Polar ice cap melts 6.1% per decade

[Chris]

You have nothing worth commenting upon but your sorry-assed doom-and-gloomery, regurgitated babbling points and the litany of logical fallacies.

Invective is all you're worth anymore, you fucking loser.

No, a loser is a person with no facts, just insults.

 

[Oddball]

Numerous others and I have plenty of facts, and have presented them, which you reject out-of-hand because they don't fit your wormy Malthusian end-is-nigh world view.

That you're a whiny, crackpot, douchebag loser is nobody's problem but yours.

 

[Chris]

Numerous others and I have plenty of facts, and have presented them, which you reject out-of-hand because they don't fit your wormy Malthusian end-is-nigh world view.

That you're a whiny, crackpot, douchebag loser is nobody's problem but yours.

I think you just described yourself.

Getting back to the facts....

http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20090804_Figure3.png

 

[Oddball]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TDqvD34hEA]YouTube - Gloom Despair[/ame]

 

[elvis]

I think we have already passed the tipping point.

Of course you do.

Wormy little doom-and-gloomer negative Nancys have to not only see the glass as half empty, they have to question the viability of the glass as an adequate vessel for the water.

You really have nothing by insults.

Certainly no facts are on your side.

Why are the glaciers and the polar ice cap melting?

yes you are a total pussy. all you HAD were neg reps. Now you have ZERO. How do you like that, shitstain?

 

[elvis]

You have nothing worth commenting upon but your sorry-assed doom-and-gloomery, regurgitated babbling points and the litany of logical fallacies.

Invective is all you're worth anymore, you fucking loser.

No, a loser is a person with no facts, just insults.

and you are a dipshit with nothing.

 

[Oddball]

BTW...

Fuck you, Old Rocksinthehead.

 

[Meister]

I think we have already passed the tipping point.

Of course you do.

Wormy little doom-and-gloomer negative Nancys have to not only see the glass as half empty, they have to question the viability of the glass as an adequate vessel for the water.

You really have nothing by insults.

Certainly no facts are on your side.

Why are the glaciers and the polar ice cap melting?

I keep telling you the SUN Let it sink and and quit asking such stupid questions

 

[Chris]

Of course you do.

Wormy little doom-and-gloomer negative Nancys have to not only see the glass as half empty, they have to question the viability of the glass as an adequate vessel for the water.

You really have nothing by insults.

Certainly no facts are on your side.

Why are the glaciers and the polar ice cap melting?

I keep telling you the SUN Let it sink and and quit asking such stupid questions

The sun is at its lowest level of activity in 80 years.

So why is the ice still melting?

 

[KittenKoder]

You really have nothing by insults.

Certainly no facts are on your side.

Why are the glaciers and the polar ice cap melting?

I keep telling you the SUN Let it sink and and quit asking such stupid questions

The sun is at its lowest level of activity in 80 years.

So why is the ice still melting?

Actually ... Time to finally explain this to you ... just because I am finally bored enough to stop laughing whenever you post it.

When the energy from Sol fluctuates the temperature goes down naturally, due to the increased atmospheric activity it causes on Terra. However when Sol is steady and calm, there is much less atmospheric shift, therefore lower wind levels and less heat transfer, so the temperature actually goes up on the surface of Terra. But oh wait ... that's just too scientific for you, how about this answer, more to your level of thinking:

That's just the way it is.

 

[Chris]

CO2 causes the earth to retain heat.

We have increased atmospheric CO2 by 40% in the last 200 years.

We are adding 10 BILLION TONS of CO2 to the atmosphere every year.

The scientists at MIT estimate that this will cause the earth to heat up 4-7 degrees in the next century.

But I am sure that you believe you are smarter than the scientists at MIT.

 

[Old Rocks]

I keep telling you the SUN Let it sink and and quit asking such stupid questions

The sun is at its lowest level of activity in 80 years.

So why is the ice still melting?

Actually ... Time to finally explain this to you ... just because I am finally bored enough to stop laughing whenever you post it.

