yeah it is that time in the earths natural cycle, every650 000 years or so we have huge techtonict shifts, scary thing is were 40 000 years over due. kind of ironic volcanoes blowing steady low level earth quakes around yellow stone super volcano. crazy weather, people get ready, build your windmill's, stock up on seeds, ect. this might be nonsense, but it could be true why take chances.
Gosh... I was hoping it would be another HAARP thread Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I moved my post that was briefly here to: http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2524225&postcount=4
i like the little jokes they came up with like: "I want cash, not ash." (regarding Iceland's bankruptcy of their banks)
. oh, i readed this news somewhere, also my fother was talking about it yesterday, Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
A scientist predicted the specific eruption 2.5 years ago, saying it would be a consequence of global warming thinning the then covering ice sheet over the volcano.. Lawsuits against oil companies for causing global warming have already proceeded.
Foolishly UK government paid off the Brits who would other wise have lost their money in the failed Icelandic banks. I.e. acted like the US's FDIC does when US bank fails. These UK investors had deposited their money in Iceland because the interest paid was much higher than in the UK (as was the risk). This is yet another example of a disturbing trend - Investors get to keep gains and Government gets to keep the loses. Years ago banks in Mexico were were paying high interest too and failed but back then people who accepted high risk for high returns were not bailed out by their governments when the deal went sour. Iceland's current stress with UK (and the Netherlands) is due to UK government wanting the ordinary citizens of Iceland to pay much higher taxes for many years so the government of Iceland can then pay back to the government of UK the money it gave to Brits who lost money when banks failed. I was not the least surprised when in the recent vote on this the people of Iceland said "Screw you." (And now they are showing they can - giving ash, not cash to UK.) The main airport of Iceland is functioning just fine, but not much traffic now. It would be a great time for Americans to visit Iceland. - I did once. - Has very clean air as hot water heats instead of fossil fuels and is an interesting place to explore. It must be very cheap - about the only European place where the dollar buys much more than it did two years ago. I am sure there must be tours to the up wind side of the eruption - there were such tours to lava flows etc when I was there, but too costly for my budget.
you would need to prove that there were never volcanic eruptions before around 20 to 40 years ago and even being generous saying 100 years ago and you would still not be able to show any connection.
You are obviously not a legal scholar. The scientist who predicted the current eruption 2.5 years ago, who could testify as an expert, is a specialist of global warming history, and his prediction that the specific volcano, then under the ice sheet, would erupt when the iced melted to a certain thinness, is not only evidence of his competence, but is based on hundreds of thousands of years of global warming history. He points out two factors: 1) volcano activity is always stimulated by global warming, whether ancient non-man made warming or modern man-made warming, 2) the current warming that triggered this eruption is man made. If you wish to know whereof you speak, read the opinion of the three judge panel I linked to as to what evidence is required. It changes as a case proceeds to trial. The tobacco and asbestos companies argued that there was not enough evidence to link tobacco and asbestos to cancer, but that did not get them very far in the end. Likewise, in the lawsuit I link to, the oil companies said there was no link from global warming to them. The appellate court so far disagreed with them.
In response to this and other personal attacks, neither are you. obviously, volcanoes are very hot. That why fire come out.
i dont know what the hell you are talking about here. Edit: and a PERFECT example of why i DO NOT read blogs. Thank You.
Dredd/John99 I would suggest that the scholar has it ass about face when it comes to the correlation between volcanic activity and global warming, at least, when discussing previous episodes. There is, of course, one possible exception - the current situation in Iceland. Generally speaking volcanoes don't erupt because the pressure above the magma chamber is equal to or greater than the pressure within the magma chamber. In iceland, these volcanoes are buried under ice sheets, which provides additional pressure. Remove the ice sheet and the volcanic magma chamber goes from being underpressured to overpressured, potentially making an eruption more likely. This is, of course, in line with the predictions of (and causal mechanisms for) the Volcanoe beside the one currently erupting (Katla) being triggered by the current eruption.
