Greenland glaciers receding SLOWER then in the 1930s..

[bobgnote]

Unable to provide the quote you attribute to me bob? How completely unsurprising since I never said any such thing. That can only mean that in additon to being a repressed homosexual, you lie. You get less interesting all the time.

I always was boring, Wienerbitch, and not very intriguing. Didn't you say waaaaayyyy?

I don't know what you are denying, *****. One out of two at graphs, and you couldn't read the good one, which is gay graphics. You didn't like O.R.'s sat data study on SLR, but neither did Ian, so you both go for fucktard physics. You tried to convince everybody atmospheric water is like a tinfoil hat, on the Earth, so more fucktard physics came from YOU. You loaded that La Jolla junk montage, which was beach boy oceanography, neat of any calibrated tide levels, which is queer, as a three-dollar-bill. Eat shit and come out, *****.

You are in denial, of warming AND AGW, like dead queers, who tricked and shoved meth, to push their HIV, all the way through AIDS, to death. But now they're dead. I bet you can hardly wait, to eat shit and die. You will die, before you successfully convince anybody how you know something, since you are a complete bullshitter and trasher.

You hang around, like this is some kind of yard, where Q-bag came out, so what do you think you have going, without your own homosexuality being evident? What do ALL the wingpunk queers do? You guys post complete shit, without proper references.

 

[skookerasbil]

Unable to provide the quote you attribute to me bob? How completely unsurprising since I never said any such thing. That can only mean that in additon to being a repressed homosexual, you lie. You get less interesting all the time.

I always was boring, Wienerbitch, and not very intriguing. Didn't you say waaaaayyyy?

I don't know what you are denying, *****. One out of two at graphs, and you couldn't read the good one, which is gay graphics. You didn't like O.R.'s sat data study on SLR, but neither did Ian, so you both go for fucktard physics. You tried to convince everybody atmospheric water is like a tinfoil hat, on the Earth, so more fucktard physics came from YOU. You loaded that La Jolla junk montage, which was beach boy oceanography, neat of any calibrated tide levels, which is queer, as a three-dollar-bill. Eat shit and come out, *****.

You are in denial, of warming AND AGW, like dead queers, who tricked and shoved meth, to push their HIV, all the way through AIDS, to death. But now they're dead. I bet you can hardly wait, to eat shit and die. You will die, before you successfully convince anybody how you know something, since you are a complete bullshitter and trasher.

You hang around, like this is some kind of yard, where Q-bag came out, so what do you think you have going, without your own homosexuality being evident? What do ALL the wingpunk queers do? You guys post complete shit, without proper references.

Proper references?

Im laughing. And whats with all the rage s0n? All that rage is gay........makes you look like you're getting publically pwned s0n.


As Ive said many times......if the science you push is such a no-brainer, why then, is nobody listening? That fact is not debatable for single moment. Cap and Trade died two years ago........its not even brought to the house floor by even the k00kiest of representatives living in k00k districts. But nobody should take my word for it..............

Read it in the New York Times.............. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/26/science/earth/26climate.html?_r=1



So who exactly is wearing the tin foil cap s0n? The climate crusaders are in such decline, its nothing short of laughable. Nobody.....and I really mean nobody cares about thsi climate change BS except the fringe nutty-asses on the internet. These dolts have literally posted up millions of hysterical posts about the the end of the world and where has it gotten them?

I'll tell you where it has gotten them.........................

It

hasnt

added

up

to

DICK





But knock yourself out s0n cursing the sceptics on here who pwn you in epic fashion. We all get a ******* kick out of it, in fact, I cant wait to get in here every night to see the hysterical awaiting me in here.


IDK how some of these people missed so many memo's in their formative years that they can consciously come back in here on a daily basis and make asses out of themselves. Its ******* fascinating. Brings me back to my college years long ago.......you'd always have the couple of jackasses show up at every party even though they got verbally abused the whole night. And they'd sure as shit show up at the next one like a perpetual side show.

 

[skookerasbil]

Skooks, Wire, West, Frank, Fitz, Dave.......................

 

[wirebender]

is this the past explanation yo are talking about? hahahahaha. wirebender's clear, concise, and logical thinking on display.

