It's all just crap...

[Sodafin]

from my perspective, climate change hysteria is closer to holocaust denial than skepticism about it. You can only engage in climate hysteria and holocaust denial if you can believe in the obviously not true

Right.

It's amazing that basically every university, research unit and political party in the world have been fooled.

But not Baruch. He knew better.

 

[Sodafin]

Best estimates, by 2030 no glaciers in Glacier National Park. There may well be no ice in the Arctic Ocean in the summer by that time. A growing population, and an increasingly impacted agriculture industry. I will see major changes during the remaining years of my life, and I am 66.

Go sell your fear somewhere else, we ain't buyin.........

Wow...you really ARE out of touch!!

But please Pike-Perch - let's see you back this up with some real science - please present some research from a credible source which backs up your position.

Perhaps when you go look for some, you'll realise that all of the science says that Old Rocks is actually totally correct, and that there is complete scientific consensus on this.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

from my perspective, climate change hysteria is closer to holocaust denial than skepticism about it. You can only engage in climate hysteria and holocaust denial if you can believe in the obviously not true

Right.

It's amazing that basically every university, research unit and political party in the world have been fooled.

But not Baruch. He knew better.

Doesn't matter how many people say a thing, or who they are. All the emperor's courtiers, all the chancellery staff, all the nobility, all the army, if they emperor is naked, talking about his wonderful suit of clothes won't change the fact.

I take nothing on authority, especially if that authority seems dishonest, partial, or more into what they can steal then actual remediation. I do the green thing... I recycle most everything I can, I bike or bus everywhere I can, I keep the thermostat low, I just like being green. I hate it when I am called anti environment by some jerk in a stretch limo on his way to a environmental conference because I don't like the looks of his kool aid, especially as he is not going to drink it himself.

 

[Sodafin]

Baruch -

As I said - basically every scientist, university, research unit and political party have been fooled.

Only you understand.

That makes a lot of sense.

 

[Sarah G]

John Coleman, the co-founder of the Weather Channel, talks about Global Warming and explains it clearly for anybody who has an open mind and proves that Global Warming is just a scam. Give it a listen and learn.

John Coleman | KUSI - News, Weather and Sports - San Diego, CA | Latest Headlines

Old news and bullshit.

 

[Zander]

Best estimates, by 2030 no glaciers in Glacier National Park. There may well be no ice in the Arctic Ocean in the summer by that time. A growing population, and an increasingly impacted agriculture industry. I will see major changes during the remaining years of my life, and I am 66.

Go sell your fear somewhere else, we ain't buyin.........

Wow...you really ARE out of touch!!

But please Pike-Perch - let's see you back this up with some real science - please present some research from a credible source which backs up your position.

Perhaps when you go look for some, you'll realise that all of the science says that Old Rocks is actually totally correct, and that there is complete scientific consensus on this.

Consensus? There was a scientific "consensus" that the earth was the center of the universe. There was a scientific "consensus" that the earth was flat too. You are the gullible one that believes CO2 emissions and cow farts are causing global warming. The funny thing is that you have no proof, just a bunch of doctored data and claims of "consensus".

I suggest you google the word "falsifiable".

Your politically driven religion of AGW has more holes in it than the immaculate conception. At least Christians admit their beliefs are based on faith.......You people are worse than the Jehovah's Witnesses knocking at my door!

 

[Sodafin]

Zander -

There is scientific consensus that 95% of the worlds glaciers are in retreat.

There is scientific consensus that the arctic polar cap is thinning and melting.

Do a little research, and come back when you are to speed on that, and perhaps we can move on to the aspects of climate change which are currently contentious or debatable.

I am happy to present hard science for you if you are unable to find it.

 

[saveliberty]

Zander -

There is scientific consensus that 95% of the worlds glaciers are in retreat.

There is scientific consensus that the arctic polar cap is thinning and melting.

