Global Warming concerts.....

Thats OK

So the report claims that atmospheric methane concentrations have not increased in the last 7 years?

1) I find that very hard to believe.
2) Even if that is true - last 7 years? For f**k sake we've been pumping crap into our atmosphere for a lot longer than that!! Seven years is nothing!!



taken from:
http://www.env.go.jp/en/wpaper/1993/...000000000.html

Also, the article states that 'apparently' Greenland's glaciers are expanding now?

Give me the name of any of the glaciers that fall under that category and I'll give you 50 that are receding. You only need to look at the photographic records to find indisputable evidence of just how much the glaciers and ice sheets in Antarctica are decreasing in size. I haven't studied Greenland's ice as extensively as Antarctica's but the notion that two great ice masses on opposite sides of the earth are doing completely opposite things is highly unlikely.

The rate of ice loss is only 25 cubic miles per year? Have a look at this Nature article and see if the figures add up - I think you'll find they're a little higher!

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...e05168_F4.html

Oh, and when you also consider that the rate of ice loss does not follow a linear variation but that the rate itself is steadily increasing, the matter is set to get very much worse in a very much shorter space of time.

Maybe you can also elaborate as to what "traditionally refereed" actually means - since the author of your article does not. Are all of the articles that have ever been written that support the idea of global warming 'unrefereed'?

I think not.

Yep, that's the same problem I have with the article. Graphs rock!

deb