Not at all ian. And the fact remains that we have little idea of what is going on at the sub atomic level. Billions of dollars are spent yearly in an attempt to just get the smallest glimpse of what is happening at that level. We arent even close to understanding what is really going on down there.

Volumes, have been written however on the fact that EM fields can and do interfere, diminish, and cancell each other out.

The harder you try ian, the more rediculous you look.

 

[bobgnote]

is this the past explanation yo are talking about? hahahahaha. wirebender's clear, concise, and logical thinking on display.

Not at all ian. And the fact remains that we have little idea of what is going on at the sub atomic level. Billions of dollars are spent yearly in an attempt to just get the smallest glimpse of what is happening at that level. We arent even close to understanding what is really going on down there.

Volumes, have been written however on the fact that EM fields can and do interfere, diminish, and cancell each other out.

The harder you try ian, the more rediculous you look.

"Volumes," comma, have been written! EMs "cancell" each other out. No shit.

OK, spelling-bee rejects. If two objects in the exact same place cause cancelling EM waves, these cancel. If two fields interact, interference occurs, IN SPOTS, Wienerbitch. If you and Ian do the 69, in a car moving down the street, and you guys bite each other, while fighting for the wheel, so what?

You still can't drive for shit, and your writing sucks because YOU SUCK.

Molecules with three or more atoms tend to help trap IR in the atmosphere, close to the surface of the Earth. Put a kid in a car in the sun, with the windows rolled up, and see if the cops don't arrest the neo-con punkass-*****, who does this, but if you take a queer dog, like suckassbil, and try this, you might only get a warning.

 

[IanC]

is this the past explanation yo are talking about? hahahahaha. wirebender's clear, concise, and logical thinking on display.

Not at all ian. And the fact remains that we have little idea of what is going on at the sub atomic level. Billions of dollars are spent yearly in an attempt to just get the smallest glimpse of what is happening at that level. We arent even close to understanding what is really going on down there.

Volumes, have been written however on the fact that EM fields can and do interfere, diminish, and cancell each other out.

The harder you try ian, the more rediculous you look.

what? so now we dont know? but you were so sure I was wrong! and what about your magical explanation that remains hidden with John Smith's gold plates?

you refuse to define anything. everything is an 'EM field'. you make no distinction between reactive and radiative. you make a big deal out of photons being the smallest quanta of a EM field and yet you dont want to discuss why photons from electric or magnetic fields can be attractive or repulsive while other photons are just light.


you have all the pieces mixed up in your head and you have the timerity to call me ignorant.

 

[wirebender]

what? so now we dont know? but you were so sure I was wrong! and what about your magical explanation that remains hidden with John Smith's gold plates?

Dishonesty is such a poor debate tactic ian.

you refuse to define anything. everything is an 'EM field'.

What is to define ian. The IR radiating away from the surface of the earth is an EM field. The IR that is emitted by a CO2 molecule is an EM field. Are you unaware of what an EM field is?

I have finished talking to you till you demonstrate that you grasp the concept of addition and subtraction of EM fields. When you can acknowledge that one EM field can diminish or cancel out another field and explain how that might happen without reducing the numbe of photons that made up the field then we can continue. Otherwise, talking to you is like beating a dead horse. You are wrong but are sure that you are right even though the laws of physics state clearly that you are wrong and all definitions from credible sources state you are wrong. Of what possible use does further discussion serve?

 

[IanC]

you are finished talking because you have nothing to say.

an electron placed in between two opposing magnetic fields is acted upon by both fields. the photons carrying force carry out their duty and when the final total is reached it veers one way or the other. the photons didnt disappear, they were expended on the electron (a bit of matter). if you place a neutron in the same spot no force will be transfered, the virtual photons radiated from the magnetic fields will simply be reabsorbed when their time runs out.

how is a radiative photon ejected to remove energy from an excited CO2 molecule similar to magnetic or electric fields? it is a real photon with no preconditions like the neccessity of a charged particle for interaction. please tell me why you think these two examples are the same.

you just have everything jumbled up in your brain

 

[RollingThunder]

Here's a flash of reality that is actually on topic.

