<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for 2008 Arctic sea-ice melt second-meltiest ever]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by GonzoDon http://www.grist.org/article/meltin/ Wed, 17 Sep 2008 12:08:32 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/meltin/1 And another 2.5 billion

Another 2.5 billion human beings on the way by year 2050.

In my relatively short lifetime, the global population has increased by about 135%.  How long can that continue?  Do you think over-exploitation of our resources (soil, water, fish, forests) could have, um, something to do with that exponential growth?  Global warming, too?

Grist!!!!  For God's sake when are you going to start reporting on stories that address exponential population growth pressures on our tiny planet?  

You have ignored several mainstream stories on the issue in just the last couple of weeks.

How long will you continue to ignore the elephant in the room?

]]> And another 2.5 billion

Another 2.5 billion human beings on the way by year 2050.

In my relatively short lifetime, the global population has increased by about 135%.  How long can that continue?  Do you think over-exploitation of our resources (soil, water, fish, forests) could have, um, something to do with that exponential growth?  Global warming, too?

Grist!!!!  For God's sake when are you going to start reporting on stories that address exponential population growth pressures on our tiny planet?  

You have ignored several mainstream stories on the issue in just the last couple of weeks.

How long will you continue to ignore the elephant in the room?

]]> Comment #2 by wreckenhavoc http://www.grist.org/article/meltin/ Wed, 17 Sep 2008 13:20:47 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/meltin/2 second-meltiest ever?

I am so confused.  'ever' to me means a really really long time, like billions and billions of years. So when you say "second-meltiest ever" in the headline, and then say "second-largest on record" I begin to wonder just when we began keeping record of this.  Was it 1979?  And if we have as you say; "slightly larger ice cover this year" doesn't that mean there is more ice to melt this year? Are you also measuring the volume of melt without factoring the total geography covered?

]]> second-meltiest ever?

I am so confused.  'ever' to me means a really really long time, like billions and billions of years. So when you say "second-meltiest ever" in the headline, and then say "second-largest on record" I begin to wonder just when we began keeping record of this.  Was it 1979?  And if we have as you say; "slightly larger ice cover this year" doesn't that mean there is more ice to melt this year? Are you also measuring the volume of melt without factoring the total geography covered?

]]>