Do a little research, and come back when you are to speed on that, and perhaps we can move on to the aspects of climate change which are currently contentious or debatable.

I am happy to present hard science for you if you are unable to find it.

Pull your head out of your ass long enough to read this:

Revealed: Antarctic ice growing, not shrinking | The Australian

ICE is expanding in much of Antarctica, contrary to the widespread public belief that global warming is melting the continental ice cap.

East Antarctica is four times the size of west Antarctica and parts of it are cooling. The Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research report prepared for last week's meeting of Antarctic Treaty nations in Washington noted the South Pole had shown "significant cooling in recent decades".

Dr Allison said there was not any evidence of significant change in the mass of ice shelves in east Antarctica nor any indication that its ice cap was melting. "The only significant calvings in Antarctica have been in the west," he said. And he cautioned that calvings of the magnitude seen recently in west Antarctica might not be unusual.

Ice core drilling in the fast ice off Australia's Davis Station in East Antarctica by the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems Co-Operative Research Centre shows that last year, the ice had a maximum thickness of 1.89m, its densest in 10 years. The average thickness of the ice at Davis since the 1950s is 1.67m.

A paper to be published soon by the British Antarctic Survey in the journal Geophysical Research Letters is expected to confirm that over the past 30 years, the area of sea ice around the continent has expanded.

With just a little effort, you can actually find real scientists using real science. I have spent some time this last week using my local data as reason to dispute global warming. I have been told it is just a local phenomena and unreliable. Much like just using Arctic data by you and fellow warmers. I guess if you have 90% of the world's ice and it is growing, you guys don't have much of a leg to stand on.

 

[Sodafin]

SaveLiberty -

I pulled my head out of my arse long enough to note that we were discussing the Arctic - and you posted a story on the Antarctic.

Priceless. Absolutely priceless.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Baruch -

As I said - basically every scientist, university, research unit and political party have been fooled.

Only you understand.

That makes a lot of sense.

I have to go with the proofs, not the assertions. We have been dealing with the GW clods for about 12 years now. They have made their models, made their predictions, spoken their piece. And been consistently wrong. 2009 was supposed to be the worst year evah for hurricanes. Lots and lots of category 5 monsters. There were none.

According to the models, it is supposed to be 2 degrees warmer now than it actually is. There is not supposed to be freezing temperatures in Florida. England should be enjoying balmy tropic breezes, not be stuck in snow and ice. The polar bears should be a memory, they are flourishing.

People can talk and talk and talk, but reality speaks louder.

Large numbers of people are emotionally and financially invested in this. I do not doubt they have studied very hard. But if the model does not meet reality, you don't toss reality and hold on to the model. Which for various and sundry financial reasons, the GW people seem to be doing.

 

[Sinatra]

SaveLiberty -

I pulled my head out of my arse long enough to note that we were discussing the Arctic - and you posted a story on the Antarctic.

Priceless. Absolutely priceless.

You are aware the Antarctic accounts for 70% of the earth's fresh water? Many times more than the arctic.

It is quite possible the loss of ice being reported at one cap is being more than replaced by the ice accumulations in another cap - that in fact, the net ice accumulations of earth are INCREASING, not decreasing.

Carry on...

 

[saveliberty]

SaveLiberty -

I pulled my head out of my arse long enough to note that we were discussing the Arctic - and you posted a story on the Antarctic.

Priceless. Absolutely priceless.

With 10% of the world's ice in the Arctic, why are you looking at such a small sample? The ice melting in the Arctic is mostly over seas. That is why sea levels have not increased dramaticlly. Ocean currents account for a great amount of that melting, not CO2 levels. Certainly not man-made CO2. Thanks for admiting where your head was and where you returned it to. I see a lot of climatologists with the same problem.

 

[Sodafin]

I have to go with the proofs, not the assertions. We have been dealing with the GW clods for about 12 years now. They have made their models, made their predictions, spoken their piece. And been consistently wrong. 2009 was supposed to be the worst year evah for hurricanes. Lots and lots of category 5 monsters. There were none.

