Looks like the Aussies may actually save the world !

Conservative MPs you now have your game plan.

Global warming has raised this morning's temperature to a roasting 13 degrees C in the middle of July!

At least the garbage in Toronto will rot at a slightly slower rate. There's a silver lining in every cloud.

The public service unions should see what is being said on Facebook as people share photograph's of Toronto's growing piles of garbage. There is no sympathy for these unions, and the rhetoric against them is getting hotter even if Gaia's temperature isn't.

Oh look normal people.

"Brain, your Australian followers have been exposed as idiots. What will you do now?"

"Pinky, they have failed me, but were only supposed to destroy Australia's economy to prove the concept. We will press on and tonight we will upload the beta mass confuserizer program to the Al Gorebot. By the end of next week I shall rule the world."

But now the Warmongers, being forced to admit that the planet has been cooling for the last ten years, are claiming that it is just a reaction to the planet getting "too hot" in the years before the 1998 el nino spike.

Desperation breeds bizarre ideas.

"Over at Real Climate they are busy giving climate skeptics reason to cheer:

“We hypothesize that the established pre-1998 trend is the true forced warming signal, and that the climate system effectively overshot this signal in response to the 1997/98 El Niño. This overshoot is in the process of radiatively dissipating, and the climate will return to its earlier defined, greenhouse gas-forced warming signal. If this hypothesis is correct, the era of consistent record-breaking global mean temperatures will not resume until roughly 2020.”

Imagine, twenty-two or more years (1998 to ~2020) of no new global temperature record. What would that do to the debate? Real Climate does say something very smart in the piece (emphasis added):

“Nature (with hopefully some constructive input from humans) will decide the global warming question based upon climate sensitivity, net radiative forcing, and oceanic storage of heat, not on the type of multi-decadal time scale variability we are discussing here. However, this apparent impulsive behavior explicitly highlights the fact that humanity is poking a complex, nonlinear system with GHG forcing – and that there are no guarantees to how the climate may respond.”"

http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/2009/07/two-decades-of-no-warming-consistent.html

Ok, this link deserves a wider audience (via MySearch4Truth on WUWT) It's exactly the kind of thing the media would be shoving down our throats if it had to do with heat rather than cold.

"Children die in Harsh Peru Winter"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8146995.stm

So Red Tory, tell me again about peer review?

That was the scientific equivalent of a 'bitch-slap'.

Go Aussie!

"In addition to immediately increasing unemployment in the energy sector, even more American jobs will be threatened by the rising cost of doing business under the cap-and-tax plan. For example, the cost of farming will certainly increase, driving down farm incomes while driving up grocery prices. The costs of manufacturing, warehousing and transportation will also increase.

The ironic beauty in this plan? Soon, even the most ardent liberal will understand supply-side economics. "

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/13/AR2009071302852.html

does anybody actually believe this will change anything in australia? understanding only comes with wisdom and wisdom is lacking everywhere.

Maybe the terrible consequences of not allowing homeowners to cut back vegatation had an effect. During the recent fires that caused total loss of property and needless deaths due to councils restricting common sense and allowing people to protect themselves. It is nice to see some politicians take a principled informed stand on an important issue. Hope it catches on and is exported.

At least there is one place on earth where this stuff is debated with actual science in mind.

Gotta love the Aussies.

Now if only we could be as grown up and mature in Canada...

Alright everyone. Fire up your word processors and write to your MPs.

Yes finally !! Western politicians were asked to explain there Global Warming Religious Zealotism - and they could not !!

Really need to track down his 50 page reply!!

Another after work project.

AtlanticJim,

You can find the PDF under Climate Change Documents.

I love Aussies because they will tell what they think, not what you want to hear..

Every time I hear about climate scientists, all I can see in my mind is SCTV's John Candy, as a pseudo scientist, explaining why your underwear will kill you..

amazing, considering that this counters the very data collected by Australia itself. cooling for the last 20 years? I think not . Sea temperature rise much?

