Apparently we really need a "debate" over the term ICE AGE because y'all are all wrong...

NBC? ... why do you think NBC has 6,000 thermometers stationed across the Earth's surface? ... or launching weather balloons? ... or flying satellites ...

HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW ...

NBC? ... that's fucking funny ... I wouldn't trust NBC to give me the current DJIA ...


Everyone knew. The satellites went up in the late 1970s. TWC had a huge piece now removed of how the satellites and balloon data was highly correlated so there was really no reason to question it, and THERE NEVER WAS...

You are IN DENIAL ABOUT ACTUAL DATA because all you "cite" is FUDGE...
 
Everyone knew. The satellites went up in the late 1970s. TWC had a huge piece now removed of how the satellites and balloon data was highly correlated so there was really no reason to question it, and THERE NEVER WAS...

You are IN DENIAL ABOUT ACTUAL DATA because all you "cite" is FUDGE...

TWC = The Weather Channel? ... HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW ...

NOAA posts their methodology ... you don't ... so, where does NOAA fudge? ... place and time please ... this data is real easy to check ... did you? ...

Which satellite band give temperature? ... how are you accumulating 100 years worth? ... HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW ...
 
TWC = The Weather Channel? ... HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW ...

NOAA posts their methodology ... you don't ... so, where does NOAA fudge? ... place and time please ... this data is real easy to check ... did you? ...

Which satellite band give temperature? ... how are you accumulating 100 years worth? ... HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW ...


The satellites went up in the late 1970s.

From the late 1970s through 2005, the satellites and balloons showed no warming in the atmosphere before being FUDGED in 2005....

Documented over and over..

Your side FUDGES DATA because it has NO WARMING from increasing atmospheric Co2...
 
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...



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...


R.db19eb4ea7b7195ba0580ba3818ecaec


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....


Center of Greenland went from forest to ice age 400-800k years ago...



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)


R.227dcdb3e70664eda94c3ed3fc04c132



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....
An ice age is demarcated by the presence, or lack of ice covered poles. We are still in an ice age.
 
You keep sending me to NBC News for this "documentation", which NBC isn't providing ...

Which satellite band is being used for temperature? ... Gen 6 satellites only have 16, how hard can this be? ... pick one and explain how NBC uses it to document temperature ...

Balloon data ... pick and choose ...


LOL!!!

FUDGE

pick and choose...


R.eecfe04a09037e54ba79a0dd59ce75e6


Coffee Shop Fudge Recipe | Taste of Home




The fact that NBC documents the fudging of the atmospheric temp data is sufficient. I did not work the data. Your side FUDGED the data, and NBC reported it, and all other coverage of the TRUTH of the satellite and balloon data has been "canceled" like North American Ice Age...

which reminds us....


YOU cannot answer the following questions


Why does Greenland have ice age glacier south of Arctic Circle while there are trees and moose north of Arctic Circle on Alaska?

Why does one Earth polar circle have 9+ times the ice of the other?

How did Co2 freeze Greenland and thaw North America at the same time?



You cannot answer those questions and you know it, so you troll with this pathetic charade of the "data" that YOUR SIDE FUDGED...
 
Why does Greenland have ice age glacier south of Arctic Circle while there are trees and moose north of Arctic Circle on Alaska?

Do you have specific locations in mind? ... and would the Köppen Classification explain this? ...

Why does one Earth polar circle have 9+ times the ice of the other?

Land ...

How did Co2 freeze Greenland and thaw North America at the same time?

Continentiallity ...

=====

Pffft ... basic meteorology ... my turn: why is there a cusp in the pseudo-adiabatic lapse rate? ...
 
Do you have specific locations in mind? ... and would the Köppen Classification explain this? ...



Land ...



Continentiallity ...

=====

Pffft ... basic meteorology ... my turn: why is there a cusp in the pseudo-adiabatic lapse rate? ...


LOL!!!


YOU FAIL!!!

Your side has fudge and fraud and you cannot explain a map of the Arctic...

But at least you figured out LAND NEAR THE POLES has something to do with it....
 
Ask NBC, they were the ones reporting the FUDGE JOB your side did in 2005...

You admit your reference is inadequate? ... should I binge-watch Friends to catch up on the science? ... or The Real Housewives of Orange County? ...

Your claim is temperatures aren't rising ... that's separate from the IPCC cherry-picking their conclusions, that's politics and better suited for The Real Housewives of Atlanta ...
 
You admit your reference is inadequate?


Co2 does nothing = highly correlated satellite and balloon data


and your side cannot explain a map of the Arctic...



Your claim is temperatures aren't rising


Outside of Urban Heat, the DATA proves Earth is not warming at all.



When you figure out why there is ice age glacier south of Arctic Circle on Greenland, let us know...
 
Please post this data ... thanx in advanced ... which satellite band give temperature? ...

You never answered: Why is there a cusp in the pseudo-adiabatic lapse rate? ...


Don't have to, NBC summarized it perfectly.

Satellites and balloons showed no warming in the atmosphere for 30+ years in highly correlated fashion.

Your side FUDGED both with laughable excuses that do not match what the fudging did.

And you are a troll who cannot explain a map of the Arctic. I don't possess the actual satellite data. You do have eyes and you cannot explain a map.

$20 trillion spent on fudgebaking liars who cannot explain a map of the Arctic = pathetic
 
Don't have to, NBC summarized it perfectly.

Satellites and balloons showed no warming in the atmosphere for 30+ years in highly correlated fashion.

Your side FUDGED both with laughable excuses that do not match what the fudging did.

And you are a troll who cannot explain a map of the Arctic. I don't possess the actual satellite data. You do have eyes and you cannot explain a map.

$20 trillion spent on fudgebaking liars who cannot explain a map of the Arctic = pathetic

Then why are you claiming the data shows no change? ... NBC isn't explaining which band they're using ... you explain ... it's your claim ...

Why is there a cusp in the pseudo-adiabatic lapse rate? ...

... I don't possess the actual satellite data ...

Who does? ...
 
NBC isn't explaining which band they're using


LOL!!!


So that explains the TRUTH that the highly correlated satellite and balloon data showed NO WARMING in the atmosphere despite rising Co2...


LOL!!!

Write NBC and bitch at them, because you

cannot explain a map of the Arctic
cannot explain how NA melted while Greenland thawed
cannot document any warming on Earth except Urban Heat

because...


R.f07e1807c72566c03e0787136917b2c4
 
May we see this data? ... NBC isn't providing it ... I'm especially interested in which satellite band is being used for temperature ...


SUE NBC for the data.

The skeptic side has always had to SUE for the "warmers' data" because they never volunteer the RAW DATA, only the FUDGE...
 
SUE NBC for the data.

The skeptic side has always had to SUE for the "warmers' data" because they never volunteer the RAW DATA, only the FUDGE...

So you admit your claims are based on criminal intent ... shame on you ... if you're knowingly repeating lies, you are a liar ...

Satellites don't measure temperature in the atmosphere ... yet ... there's promising research going on, but no, we're not measuring temperatures from space ... now you know ... let's see if there's any honesty left in you ...
 

Forum List

Back
Top