View Single Post
Old 04-09-2009, 04:35 PM
NateR's Avatar
NateR NateR is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,742

Originally Posted by timmyja
I'm sure by now I have established myself as no genius, but I'm having a hard time wrapping my arms around the idea of this "polar ice-cap mirror" theory. I'm pretty sure, if I remember right, that the most direct sunlight strikes a fairly large protion of the Earth called "the equator." The latest theory on global warming that I have heard is that if the polar icecaps melt, it won't be the "waterworld" scenario, but the Earth will overheat because the polar icecaps cannot reflect the sun's rays back into space. It seems to me that the poles, north and south, are both pretty dark places. I was just wondering if anybody could really explain that theory in laymen's terms

There's actually evidence that the polar ice caps are expanding, not shrinking. There is also a group of over 600 scientists (and growing) who claim that the entire "global warming" thing is bunk. So, in the face of so much conflicting evidence and contradictory theories, it's best to just say that none of these people have any idea of what they are talking about.

Personally, I think the flaw in global warming is that it is based on an Evolutionary timetable. We've only been measuring the melting of the ice caps for maybe a century, so saying that it's become rapidly accelerated is just speculation. If you go by the young earth theory (which is what the Bible would support), then the glaciers have probably only existed for a few thousand years (probably from the Great Flood in Genesis) and they've probably been melting since then. So if you take the amount that the glaciers have receded over the course of a few thousand years and stretch it out over billions of years, then of course any melting we observe today is going to appear frighteningly accelerated.

What global warming amounts to is just a bunch of alarmists and opportunists trying to cash in on artificially-produced mass hysteria.
Reply With Quote