SupremeLeader

Another wife comment...Nice. I won't bring your hubby into it; that is rude....as were my PM'd comments, but you asked for it.

I didn't start the personal attack(s)....that was Lynn, and you insinuating I would bring up another past topic. I commented on Canadesis' opinion on the Scientific community (which he made on this topic).....and I get ganged up on, c'mon. You guys are weak. And Lynn, I'm a 'chicken *hit',....that's hilarious! You jump in conveniently when you think you have the upper-hand (which you must.....If I made a crack like the one you made it would never be posted). But at least the Mods let me give you one back. This topic was about the cold weather and pine beetles; Canadensis attempted to turn it into something else, I responded, and I'm the bad guy? Please. I play back (dirty, as it was necessary) and you still all miss the point. "Feel free to comment but watch your tone"...... Settle down Sun, who do you think you are? And I don't need a lesson on tone and sentence structure. What a bunch.

hmmm, my calculations indicate Lynn is shorter and larger than my wife.

Wow, wife comments now..... Am I not allowed to comment on someone who is attacking the scientific community?

Explain?

Your disdain for the scientific community is both naive and ignorant.

I would speculate that considering the number of protesters and potential security issues coupled with the logistical coordination, mass transit is not an option for foreign delegates, diplomats, etc. Teleconferencing on this scale would also logistically be difficult. Another point is that these types of events allow people to mingle and discuss options at the several smaller venues that occur over the length of the conference.

agreed.

Thing is, the problem is very 'pressing' for some communities (particularily in the Arctic). And there is the vast amounts of locked methane that may possibly be released into the atmosphere if the climate continues to warm at this unprecedented rate (please...don't bring up the 10 year nonsense 'trend'). I say possibly because this is not a known outcome at this point, however, it is hardly something that should be played with considering Methane is 10 times more potent a greenhous gas than C02. http://marine.usgs.gov/fact-sheets/gas-hydrates/title.html http://www.energybulletin.net/node/3647 http://www.scientificamerican.com/article....l-below-the-ice

What? Another excellent comparison from Candensis. You just compared a National park to the Oil Sands. You do know Banff has a cap on development? Is there one on the Oil Sands?

Indeed, and make sure you also leave a hole in the Boreal forest the size of Great Britain in the process of being such concerned stewards of the environment. On another topic you mentioned pumping nutrients into the upper bow to increase nutrients. Sun, your suggestions are akin to one who thinks of themself as some kind of fifth element. All of your suggestions are slanted to suit a better life for.....yourself. On one hand you say we have no part in climate change and converting 65 millions barrels of oil per day into a gas has no effect, and on the other we should remove oil from the Athabasca region to make the river less toxic because 'it is the most reasonble thing to do'. Reason, that's a good word..you should look it up.

Stop using the 10-11 year 'trend'; this has been explained to you already. A 'trend' is something that doesn't have enough quantifiable results to be considered noteworthy. The 'trend' by the way is ~.1 degree. And to reiterate; if you start your graph out in 1997 or 1999 the results go out the window......and you talk about selective science. And to a couple of other 'facts' posted in this discussion; NASA stated that 1998 was the hottest year on record in the "United States", not the planet. In fact, the hottest year on record according to NASA is 2006 (on the planet)....not 1998. Keep bringing up the argument 'guys like SL' use about 'not caring about the future of your children', and keep posting Sun, you're oozing guilt at this point. It's so bad now you're posting Fox news sources, and you've reached 12 pages. But who knows, maybe the guilt is a good thing. Often times science denying 'Zealots' (which seems a far more appropriate term to describe your fanaticism) come full circle. Perhaps you're like Darth Vader......eventually you'll turn to the good side. Regards, Paul

I hate hockey (except the olympics). I think Sun is feeling cold; you'd better jump back in bed with him. But...would that be cheating?

That must be Sun-shine.

Check out this Sun, The report to support this news is linked to the article. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8387137.stm