Greenland's ice sheet has melted during our current ice age. It could melt again

[Crick]

The climate fear salesman came again with his brand of news.

I came with another in an extremely long line of evidence supporting AGW theory and spelling out the variety of threats it poses.

 

[Robert W]

I came with another in an extremely long line of evidence supporting AGW theory and spelling out the variety of threats it poses.

Problems you admit to being a part of creating.

 

[Crick]

Problems you admit to being a part of creating.

Of course. How about you? You've not only been burning fossil fuels your whole life, you seem to have no plans to ever cut down, despite knowing what that will do to the world your children and their children and their children will inherit from us.

 

[EMH]

You think the latitudinal faults along the Mid Atlantic Ridge are the "footprints of Greenland"?

In a way, since they mark the movement tectonically from the fault.

 

[Robert W]

Of course. How about you? You've not only been burning fossil fuels your whole life, you seem to have no plans to ever cut down, despite knowing what that will do to the world your children and their children and their children will inherit from us.

I commend you for taking responsibility for your role in global warming.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

It is actually possible. The bedrock under the West Antactic Ice Sheet is below sea level and the sheet has begun separating from the bedrock. Relatively warm sea water goes miles under the ice with the tides. It is physically possible, though unlikely, that the entire thing could catastropically separate from it's bedrock in a matter of days. The global rise would be between 3 and 5 meters (7.6 to 16.4 feet).

Bullshit. You have never studied thermodynamics.

 

[Robert W]

Bullshit. You have never studied thermodynamics.

At least he admits he caused bad climate.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

At least he admits he caused bad climate.

It all goes back a few years ago when the eco-Nazis were complaining that the ice on a mountain in Antartica was melting, blaming it on global warming. The exact same day that hit the news, vulcanologists discovered the "mountain" under all of that ice was actually a now-active volcano spreading heat under the mountain's ice. Neither one apparently knew what the other group was saying at the same time.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

It is actually possible. The bedrock under the West Antactic Ice Sheet is below sea level and the sheet has begun separating from the bedrock. Relatively warm sea water goes miles under the ice with the tides. It is physically possible, though unlikely, that the entire thing could catastropically separate from it's bedrock in a matter of days. The global rise would be between 3 and 5 meters (7.6 to 16.4 feet).

I reread this and can't believe I missed it. The thread title is about Greenland. The West Antarctic ice sheet is in Greenland? Man, are you drinking while posting?

 

[Crick]

I reread this and can't believe I missed it. The thread title is about Greenland. The West Antarctic ice sheet is in Greenland? Man, are you drinking while posting?

It was all in response to you

Why are you constantly spouting off like Chicken Little? The change will slow enough that humankind can adapt. The seas are not going to rise 10 feet overnight. Are they?

 

[ding]

New ice coring that has reached through the ice and found evidence of vegetation underneath, more recently than once thought, shows that it is indeed possible.

No shit. It's not new news. In fact, it's idiotic to say it is indeed possible when the geologic record shows that Greenland has deglaciated quite often in the last 3 million years.

 

[jc456]

You seem to have a slight problem so I will take my time to explain things in very simple terms.
First off we will start off with something that your cult may not have made you aware of. Plants take in CO2 and release oxygen. Whether by design or accident ( not going into that here) that has kept this planet viable for many centuries. Now ask yourself how many millions of acres of rainforest has been destroyed. One of the names given to the rainforests was the lungs of the earth. How many acres of forest has been replaced by housing and parking lots. I hope you can process the fact that if you damage your lungs enough you will die.
Second if someone goes around claiming that there is going to be an 8.5 magnitude earthquake in Oklahoma City and then buys up a mansion in that city then I find that a bit suspicious.
If someone runs around waving thier arms in the air claiming that a 10 ton meteor is going to hit the earth in a week and nothing happens in a month. Then I tend to be sceptical. If they claim a 9 ton asteroid will hit in a week and nothing happens again I become even more sceptical. Considering there have been almost 90 times that so called experts have predicted certain events that have not come true I am a bit sceptical. Such as all the glaciers in glacier national park would be gone.
You seem to be missing the two most important parts first off they are planing about 40 new coal fired plants. Second they are up and coming and some of their cities are more polluted then ours ever were.
But hey do not let me try and dissuade you from your cult.
Do I think that we need to lower emissions? Yes.
Do I think that you and others have the answers? No far from it.
I actually believe that your cult are slightly unhinged

Explanation of CO2 in this video. Why ice ages occur

 

[EMH]

I came with another in an extremely long line of evidence supporting AGW theory and spelling out the variety of threats it poses.

100% pure FUDGED FRAUD.

Here is the only data we need. Your theory is that increasing atmospheric Co2 causes warming in the atmosphere....

