2016 Arctic sea ice thread

[TyroneSlothrop]

One point I can make now, is that the author could send ask each scientist personally, what he thinks, but that is not done. You will produce one man's opinion, maybe two or three, but you will not find a consensus.

but, give it a try, others have, and failed,

There is no DOUBT where Science stand its simply stubborn stupidity to say otherwise
Like I said you are an asshole ...you make the claim that you have better science and better Climate knowledge than NASA NOAA the World Climate Agencies the UN etc and I AM THE ONE WHO HAS TO SHOW YOU PROOF...that is proof you are an asshole

"Jump to 1838, Scottish philospher Thomas Dick, of County Angus, published his Celestial Scenery, in which he explained how different land masses or continents fit neatly together to form one continent, and proposed how they may of been torn apart."

 

[elektra]

You posted a cartoon, and a colored drawing, as science.

A 2013 paper in Environmental Research Letters reviewed 11,944 abstracts of scientific papers matching "global warming" or "global climate change". They found 4,014 which discussed the cause of recent global warming, and of these 97.1% endorsed the consensus position.
Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cartoons to Wikipedia? Well, you are getting closer with your google searching, will you produce the study, and will the study be complete or just what the author wants us to believe he found out, I can not wait to know. Cut to the chase, not links to links to links.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Cartoons to Wikipedia? Well, you are getting closer with your google searching, will you produce the study, and will the study be complete or just what the author wants us to believe he found out, I can not wait to know. Cut to the chase, not links to links to links.

Climate change doubters really aren't going to like this study

Researchers have designed an inventive test suggesting that the arguments commonly used by climate change contrarians don’t add up, not only according to climate scientists (we know what they think already) but also in the view of unbiased experts from other fields.

 

[elektra]

Jump to 1838, Scottish philospher Thomas Dick, of County Angus, published his Celestial Scenery, in which he explained how different land masses or continents fit neatly together to form one continent, and proposed how they may of been torn apart.

Your post here by the way is "Real science " Tee hee ...it has yellow color photos of pages
Study: humans have caused all the global warming since 1950

The Guardian? Not a study. Not debatable or worth discussing, on a scholarly level. No link to a link to a link, produce studies.

 

[elektra]

Cartoons to Wikipedia? Well, you are getting closer with your google searching, will you produce the study, and will the study be complete or just what the author wants us to believe he found out, I can not wait to know. Cut to the chase, not links to links to links.

Climate change doubters really aren't going to like this study

Researchers have designed an inventive test suggesting that the arguments commonly used by climate change contrarians don’t add up, not only according to climate scientists (we know what they think already) but also in the view of unbiased experts from other fields.

Headlines from the Washington Post, is not a study?

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Cut to the chase,.

Post something that demonstrates that you are wiser than science ...not this kind of tripe LOL...below is a sample from your post on Climate LOL

"Jump to 1838, Scottish philospher Thomas Dick, of County Angus, published his Celestial Scenery, in which he explained how different land masses or continents fit neatly together to form one continent, and proposed how they may of been torn apart."

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

The Guardian? Not a study. Not debatable or worth discussing, on a scholarly level. No link to a link to a link, produce studies.

you must be a speed reader LOL
maybe this stroke of genius will convince you...a "genius" posted it LOL

"Jump to 1838, Scottish philospher Thomas Dick, of County Angus, published his Celestial Scenery, in which he explained how different land masses or continents fit neatly together to form one continent, and proposed how they may of been torn apart."

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Here is the kicker quote from this creature Elektra
"...Not debatable or worth discussing, on a scholarly level..."
In other words this "Jaboony" Believes she is on a "Scholarly Level"

"Jump to 1838, Scottish philospher Thomas Dick, of County Angus, published his Celestial Scenery, in which he explained how different land masses or continents fit neatly together to form one continent, and proposed how they may of been torn apart."

 

[elektra]

Jump to 1838, Scottish philospher Thomas Dick, of County Angus, published his Celestial Scenery, in which he explained how different land masses or continents fit neatly together to form one continent, and proposed how they may of been torn apart.

Your post here by the way is "Real science " Tee hee ...it has yellow color photos of pages
Study: humans have caused all the global warming since 1950

Yes, I am using a book as a reference, not Google. 695 pages. How many pages does your Google'd found article from the Washington post, reference.

You get a simple snapshot from google, and base your knowledge on that, then you make fun of someone who takes the time to read exactly what Scientists and Scholars think, know, and write?

 

[elektra]

Here is the kicker quote from this creature Elektra
"...Not debatable or worth discussing, on a scholarly level..."
In other words this "Jaboony" Believes she is on a "Scholarly Level"

"Jump to 1838, Scottish philospher Thomas Dick, of County Angus, published his Celestial Scenery, in which he explained how different land masses or continents fit neatly together to form one continent, and proposed how they may of been torn apart."