Greenland's glaciers melting faster, say scientists
Greenland's glaciers are melting 30 faster than they were a decade ago, satellite images reveal.
Christian Science Monitor
By Jennifer Welsh, LiveScience Staff Writer
May 3, 2012
(excerpts)

Greenland's ice sheet is on the move, with new images showing its glaciers moving 30 percent faster than they were a decade ago. Greenland and Antarctica are home to the two biggest blocks of ice on Earth. As climate changes, these glacier are shrinking and the water contained in them is moving into the oceans, adding to the already rising sea level. The researchers analyzed satellite images of the Greenland glaciers taken between 2000 and 2010. These annual images were put through a computer program to detect how quickly the ice is moving. In general, the glacial flow has sped up by 30 percent over the 10 years, Moon said.

To get a better idea of the glacier's dynamics, the researchers looked at the area's more than 200 glaciers individually. Some of these glaciers end on land, some drop off into the sea, and the rest gradually extend their ice sheets into the water, creating an ice shelf. The researchers saw that the glacier's type has a big impact on how quickly it flows. Land-ending ice sheets can move 30 to 325 feet (9 to 99 meters) per year, while glaciers that terminate in ice shelves move much faster, from 1,000 to more than 5,000 feet (305 to 1,600 m) per year. The glaciers that drop off into the sea are flowing the fastest, Moon said, up to 7 miles (11 kilometers) per year and their speeds are accelerating. "The areas where the ice sheet loses the most ice are also the areas we are seeing the biggest changes," Moon said.

"A lot of the drive behind current Greenland ice sheet and Antarctica studies is to ask, 'What sea-level rise can we expect?'" Moon said. "Both of these areas hold vast amounts of ice and the potential for very large sea-level rises. We need to understand what's happening on them to see what potential scenario will be realized." The study is to be published tomorrow (May 4) in the journal Science.

 

[healthmyths]

Here's a flash of reality that is actually on topic.

Greenland's glaciers melting faster, say scientists
Greenland's glaciers are melting 30 faster than they were a decade ago, satellite images reveal.
Christian Science Monitor
By Jennifer Welsh, LiveScience Staff Writer
May 3, 2012
(excerpts)

Greenland's ice sheet is on the move, with new images showing its glaciers moving 30 percent faster than they were a decade ago. Greenland and Antarctica are home to the two biggest blocks of ice on Earth. As climate changes, these glacier are shrinking and the water contained in them is moving into the oceans, adding to the already rising sea level. The researchers analyzed satellite images of the Greenland glaciers taken between 2000 and 2010. These annual images were put through a computer program to detect how quickly the ice is moving. In general, the glacial flow has sped up by 30 percent over the 10 years, Moon said.

To get a better idea of the glacier's dynamics, the researchers looked at the area's more than 200 glaciers individually. Some of these glaciers end on land, some drop off into the sea, and the rest gradually extend their ice sheets into the water, creating an ice shelf. The researchers saw that the glacier's type has a big impact on how quickly it flows. Land-ending ice sheets can move 30 to 325 feet (9 to 99 meters) per year, while glaciers that terminate in ice shelves move much faster, from 1,000 to more than 5,000 feet (305 to 1,600 m) per year. The glaciers that drop off into the sea are flowing the fastest, Moon said, up to 7 miles (11 kilometers) per year and their speeds are accelerating. "The areas where the ice sheet loses the most ice are also the areas we are seeing the biggest changes," Moon said.

"A lot of the drive behind current Greenland ice sheet and Antarctica studies is to ask, 'What sea-level rise can we expect?'" Moon said. "Both of these areas hold vast amounts of ice and the potential for very large sea-level rises. We need to understand what's happening on them to see what potential scenario will be realized." The study is to be published tomorrow (May 4) in the journal Science.

Both of these areas hold vast amounts of ice and the potential for very large sea-level rises.

What is "very large seal level rises?

