Goodpoint’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Slowed due to climate change?...

  To be serious for a moment...Of course the slowing of the growth of the ice cap is due to global warming.  I honestly can't believe there are people out there who are still denying THAT fact.

  But, I think we're being incredibly arrogant to think mankind could have such a major effect on our big ol' planet.

  This whole debate is so polarizing.  Both sides think the other is a step under grasshoppers in the intelligence department...

  And these arguments from the Suzuki/Gore side:  They're just as lame as the ones from the other side that did "the Great Global Warming Swindle".

  Do your own research on the topic.  Avoid information from biased sources on both sides.

  Gore/Suzuki/"Climate Change Scientists" are making the fight against climate change into a multi billion dollar industry.  They get paid for backing their side of the debate just like the other side has scientists and other "experts" being paid by Big Oil and other energy interests.

  So check out sources that have nothing to lose either way.  

  The government of Switzerland has been keeping records of their glaciers as far back as the 1600's when towns started getting wiped out as the glaciers advanced. (And, they ARE receding just as fast NOW as they advanced THEN.)

  Articles like the one on "the Missing Squadron" show how quickly ice can form.  (So, how long has Greenland really been ice covered???  Maybe only 200 years) And again, these guys who dug down to find those planes wouldn't lie about the depth they found them at.  They have nothing to lose in the global warming debate.

  There are so many examples...

  Just do a little research, I think you'll see this is a natural unstoppable cycle and we are going to have to act quickly to prepare for the coming changes or we're going to be as screwed as the polar bears.

  D N Jones Always think.

  On 'Greenland used to be green'--Don't judge a book by its cover, much less a land by its name posted 1 year, 10 months ago 23 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Party like it's 1992...?

  If you care to read the objection/answer at the top of the page, it asks the question : "How different could it have been just 1,000 years ago?"

  The answer to that is: 1000 years ago, the ice cap was significantly smaller than it is today.

  And to answer you question, the ice has gained only about 20 feet since 1992. 'cause the planets warmin' up, dontcha know?!?

  D N Jones Always think.

  On 'Greenland used to be green'--Don't judge a book by its cover, much less a land by its name posted 1 year, 10 months ago 23 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  How different could it have been just 1,000 years

  Well, to have an idea on how to answer this question check out this link:
  http://www.thelostsquadron.com/.

  Apparently Greenland's ice cap had grown 268 feet between 1942 and 1992!!!  That's over 5 feet/year average.

  So, it would be reasonable to say that Greenland was probably quite different 1,000 years ago.

  What truly "inconvenient truths" we can discover by simply asking questions and not going along with the "sky is falling" clique.

  D N Jones Always think.

  On 'Greenland used to be green'--Don't judge a book by its cover, much less a land by its name posted 1 year, 10 months ago 23 Responses