EMH
Diamond Member
- Apr 5, 2021
- 14,088
- 9,710
- 2,138
What is an ICE AGE?
Most apparently still believe it is a terrifying horror movie event where Earth all at once freezes up. The data has never supported such a scenario. Since 2010, there has been a massive effort to re-write Earth climate history into a series of rapid "glaciations" and ice retreats, as if "Day After Tomorrow" movie is accurate... LOL!!! What was North American Ice Age before 2010 is now spun into a series of rapid "ice ages" where it took a mere 75k years for the "ice age" to start in Northern Canada and put 2.5 mile thick glaicers on Chicago. This is "Milankovich" cycles, which I call McBullshit, and the data and debate on North American Ice Age vs. McBullshit is here...
www.usmessageboard.com
and it isn't close. McBullshit is off by a factor of 10+ on every measure of ice age glacier available today.
The original definition of ICE AGE which is still used today was formed without any knowledge that land moves via the tectonic plates. It was thought that glaciation of South America's southern tip was the result of ice from Antarctica, in its current position, growing out over ocean and freezing up southern South America "during an ice age". Since 2010 that is now recorded, cough cough, as a rapid series of Dennis Quaid style ice ages coming and going. Neither of those are correct. As this map with sea level depth exposed shows, South America on the southern tip glaciated because 20 million or so years ago it was still attached to Antarctica, but isn't anymore and that's why it melted to just mountains today...
Antarctica itself has 70 million year old dinosaur fossils, because 70 million years ago it was not on the South Pole (and not covered with 2+ mile thick ice age glacier), but halfway to South Africa where it originated.
Rule 1 = Ice Age Glacier does not grow out over ocean, it breaks off - see Antarctica and Greenland, Titanic
Rule 2 = Ice Ages are Continent Specific Events because of Rule 1
The proof of this is the indisputable fact that Greenland froze while North America thawed. 20k years ago there was ice still in Chicago and Indiana. That is now gone. The Vikings were farming the southern tip of Greenland until the 1400s, when they were frozen off/out. For the past 20k years, Greenland froze while North America thawed. How far back that goes is in debate now, but it is a laughable debate. The data from Greenland is pretty well defined.
Greenland was unfrozen, completely unfrozen, 2 million years ago, as its northern tip was a flourishing forest....
www.nature.com
Center of Greenland went from forest to ice age 400-800k years ago...
www.livescience.com
The continent specific ice age on Greenland is under 2 million years old.
North America had this for either 75k years or 30-50 million years (the latter is the sane answer)
This map was done before the data from Greenland kept rolling in, as it was assumed Greenland and NA were attached and Greenland had been frozen for a long time = NOT THE CASE according to the data above. North America was covered with ice age glacier down to Indiana. That is the debate in the first link at the top of the post, how old that ice was and how long it took to grow and melt. Clearly, it melted, and Greenland is now frozen.
North America thawed while Greenland froze. Ice Ages are continent specific (with a planetary effect) but not planetary. THAT is the DATA...
So what causes an ICE AGE?
Land moving near the poles. When land gets to within - roughly- 600 miles of a pole, as Greenland just did, the annual snowfall ceases to fully melt in the summer, and then it starts to stack. Stack for a million or 2 years = Greenland. Stack for 40+ million years = Antarctica. Ice ages like North American Ice Age end when the land moves outside of the 600 miles to a pole barrier.
Greenland and Antarctica are ice ages. Earth Climate Change is 99% about where land is. If Earth had two polar oceans, it would have no ice (much warmer). If Earth had two polar continents, two "Antarcticas" it would have roughly twice the ice, oceans would be lower, there would be a thinner atmosphere with less humidity, and it would be colder...
Earth climate change is about ice. Ice controls sea level, temperature, atmospheric thickness, and humidity.
Ice is about where land is. 90% on Antarctica, 7% on Greenland today.
Land moves.
Not that hard.
Atmosphere, Co2 in atmosphere and Sun are not causes of climate CHANGE. Co2 does nothing. Sun is constant. What changes is where land is...
If you understand what an ice age is, it all makes sense. If you blur it and allow the Co2 fraud to define "ice age" as a Dennis Quaid movie, you are lost, and you are playing their game of debating their fudged fraud....
Most apparently still believe it is a terrifying horror movie event where Earth all at once freezes up. The data has never supported such a scenario. Since 2010, there has been a massive effort to re-write Earth climate history into a series of rapid "glaciations" and ice retreats, as if "Day After Tomorrow" movie is accurate... LOL!!! What was North American Ice Age before 2010 is now spun into a series of rapid "ice ages" where it took a mere 75k years for the "ice age" to start in Northern Canada and put 2.5 mile thick glaicers on Chicago. This is "Milankovich" cycles, which I call McBullshit, and the data and debate on North American Ice Age vs. McBullshit is here...
How old were the 2.5 mile thick glaciers covering Chicago in the past 20k-5 million years?
This is where the climate debate is now stuck. Every piece of land within 600 miles of a pole is in ice age, everything outside of that is not. Nobody has attempted to dispute that. It is the clear truth of Earth today. Milankovitch Cycles, which I call McBullshit Cycles, take a very...
www.usmessageboard.com
and it isn't close. McBullshit is off by a factor of 10+ on every measure of ice age glacier available today.
The original definition of ICE AGE which is still used today was formed without any knowledge that land moves via the tectonic plates. It was thought that glaciation of South America's southern tip was the result of ice from Antarctica, in its current position, growing out over ocean and freezing up southern South America "during an ice age". Since 2010 that is now recorded, cough cough, as a rapid series of Dennis Quaid style ice ages coming and going. Neither of those are correct. As this map with sea level depth exposed shows, South America on the southern tip glaciated because 20 million or so years ago it was still attached to Antarctica, but isn't anymore and that's why it melted to just mountains today...
Antarctica itself has 70 million year old dinosaur fossils, because 70 million years ago it was not on the South Pole (and not covered with 2+ mile thick ice age glacier), but halfway to South Africa where it originated.
Rule 1 = Ice Age Glacier does not grow out over ocean, it breaks off - see Antarctica and Greenland, Titanic
Rule 2 = Ice Ages are Continent Specific Events because of Rule 1
The proof of this is the indisputable fact that Greenland froze while North America thawed. 20k years ago there was ice still in Chicago and Indiana. That is now gone. The Vikings were farming the southern tip of Greenland until the 1400s, when they were frozen off/out. For the past 20k years, Greenland froze while North America thawed. How far back that goes is in debate now, but it is a laughable debate. The data from Greenland is pretty well defined.
Greenland was unfrozen, completely unfrozen, 2 million years ago, as its northern tip was a flourishing forest....
A 2-million-year-old ecosystem in Greenland uncovered by environmental DNA - Nature
Analysis of two-million-year-old ancient environmental DNA from the Kap København Formation in North Greenland shows there was an open boreal forest with diverse plant and animal species, of which several taxa have not previously been detected at the site, representing an ecosystem that has no...
www.nature.com
Center of Greenland went from forest to ice age 400-800k years ago...
Ancient Greenland Was Actually Green
Greenland was once carpeted in lush forests, a new study shows.
The continent specific ice age on Greenland is under 2 million years old.
North America had this for either 75k years or 30-50 million years (the latter is the sane answer)
This map was done before the data from Greenland kept rolling in, as it was assumed Greenland and NA were attached and Greenland had been frozen for a long time = NOT THE CASE according to the data above. North America was covered with ice age glacier down to Indiana. That is the debate in the first link at the top of the post, how old that ice was and how long it took to grow and melt. Clearly, it melted, and Greenland is now frozen.
North America thawed while Greenland froze. Ice Ages are continent specific (with a planetary effect) but not planetary. THAT is the DATA...
So what causes an ICE AGE?
Land moving near the poles. When land gets to within - roughly- 600 miles of a pole, as Greenland just did, the annual snowfall ceases to fully melt in the summer, and then it starts to stack. Stack for a million or 2 years = Greenland. Stack for 40+ million years = Antarctica. Ice ages like North American Ice Age end when the land moves outside of the 600 miles to a pole barrier.
Greenland and Antarctica are ice ages. Earth Climate Change is 99% about where land is. If Earth had two polar oceans, it would have no ice (much warmer). If Earth had two polar continents, two "Antarcticas" it would have roughly twice the ice, oceans would be lower, there would be a thinner atmosphere with less humidity, and it would be colder...
Earth climate change is about ice. Ice controls sea level, temperature, atmospheric thickness, and humidity.
Ice is about where land is. 90% on Antarctica, 7% on Greenland today.
Land moves.
Not that hard.
Atmosphere, Co2 in atmosphere and Sun are not causes of climate CHANGE. Co2 does nothing. Sun is constant. What changes is where land is...
If you understand what an ice age is, it all makes sense. If you blur it and allow the Co2 fraud to define "ice age" as a Dennis Quaid movie, you are lost, and you are playing their game of debating their fudged fraud....