Now the experts tell us that:
Glaciers store about 69% of the world's freshwater, and if all land ice melted the seas would rise about 70 meters (about 230 feet).
Glaciers and icecaps, USGS Water Science for Schools water-information site

WOW 230 feet if all the glaciers melted!
WOW..
So with 57,491,000 square miles of land..
and with 5,773,000,000,000,000,000 (5.7 quintillion gallons in all the Ice caps,Glaciers),..
and it all melted it would add to all the oceans seas, bays with 321 quintillion gallons that would be equal to adding 1.74% to the oceans.

That is equal to adding to a 648,000 gallon Olympic sized pool at 9 feet 10 inches

2 inches!

In Florida the commonly used example of land being covered by melting glaciers, the gulf of Mexico is a depth of less then 100 feet for over 100 miles from shore.
1.74% increase of water due to melting of all glaciers would add 1.7 feet.
NOT perceivable nor affecting life much less covering the state!

So where did these experts get 230 feet!!!

 

[RollingThunder]

Here's a flash of reality that is actually on topic.

Greenland's glaciers melting faster, say scientists
Greenland's glaciers are melting 30 faster than they were a decade ago, satellite images reveal.
Christian Science Monitor
By Jennifer Welsh, LiveScience Staff Writer
May 3, 2012
(excerpts)

Greenland's ice sheet is on the move, with new images showing its glaciers moving 30 percent faster than they were a decade ago. Greenland and Antarctica are home to the two biggest blocks of ice on Earth. As climate changes, these glacier are shrinking and the water contained in them is moving into the oceans, adding to the already rising sea level. The researchers analyzed satellite images of the Greenland glaciers taken between 2000 and 2010. These annual images were put through a computer program to detect how quickly the ice is moving. In general, the glacial flow has sped up by 30 percent over the 10 years, Moon said.

To get a better idea of the glacier's dynamics, the researchers looked at the area's more than 200 glaciers individually. Some of these glaciers end on land, some drop off into the sea, and the rest gradually extend their ice sheets into the water, creating an ice shelf. The researchers saw that the glacier's type has a big impact on how quickly it flows. Land-ending ice sheets can move 30 to 325 feet (9 to 99 meters) per year, while glaciers that terminate in ice shelves move much faster, from 1,000 to more than 5,000 feet (305 to 1,600 m) per year. The glaciers that drop off into the sea are flowing the fastest, Moon said, up to 7 miles (11 kilometers) per year and their speeds are accelerating. "The areas where the ice sheet loses the most ice are also the areas we are seeing the biggest changes," Moon said.

"A lot of the drive behind current Greenland ice sheet and Antarctica studies is to ask, 'What sea-level rise can we expect?'" Moon said. "Both of these areas hold vast amounts of ice and the potential for very large sea-level rises. We need to understand what's happening on them to see what potential scenario will be realized." The study is to be published tomorrow (May 4) in the journal Science.

Both of these areas hold vast amounts of ice and the potential for very large sea-level rises.

What is "very large seal level rises?

Now the experts tell us that:
Glaciers store about 69% of the world's freshwater, and if all land ice melted the seas would rise about 70 meters (about 230 feet).
Glaciers and icecaps, USGS Water Science for Schools water-information site

WOW 230 feet if all the glaciers melted!
WOW..
So with 57,491,000 square miles of land..
and with 5,773,000,000,000,000,000 (5.7 quintillion gallons in all the Ice caps,Glaciers),..
and it all melted it would add to all the oceans seas, bays with 321 quintillion gallons that would be equal to adding 1.74% to the oceans.

That is equal to adding to a 648,000 gallon Olympic sized pool at 9 feet 10 inches

2 inches!

In Florida the commonly used example of land being covered by melting glaciers, the gulf of Mexico is a depth of less then 100 feet for over 100 miles from shore.
1.74% increase of water due to melting of all glaciers would add 1.7 feet.
NOT perceivable nor affecting life much less covering the state!

So where did these experts get 230 feet!!!

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.....always funny to watch retards try to do math.

"1.74% increase of water due to melting of all glaciers would add 1.7 feet."

Unbelievably stupid conclusion there, Hellamyths. You really don't know your ass from a hole in the ground, do you? BTW, the actual figure for the percentage of water on Earth that is ice, is 2.2%.

"So where did these experts get 230 feet!!!"