Key claim against global warming evaporates

Satellite and weather balloon data used to argue that climate models were wrong and that global warming isn't really happening turns out to be based on faulty analyses, according to three new studies.

www.nbcnews.com

satellite and weather balloon data have actually suggested the opposite, that the atmosphere was cooling


SCIENCE says THEORY REJECTED

"climate science" aka "the science" says FUDGE THE DATA and claim "warming" THAT DOES NOT EXIST

 

[EMH]

Explanation of CO2 in this video. Why ice ages occur

All bullshit.

Truth about ice ages, including the CORRECT DEFINITION of ICE AGE, is here...

Apparently we really need a "debate" over the term ICE AGE because y'all are all wrong...

What is an ICE AGE? Most apparently still believe it is a terrifying horror movie event where Earth all at once freezes up. The data has never supported such a scenario. Since 2010, there has been a massive effort to re-write Earth climate history into a series of rapid "glaciations" and ice...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[EMH]

It all goes back a few years ago when the eco-Nazis were complaining that the ice on a mountain in Antartica was melting, blaming it on global warming. The exact same day that hit the news, vulcanologists discovered the "mountain" under all of that ice was actually a now-active volcano spreading heat under the mountain's ice. Neither one apparently knew what the other group was saying at the same time.

Court certified truth that Antarctica is not "melting" nor can the Co2 FRAUD show us LIQUID WATER on AA...

Court Identifies Eleven Inaccuracies in Al Gore’s ‘An Inconvenient Truth’

Here's something American media are virtually guaranteed to not report: a British court has determined that Al Gore's schlockumentary "An Inconvenient Truth" contains at least eleven material falsehoods. It seems a safe bet Matt Lauer and Diane Sawyer won't be discussing this Tuesday morning...

www.newsbusters.org

• The film suggests that the Antarctic ice covering is melting, the evidence was that it is in fact increasing.

And NASA admitted the truth too...

Study: Mass gains of Antarctic ice sheet greater than losses - NASA Science

A new NASA study says that an increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers.

science.nasa.gov

the Antarctic ice sheet showed a net gain of 112 billion tons of ice a year from 1992 to 2001. That net gain slowed to 82 billion tons of ice per year between 2003 and 2008.



and since AA is 90% of Earth ice, there are two other issues...


1. the Co2 FRAUD cannot show us one single photo of "ocean rise"

2. Surface Air Pressure has been dropping for the past 70 years. Given all the compressed air trapped in Antarctic ice, it would be rising if AA was actually "melting"


The claim that Antarctica is "melting" is complete bullshit as is everything else from the Co2 FRAUD

 

[jc456]

I came with another in an extremely long line of evidence supporting AGW theory and spelling out the variety of threats it poses.

 

[jc456]

All bullshit.

Truth about ice ages, including the CORRECT DEFINITION of ICE AGE, is here...

Apparently we really need a "debate" over the term ICE AGE because y'all are all wrong...

What is an ICE AGE? Most apparently still believe it is a terrifying horror movie event where Earth all at once freezes up. The data has never supported such a scenario. Since 2010, there has been a massive effort to re-write Earth climate history into a series of rapid "glaciations" and ice...

www.usmessageboard.com

I disagree. are you one of those who throw tantrums and will tell me I'm not allowed to disagree? You throw some whoppers of tantrums in here. Can't maintain a calm cool collected approach huh?

 

[jc456]

All bullshit.

Truth about ice ages, including the CORRECT DEFINITION of ICE AGE, is here...

Apparently we really need a "debate" over the term ICE AGE because y'all are all wrong...

What is an ICE AGE? Most apparently still believe it is a terrifying horror movie event where Earth all at once freezes up. The data has never supported such a scenario. Since 2010, there has been a massive effort to re-write Earth climate history into a series of rapid "glaciations" and ice...

www.usmessageboard.com

It's really quite clear, the reason for ice in the arctic is due to the inability of warm pacific and atlantic currents to get into the circle by the way the continents surround the circle, and the fact that antarctica separated from south america is why there is now ice in the south pole, no warmer pacific and atlantic water flow around the pole. Seems the reasons are not because of your 600 miles nonsense. It's due to lack of warmer currents around the poles.

 

[jc456]

It's really quite clear, the reason for ice in the arctic is due to the inability of warm pacific and atlantic currents to get into the circle by the way the continents surround the circle, and the fact that antarctica separated from south america is why there is now ice in the south pole, no warmer pacific and atlantic water flow around the pole. Seems the reasons are not because of your 600 miles nonsense. It's due to lack of warmer currents around the poles.

See, the issue is there wasn't ice in the south pole until the continents South America and Antarctica splitting apart. Only then did Ice accumulate.

 

[jc456]

I came with another in an extremely long line of evidence supporting AGW theory and spelling out the variety of threats it poses.

but actually, the reason the ice is on Greenland is due to lack of Atlantic current flows to provide necessary warming, so has nothing at all to do with CO2.