Was this a year from hell?

[checking]

I believe I'd like a repeat of it in 2010.

[grrrr]

I would like another year like this. Best crop ever. I think it was a year for farming on a smaller scale rather than on a larger scale.

[silverback]

Too many farmers in this area with extreme stress and despair this summer and then fall.

I don't ever want to see that again.

[SASKFARMER3]

Yea Ill take the yields any year to be like the last two only thing i would change is the frosts for a whole week in June and harvesting in late October and November like we had in 08 and 09. A lot of bigger guys my self included are wondering if were at a very comfortable size. We just turned down another 1600 acres of which we probably could buy 480 in future.

[icelander]

If I have another year like this one I will hang myself. Way too much work and worry if the crop will amount to anything for my nerves. I need a normal year to keep my sanity.

[Hopperbin]

Why would you want a year like this?
So that you can sit back and laugh at farmers not done before the end of September? Joking. If you like a challenge, this was a good year.

[frustrated1]

I vote worst year. Froze in spring and fall, drought in between. Plowed crop under, baled it, silaged it and then combined in 4 different months. Talk about stress, here I am at 2 am wondering how to pay the bills when CAIS claws back an overpayment (they generated) by taking it off my crop insurance cheque. Precious little grain put in the bins. Survive another year like this? Not sure I'm going to survive this one. Oh, but I'm sure agstability will step up to save me. It's such an improved program. Or perhaps our health care will just take care of me when the stress takes its toll? I'm leaning towards worst year, but I will agree it's a challenge.

[AdamSmith]

This news has been out there for over a week now and the national newspapers and the national tv networks, go on making themselves more irrelevant and more un-trustwothy by the day by not covering this story.

Man-made global warming is being shown to be a scam and a hoax and the crickets have never been louder.

Thanks to Smalldeadanimals.com for doing the job the MSM should be doing.

Not only are we seeing the death of man made global warming, were witnessing the death of the MSM.

[ianben]

My problem with global warming/climate change is not that it is happening it always has.

I believe history tells us it always has been changing, perhaps the most unusual thing is how little change there has been in the last couple of millenium.

I just dont understand how they can put any meaningful value to the measures they say we need to take.

The variables are just too great making any results little better than the number they first thought of, or less politely "absolute bullshit".

The signs of the zodiac could be used just as effectively to predict the future.

.

[silverback]

Sure makes you wonder what our own little "Wheat Board Gate" would turn up if anyone would ever do a comprehensive audit.

I'm guessing a little bit of "Premium Price" data has been lost between floors at 423.

[burnt]

C'mon now give'm a break - they're too busy covering important issues like whether Tiger Woods' poor driving is resulting from him putting on the wrong green or vice versa.

Never forget that the poll can be designed to given the pollster favorable results. What were the exact questions asked? If I want to, I could set up a poll that would make the most vehement CWB hater look like a firm supporter.

That's how much many polls are worth.

[AdamSmith]

Here's another great example of "Alarmist" reporting by the msm.
It's reuters story picked up by the G&M.
---------------------------------------
Greenland ice loss accelerating: study
Loss due equally to icebergs breaking away and meltwater, nudging up sea levels

Alister Doyle

Reuters
Published on Thursday, Nov. 12, 2009 2:50PM EST

Last updated on Thursday, Nov. 12, 2009 5:17PM EST


Greenland's ice losses are accelerating and nudging up sea levels, according to a study showing that icebergs breaking away and melt water runoff are equally to blame for the shrinking ice sheet.

The report, using computer models to confirm satellite readings, indicated that ice losses quickened in 2006-08 to the equivalent of 0.75 millimetres of world sea level rise per year from an average 0.46 mm a year for 2000-08.

“Mass loss has accelerated,” said Michiel van den Broeke, of Utrecht University in the Netherlands, who led the study, in Friday's edition of the journal Science.

“The years 2006-08, with their warm summers, have seen a huge melting,” he told Reuters of the study with colleagues in the United States, the Netherlands and Britain.

“The underlying causes suggest this trend is likely to continue in the near future,” Jonathan Bamber, a co-author at the University of Bristol, said in a statement.

The computer models matched satellite data for ice losses - raising confidence in the findings - and showed that losses were due equally to melt water, caused by rising temperatures, and icebergs breaking off from glaciers.

“This helps us to understand the processes that affect Greenland. This will also help us predict what will happen,” Mr. van den Broeke said. Until now, the relative roles of snowfall, icebergs and thawing ice have been poorly understood.

Greenland locks up enough ice to raise world sea levels by seven metres if it ever all thawed. At the other end of the globe, far-colder Antarctica contains ice equivalent to 58 metres of sea level rise, according to UN estimates.

COPENHAGEN

About 190 governments will meet in Copenhagen from Dec. 7-18 to try to agree a UN pact to slow global warming, fearing that rising temperatures will bring more powerful storms, heat waves, mudslides and species extinctions as well as rising sea levels.

The study said losses of ice from Greenland would have been roughly double recent rates but were masked by more snowfall and a re-freezing of some meltwater before it reached the sea.

In total, Greenland lost about 1,500 billion tonnes of ice from 2000-08, split between icebergs cracking into the sea from glaciers and water runoff. “The mass loss would have been twice as great,” without offsetting effects, Mr. van den Broeke said.

The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimated in 2007 that world sea levels could rise by 18-59 centimetres by 2100. A natural expansion of water as it warms would account for most of the rise, rather than melting ice.

Greenland's current rate, of 0.75 millimetres a year, would be 7.5 centimetres if continued for 100 years. “This is ... much more that previous estimates of the Greenland contribution,” Mr. van den Broeke said.

---------------------------------------
Alarmist headline "Greenland is Melting"

buried in the bottom of the article is the reports computer modeled facts, which state intead of the previous avg. of .46 mimimeters of loss per year in 2006 and 2007 the rate went to .76 mimimeters per year.

That's an extra 3 centimeters of ice loss over the next 100 years.

Three centimeters

One and an eigth inches.

in Greenland

Where in the center of the island the ice is over a mile thick.

THIS IS F-ing NEWS????

Why lets spend trillions of dollars and maybe just maybe mind you, and if your all good boys and girls there will be something in your stocking on Chrismas morning, er, um, I mean the ice won't melt and we can avoid a global catastrophy.

It seems that the more information and knowledge becomes available the stupider people become.

[parsley]

SOME of the scientific elite are out of control, and they will generate any findings their paying sponsor requests.

Since these bought and paid for scientists often collectively request funding, usually via MSM propoganda pressure and overnight created scientific political associations, to crank out studies on global warming...on behalf of the United Nations and governments, they should be publically disbarred and collectively listed as Accredited Agents of Dillusion and Collusiontheir professional scientific accredtiing associations.

I can think of a few to shortlist.

Maybe I'm not hard nosed enough about this issue. Pars

[AdamSmith]

THE GLOBAL WARMING SCIENCE MACHINE:
$79 BILLION AND COUNTING

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/commentaries/Glover%20%20Economides%20-%20The%20GW%20Science%20Machine%20-%20by%20Jenn%2008%2010%2009.pdf

[Hopperbin]

In a nutshell the sun creates warm and cool cycles and we can view it through sunspots. The sun with its cycles warms and cools our planet. The CO2 follows some 300 years behind the warming and cooling affect because it is that time period that the oceans need to equalize the atomosphere. I know I did not explain it properly at coffee today because I got a lot of blank stares and changing subjects LOL.