Extreme weather, 2011

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1K6VusP_sr4&feature=related]Tropical Temperature Impacts Ice in Antarctica - YouTube[/ame]
 
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1Xmy-5W3IU&feature=related]Arctic Sea Ice Melting Faster NASA Video - YouTube[/ame]
 
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztz3ZdPbdKo&feature=related]NASA: Arctic Ocean Could be Mostly Ice Free in 2013 - YouTube[/ame]
 
All the video of the arctic in this video is computer generated. That means its bullshit, for all we know. You can make computers show whatever you want them to show.



God almighty, are you really that stupid, Pattycake? The data is sent down by satellite and made into pictures by a computer. Then the pictures are assemble and ran like a movie film. Yes, it is computer generated, just as the words in this post are computer generated.
 
Ahem . . . . . . See ice in the arctic has been increasing since 2007. Curious that your video was made in 2007. At least, it only shows data up to 2007.


Ahem, dumb fuck, this year, depending on the source,it was slightly more, or slightly less than in 2007. And the volume was less.

PIOMAS September 2011 (volume record lower still) - Arctic Sea Ice


Here's some more honest data, dumb fuck, rather than some warmist government toady data.

30-yr-ice-area1.jpg


Note the increase in area after 2007.

You might want to read the article that goes with it:

Arctic Sea Ice Increases at Record Rate | Watts Up With That?
 
All the video of the arctic in this video is computer generated. That means its bullshit, for all we know. You can make computers show whatever you want them to show.



God almighty, are you really that stupid, Pattycake? The data is sent down by satellite and made into pictures by a computer. Then the pictures are assemble and ran like a movie film. Yes, it is computer generated, just as the words in this post are computer generated.

The "made into pictures by a computer" part is where the potential for bullshit enters the picture. Anything can be done with computer algorithms. We already know how the Hadley CRU used computer algorithms to manipulate their data.

See, I can use a computer to generate the truth or lies they way you do.
 
Last edited:
Ahem . . . . . . See ice in the arctic has been increasing since 2007. Curious that your video was made in 2007. At least, it only shows data up to 2007.

Ahem, dumb fuck, this year, depending on the source,it was slightly more, or slightly less than in 2007. And the volume was less.

PIOMAS September 2011 (volume record lower still) - Arctic Sea Ice


Here's some more honest data, dumb fuck, rather than some warmist government toady data.

30-yr-ice-area1.jpg


Note the increase in area after 2007.

You might want to read the article that goes with it:

Arctic Sea Ice Increases at Record Rate | Watts Up With That?

A dumb fuck quoting a lying fuck. Silly ass, it has one year after 2007 on that graph, and it is barely above the low of 2007. Same for 2009, and 2010. But 2011 was either very slightly higher or very slightly lower than 2007. And the volume was significantly less than that of 2007, or any other year on record.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.area.arctic.png

PIOMAS September 2011 (volume record lower still) - Arctic Sea Ice
 
All the video of the arctic in this video is computer generated. That means its bullshit, for all we know. You can make computers show whatever you want them to show.

God almighty, are you really that stupid, Pattycake? The data is sent down by satellite and made into pictures by a computer. Then the pictures are assemble and ran like a movie film. Yes, it is computer generated, just as the words in this post are computer generated.

The "made into pictures by a computer" is where the potential for bullshit enters the picture. Anything can be done with computer algorithms. We already know how the Hadley CRU used computer algorithms to manipulate their data.

See, I can use a computer to generate the truth or lies they way you do.

So what you are stating is that the scientists that interpret the data from the satellites, US, Chinese, EU, Russian, and Japanese, are all in a conspiracy to lie to us.

There are multiple satellites from multiple nations observing the shrinking ice. Either you posit an international conspiracy among scientists, or you admit that you are an idiot. Of course the former equals the latter, and we know what you are from your unsupported posts.

Watch what happens this year. Two La Nina winters in a row, the cap should grow this year. But it will not.
 
Ahem, dumb fuck, this year, depending on the source,it was slightly more, or slightly less than in 2007. And the volume was less.

PIOMAS September 2011 (volume record lower still) - Arctic Sea Ice


Here's some more honest data, dumb fuck, rather than some warmist government toady data.

30-yr-ice-area1.jpg


Note the increase in area after 2007.

You might want to read the article that goes with it:

Arctic Sea Ice Increases at Record Rate | Watts Up With That?

A dumb fuck quoting a lying fuck. Silly ass, it has one year after 2007 on that graph, and it is barely above the low of 2007. Same for 2009, and 2010. But 2011 was either very slightly higher or very slightly lower than 2007. And the volume was significantly less than that of 2007, or any other year on record.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.area.arctic.png

PIOMAS September 2011 (volume record lower still) - Arctic Sea Ice


The last two peaks on the graph are increasing.

Speaking of lying fucks, you're referring to an organization that has been caught doctoring its data numerous times. Your NASA data isn't credible.
 

Forum List

Back
Top