Comments on: Giant Ice Shelf Breaks Off In Arctic

Ice Chunk Spanning 7 Square Miles Is Largest Piece To Break Off Since 2005

[jimfinster]

Oh ***! there is more ice in the artic than there was at this time last year, you idiot liberals want to make more crisis than solutions, we should have open season on all liberals, we need to thi them out like all wide idiots. This is sumer isn this part if the world, what else does ie do when it is hot, it melts, did the liberals not learn that in school or what, screw the liberals.

Posted by zgomer


LOL, both your spelling and facts are atrocious:


The Arctic ice cap has shrunk by an area twice the size of France''''s land mass over the last two years, the Paris-based National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS) said Wednesday.

"The year 2008 promises to be a critical year on every level," said Jean-Claude Gascard, the body''''s research director and coordinator of European scientific mission Damocles, which is monitoring the effects of climate change across the Arctic.

September 2007 measurements show ice covering 4.13 million square kilometres (1.6 million square miles), down from 5.3 million square kilometres in 2005.

"Melting could result in the loss of another million in one (2008) summer," he added at a press conference.

[nojoy01]

Bye guys, gotta go. ''Nova Science Now'' is coming on.
:)

[nojoy01]

Posted by jimfinster at 07:42 PM : Jul 30, 2008

I respect their opinions, but I have to go with the data presented & my own experiences w/firearms.

no argument, just difference of opinion. ''nuf said ''bout this here.

[nojoy01]

''Although that one is a stretch.''

Posted by jimfinster at 07:37 PM : Jul 30, 2008

Well, ok, but not really. This is the wrong forum but I did check data & drew my own conclusions. The final factor that convinced me was that it was a ''clout shot''. The car was going in a straight line away from oswald, downhill which cured a lot of problems with shooting ''down hill at a moving target'' and the shot that killed JFK was at 70 yards. Yes, I know it was a POS rifle but even a POS works well enough if you know it inside out.

[jimfinster]

The impossibility of Oswald''s alleged shooting feat was what led former Marine sniper Craig Roberts to reject the lone-gunman theory. Roberts explains as he recounts the first time he visited the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository:

I turned my attention to the window in the southeast corner--the infamous Sniper''s Nest. . . . I immediately felt like I had been hit with a sledge hammer. The word that came to mind at what I saw as I looked down through the window to Elm Street and the kill zone was: IMPOSSIBLE! I knew instantly that Oswald could not have done it.

Retired Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock is likewise skeptical of Oswald''s alleged shooting feat. Hathcock is a former senior instructor at the U. S. Marine Corps Sniper Instruction School at Quantico, Virginia. He has been described as the most famous American military sniper in history. In Vietnam he was credited with 93 confirmed kills. He now conducts police SWAT team sniper schools across the country. Craig Roberts asked Hathcock about the marksmanship feat attributed to Oswald by the Warren Commission. Hathcock answered that he did not believe Oswald could have done what the Commission said he did. Added Hathcock,

Let me tell you what we did at Quantico. We reconstructed the whole thing: the angle, the range, the moving target, the time limit, the obstacles, everything. I don''t know how many times we tried it, but we couldn''t duplicate what the Warren Commission said Oswald did.

[jimfinster]

H) Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone and was solely responsible for the death of John F. Kennedy.

Posted by nojoy01


Although that one is a stretch.

[nojoy01]

: ))

[jimfinster]

That is what I believe jfinster. And if you ''''don''''t expect to change and minds'''' then you are just feeding your ego in this forum.

Posted by nojoy01


You say "feeding my ego" like it''s a bad thing :)

[zykracosmos]

NoJoy,
Most scientists believe in "healthy skepticism." That should not translate as cynicism. The best science is that which is peer reviewed. Theories only become stronger when methods and data are questioned. Or they change if they must. Look at the hand-wringing that cosmologists are going through right now over the nature of the universe- the role of dark matter and dark energy, the "theory of everything." They have more questions than answers now (and I feel for them, because many of these questions may be out of reach for answers in their lifetimes). The difference here is that our very existence depends on an agressive approach to understanding the intricacies of our climate systems, including the interactions and dependence of ecoysystems. We are now in the middle of the 6th Extinction Event. We are losing more species now, at a faster rate, than any extinction event in the history of the planet. But we are like the frog in the pot. A frog put in a pot of cold water will sit still as the water heats up and finally boils him. If thrown into a pot of hot water, he will instinctively jump out. We have to find a sense of urgency in what is slowly becoming a threat to our entire life support system.

[voidmaster-2009]

well... gotta go, folks. Been fun.