AtlanticJim,

Below is a link to a post on Senator Steve Fieldings Web Page about the climate change issue. From this link are additional links to:

1) The three Questions Senator Fielding asked Minster Wong regarding climate change.
2) Minister Wong's answers to the three questions.
3) A brief assessment of Minster Wong's reply
and last but not least
4) The fifty page due diligence by four Aussie scientists on Minister Wong's reply to Senator Fielding's Three Questions on Climate Change.

Knock yourself out mate.

http://stevefielding.com.au/climate_change/

Look at this jaw dropping comment

Note that the models must match the IPCC selection criteria. especially the first one of the five. Criterion 1: Consistency with global projections. They should be consistent with a broad range of global warming projections based on increased concentrations of greenhouse gases. This range is variously cited as 1.4°C to 5.8°C by 2100, or 1.5°C to 4.5°C for a doubling of atmospheric CO2 concentration (otherwise known as the "equilibrium climate sensitivity"). I read that a model or a run that does not show warming due to doubling of CO2 should be rejected.

http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=6540#comment-348973

In other words, if the model doesn't prove the warmies right, the model is wrong. This is similar to legislating the value of pi. When are they going to realize that they have become an oppressive orthodoxy? I guess they know it and don't care.

WOW, so, not withstanding my general ignorance of this tiresome bogus subject, my pet question (or a variant thereof) shows up in the THREE QUESTIONS, namely:

Heh, what caused that one-mile thick slab of ice over Edmonton to melt 12,000 years ago?.

Related: This event totally destroys the bogus view -- expressed by a few posters on an earlier thread -- that it's political suicide for a pol to ask these simple questions. A good leader would make it very clear that he was strongly pro-environment, would make loud noises about clean water and air, etc., but would not be afraid to ask these child-like questions. You know, like, "Daddy what makes the sky blue".

Oh, and Bill O'Reilly has evidently drunk the "fair and balanced" AGW cool-aid, on top of "not having a problem" with Obama's timid reaction to the Iranian democracy protesters, and Sotomayer's "wise Latina" racism.

Thanx redneck. I'm looking forward to it.

The inconvenient truth is that "the concensus" is limited to the nutjobs at "Real Climate".....
And the Aussies have figured that out....
That's all folks.......

I LOVE the line on the first page of the 50 page paper calling for scientific evidence to be presented under oath with proper rules of evidence in place!

(Thanks for the link Kathryn.)

Wow, even if you don't understand the technical details of what is presented in the papers, these guys did a hell of a job in arguing their case.

This defines b!itchslap.

Starting on Page 22 of the "Due Diligence" paper, the authors answer the questions they proposed. Check it out.

Me No Dhimmi: My pet question to the AGW alarmists is, what has caused the Antarctic to be covered with 2 mile thick ice shield, after the palm trees were growing there previously?

God bless the Aussies.

sda continues and continues and continues to deliver ... DAILY !!! thx Kate :)

Heh. No Red Tory, no John Cross. Y'ever notice the Lefties/warmies always hide when there's something not going their way?

understanding only comes with wisdom and wisdom is lacking everywhere.
~old white guy at July 14, 2009 9:50 AM

Wisdom is the knowledge of right and wrong(understanding) coupled with right action.

That is why young people don't respect their elders anymore.
Elders used to be respected because they had wisdom and knew what it was.
Now that old people don't have wisdom, don't even know the meaning of it, they have nothing to bring to the intergenerational table.

The wheels are coming off of the AGW wagon, and the wagon is going over a cliff, just as the Harper government is climbing on.

Kathryn and redneck, cheers!

Between this and looking up the Don Lemon video, after work promises to be good for a laugh.

Heh. No Red Tory, no John Cross. Y'ever notice the Lefties/warmies always hide when there's something not going their way?

They all wanted the world to be ending and now they are dissapointed.

[quote]A common expression of human caution, often attributed to Rupert Murdoch, is that in
matters of potential global warming we should “give Earth the benefit of the doubt”.[/quote] Aus Report

I knew that Bill O'Reily (FOX) was in the bag. He has some explaining. He (or the mouth of Murdock) said last night that AGW temp increased 1 deg. O’Reily is a fake

The gangsters, behind the scene, are coming into focus... Under oath & each individual’s wealth audit will help....

"A good leader would make it very clear that he was strongly pro-environment, would make loud noises about clean water and air, etc.,"

Agreed. If we're going to over spend, I'd like to get something tangible for my money. Anything!

MND
Agreed wrt Bill O'Reilly.

Aaron, the drifting of the continent of antarctica over millions of years from an equatorial region to its present day location over the south pole has caused the two mile thick ice sheet. Nothing to do with climate change.

What evidence do you have to that effect, Pete? Evidence, like in verifiable factual information. I know that it's a widely accepted hypothesis, nothing more.

Pete,

If memory serves, Pangea (or however you spell it) broke up and drifted north from the south. If my memory is correct (dubious at the best of times) then that would suggest Antarctica didn't move far if at all.

There are theories suggesting the earth's axis tilted at least once in history though so that might be it.

But again, my memory isn't good so take it with a grain of salt.

Aaron: Another pet question is, why all those London street names containing the word "vine". Answer: England was once prime wine country.

GREENland. Well, that's a bit too easy eh?

Finally...at long last a politician with enough courage to challenge the global warming cretins and begin to peel off the layers of alarmism and deceit. This should be a wakeup call for politicians around the world which should start to have a snowball effect.

Now that the goose that laid the golden egg apparently has its head on the chopping block, it will be interesting to see the reaction of Gore, Suzuki et al. Will common sense tell them that it's been a good run and to take their ill-gotten gains and "git while the gittin's good"? Or will greed prevail and they will dig in their heels and continue this travesty?

"Heh. No Red Tory, no John Cross. Y'ever notice the Lefties/warmies always hide when there's something not going their way?"

Alas. He's over at Jay Curries arguing that black is white.

Apparently AGW "overshot" so we're in for 20 years for cooling, so all is good.....

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/07/14/real-climate-gives-reason-to-cheer/

Cap and trade legislation shows up in the federal legislating houses of UK, US and Australia within a month of each other. Similar crippling tax and regulate laws are on the drawing board of the other G8 nations.

Please think about this. This isn't coincidence any more. This is a pan-nation agenda. Now who has the political and economic juice to put this vast wealth and tax burden transfer agenda on the table of every political party in the free world?

It sure isn't a few smelly hippies protesting the seal hunt or rain forest logging. The Carbondioxide-is-poison coup is backed by the largest banking and corporate investment cartels on earth. This is a multinational corporate establishment tax coup.

Look at the cap and trade, taxing schemes. Note how the operational net effect off-loads the fiscal responsibility for corporate best practices on the consumer, the taxpayer the end user?

Is this coincidence as well?

biffjr.
**Now that the goose that laid the golden egg apparently has its head on the chopping block, it will be interesting to see the reaction of Gore, Suzuki et al. Will common sense tell them that it's been a good run and to take their ill-gotten gains and "git while the gittin's good"? Or will greed prevail and they will dig in their heels and continue this travesty?**

Greed will prevail....
mounting the scaffold will not silence them, nor the tightening of the nose....only the springing of the trap will silence them....
They do not merit a gallows...a lamp post is more appropriate........

pretty simple Aaron. First go to Wikipedia and read the entry for Mid-ocean ridge. These are where new ocean floors are being created. How do we know they're new? Drilling cores have been dated, and it shows that the ocean floors get progressively older the further from the ridges. So if the ocean floors are continually growing, either the earth is getting bigger, or there has to be somewhere where the crust is being recycled. Bingo! Look along the edges of continents where the meet the ocean floor. Every continent seems to have a deep trench on one side that also happens to have lots of mountains, volcanic activity, seismic activity, etc. Again, drilling has shown the ocean crust being forced down beneath the continental crust. So from these observations, we can conclude that at least some of the oceanic crust is being recycled back into the earth. It also means that the continents 'float' around. In this way, we can trace the course that they've floated over millions of years by looking at which side trails away from a mid-oceanic ridge.

At risk of being called an irrational fool or scolded for going off-topic...

Pete, how do we know that the mid-oceanic ridges are "geo-stationary"?

Kate....comments for Cali juxtapose not working.

It is just more of the same thing that got us here. I think I am going to throw up (again). Here is a quote from http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2009/06/could-cap-and-trade-cause-another-market-meltdown
''In addition to trading the allowances and offsets themselves, participants in carbon markets can also deal in their derivatives—such as futures contracts to deliver a certain number of allowances at an agreed price and time. These instruments will be traded not only by polluters that need to buy credits to comply with environmental regulations, but also by financial services firms. In fact, a study (PDF) by Duke University's Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions anticipates that if the United States passes a cap-and-trade law, the derivatives trade will probably exceed the market for the allowances themselves. "We are on the verge of creating a new trillion-dollar market in financial assets that will be securitized, derivatized, and speculated by Wall Street like the mortgage-backed securities market," says Robert Shapiro, a former undersecretary of commerce in the Clinton administration and a cofounder of the US Climate Task Force.''

Come on Pete. We all know that radioactive isotope dating is a plot.

I can't remember if its a Bildeburger plot, a communist plot, a Nazi plot or just one of them there kinda eeeevile plots. But fer shur its a plot.

High noon in Calgary on July 14, 2009.

And the temperature is 10 degrees C.

/above zero that is.

I love the Aussies too - when Bob Hawke met with the UN Sec-Gen to thank him for assistance during the East Timor crisis, his exact words were, "I owe you a beer." Not at all like the useless deadweight spineless bloodsucking pantywaists we elect in this poor country, although clearly the Aussies also suffer from this syndrome as do all Western nations, but at least they have a few with the courage of their convictions, some semblance of honor left.

Here's some more heartening news for you:

Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth became a big part of the British secondary educational landscape when it was made part of the official curriculum. This was a big victory for those who feel the world is in imminent danger because of anthropogenic global warming. However, the High Court of London recently said “not so fast.” Steward Dimmock sued under Section 406(1)(b) of the Education Act 1996, claiming that the movie is a form or political indoctrination. That law says that school governing bodies and head teachers “shall forbid… the promotion of partisan political views in the teaching of any subject in the school”.
The court ruled that:
1.) in order to show this movie to the children teachers must make clear that the film is a political work and promotes only one side of the argument.
2.) If teachers present the film without making this plain they may be in breach of section 406 of the Education Act 1996 and guilty of political indoctrination.
3.) Nine inaccuracies have to be specifically drawn to the attention of school children.
These nine inaccuracies are:

• The film claims that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidence global warming. The Government’s expert was forced to concede that this is not correct.
• The film suggests that evidence from ice cores proves that rising CO2 causes temperature increases over 650,000 years. The Court found that the film was misleading: over that period the rises in CO2 lagged behind the temperature rises by 800-2000 years.
• The film uses emotive images of Hurricane Katrina and suggests that this has been caused by global warming. The Government’s expert had to accept that it was “not possible” to attribute one-off events to global warming.
• The film shows the drying up of Lake Chad and claims that this was caused by global warming. The Government’s expert had to accept that this was not the case.
• The film claims that a study showed that polar bears had drowned due to disappearing arctic ice. It turned out that Mr Gore had misread the study: in fact four polar bears drowned and this was because of a particularly violent storm.
• The film threatens that global warming could stop the Gulf Stream throwing Europe into an ice age: the Claimant’s evidence was that this was a scientific impossibility.
• The film blames global warming for species losses including coral reef bleaching. The Government could not find any evidence to support this claim.
• The film suggests that sea levels could rise by 7m causing the displacement of millions of people. In fact the evidence is that sea levels are expected to rise by about 40cm over the next hundred years and that there is no such threat of massive migration.
• The film claims that rising sea levels has caused the evacuation of certain Pacific islands to New Zealand. The Government are unable to substantiate this and the Court observed that this appears to be a false claim.

Another quick thought: given that yeah, Antarctica likely travelled from warmer to colder parts of the world, how about the fact that here have been multimillion-year periods of NO ice on the planet, to say nothing of the Wisconsinan ice sheet melting a mere 12,000-odd years ago? :)

If the US Senate issues Albert Gore a subpoena to testify, it is all over.

Speaking of Aussies, here's another one that's good to know: Prof. Ian Plimer, geologist.

"Meet the man who has exposed the great climate change con trick"

pete, I don't get information from Wikipedia - it's controlled by a bunch of loonies, living in their mother's basements. That said, the theory is still a theory.

Aaron, it may be just a theory, but the evidence I mentioned suggests it's very likely to be true. In order for you to discount the truth of it, you can't just dismiss "because it's just a theory". You must propose an alternative theory which can also explain the evidence. Otherwise, you sound like a fool.

You people are pathetic. Some guy from Toronto (Ontario) called John Moore said so in the National Post this morning.

I think he has a job in radio or something so he must know what he's talking about.

Me? I'm just an engineer with only 45 years experience in climate-related endeavours, so I can't be expected to know as much as a TO radio guy.

Let's see if the NP publishes my rebuttal letter. If they don't, I'll post it here tomorrow.

Aaron,

I hear you. I too refuse to believe in the THEORY of Gravity. Also in the theory of evolution.

Fool.

A theory (scientifically) means the explanation supported by the scientific method. You're using the world theory like a creationist... shame on you.

Damn those warmonger fascists. They are so abusive to our plants. Our plants(food), truly 'green', were hoping they could get back to their former glory days of 1500 ppm CO2. Today's 380 ppm, a mere 0.004%, is an improvement over 280 but the environment unfriendly Gore Kult wants to nix it. Dolts with a full belly.

Jon, drop a brick on your foot and you'll feel the gravity. Stare at Antarctic for eons and you won't see it moving an inch. Thanks for epithet, by the way, I collect them and send them back when an opportunity arises.

To argue that AGW has the certainty of the Theory of Evolution or the Theory of Gravity is also foolish. BTW, AGW in no way, shape or form conforms to the scientific method.

First of all, the Theory of Gravity is falsifiable unlike AGW which uses computer models (that do not work in the present or past) to forecast future events. If observations do not fit the model then the Armageddon time lines are moved or the observed data is corrected. There is also no way to disprove this theory since every event is deemed to be proof of AGW.

Secondly, the AGW proponents will not openly debate their theory. They scream that the science is settled and deniers must be idiots, traitors to the planet or in the employ of Big Oil.

Finally the main beneficiaries and biggest promoters of AGW are also the ones positioned to benefit through carbon markets, alternative energy subsidies, new bureaucracy and science grants. No other theory in history had as many financial rewards as AGW. The whole thing stinks of collusion and opportunism.

AGW is a fraud that is attempting to imitate science without the inconvenience of following any of the basic protocol.

Stare at Antarctic for eons and you won't see it moving an inch.

Really?

I did a cut-and-paste and emailed this article to my MP. I hope everybody else does the same. We have to let our representatives know that public sentiment is changing on this global warming/carbon gas crap. You can rest assured that the other side is filling their in boxes with propoganda. Here is the e-contact info for all Canadian MPs: http://webinfo.parl.gc.ca/MembersOfParliament/MainMPsCompleteList.aspx?TimePeriod=Current&Language=E

Give'em hell....they deserve it!

It's ok, for Aaron "science" is only what he can perceive without tools. So for him I assume nuclear power is merely magic.

As for calling him a fool, I just call them like I sees them.

The Lying Liar: Goreacle and his "'Inconvenient Truth'".

*"HEATHER EWART: There was also, though, a British judge who ruled that there were in fact, I think, nine errors when it was challenged in court?

AL GORE: Well, the ruling was in my favour."

Goreacle: A serpent of Gaia.
...-

"Al Gore urges Australia to move on carbon emissions trading
Australian Broadcasting Corporation
Broadcast: 13/07/2009
Reporter: Heather Ewart"
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2009/s2624723.htm

Continental drift is how Antarctica got where it is... not theory ... proven.

Fact not theory:
Continental movement is a larger climate impacting force than any trivial atmospheric variation.

Fact not theory:
Climate change is inevitable and you can't do an effin thing about it.
Fact not theory.

Discredited Theory:
Greenhouse gas impacts on climate and the ability of mankind to influence in any significant way. AKA Global Warming.

Anyone who persists in promoting this garbage is a fraud.

More proof that society will only lose if it aligns itself with Gore and friends.

The pic of stacks showing at that website are just a-smoking, belching ....

If you look closely there is an icon of St. Albert in the belch from the top stack at the right; a Gaia miracle.
...-

"'Fraction' of CO2 cuts driven by govt"

"Only 15 per cent of carbon cuts direct result of government policies"

"By Alex Stevenson

The government's climate change policies have been responsible for just 15 per cent of emissions reductions between 1990 and 2006, it has emerged.

Coming in the week the government uses a major white paper to outline how it plans to meet its commitments to cutting CO2 emissions by 80 per cent by 2050, the admission has raised eyebrows among campaigners.

Climate change minister Joan Ruddock revealed the figures in an answer to a question tabled by Labour backbencher Colin Challen, chairman of the all-party group on climate change.

Improvements in energy efficiency, structural changes in the economy and lower carbon fuels were together responsible for 20 per cent, 30 per cent and 25 per cent of the reductions."
http://www.politics.co.uk/news/environment-and-rural-affairs/-fraction-of-co2-cuts-driven-by-govt-$1311372.htm

I am not the least surprised by the Aussie's stance on climate change, given this country came into existence as an "Island Jail". Convicts were shipped to Australia to serve out their sentences - the simple truth is - it is difficult indeed to con a country founded on con's.

I see a parallel between the public swallowing Darwinism and today's acceptance of global warming. When Darwinism came into serious scientific scrutiny - neo-Darwinism was introduced to explain away the obvious errors in Darwinism. History is repeating itself. Now Climate Change is being introduced to explain away the obvious scientific errors with "global warming". In my view, both absurd theories were and are politically motivated. Same game; different name. I predict the Pseudoscience of climate change will be accepted just like Darwinism was.

Cou Rouge, I did the same thing. Sent it to my MP, to the PM, to the Environment Minister and the Minister of Science and whatever (I can't remember the full title of the portfolio). Remember folks, letters sent to MPs don't need postage. Go for it.

Jon, no amount of theorizing can prove where Antarctic came from. I know, it is hurting, just give it another try. That theory can only explain how the continents drifted relative to each other, but not relative to sun. We have no idea how the axis moved in time.

Sent the Aussie links to the Prime Minister and 15 other MPs.

Aaron, you're making a fool of yourself. Your question to ask AGW believers was in regard to the two mile thick ice sheet in Antarctica where once there were palm trees. You would be the lone voice in the world in believing that
A: Antarctica has always been located over the south pole
B: it was once a tropical climate
C: climate change, not continental drift, is the reason why it is now a frozen wasteland.
Please give up your argument, you won't convince a single person to believe you, but you will convince 99.9% of the readers here that you're making a fool of yourself.

According to Intelligent Design scientists, before the worldwide flood, the Earth was all one temperature which would account for the palm trees found in both the North and South poles.

"Intelligent Design Scientist" is an oxymoron, if ever there was one.

Uhhhmmmmmm, no. According to Short Term Creationists maybe, but Intelligent Design Scientists don't hold to that view.

gordinkneehill,

Took the words right out of my mouth!

Getting back to the topic, I predict the AGW alarmists will go to grownd. After seeing what happened in Oz they'll be doubly afraid to debate and will resort to calling names, intimidation and smear tactics.

Just in case anyone is interested Al Gore is currently in Australia. It appears Senator Fielding is trying to get an audience with the Goreacle so as to convince Big Al that he is wrong about climate change.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25780407-5019059,00.html

I wish Senator Fielding luck but I think he is pushing $hit uphill.

"will resort to calling names, intimidation and smear tactics."

When is that going to start?

It is idiotic to think that we humans can “control” the future by looking at the past. We have never controlled anything in the history of the planet.. what is the human marker?

Taking a mad-hatter theory, and applying/presenting that theory as "results based" climate control is scientifically insane.

If mother earth decides to create a new Mountain range; what brilliant plan will rule in the resulting climate change?. GORE II

We... like the Ant... are just along for the ride

The earth has been ice free in the past - even the poles. And it wasn't because of CO2. Or Mankind !

SINGAPORE (Reuters) - A dramatic warming of the planet 55 million years ago cannot be solely explained by a surge in carbon dioxide levels, a study shows, highlighting gaps in scientists' understanding of impacts from rapid climate change.

During an event called the Palaeocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, global temperatures rose between 5 and 9 degrees Celsius within several thousand years. The world at that time was already warmer than now with no surface ice.

http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-41050320090715

Aaron, how in HELL would you know whether or not anyone would see Antarctica fail to move in "eons"? As with AGW, facts don't exist in the future - but they do exist in the past, and they are measurable. Look up palaeomagnetism.

oz. wisdom is not what o think it is.

Aaron, I’m afraid you are wrong. We do know where seafloor is created relative to the rotational axis of the earth, even eons ago.

Like most science, there are multiple complimentary sets of data, but the simplest, and probably the best, line of evidence is paleomagnetism of the ocean floor. When new crust is formed at those mid-ocean ridges mentioned above, small crystals of magnetic minerals orient themselves with the earth’s magnetic field. Essentially, they are like millions of little magnets pointing north. Since the earth’s magnetic field is parallel to the surface at earth’s the equator, and vertical relative to the surface at the magnetic poles, one can look at the angle those little magnets make relative to horizontal at the time of their formation: the higher that angle, the closer the rocks are to the pole. Bob’s yer uncle.

When Antarctica broke off from Gondwana, about 80 million years ago (well after the Pangaea breakup), the new seafloor formed between Antarctica and Australia essentially “froze” a snapshot of the location on Antarctica relative to the poles. Verifiable, factual information.

Phil, It is idiotic to think humans will not control their future, and foolish to not look at the past for lessons about controlling that future.

You say humans have never controlled anything in history? Wow. How about the eradication of smallpox? We planned, organized, and brilliantly executed the eradication of an entire species, solely for our own purposes. How about the successful destruction of the Aral Sea? How about the complete transformation of more than 300 million acres acres of long- and short-grass prairies to monoculture cropland in the continental US alone? How about the Montreal Protocol? History if full of examples of how humans have changed ecosystems in the past. We will continue to in the future, the question is whether we are going to do it with our eyes open so we can predict and avoid unpleasant consequences, or whether we are blindly going to charge ahead and let your kids and their kids worry about the consequences. Because you aren’t the Ant that is going to be squished, it is your children.

Now, on to your ignorance of mountain ranges. They are being built as we speak. It never stops. Luckily, that process is so slow that ecosystems (and people) will have time to adapt, as we always have. If you read Jarrod Diamond, he has a great thesis on how the orientations of mountain ranges in the New World vs. the Old World were probably instrumental in the technological advances that made Europe dominant over the Americas in the 15th Century… but I digress.