quote:


Most of Great Lakes surface frozen for second straight year
By JOHN FLESHER - The Associated Press

TRAVERSE CITY, Mich. (AP) For the second consecutive winter, bitter weather threatens to turn the surface of the Great Lakes into a vast, frozen plain.

Nearly 81 percent of the lakes' surface area was covered with ice, the NOAA Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory reported Friday. That was down slightly from more than 85 percent the previous day a glitch that probably happened because strong winds broke apart some ice and created open spots detected by satellites, said George Leshkevich, a physical scientist with the lab in Ann Arbor.

But with forecasts calling for frigid weather at least through the end of the month, the ice cover may keep expanding, he said. It's grown rapidly as temperatures have plunged this month, nearly doubling over the past couple of weeks.

Records show the lakes' most widespread freeze was 94.7 percent in 1979. The ice cover topped out at 92.2 percent last March.

Significant portions of the lakes typically froze over decades ago, Leshkevich said, but the frequency of severe winters has declined since the late 1990s.

"Two almost record-setting years back to back would be very unusual," he said.

One likely explanation for the rapid buildup this month is that 2014's freeze lasted so long Lake Superior wasn't completely ice-free until June and summer was so mild that the lakes didn't absorb much heat, he said. "So we started this season with below-water temperatures to begin with."

The ice blanket reaches across more than 90 percent of Lakes Superior, Huron and Erie, while Lakes Michigan and Ontario are more than halfway covered.

It has produced some spectacular visual images, from ice caves along the Lake Michigan shoreline to a glacial buildup making it appear that Niagara Falls had frozen in place.

But it's a headache for the Coast Guard, whose cutters open channels for vessels hauling vital cargo such as heating oil and road salt. The Detroit-based tug Bristol Bay has struggled for days to free the Arthur M. Anderson, a freighter stranded about 70 miles east of Cleveland in ice up to 10 feet thick. The Canadian Coast Guard has dispatched an icebreaker to assist.

The job has taken so much longer than expected that the Bristol Bay's crew ran low on food and had to receive a delivery by helicopter, which lowered supplies in their rescue basket.

Things will get even busier in mid-March, when the shipping season begins for the lakes' regular traffic of vessels carrying iron ore, coal, grain and other bulk cargo.

"We're probably going to be looking at situations like we had last year, where we had to put together convoys lots of vessels together to make it through," Coast Guard spokesman Lorne Thomas said.

quote:

ORIGINAL: usememistress775

I cannot say for certain about why they lie, but my best bet is money.

quote:

ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies

quote:

ORIGINAL: usememistress775

I cannot say for certain about why they lie, but my best bet is money.

If that's true, who's money? We know where the deniers get theirs from, where do the warmers get theirs from?

quote:

ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies

We have scientists asserting that there is man made climate change, they don't know by exactly how much or how it will affect the future of the planet and mankind, but they are sure it is happening.

We have a few scientists denying that there is any climate change. I don't know the exact ratio of fors to againsts, 97% is a number I have heard being put forward, this may be true or not but it is clear that the vast majority believe in man made climate change, pick a number lets say at least 9 to 1.

Now we know why most of the deniers are doing what they are doing, vast lumps of cash coming from the fossil fuel lobby, which leaves a tiny % age of scientists who genuinely do not believe in climate change.

Now the deniers spend all their time debunking all the science, the large and growing amount of data we have that proves climate change.

My question is what's in it for all the scientists who believe? What is their motive? Why are they gathering, analysing and announcing their results?

Are they all lying, if so why? Why are they all risking their reputations, their futures as scientists if it is all nonsense and lies? Is there an incredibly rich and powerful wind turbine company funding it all that I have never heard of?

Just for some here who only see through red white and blue tinted spectacles, these scientists who comprise the vast majority of scientists in this field come from all over the world, every bit of it, so it isn't some lefty liberal Democrat vs Republican thing.

Why would they all be lying?

And if they are lying, what is the purpose of those lies? What are they trying to achieve?

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies

We have scientists asserting that there is man made climate change, they don't know by exactly how much or how it will affect the future of the planet and mankind, but they are sure it is happening.

We have a few scientists denying that there is any climate change. I don't know the exact ratio of fors to againsts, 97% is a number I have heard being put forward, this may be true or not but it is clear that the vast majority believe in man made climate change, pick a number lets say at least 9 to 1.

Now we know why most of the deniers are doing what they are doing, vast lumps of cash coming from the fossil fuel lobby, which leaves a tiny % age of scientists who genuinely do not believe in climate change.

Now the deniers spend all their time debunking all the science, the large and growing amount of data we have that proves climate change.

My question is what's in it for all the scientists who believe? What is their motive? Why are they gathering, analysing and announcing their results?

Are they all lying, if so why? Why are they all risking their reputations, their futures as scientists if it is all nonsense and lies? Is there an incredibly rich and powerful wind turbine company funding it all that I have never heard of?