When the energy from Sol fluctuates the temperature goes down naturally, due to the increased atmospheric activity it causes on Terra. However when Sol is steady and calm, there is much less atmospheric shift, therefore lower wind levels and less heat transfer, so the temperature actually goes up on the surface of Terra. But oh wait ... that's just too scientific for you, how about this answer, more to your level of thinking:

That's just the way it is.

 

[KittenKoder]

CO2 causes the earth to retain heat.

We have increased atmospheric CO2 by 40% in the last 200 years.

We are adding 10 BILLION TONS of CO2 to the atmosphere every year.

The scientists at MIT estimate that this will cause the earth to heat up 4-7 degrees in the next century.

But I am sure that you believe you are smarter than the scientists at MIT.

You still avoid big pictures ... does more than one variable just give you a headache?

 

[KittenKoder]

The sun is at its lowest level of activity in 80 years.

So why is the ice still melting?

Actually ... Time to finally explain this to you ... just because I am finally bored enough to stop laughing whenever you post it.

When the energy from Sol fluctuates the temperature goes down naturally, due to the increased atmospheric activity it causes on Terra. However when Sol is steady and calm, there is much less atmospheric shift, therefore lower wind levels and less heat transfer, so the temperature actually goes up on the surface of Terra. But oh wait ... that's just too scientific for you, how about this answer, more to your level of thinking:

That's just the way it is.

See my post above.

 

[Oddball]

CO2 causes the earth to retain heat.

We have increased atmospheric CO2 by 40% in the last 200 years.

We are adding 10 BILLION TONS of CO2 to the atmosphere every year.

The scientists at MIT estimate that this will cause the earth to heat up 4-7 degrees in the next century.

But I am sure that you believe you are smarter than the scientists at MIT.

Which MIT scientists, the ones who said that AGW is a supposed threat or the ones who said it isn't??

 

[Oddball]

The sun is at its lowest level of activity in 80 years.

So why is the ice still melting?

Perhaps because water holds its temperature longer than does the air?

But that one has also been mentioned to you too many times to number, you imbecilic loser.

 

[Chris]

BNClimate change odds much worse than thought
New analysis shows warming could be double previous estimates
David Chandler, MIT News Office
May 19, 2009

The most comprehensive modeling yet carried out on the likelihood of how much hotter the Earth's climate will get in this century shows that without rapid and massive action, the problem will be about twice as severe as previously estimated six years ago - and could be even worse than that.

The study uses the MIT Integrated Global Systems Model, a detailed computer simulation of global economic activity and climate processes that has been developed and refined by the Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change since the early 1990s. The new research involved 400 runs of the model with each run using slight variations in input parameters, selected so that each run has about an equal probability of being correct based on present observations and knowledge. Other research groups have estimated the probabilities of various outcomes, based on variations in the physical response of the climate system itself. But the MIT model is the only one that interactively includes detailed treatment of possible changes in human activities as well - such as the degree of economic growth, with its associated energy use, in different countries.

Study co-author Ronald Prinn, the co-director of the Joint Program and director of MIT's Center for Global Change Science, says that, regarding global warming, it is important "to base our opinions and policies on the peer-reviewed science," he says. And in the peer-reviewed literature, the MIT model, unlike any other, looks in great detail at the effects of economic activity coupled with the effects of atmospheric, oceanic and biological systems. "In that sense, our work is unique," he says.

The new projections, published this month in the American Meteorological Society's Journal of Climate, indicate a median probability of surface warming of 5.2 degrees Celsius by 2100, with a 90% probability range of 3.5 to 7.4 degrees.

Climate change odds much worse than thought - MIT News Office

 

[KittenKoder]

Chris the broken record ...

Rocks the short sighted ...

... yeah ...

 

[Chris]

Chris the broken record ...

Rocks the short sighted ...

... yeah ...

Koder and "Dude" are smarter than the scientists at MIT.

 

[KittenKoder]

Chris the broken record ...

Rocks the short sighted ...

... yeah ...

Koder and "Dude" are smarter than the scientists at MIT.

Wow .... you are both a broken record and short sighted ...