Maybe because they are experts and they actually know something. Unlike you, you dimwitted fool. Scientists can look at what happened in the Earth's past when CO2 levels were this high and temperatures were a a few degrees warmer and sea levels were up to 70 feet higher. Large sea level rises due to the melting of the glaciers and the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets have happened before, dumbass.

Global Sea Level Likely to Rise as Much as 70 Feet for Future Generations
Rutgers University
March 19, 2012
(excerpts)

Even if humankind manages to limit global warming to 2 degrees C (3.6 degrees F), as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change recommends, future generations will have to deal with sea levels 12 to 22 meters (40 to 70 feet) higher than at present, according to research published in the journal Geology. The researchers, led by Kenneth G. Miller, professor of earth and planetary sciences in the School of Arts and Sciences at Rutgers University, reached their conclusion by studying rock and soil cores in Virginia, Eniwetok Atoll in the Pacific and New Zealand. They looked at the late Pliocene epoch, 2.7 million to 3.2 million years ago, the last time the carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere was at its current level, and atmospheric temperatures were 2 degrees C higher than they are now.

“The difference in water volume released is the equivalent of melting the entire Greenland and West Antarctic Ice Sheets, as well as some of the marine margin of the East Antarctic Ice Sheet,” said H. Richard Lane, program director of the National Science Foundation’s Division of Earth Sciences, which funded the work. “Such a rise of the modern oceans would swamp the world’s coasts and affect as much as 70 percent of the world’s population.” Miller said, however, that this research highlights the sensitivity of the earth’s great ice sheets to temperature change, suggesting that even a modest rise in temperature results in a large sea-level rise. “The natural state of the earth with present carbon dioxide levels is one with sea levels about 20 meters higher than at present,” he said.

 

[Old Rocks]

Here's a flash of reality that is actually on topic.

Greenland's glaciers melting faster, say scientists
Greenland's glaciers are melting 30 faster than they were a decade ago, satellite images reveal.
Christian Science Monitor
By Jennifer Welsh, LiveScience Staff Writer
May 3, 2012
(excerpts)

Greenland's ice sheet is on the move, with new images showing its glaciers moving 30 percent faster than they were a decade ago. Greenland and Antarctica are home to the two biggest blocks of ice on Earth. As climate changes, these glacier are shrinking and the water contained in them is moving into the oceans, adding to the already rising sea level. The researchers analyzed satellite images of the Greenland glaciers taken between 2000 and 2010. These annual images were put through a computer program to detect how quickly the ice is moving. In general, the glacial flow has sped up by 30 percent over the 10 years, Moon said.

To get a better idea of the glacier's dynamics, the researchers looked at the area's more than 200 glaciers individually. Some of these glaciers end on land, some drop off into the sea, and the rest gradually extend their ice sheets into the water, creating an ice shelf. The researchers saw that the glacier's type has a big impact on how quickly it flows. Land-ending ice sheets can move 30 to 325 feet (9 to 99 meters) per year, while glaciers that terminate in ice shelves move much faster, from 1,000 to more than 5,000 feet (305 to 1,600 m) per year. The glaciers that drop off into the sea are flowing the fastest, Moon said, up to 7 miles (11 kilometers) per year and their speeds are accelerating. "The areas where the ice sheet loses the most ice are also the areas we are seeing the biggest changes," Moon said.

"A lot of the drive behind current Greenland ice sheet and Antarctica studies is to ask, 'What sea-level rise can we expect?'" Moon said. "Both of these areas hold vast amounts of ice and the potential for very large sea-level rises. We need to understand what's happening on them to see what potential scenario will be realized." The study is to be published tomorrow (May 4) in the journal Science.

Both of these areas hold vast amounts of ice and the potential for very large sea-level rises.

What is "very large seal level rises?

Now the experts tell us that:
Glaciers store about 69% of the world's freshwater, and if all land ice melted the seas would rise about 70 meters (about 230 feet).
Glaciers and icecaps, USGS Water Science for Schools water-information site

WOW 230 feet if all the glaciers melted!
WOW..
So with 57,491,000 square miles of land..
and with 5,773,000,000,000,000,000 (5.7 quintillion gallons in all the Ice caps,Glaciers),..
and it all melted it would add to all the oceans seas, bays with 321 quintillion gallons that would be equal to adding 1.74% to the oceans.

