Adam C

This is a front page headline from todays The Independent - one of the UKs most prestigious newspapers known for its neutrality and adherence to facts.

The article states:

Both the NW and the NE passages have become ice free "for the first time in at least 125,000 years"

"The opening of the passages is only the greatest of a host of ominous signs this month of a gathering crisis in the Arctic."

"Professor Mark Serreze, a sea ice specialist at the official US National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC), hailed the publication of the images as "a historic event", and said that it provided further evidence that the Arctic icecap may now have entered a "death spiral"."

In addition:

Auyuittuq National Park has seen "flooding from thawing glaciers. Auyuittuq means "land that never melts".

"Four weeks ago, a seven-year study at the University of Alberta reported that – besides shrinking in area – the thickness of the ice had dropped by half in just six years."

Please do not make any comments about what Al Gore or Palin or any other politician (especially US) has said.

The above is real, today, it has happened!

It is not a prediction.

It is not a theory.

It is not a computer model.

It is real and has already happened - the arctic is melting...

Finally, anyone who wants to says this is 'natural', 'usual', 'part of the pattern', etc. - please give verifiable sources for your statements (e.g. where are the computer models, predictions, etc that show that this much ice was going to happen without outside - e.g. human - interference). Any answers without such will be considered 'not an answer'.

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-c...

Gustav is predicted to hit New Orleans - based on AGW logic, shouldn't people stay?

Life is based on predicting future outcomes (note the plural). It is one of the things that distinguishes humans from animals - the ability to make predictions beyond the immediate future and to make appropriate decisions based not just on the likelihood of the prediction but on the impact of the predicted event.

For example:

If we are 99% certain it will rain tomorrow, we may still not pack an umbrella because getting wet isn't such a big deal.

If we are 25% sure that company X is going to go bankrupt next week, we will probably sell our shares today.

If there is a 1 in 200 chance that the ice is not thick enough, we tell our kids not to skate on the lake.

Scientists predict (at the time of me writing) less than a 90% chance that Gustav will hit New Orleans and yet the Governor of Louisiana has declared an emergency, Britons are told to leave the city and the mayor has imposed a curfew:

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/US/weather/08/27/gusta...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7590904.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7590426.stm

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/US/weather/08/27/gusta...

Scientists - not Al Gore, et al - from around the world - not just the USA - have said there is a 90% chance that humans are causing GW that will drastically affect all life on this planet and potentially (yes, low likelihood but high impact) cause the death of billions (note, not millions).

So, are there any AGW sceptics out there in New Orleans & Louisiana? Are you going to go about your normal business - no evacuation, no shattering of windows, no emergency rations, drive off calmly to work as usual... after all, it's just a prediction...

T Boone Pickens started Mesa Petroleum in 1956 with just $2,500 and now has a personal wealth of $2.7bn most of it from oil - now here's a man who understands the importance of energy to maintain our modern society - what do those scientists who depend on government hand outs know?

And what does the inspiration for 'Gordon Gekko' in Wall Street have to say, this epitomy of Big Texan Oil and staunch Republican?

"We're paying $700bn a year for foreign oil; it's breaking us as a nation. 90 days after the oil hits our shores, it's all burned up - we've got nothing to show for it: they still have our money!"

"Nixon said in 1970 that we were importing 20% of our oil and by 1980 it would be 0%. Now, it's just under 70%!"

His solution - drilling for more oil?

No:

Build wind turbines (he wants wind energy to go from 1% of US needs to 15% by 2020)!

He is building the world's largest wind farm (700 turbines) that will cost him $12bn.

AGW skeptics and oil enthusiasts - response?

"2008 State of the Future", a report commissioned and/or backed by a variety of organisations including The Millenium Project: World Federation of UN Associations, UNESCO, US Army, the World Bank and the Rockefeller Foundation, is due to be published this month. Excerpts have been released, one of which refutes the IPCCs report!!

Last year's IPCC report on AGW is shown to be wrong. This brand new report says "CO2 emissions are increasing even faster - and the world is warming faster - than the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reported... Emissions have gone from 19,912,070 kilotonnes in 1985 to 30,144,169 today."

If a cardiologist told you that you were likely to have a heart attack in a few years unless you stopped eating fried food, would you:

a) Argue that no one has ever seen a heart attack with their own eyes (it's always hidden inside the body)

b) Say that as it is just "likely", it isn't proven so until it happens, don't change your habits

c) Find a chiropodist who tells you everything's OK

d) Find a mechanic who tells you everything's OK

e) Talk to 30 cardiologists until you find one (employed by a fast food company) who says there's nothing to worry about

f) Argue that the guy at the other table is eating fries and he's not dying

g) Bring up research showing that the leading cause of death for women in Afghanistan is child birth

h) Cut back on the fried food, at least a little bit, just in case he's right

i) Not get the point and tell me this should be in 'health and medicine'

j) Argue that humans don't learn by experience and/or drawing comparisons

(Now apply this to GW!)

Are you, the audience, so sensitive or ignorant that you find the term "**** Sapiens", the proper name for our species, insulting, demeaning or otherwise offensive?