Elektra is a record label, I am guy, I got balls, it is the ignorant and stooges who assume otherwise.

 

[elektra]

Cut to the chase,.

Post something that demonstrates that you are wiser than science ...not this kind of tripe LOL...below is a sample from your post on Climate LOL

"Jump to 1838, Scottish philospher Thomas Dick, of County Angus, published his Celestial Scenery, in which he explained how different land masses or continents fit neatly together to form one continent, and proposed how they may of been torn apart."

Wrong again, that post had nothing to do with Climate, it contradicts a contention Old Crock made, which was in response to my post in which I stated, "Scientists disagreed with plate tectonics and decades later were proved wrong".

tyrnoesloprop, you grasp at straws, trying to denigrate me, who you claim is a nobody?

 

[elektra]

Yet, does geography apply to the Arctic, the Antarctic, Sea Ice, or Sea Level?

 

[jc456]

The Antarctic is doing the same thing. Yes, it's "growing", it's growing in the sense that there's less ice there too.

There might not be details of how many times polar bears fart in the Arctic, however, like I said, what you've said (and which you seem to have decided to not talk about in this post) is not actually true.

You're making claims which are not based on logic.

You're saying that because the Arctic ice is spread over a larger space, that this somehow means that global warming isn't happening.

Would you like to change your view now?

Nope, its getting thicker, I posted the story and the link, I can go back and get it.

I still can't figure out how ice melts under 29 degrees F.

Why do you think there is ice melting under 29 degrees F?

cause you all keep saying it. you have no evidence that the arctic has been warmer. The average temp is 27 degree F. So?

No evidence the arctic is warmer?

Sea ice area is lower, hotter temperatures, lower sea ice.

Oh, NASA sees temperatures rising.

The UAH sees them rising.

And some more

how can that be when their satellites failed? DOH!

 

[jc456]

Well, the problem is some people just act like science should be easy enough for them to understand, and if they can't understand it, they reject it.

Of course there are those who are arrogant and think they are smart enough to understand complex hypothesis, or even more complex theories, simply because they go outside on a warm day and arrogantly think that confirms their understanding.

Nice observation of yours, although a bit shallow.

That is why we have NOAA NASA and Meteorological bureaus...they all agree on AGW

they lie.

 

[jc456]

YEAR IN THE RED
I think most climate scientists are surprised at the speed that it’s happening,” she said. “But at the same time, with emissions peaking again last year... everything was pointing to an increased temperature. It’s the amount by which the records are being broken, not the fact that the record’s being broken, that’s really striking.

Coloring is for fools and the ignorant.

Rejecting science to repeat Political dogma is MORONIC

Lie to get more political money is moronic. And I didn't need to increase font size or bold the text. Wow.

 

[jc456]

Rejecting science to repeat Political dogma is MORONIC

Yet, I did not reject science, I pointed out how a colored picture is for the fools and ignorant, it was pretty, did you use crayolas or did you copy it from a google search?

Hey Fuck face did you go to the link and read the INFORMATION in TEXT..Go F Yourself Idiot
here is an example
We are breaking records by 3 to 4 tenths of degree C, whereas even the largest El Niños... only boost global temperatures by 1 to 2 tenths of a degree C,” Michael Mann, a climate scientist and director of Pennsylvania State University’s Earth System Science Center, told The Huffington Post in an email. “Even neglecting the possibility that climate change itself is leading to more monster El Niños... El Niño cannot explain the majority of this record warmth. Climate change is clearly playing a key role in the record warmth.”
We Just Completed A Full Year Of Record-Hot Months

I call bullshit. Can't be proven and we all know that the data is adjusted. Tell me it isn't.

 

[jc456]

Rejecting science to repeat Political dogma is MORONIC

Yet, I did not reject science, I pointed out how a colored picture is for the fools and ignorant, it was pretty, did you use crayolas or did you copy it from a google search?

LOL

Incredible I put up a link with all kinds of Information and all this creepy snide Individual has to say is that it has a "Colored picture " and therefore its for "fools and ignorant" followed by rather pathetic snark fail...Are these fuckers on Drugs or something ?

not sure what any of that proves other than you know where colored pictures are at on the internet. It certainly does not prove AGW or that any of it is factual.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

not sure what any of that proves other than you know where colored pictures are at on the internet. It certainly does not prove AGW or that any of it is factual.

Repeating your opinions on climate over and over does not prove AGW is false.........

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

I call bullshit. Can't be proven and we all know that the data is adjusted. Tell me it isn't.

Only Truthers like you know reality NOAA NASA fakers you Real

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

That is why we have NOAA NASA and Meteorological bureaus...they all agree on AGW
they lie.

No you lie ...I trust NOAA and NASA more that I trust you...can anyone blame me ?