gloabl warming scare affects the global economy
Imagine if all the focus, energy and money spent on "saving the planet" and instead focused on more important Global issues such as endemic hunger. Wouldnt we all be better off
Anthropogenic Global Warming Theory Trashes the Scientific Method
Omestad claims recent melting is historic and unprecendented. It is neither. In 2006 scientists discovered evidence in seabed core samples showing the Arctic was TROPICAL in its past. The core samples show fluctuating warm and cold periods throughout the Arctic's history. Ice ages followed by interglacial periods. We're in an interglacial period right now. Anthropogenic global warming (AGW) alarmists never use data before the 1970s since it doesn't compliment their agenda. Furthermore, there is no runaway global warming. Avg. global temps. are about the same now as they were a century ago. Over the past century temperatures oscillated up and down slightly with no net gain. The slight warming since the 1970s (a rise of about 0.6 degrees Celsius) was erased completely in 2007. Could it be that something other than CO2 drives climate? Perhaps the sun and the oceans? If the media did its job it would find mountains of evidence that the cycles of the sun and oceans drive Earth's climate. Why do AGW alarmists ignore the sun, the solar system's ultimate source of energy, and its connections to the oceans. The oceans are still not understood completely, but it is understood that they store and release vast amounts of energy. Never mentioned by AGW alarmists are things like the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO). Let's look at the PDO. Discovered by Don Easterbrook and confirmed by NASA, the PDO shifts between cool and warm phases every 20-30 years. From the late 1970s to the late 1990s the PDO was in a warm phase. During PDO warm phases the El Nino warming phenomenon dominates world weather making climate warmer. A strong temperature spike in 1998 coincides with a potent El Nino and a very active sun that year. How can this be ignored? Now the PDO has shifted to its cool phase and guess what? The sun is quiet. Hardly any sunspots. Not one sunspot in August 2008. During PDO cool phases, La Nina dominates world weather making climate cooler. La Nina dominated in 2007 and the planet cooled. Climate is cyclic and CO2 is a minor factor. CO2 is an essential trace gas that makes up about 0.037 percent of all greenhouse gases. Man's contribution to CO2 is a fraction of that. And we're to believe CO2 overrides the energy of the sun and the oceans? The wild predictions of climate chaos caused by CO2 are not coming true. Temps are not rising. Sea levels are not rising. How do we know that natural processes are not melting Arctic ice? We don't. Climate science is far from settled. Consensus hasn't been reached. To claim the science is settled is anti-science. AGW alarmists spit on the scientific method by ignoring any evidence that contradicts it. Questioning AGW is heresy. It's more religion than science. So many scientists are skeptics. So much evidence contrary to AGW is available. The media won't dare print it, so you have to find it yourself. When politicians claim the science is settled it's time to ask questions.
