how come there are records...?

Question

of Leif Erickson giving the name to Greenland after hwo warm and green it was all year round and also record of Chinese sailors sailing all the way around Greenland in the middle of winter if human activity is causing gloabl warming.

Also (for you global warming idiots) how come astronmers can observe 'global warming' happening today on Mars and other planets if this is created by humans.

You global warming people think you are the smartest people on earth but actually you are the biggest dopes.

Answer 1

I'll ignore the discourteous parts of your question and address the other parts, which are easy to answer:

Regarding Greenland, you should read Jared Diamond's "Collapse". Greenland, despite its name, was never a "warm and green year round" place. After all, Viking civilization there never amounted to much of anything, suggesting that even if it experienced some localized temporary warming (which is certainly possible), it certainly wasn't broad in scope and extent. And the Chinese sailor angle is just plain silly. You may as well claim that unicorns also sailed around Greenland in winter too, and ask that I disprove that too.

As far Mars, we have 3 years, maybe 4 now, of evidence for a change in the extent of the south polar cap. Funny how a climate change denialist ignores hundreds of years of directly measured worldwide earth climate data and thousands of years of repeated and confirmed indirect measurements, but quickly latches on to 3 years of data from Mars, thinking that it represents a real "trend".

Even so, it's hard to say exactly what's happening on Mars, although there are a number of explanations. Whatever it is, it certainly doesn't seem to be due to solar activity, given that we have an excellent record of solar irradiance over the past 150 years, and there's been virtually no change in it in that time, despite world temperatures increasing all the while.

Sorry, but climate change denialists are going to have to work a little harder than to just spout the usual often-debunked canards like these.

Answer 2

The first settlers to arrive in Greenland were a group of Icelandic warrior-sailors led by Eirik Raude (better known as Eric the Red). Born in Jaeder, Norway in 950 he had been exiled due to his murderous activities and fled to Iceland from where he was again exiled http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erik_the_Red

He arrived in the fjords in the south west of the country in about 982 in what was then an uninhabited and unnamed land. Finding the surrounding land lush and green, the country was given the name Greenland (it's proper name is Kalaallit Nunaat meaning Land of Humans) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland

To imply that Greenland was once a green land demonstrates either ignorance, bias or a distortion of the facts. It was then, and always has been, a land primarily covered with a thick ice sheet. The fringes of the island are warmed by the Atlantic Conveyor (Gulf Stream) which ensures the coastal regions are considerable warmer than the inland areas. http://zfacts.com/p/190.html It's this same Gulf Stream that allows tropical gardens to flourish as far north as Scotland http://www.aboutscotland.co.uk/land/inverewe.html

At the time of 'discovery' the world was at the start of what is commonly referred to as the Medieval Warm Period, a period of a few hundred years when the average temperature of the earth rose above the global average for the last 2000 years. http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison_png

This should be put into context, the temperature rise had been about 0.4 degrees Celsius over 1000 years. In recent years this same level of warming has occurred during the last 25 years. In short, temperatures are rising about 40 times as fast now as they were when Eric the Red landed his ships on Greenland. http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:Instrumental_Temperature_Record_png

As for global warming on Mars, I'm afraid that this too is something that is often taken out of context by the ill-informed. It's an argument commonly used by those who dispute global warming but in doing so they demonstrate a lack of real evidence and a reliance on fabrication.

It all stems from a report published by NASA entitled 'Mars Is Melting' which was published in several journals and periodicals including National Geographic. You may wish to educate yourself and read the report here http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2003/07aug_southpole.htm You'll note that there is no reference to global warming and that the melting of the south polar ice cap (the north polar ice cap is expanding) is due to seasonal variations.

Quote Like Earth, Mars has seasons that cause its polar caps to wax and wane. "It's late spring at the south pole of Mars," says planetary scientist Dave Smith of the Goddard Space Flight Center. "The polar cap is receding because the springtime sun is shining on it." Unquote.

In future it may be prudent to check your facts before labelling people as 'idiots' and 'dopes'. To my mind the person who tries to make a point using fabricated evidence and distortions is the real idiot.

Answer 3

This is actually a very immature way of trying to make your point. There are much better ways. Besides you shouldn't allow other people to upset you like you have or else you will have a very difficult life. Let me try to put some balance back into this question:

The final answer to this question is not yet in. And although I lean towards accepting the human contribution to global warming and our consequent need to help curb it, I still hear and see evidences to the contrary. Day before yesterday on C-SPAN radio the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee (led by Chairman Henry Waxman, U.S. Representative, D-CA) interviewed James E. Hansen, Director, NASA, Goddard Institute for Space Studies who has been the most outspoken climate modeler and protagonist for global warming due to CO2. Also interviewed were Roy Spencer, Principal Research Scientist, University of Alabama in Huntsville, Earth System Science Center,
James Connaughton, Chair, White House Council on Environmental Quality, Philip Cooney, Chief of Staff (Fmr.), White House Council on Environmental Quality,
and George Deutsch, Public Affairs Officer (Fmr.), NASA.
This House Oversight Committee was conducting this hearing on possible political interference in the work of government climate change scientists. However most of the discussion seemed to be on global warming per se. And listening to this Committee you definitely understand why there is still controversy and lack of a general consensus on the subject.

One of the reasons some scientists have offered in place of CO2 greenhouse gas (and which was not discussed in house committee hearing) as the major contributor to global warming is the extremely high correlation between sun-spot duration and the planet's temperature increase. Let me cite the following as evidence in support of this theory:
http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=...

As far as temperature increases on Mars - if you will check this out more closely you will find they are due to the fact that the temperatures are in comparison to when Mars was experiencing major dust storms which brought about a general Martian cooling.

The bottom line for me, a scientist is this. Do what I can to curb the use of fossil fuels and continue to gather information on all sides of this issue. Remain open and do not jump on any one side of this issue too quickly. I'm personally sorry for having appeared to have committed this mistake in some of my own contributions in this venue and I urge you and all of rest of your readers not to do the same.

Answer 4

wow, a little angry are we?

someone need alittle therapy do we?

...geez... meow!!!!...