This from BBC -

The Arctic Climate Impact Assessment project notes that systematic collection of data in parts of the Arctic began in the late 18th Century. The US National Hurricane Center notes that "organised reconnaissance" for Atlantic storms began in 1944. So although historical data is not as complete as one might like, conclusions can be drawn. And the IPCC does not claim that global warming will make hurricanes more frequent - its 2007 report says that if anything, they are likely to become less frequent, but more intense.

BBC NEWS | Special Reports | 629 | 629 | Climate scepticism: The top 10

btw. Global warming as a theory dates back to at least that 1890s - not 12 years ago!

 

[Sodafin]

It is quite possible the loss of ice being reported at one cap is being more than replaced by the ice accumulations in another cap - that in fact, the net ice accumulations of earth are INCREASING, not decreasing.

Possible in theory perhaps - but that is patently not what is happening.

In reality, the Eastern Antarctic had been quite stable until recently, even growing on occasions, while the Western fell to pieces in quite dramatic fashion.

The latest reports show the Eastern Antarctic starting to collapse as well - although it is too soon to say much about what is happening there.

Please read this:

West Antarctic Ice Sheet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[saveliberty]

It is quite possible the loss of ice being reported at one cap is being more than replaced by the ice accumulations in another cap - that in fact, the net ice accumulations of earth are INCREASING, not decreasing.

Possible in theory perhaps - but that is patently not what is happening.

In reality, the Eastern Antarctic had been quite stable until recently, even growing on occasions, while the Western fell to pieces in quite dramatic fashion.

The latest reports show the Eastern Antarctic starting to collapse as well - although it is too soon to say much about what is happening there.

Please read this:

West Antarctic Ice Sheet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Our data is from 2009. Your source is 2006 data. Nice try. Your research is almost as good as a global warming scientist.

 

[SFC Ollie]

I have to go with the proofs, not the assertions. We have been dealing with the GW clods for about 12 years now. They have made their models, made their predictions, spoken their piece. And been consistently wrong. 2009 was supposed to be the worst year evah for hurricanes. Lots and lots of category 5 monsters. There were none.

This from BBC -

The Arctic Climate Impact Assessment project notes that systematic collection of data in parts of the Arctic began in the late 18th Century. The US National Hurricane Center notes that "organised reconnaissance" for Atlantic storms began in 1944. So although historical data is not as complete as one might like, conclusions can be drawn. And the IPCC does not claim that global warming will make hurricanes more frequent - its 2007 report says that if anything, they are likely to become less frequent, but more intense.

BBC NEWS | Special Reports | 629 | 629 | Climate scepticism: The top 10

btw. Global warming as a theory dates back to at least that 1890s - not 12 years ago!

SO we've been warming for 120 years? Now I know that's not true. You sure you don't want to rethink that one?

 

[Sodafin]

Save -

For a person who just mistook the Arctic for Antarctic, you show a remarkably brave face.

Unfortunately, you don't seem to have much idea of the topic.

Eastern Antarctica is, as I explained already, generally stable, and in some cases has grown. Western Antarctica has been collapsing:

"Scientists track ice shelves and study collapses carefully because some of them hold back glaciers, which if unleashed, can accelerate and raise sea level. Scambos said, "The Wilkins disintegration won't raise sea level because it already floats in the ocean, and few glaciers flow into it. However, the collapse underscores that the Wilkins region has experienced an intense melt season. Regional sea ice has all but vanished, leaving the ice shelf exposed to the action of waves."

Antarctic Ice Shelf Disintegration Underscores a Warming World

However, the East may also be starting to collapse:

The ice sheet covering east Antarctica may have been melting since 2006, according to new research, contradicting previous suggestions that it has remained stable or even grown in mass.

http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2009/11/is_east_antarctic_ice_melting.html

 

[Sodafin]

SO we've been warming for 120 years? Now I know that's not true. You sure you don't want to rethink that one?

No, you mis-read what I posted.

What I said was that the SCIENCE of global warming was developed in the 1890s.

Here it is for you:

In 1896 a Swedish scientist published a new idea. As humanity burned fossil fuels such as coal, which added carbon dioxide gas to the Earth's atmosphere, we would raise the planet's average temperature. This "greenhouse effect" was only one of many speculations about climate, and not the most plausible. Scientists found technical reasons to argue that our emissions could not change the climate. Indeed most thought it was obvious that puny humanity could never affect the vast climate cycles, which were governed by a benign "balance of nature." In any case major change seemed impossible except over tens of thousands of years.

In the 1930s, people realized that the United States and North Atlantic region had warmed significantly during the previous half-century. Scientists supposed this was just a phase of some mild natural cycle, with unknown causes. Only one lone voice, the amateur G.S. Callendar, insisted that greenhouse warming was on the way. Whatever the cause of warming, everyone thought that if it happened to continue for the next few centuries, so much the better.

Introduction - Summary

 

[saveliberty]

Save -

For a person who just mistook the Arctic for Antarctic, you show a remarkably brave face.

Unfortunately, you don't seem to have much idea of the topic.

Eastern Antarctica is, as I explained already, generally stable, and in some cases has grown. Western Antarctica has been collapsing:

"Scientists track ice shelves and study collapses carefully because some of them hold back glaciers, which if unleashed, can accelerate and raise sea level. Scambos said, "The Wilkins disintegration won't raise sea level because it already floats in the ocean, and few glaciers flow into it. However, the collapse underscores that the Wilkins region has experienced an intense melt season. Regional sea ice has all but vanished, leaving the ice shelf exposed to the action of waves."

Antarctic Ice Shelf Disintegration Underscores a Warming World

However, the East may also be starting to collapse:

The ice sheet covering east Antarctica may have been melting since 2006, according to new research, contradicting previous suggestions that it has remained stable or even grown in mass.

http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2009/11/is_east_antarctic_ice_melting.html

You claim global warming idiot. The subject is melting ice caps. The ones in Antarctia are growing as of September 2009. It is not my fault you used an old reference, because it suited your purposes. The Eastern section represents 80% of the ice cap. It more than offsets the losses of the Western side and the Arctic. The research my assertion covers, is from ice core samples. It has been pretty reliable data in the past. I can't comment on your last source, as it is not retrievable.

Since you insist on focusing on the Arctic, have you done any reading on shifts in ocean currents that have been melting the ice caps? The sun, volcanoes and ocean currents are melting your ice caps pal. Man-made CO2, not a factor.

 

[saveliberty]

I have to go with the proofs, not the assertions. We have been dealing with the GW clods for about 12 years now. They have made their models, made their predictions, spoken their piece. And been consistently wrong. 2009 was supposed to be the worst year evah for hurricanes. Lots and lots of category 5 monsters. There were none.

This from BBC -

The Arctic Climate Impact Assessment project notes that systematic collection of data in parts of the Arctic began in the late 18th Century. The US National Hurricane Center notes that "organised reconnaissance" for Atlantic storms began in 1944. So although historical data is not as complete as one might like, conclusions can be drawn. And the IPCC does not claim that global warming will make hurricanes more frequent - its 2007 report says that if anything, they are likely to become less frequent, but more intense.

BBC NEWS | Special Reports | 629 | 629 | Climate scepticism: The top 10

btw. Global warming as a theory dates back to at least that 1890s - not 12 years ago!

Thanks for showing us your little talking points source. Do your own research idiot. "...systematic collection of data in parts of the Arctic began in the late 18th Century." Ever look at maps from the late 1700s? Take Michigan for example. How accurate a map was that? Now you expect me to believe ACCURATE data was collected in the Arctic back then? Don't make excuses for the bad hurricane info, they blew it, plain and simple.