Global Warming Nutbags in Full-Blown Hysteria: Climate Change Caused Japan Tsunamis….

[HonestChieffan]

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2...uses-tsunamis/


Who would have expected it...

[Jaric]

Strange. I thought in this instance it was the earthquake that caused the tsunami. And I thought that it was techtonic (spelling?) plates pushing against each other that caused the earthquake. Well not so much the pushing, but more the end result of the pushing.
And here I find out it was all global warming. How about that?

[tiptap]

The mechanism proposed as a hypothesis is that the removal of the weight of Glaciers allows for a "rebound" of the earth from underneath the mass. We do see rebounding over areas from the lost of ice from the last Glacial period here in N. America. But its association with earthquakes would be hard to substantiate. This is a blog and not from any peer reviewed publication.

[Jaric]

Originally Posted by tiptap

The mechanism proposed as a hypothesis is that the removal of the weight of Glaciers allows for a "rebound" of the earth from underneath the mass. We do see rebounding over areas from the lost of ice from the last Glacial period here in N. America. But its association with earthquakes would be hard to substantiate. This is a blog and not from any peer reviewed publication.

I was under the impression that plate movements had far more to do with what was happening below the earth's surface, rather than above it.

Which would seem to rule out "global warming"

[tiptap]

Take disease. You can have causes do to germs or old age or environmental uptake (poison) and the existence of one does not forbid the other sources of diseases. I am as sure as one can be that the Japanese quake is all do to plate tectonics and lateral movement of the earth crust. It has absolutely nothing to do with Glacial lost. But rebound of the crust is a known phenomenon from lost of Glacial Ice and to investigate the possibility of that interacting with "triggering" plate responses isn't ludicrous just totally unsubstantiated at this point.

[BucEyedPea]

tip you must have some sort of marker that alerts you to any global warming threads since you're rarely here otherwise.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by HonestChieffan

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2...uses-tsunamis/


Who would have expected it...

I know a self-proclaimed socialist who thinks the Indonesian Tsunami was caused by oil drilling.

[loochy]

I think the earthquake was caused by Charlie Weis falling off of his hoveround.

[Jaric]

Originally Posted by tiptap

Take disease. You can have causes do to germs or old age or environmental uptake (poison) and the existence of one does not forbid the other sources of diseases. I am as sure as one can be that the Japanese quake is all do to plate tectonics and lateral movement of the earth crust. It has absolutely nothing to do with Glacial lost. But rebound of the crust is a known phenomenon from lost of Glacial Ice and to investigate the possibility of that interacting with "triggering" plate responses isn't ludicrous just totally unsubstantiated at this point.

I know you aren't arguing this is the cause, but since Glaciers melts and refreeze every year as a result of normal temperature change, wouldn't we see more evidence of them causing earthquakes (albiet much smaller in nature than this one) if the theory held water so to speak?

[tiptap]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

tip you must have some sort of marker that alerts you to any global warming threads since you're rarely here otherwise.

It is like this BEP, last time I quit following football was during the labor strike so I am really not interested there. Most of the reiterated stories are politically motivated over here. Including those associated with Climate Change. I know I am seen as being no less political. However I am quite willing to have Capitalistic solutions put forward to Global Warming. You know grapes rather than watermelons. But that requires addressing the assault on the science.

I am not interested in the political solution, just that the solution is addressed. So I have cut back on commenting about other political discussions and have addressed just this subject as to the science. I understand that it is perceived as liberally motivated because I am a liberal. But as such I am not wedded to one approach over another if they are both reasonably successful. And I try just to address the science.

[tiptap]

Originally Posted by Jaric

I know you aren't arguing this is the cause, but since Glaciers melts and refreeze every year as a result of normal temperature change, wouldn't we see more evidence of them causing earthquakes (albiet much smaller in nature than this one) if the theory held water so to speak?

How old is the earth Jaric? We measure the whole Great Lakes area rebounding from the Ice Age Glacial lost. We do not have that melt and refreeze every year and that scale of activity that is associated with "rebound" Only if mass was lost from Greenland or Antarctica would we see "rebound" there. And again I don't see a mechanism for translating that to triggering plate movement so far from those areas. Please don't let this rather obscure argument be seen as being central or even evidence of Global Warming.

[ClevelandBronco]

Originally Posted by tiptap

I understand that it is perceived as liberally motivated because I am a liberal.

You forgot "ponderously dull" and "irrelevant."

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by tiptap

It is like this BEP, last time I quit following football was during the labor strike so I am really not interested there. Most of the reiterated stories are politically motivated over here. Including those associated with Climate Change. I know I am seen as being no less political. However I am quite willing to have Capitalistic solutions put forward to Global Warming. You know grapes rather than watermelons. But that requires addressing the assault on the science.

I am not interested in the political solution, just that the solution is addressed. So I have cut back on commenting about other political discussions and have addressed just this subject as to the science. I understand that it is perceived as liberally motivated because I am a liberal. But as such I am not wedded to one approach over another if they are both reasonably successful. And I try just to address the science.

Well that's all well and good. I was just observing your immediate appearance on GW and no where else.

[tiptap]

If you mean me personally that is true. I am old enough that I will not pay the consequence.

[Jaric]

Originally Posted by tiptap

How old is the earth Jaric? We measure the whole Great Lakes area rebounding from the Ice Age Glacial lost. We do not have that melt and refreeze every year and that scale of activity that is associated with "rebound" Only if mass was lost from Greenland or Antarctica would we see "rebound" there. And again I don't see a mechanism for translating that to triggering plate movement so far from those areas. Please don't let this rather obscure argument be seen as being central or even evidence of Global Warming.

That makes sense.