It's being called a Christmas miracle: the South Pole, where temperatures this time of year (the southern hemisphere's summer) tend to be around minus 15 degrees Fahrenheit, set a record high on Christmas Day with a whopping 9.9F -- that's right, 9.9, not 99.
On top of that, it also snowed on Christmas Day. What's odd about that? The pole actually gets little in the way of snowflakes -- it's one of the driest places on Earth with just .20 inches a year -- and most of the "snow" there is actually ice from over the years, some of which scatters with the winds.
"We like to call this our little Christmas miracle that we ended up getting snow and getting a record high for the books," Phillip Marzette, senior meteorologist at the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station, told The Antarctic Sun, a newspaper at the main U.S. base of McMurdo.
READ ON!!
NO!NO!NO! THERE IS NO CLIMATE CHANGE!
IT IS ALL A LINE OF BS!!
NOTHING TO SEE HERE!!!!
MOVE ON!!!!
From the very next paragraph of the msnbc news story...Originally Posted by YWD67
And no, the record heat is not a case of global warming (though some coastal areas of Antarctica are seeing rapid glacial melt tied to rising sea temperatures).
Winds came in from an unusual direction on Christmas Day, Marzette said, bringing with them relative warmth that started to raise temperatures rapidly at 6 a.m.
The warmth was only around for the day, and within a few days it was back to normal: minus 15F or so.
So what was the previous South Pole high? 7.5 F, set on Dec. 27, 1978. As for a record South Pole low (data goes back to 1957), that was minus 117F on June 23, 1982.
Record low was recorded 29 years ago, so yeah, I can see how it is just as Dog said, all a line of BS...
*
The Indiana Senate last week approved a bill that would allow public schools to teach creationism as long as they include theories from multiple religions.
The bill, now under consideration in the Indiana House, would permit school boards to offer science classes that include origin theories from religions including, but not limited to, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism and Scientology.
Frankly, we don�t see the harm in offering students instruction on the teachings of many religions. It might be good preparation for life in an increasingly diverse society.
We�re not sure such instruction should be part of the science curriculum. It seems better suited for a class on religion or philosophy.
Critics have questioned whether the class would pass constitutional muster. They see it as a possible violation of the separation between church and state.
We don�t think that should be an issue so long as the class includes instruction in the teachings of multiple religions. Of course, deciding which religions to include might be tricky. Should the school board limit instruction to just those religions that might be represented among students at the school, or should it cast a wider net?
Critics also point out that it might be difficult to find teachers qualified to teach such a class. How many teachers, particularly science teachers, are really experts in the teachings of the world�s religions?
The bill�s original goal, of course, was not to provide a primer on religious teachings. It was to provide a counter-argument to Charles Darwin�s theory of evolution.
More
Florida tried this a few years ago when my oldest boy was in Jr high. Each day he cam home with a different paper that highlighted the religion being taught that day.
Most consisted of one or two pages that gave light cursory information of each religion and it's beliefs.
That is with one exception and that was the day that christianity and creationism was the topic.
Twelve pages came with that days topic, which covred bible quotes and internet links to the The Institute for Creation Research, and the Discovery Institute (creation by Intelligent design)
The state court found that the the teaching of such was a violation of church and state. They said that the course information was anything but secular, especially with the overwhelming emphasis on christianity over the other religions.
Criticizing the theory of evolution is not just one of a variety of Religious Right priorities, but is central to their cause as many social conservatives believe that evolutionary thought is the culprit behind much-despised notions like secular government, feminism and moral relativism. As leading young earth creationist Ken Ham explained at the Family Research Council’s Watchmen on the Wall conference, belief in a non-literal interpretation of Genesis is even responsible for President Obama’s support for marriage equality:
And no one on the right including Tea Party members nor so called Constitutionalist lash out at this kind of trash.
I would have no problem dealing with such posters proclaiming to be such patriots.
Yet they only seem to attack the main stream media, and the current admin.
Not the ever growing far right people of the constitution.
Why the "holier than thou" attitude? Especially when it is soo inaccurate. I've posted on the idiocy of the religious right many many times, and Poot has as well. Besides that, I really don't consider whether my opinions and beliefs meet your approval or not when I'm posting. And lastly, for the umpteenth time, Constitutionalists are not on the right. We have views on the right, the left, and centrist. You just choose to ignore any views not on the right.
Nobody can start over and make a new beginning, but anyone can start today and make a new ending.
Okey lets call you to task on this one Carp. List the threads that you have started calling these people onto the "carpet". If that is an effeort to big for you then link the post you have made doing such.
Everytime someone post positive about the current admin, you lash out.
Yet when things such as this come up you hardly ever responds unless you feel it is direct towards you.
If such happens, then you try and dissociate yourslef from such.
It has nothing to do with "holier than thou" attitude. It has to do with your personal bias.
All I see from you for the last couple of years is attacking those you see as being of the left, socialist, communist or sheep in your term.
However those postings of the wacko far right you more times then not give a fucking free pass to without comment.
Yet you wish to lable yourself a centrist. What a joke. A centrist would be willing to have the gov help those of need in this nation.
Your view is, "fuck'em"! I have mine, let them get theirs.
That my friend is not a "centrist" but a ultra-rightwing conservative.
Last edited by YWD67; May 26th, 2012 at 10:32 AM.
My dick is bigger than yours....
______________________________________________
In the 60's, people took acid to make the world weird.
Now the world is weird and people take Prozac to make it normal.
Seriously, FFS.
<whiney voice> "My Dad can beat up your dad..."
This thread has turned into a name calling soapbox and...just fuck the dumb. And please don't ask me any questions or pm me about my thoughts or opinions. You know who you are.
"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to moneoa again."
The most Beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious.
It is the source of all true art and science.
~ Albert E.
You apparently only see what you want to. What makes you think I'm going to dig through 10 years of posts for you? I label myself Libertarian. Also atheist, pro choice on just about anything you can think of, for legalization of drugs, anti-war, and anti-police state.
You're barking up the wrong tree here Dog.
Nobody can start over and make a new beginning, but anyone can start today and make a new ending.
I will let everyone know right here and right now that if anyone in the Moderator Team bans people for no reason or for voicing their opinion respectfully or harasses them Via PM let me know and it will be taken care of accordingly.
______________________________________________
In the 60's, people took acid to make the world weird.
Now the world is weird and people take Prozac to make it normal.
I second that. That kind of bullshit is unacceptable here. Political opinions are just that, "opinions" and we're all entitled to them. When it comes to harassing members via PM because you disagree with their opinions then it's gone way too far, imho. If a mod abuses his/her power to reflect his or her opinion that is just cause for de-modding. End of fucking story!
I'm closing this thread until further notice. Any discussion regarding this thread can be taken up either by PM or in the admin section.
Last edited by RACKnRAIL; May 27th, 2012 at 06:24 AM.
-----------®N®----------
あなたをファック
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks