Click pics for more
I wonder if/how this will affect climate change?
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Bad Behavior has blocked 25427 access attempts in the last 7 days.
The first ons is cool (& hot).
Re: #1 Me
one not ons
It’s bad news only if you can pronounce the glaciers name.
Another spectacular event brought to you by LHC.
Notice the funny lines showing up on weather radar?
The link in the OP has further links to some interesting “odd ball news” that are new to me. I’ll be spending hours there today. Who knew Napoleon was average height?
Eyjafjallajökull.
[Updated. Thanks! -- UD]
The BBC Guide to Icelandic Pronunciation..
http://bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A2181557
This is only a few miles from my house, and it’s not visible from here. Still stunk to high heaven when I got closer…
Earth farts (read: volcanoes) cause global warming.
Boring. The s;dlfkdfigjsdkj glacier is far more interesting.
Nice password!
Where is Professor Lindenbrook now that we need him?
Take your pick. It will either cause global warming or it was caused by global warming.
I wonder what kind of chants they have at Eyjafjallajökull High School football games?
#12- that was a good one Floyd.
Here’s the thing. If a volcano can erupt under this glacier (whatever the h*ll its name is). And probably lead to its rapid melting. Then why can’t measurable glacier melting, in other parts of the world, be the result of what’s going on in the earth’s crust? All the AGW advocates have are visual observations (and not always accurate) of receding glacier ice. But not any temperature data, below the ice. So how do we know, for certain, that the ground beneath the ice hasn’t gotten warmer?
How did all this ice form, if the hard ground underneath it all, wasn’t cold enough to keep it from becoming a chilly river? And how has the ground managed to warm up, to where it can’t refreeze melt water reaching it, if warmer air and sunlight, can’t even get to it beneath all that ice? There seems to be a dynamic that’s not been adequately explained to the public, by the scientists. We’re just to take it for granted that glaciers can melt, and form rivers underneath. Contrary to how they initially formed.
Maybe huge glaciers are the anomaly, and melting ones are the norm. Seems to me that we’re being told to worry more about the preservation of frozen waste land, than of rain forests. A lot seems upside down about environmental science-politics.
Uncle Dave pondered: “I wonder if/how this will affect climate change?”
I say, warmers should go there and protest the volcano.
#13 I pick both.
Love that name!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laki#1783_eruption I would like to see pictures from this eruption!
It will not contribute to “climate change”, because you can’t tax it!
>> pedro said, on March 21st, 2010 at 10:03 pm
>> I say, warmers should go there and protest the volcano.
By “warmers” you mean peer-reviewed, mainstream scientists.