You know how people are always griping about global warming? “Oh, it’s killing the polar bears.” “What about our shores? They’ll be washed away.” “Cough-cough, it’s so hard to breathe with all this carbon dioxide.” “Won’t someone please think of the children.” It’s so tiresome!
So next time some liberal hippie tree hugger bitches and moans about how the industrial age and insatiable human demand has ravished our planet, screwed with mother natural and destroyed our ozone, you should cite this Reuters “Nature Geoscience report” article about about a U.N. study on how carbon dioxide emissions are holding off the next ice age.
High levels of carbon dioxide emissions in the atmosphere mean the next ice age is unlikely to begin for at least 1,500 years, an article in the journal “Nature Geoscience” said on Monday.
Concentrations of the main gases blamed for global warming reached record levels in 2010 and will linger in the atmosphere for decades even if the world stopped pumping out emissions today, according to the U.N.’s weather agency.
…
Officially, the earth has been in an interglacial, or warmer period, for the last 10,000 to 15,000 years, and estimates vary on how long such periods last.“(Analysis) suggests that the end of the current interglacial (period) would occur within the next 1,500 years, if atmospheric CO2 concentrations do not exceed (around) 240 parts per million by volume (ppmv),” the study said.
However, the current carbon dioxide concentration is of 390 ppmv, and at that level an increase in the volume of ice sheets would not be possible, it added.
With global greenhouse emissions only growing, there’s no way the world will suddenly freeze! And as the icebergs melt, it’s looking like Kevin Costner will finally be vindicated for Waterworld. We humans will never have to endure another ice age again. This is, of course, a relief.
Ice ages are no picnic. Quite the contrary. Unless you’re one of the lucky ones to make it to some isolated spot of warmth, as some researchers suggest may have happened during the last ice ages, the frosty eras are dismal, cold (obviously), desolate, soul-crushing, cold (again) and basically fucking miserable and most of us would die.
Plus, ice ages automatically bring back all the primitive creatures currently housed in museums. And you do not want to mess with those monsters. Wooly mammoths are not like tusk-less Sesame Street resident Snuffleupagus. And tender-hearted saber-tooth tiger Diego from Disney’s “Ice Age” is the exception, not the rule. Saber-tooths are more like the Marvel Comics variety, villain Sabretooth.
So, thank you, global warming! You have saved future generations of Americans the hassle of having to trudge through ice for thousands of years. Now all they have to worry about is food supply, energy supply, clean water, overpopulation, disease, famine, war and, oh, yeah, global warming.





January 09, 2012 at 10:25 pm, Stella Sally said:
I’m a sweet, friendly, honest and caring girl in search of casual encounters. I’ve been single for over two year, so I got a profile(Angel78) on –Casualloving dot c’0m–. It’s where for men and women looking for intimate encounters.
It’s the first and safe place for people who wanna to start a short-term relationship. Maybe you wanna hit me up, seriously!no bounds or limits in front of true love.
++++++Life is short. Enjoy yourself.
January 10, 2012 at 5:50 am, Raymojw said:
Why can’t we move the polar bears to the south pole?
January 10, 2012 at 5:54 am, Kimmowens said:
Andrew Belingsky, you’re an absolute idiot. Why don’t you learn some facts before misguiding even more people.
January 10, 2012 at 9:04 am, Strider said:
We are all now dumber having read that.
January 10, 2012 at 9:21 am, Andrew Payne said:
I’m all for Global Warming. I can’t wait for it to get here. I don’t give a rat’s ass about the Polar Bears. If it was Global Freezing, they would be down here eating my frozen ass. I’m looking forward to having ocean front property here 50 miles from the current coastline.
January 10, 2012 at 9:30 am, Jayson said:
Needed something to write about? Deadlines getting to you? Maybe you should try to be a real journalist? Not sure there are many of those around these days. What a fool.
January 10, 2012 at 9:57 am, Dlong382 said:
Judging from previous comments, the truth hurts. Keep hurting ‘em.
January 10, 2012 at 10:04 am, Roary Storm said:
Congratulations Andrew Belingsky. Another example of how bias expresses itself as pure stupidity.
Interpreting abnormal as a good thing when the exact quotes are
“ causes of ice ages are not fully understood”, “The world is forecast to grow hotter as greenhouse gases continue to rise, increasing threats such as extreme weather events and sea level rise.”
Indicate the article is validating the effects of man over time. Scientists are seeking to “fully understand” what is happening.
Incompetent judgmental blathering idiots write what you wrote. You still have value as a bad example though,
January 10, 2012 at 10:33 am, Swilliamrex said:
Truth hurts, and delusion is like heroin to junkies. But hey, it’s a free country, so feel free to show your ignorance. AB, you’re spot on, despite the sarcasm.
January 10, 2012 at 10:34 am, JRH said:
This just proves that Al Gore has his own agenda.
January 10, 2012 at 3:53 pm, Britt said:
You clearly didn’t even read the study yourself, and instead simply accepted Reuters’ selective quotes that skew the conclusions of the study, which clearly states: “the precise CO2 threshold, as well as the timing of the hypothetical next glaciation remain unclear.” So, while pumping CO2 into the atmosphere MIGHT hold off an ice age, the myriad of other environmental problems we’ve created still won’t provide for a very healthy or enjoyable future regardless… Oh and by the way, it’s called CLIMATE CHANGE. At least to people who know what they’re talking about.
January 10, 2012 at 11:06 pm, Ssinnock said:
Actually global warming will bring lots of good things for people and other critters and lots of bad things. So would global cooling. With any change, anthropogenic or not, large or small, there will be winners and losers. A winner of global warming is likely to be biomass production and, hence, food supply, especially along the upper mid latitudes of the northern hemisphere, where nearly all computer-model maps I have seen show more warmth and more moisture – read the vast land areas of northern US, southern Canada and like latitudes all across Eurasia, the breadbaskets of the world. More food for hungry children – good, right? On the other hand more food might just let us keep more people living in increasing poverty and environmental damage - bad, right? I don’t really know. Do you? Anyway, it won’t all be bad, for sure. 55 degrees on January 10 in Chicago, now that’s some climate change I can get used to!