That is equal to adding to a 648,000 gallon Olympic sized pool at 9 feet 10 inches

2 inches!

In Florida the commonly used example of land being covered by melting glaciers, the gulf of Mexico is a depth of less then 100 feet for over 100 miles from shore.
1.74% increase of water due to melting of all glaciers would add 1.7 feet.
NOT perceivable nor affecting life much less covering the state!

So where did these experts get 230 feet!!!

Well, instead of being such a screwball flapyap, and just throwing meaningless numbers around, you might try researching how the scientists arrived at those numbers.

 

[bobgnote]

Greenland ice will make a difference, but the worst SLR outcome will happen, after East Antarctica starts to melt. EA is just losing around the fringes, while overall cover is intact or growing, slightly.

 

[skookerasbil]

Greenland ice will make a difference, but the worst SLR outcome will happen, after East Antarctica starts to melt. EA is just losing around the fringes, while overall cover is intact or growing, slightly.

So..........did anybody else see Bob-g's posting of his home made emergency ark ( in case the floods come )

Apologize if it is a repost............I think its actually a fairly good effort.

 

[bobgnote]

But suckassbil. You'll for sure be dead, by the time East Antarctica starts to really melt down. So never mind science. You'll be dead! And you'll be winning!

I have NO DOUBT. I don't get flooded out, do you? Do retards on meth swim? Like Phelps, I bet.

 

[bobgnote]

I got one for you, suckassbil. There's VOLCANOES in Antarctica. Some of them are under East Antarctica. So what happens, when the heavy tides disturb volcanic shit, in East Antarctica?

Why then! Those volcanoes in East Antarctica melt a shitload, and they release CO2, SO2, and N2S, and some don't put any ash, into the atmosphere! The sea level will go up, for shit-sure, and some. But by then, you'll be kinda dead, or not?

THE PLEIADES Stratovolcano Potassium-Argon East Antarctica
UNNAMED Scoria cones Holocene? East Antarctica
MOUNT RITTMANN Shield volcano Pleistocene-Fumarolic East Antarctica
MELBOURNE Stratovolcano Tephrochronology East Antarctica
UNNAMED Submarine volcano Holocene? East Antarctica
EREBUS Stratovolcano Historical East Antarctica
MT. MORNING Shield volcano Holocene? East Antarctica
ROYAL SOCIETY RANGE Cinder cones Holocene? East Antarctica

 

[Big Fitz]

Hey stupid !

This article compares melting to 10 years ago.

The OP is comparing to 80 years ago.

Wow......you just don't get it. You've got the Kool-Aid needle stuck so far up your arm you can't bend your elbow. Pay attention and digest the difference.

Or is that possible for you ?

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibaYHTPE0uY"]just hook it to my veins - YouTube[/ame]

 

[skookerasbil]

How do these people even navigate life without a mobile valium drip?

What you see going on here people is uncontrolled OCD. I deal with it every day at work. Its people ruminating on thoughts.........its basically, a serotonin level **** up, and Im not kidding. Its not at all unlike the dude who cant leave his home in the morning without washing his hands 25X. All these radical environmentalists.........they wake up worring about this shit. That is why, if you notice, I never refer to these people as "retards". Stuff has nothing to do with intelligence...........100% certainty. But there are many people with depressive disorders. OCD falls under the depression umbrella and is treatable only with pharmachological aids.


People who eat, sleep and drink the world is coming to an end stuff cannot help themselves, just like the guy who cant fall asleep without putting his remote control in a safe. OCD tends to be very specific in how it manifests itself. Accordingly, that is why you just dont have many people who embrace the doomsday stuff.........its only the OCD's and/or the money chasers.

 

[bobgnote]

How do you explain 3000 posts per year, like the ones you put up, suckassbil?

Are you somehow a professional sociopath? What's Pig Shitz' excuse, for pretending Greenland isn't melting, and it isn't going to finish melting, maybe in our lifetime? Is it shit-for-brains?