For those that say no reputable scientist would agree:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n..._DayAfter.html


Michael Bryant, WA4009SWL
Louisville, KY
R75, S800, RX320, SW77, ICF2010K,
DX398, 7600G, 6800W, RF2200, 7600A
GE SRll, Pro-2006, Pro-2010, Pro-76
(remove "nojunk" to reply)

Michael 'I'm a disgusting slug of a man' Bryant wrote:

For those that say no reputable scientist would agree:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n..._DayAfter.html

I do agree that you are a retard, Fat Boy.

You prove my point most every day!

OFF TOPIC !!!

jw
K9RZZ

Dude get a friggin life! You need to post to rec.alt.crazy or
rec.alt.losers!


"Michael Bryant" wrote in message
...
For those that say no reputable scientist would agree:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n..._DayAfter.html


Michael Bryant, WA4009SWL
Louisville, KY
R75, S800, RX320, SW77, ICF2010K,
DX398, 7600G, 6800W, RF2200, 7600A
GE SRll, Pro-2006, Pro-2010, Pro-76
(remove "nojunk" to reply)

In article ,
ocom (Michael Bryant) writes:

Subject: Overwhelming Scientific Consensus on Warming
From: ocom (Michael Bryant)
Date: 30 May 2004 14:47:09 GMT

For those that say no reputable scientist would agree:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n..._DayAfter.html



But is global warming real?

The overwhelming scientific consensus is that global warming is real, and that
it's upon us now. In the last century, the average temperature of the Earth has
warmed roughly 1° Fahrenheit [0.56° Celsius]. That means an enormous additional
amount of heat energy has been built into the system, and there are serious
consequences to that warming.

What role does human activity play in global warming?

The atmosphere of the Earth is like a blanket that traps heat. It keeps the
temperature at the surface of the Earth about 50° or 60° [Fahrenheit/28° or 33°
Celsius] warmer than it would be otherwise, which is great because it makes the
world a pleasant place to live. But humans have been adding to the gases that
help trap this heat.

We've been adding to the stock of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by taking
coal, oil, and natural gas out of the ground and burning them as fuels.
Combined with deforestation, this has added around a third of the amount of
carbon in the atmosphere.

How does climate change manifest itself?

Ocean levels are rising, because water expands as it heats up. Since there is
more energy in the system, storms may become more frequent and more violent.
Increased incidents of flooding create heavier runoffs and soil erosion.
Indirect effects of climate change can also cause entire species to go extinct.


In the movie, the influx of fresh water, caused by the melting of a massive ice
sheet, changes the salinity of the oceans, shutting down the Gulf Stream.

Could that happen?

In theory, that is realistic. Salty water is heavier than fresh water. When the
cold, salty current reaches the northern latitudes and gives out its heat, the
current actually sinks and flows back along the bottom of the ocean toward the
tropics.

When then there's a lot of fresh water added to that current, it may stop
flowing, because it's not dense enough to sink anymore.
In the past, retreating glaciers dumped enormous amounts of fresh water very
suddenly into the North Atlantic, and the currents stopped

(Michael "Mega-Wide" Bryant) wrote:


For those that say no reputable scientist would agree:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n..._DayAfter.html


Yep, many scientists agree that NYC would be inundated by a huge wall of water
if Comrade Bryant was dropped into Long Island Sound from the rear cargo doors
of a C5-A transport plane.

CRUSH THE LEFT wrote:

(Michael "Mega-Wide" Bryant) wrote:


For those that say no reputable scientist would agree:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n..._DayAfter.html


Yep, many scientists agree that NYC would be inundated by a huge wall of water
if Comrade Bryant was dropped into Long Island Sound from the rear cargo doors
of a C5-A transport plane.

LOfrickinL!

"Michael Bryant" wrote in message
...
For those that say no reputable scientist would agree:


http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n..._DayAfter.html


Awww, from the header I actually thought there was going to be
evidence of an overwhelming consensus as opposed to -one guy saying-
there's a consensus.

And I believe the real dispute in this area is on whether the human
contribution to warming is a meaningful contributor to the issue.

However, the quantities of CO2 have increased dramatically over the last
100-150 years.

Probably due to the increase in human population. After all, we exhale CO2.

Bill, K5BY

Anything with an oxidative metabolism will exhale CO2. The rise in human
population hasn't been that extreme between 1750-1900. But it went up very
quickly from 1950 onwards. See the following link:

http://www.prb.org/Content/Navigatio...ion_Growth.htm

Regards

John Barnard

WShoots1 wrote:

However, the quantities of CO2 have increased dramatically over the last
100-150 years.

Probably due to the increase in human population. After all, we exhale CO2.

Bill, K5BY