Just for some here who only see through red white and blue tinted spectacles, these scientists who comprise the vast majority of scientists in this field come from all over the world, every bit of it, so it isn't some lefty liberal Democrat vs Republican thing.

Why would they all be lying?

And if they are lying, what is the purpose of those lies? What are they trying to achieve?

First off, most of what you've said is leftist myth. For instance your 97%. Thousands of papers are written on climate. Of those written, something like 37 papers made a comment one way or another on it being man caused. Leftist took those 37 papers and said 97% all agree on something so the science is settled. What I would ask you is, why do you believe any science is settled. We're still arguing how many planets exist in our solar system.

You say the oil industry is dumping money to scientists to disput global warming so those scientists shouldn't be trusted. Do you know how much money the government is throwing at scientists to prove there is global warming. By your preposition, your entire argument is moot.

Frankly, most of the senior climate scientist used to be nuclear physisists. When the Berlin Wall went down, so did their government funding. They are not going to let that happen again.

People have been finding temperature data in the models that's been fudged for years. It's just happened again. So, say, you're one guy at NASA collectin temperature data and you fudge it (as is actually being found now) and then everyone else uses it...does that mean all climate scientists are fudging data?

I can go on with the errors in your statement, but I'm guessing it won't matter to you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: usememistress775

Everyone is getting paid for their research. The last scientist who only cared about discovering things for the sake of discovery and not selling his/her ideas for money died penniless after living on catfood for years. Without that mentality all of the research is questionable.

The original research into global warming skipped over the medieval warm period to make the present day temperature spike more startling. The reason we feel the effects of that temperature spike so much more is because we live with all the modern conveniences of air conditioning and heat in the winter. Our bodies have no time to acclimate to the heat outside during the summer so it feels more intense than it did when we spent more time outside than in. The difference between 100 and 99 is not that great, but when we spend 90+% of the time in 70 we cannot bear the regular temperature.

quote:

ORIGINAL: usememistress775

Everyone is getting paid for their research. The last scientist who only cared about discovering things for the sake of discovery and not selling his/her ideas for money died penniless after living on catfood for years. Without that mentality all of the research is questionable.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tkman117


Moron, you really need to understand how funding for scientific research works before you make stupid claims.

http://www.iflscience.com/editors-blog/seven-myths-about-scientists-debunked

quote:

ORIGINAL: usememistress775

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tkman117


Moron, you really need to understand how funding for scientific research works before you make stupid claims.

http://www.iflscience.com/editors-blog/seven-myths-about-scientists-debunked

Anyone who opens their statement with an ad hominem attack doesn't get their links clicked.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies

We have scientists asserting that there is man made climate change, they don't know by exactly how much or how it will affect the future of the planet and mankind, but they are sure it is happening.

We have a few scientists denying that there is any climate change. I don't know the exact ratio of fors to againsts, 97% is a number I have heard being put forward, this may be true or not but it is clear that the vast majority believe in man made climate change, pick a number lets say at least 9 to 1.

Now we know why most of the deniers are doing what they are doing, vast lumps of cash coming from the fossil fuel lobby, which leaves a tiny % age of scientists who genuinely do not believe in climate change.

Now the deniers spend all their time debunking all the science, the large and growing amount of data we have that proves climate change.

My question is what's in it for all the scientists who believe? What is their motive? Why are they gathering, analysing and announcing their results?

Are they all lying, if so why? Why are they all risking their reputations, their futures as scientists if it is all nonsense and lies? Is there an incredibly rich and powerful wind turbine company funding it all that I have never heard of?

Just for some here who only see through red white and blue tinted spectacles, these scientists who comprise the vast majority of scientists in this field come from all over the world, every bit of it, so it isn't some lefty liberal Democrat vs Republican thing.

Why would they all be lying?

And if they are lying, what is the purpose of those lies? What are they trying to achieve?

First off, most of what you've said is leftist myth. For instance your 97%. Thousands of papers are written on climate. Of those written, something like 37 papers made a comment one way or another on it being man caused. Leftist took those 37 papers and said 97% all agree on something so the science is settled. What I would ask you is, why do you believe any science is settled. We're still arguing how many planets exist in our solar system.

You say the oil industry is dumping money to scientists to disput global warming so those scientists shouldn't be trusted. Do you know how much money the government is throwing at scientists to prove there is global warming. By your preposition, your entire argument is moot.

Frankly, most of the senior climate scientist used to be nuclear physisists. When the Berlin Wall went down, so did their government funding. They are not going to let that happen again.

People have been finding temperature data in the models that's been fudged for years. It's just happened again. So, say, you're one guy at NASA collectin temperature data and you fudge it (as is actually being found now) and then everyone else uses it...does that mean all climate scientists are fudging data?

I can go on with the errors in your statement, but I'm guessing it won't matter to you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: usememistress775

Quick, how much money is in "green" industry? Not all the scientists claiming global warming are paid by the government. Also certain political entities and lobbyist groups pay for scientific studies as well.