Of polar caps and climate change

[EMH]

So what the point is normal human activity will not change the climate. Volcanoes can have short term effect

OK, but words matter, and CO2 FRAUD has a PhD in "wordsmithing."

Notice cold weather and they blame "climate change."

Notice hot weather and they blame "global warming."

One is a science, the other is a treasonous fraud faux theory that is proven wrong by all actual data.

Yes, with nuclear weapons, man can change the climate. And you are right about spurts of large scale volcanic activity.

 

[EMH]

That PDF is not evidence that melting glaciers could multiply Earth’s surface air pressure 3-5×.

What else could cause it?

Glacial air isn’t a pressure pump.

It is on every planet with polar ice caps....

 

[EMH]

Antarctica gaining mass in some regions due to increased snowfall is true, but it doesn’t offset the net ice loss from thinning glaciers and ice shelves along the Antarctic coast. Overall, satellite gravimetry and altimetry show Antarctica is losing ice mass and contributing to sea level rise. Snow accumulation inland adds mass locally, but the dynamics of outlet glaciers and ice streams dominate the net balance. It's a partial, region specific effect, not the full picture.

Antarctica has grown a new layer of ice every year for tens of millions of years, and the ice cores prove it.

Once again, CO2 FRAUD defines "melting" as "it grew a new layer of ice on top."

 

[Anomalism]

There is more ice not less, we arent getting warmer, CO2 is good for the planet, Humans dont change the climate, renewable energy will wreck the economy, climate change is a lie,

None of that holds up against multiple lines of evidence. Antarctica is losing ice overall, global temperatures are rising, CO2 increases are driving measurable radiative forcing, and detection and attribution studies show human activity is the dominant factor.

 

[Anomalism]

Antarctica has grown a new layer of ice every year for tens of millions of years, and the ice cores prove it.

Once again, CO2 FRAUD defines "melting" as "it grew a new layer of ice on top."

Yes, Antarctica accumulates new snow every year. That’s how ice cores form and record climate history. That doesn’t contradict current measurements showing net ice loss. Satellite data, including GRACE gravimetry and altimetry, track thinning glaciers and shrinking ice shelves. Adding a new layer on top doesn’t cancel out the ice being lost at the edges. Seasonal or layer by layer growth isn’t evidence against overall melting.

 

[Hafar1014]

None of that holds up against multiple lines of evidence. Antarctica is losing ice overall, global temperatures are rising, CO2 increases are driving measurable radiative forcing, and detection and attribution studies show human activity is the dominant factor.

Renewable energy is in decline in America. There is no evidence only invalid correlational studies. The climate change lie has damaged our economy and has now ended.

 

[EMH]

Yes, Antarctica accumulates new snow every year. That’s how ice cores form and record climate history.

So how is that "melting" if the ice grows up another layer every year?

That doesn’t contradict current measurements showing net ice loss

Those "measurements" are FUDGED FRAUD, and YES IT DOES CONTRADICT THE FUDGE.

Adding a new layer on top doesn’t cancel out the ice being lost at the edges

For AA that means ICEBERGS which are STILL FROZEN when calved. So WHERE is the "melting?"

Seasonal or layer by layer growth isn’t evidence against overall melting.

????????????????????????????????????????


not a sane answer

 

[EMH]

The climate change lie has damaged our economy and has now ended

but if the Dems win in 2028 they will simply bring it back. To "kill it" the CO2 FRAUD needs to be PROSECUTED....

 

[Anomalism]

Renewable energy is in decline in America. There is no evidence only invalid correlational studies. The climate change lie has damaged our economy and has now ended.

Okay bud.

 

[Hafar1014]

but if the Dems win in 2028 they will simply bring it back. To "kill it" the CO2 FRAUD needs to be PROSECUTED....

I dont think they have a candidate.

 

[EMH]

I dont think they have a candidate.

Who is responding to the SOTU address?


THAT monster will be the candidate, because you are correct about all the others....

 

[Anomalism]

So how is that "melting" if the ice grows up another layer every year?





Those "measurements" are FUDGED FRAUD, and YES IT DOES CONTRADICT THE FUDGE.






For AA that means ICEBERGS which are STILL FROZEN when calved. So WHERE is the "melting?"






????????????????????????????????????????


not a sane answer

Melting refers to net loss. Antarctica can gain snow inland while losing more ice at the edges via thinning glaciers and iceberg calving. Adding layers on top doesn’t cancel the overall mass deficit.

 

[EMH]

Melting refers to net loss.

Melting - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Melting, or fusion, is a physical process that results in the phase transition of a substance from a solid to a liquid. This occurs when the internal energy of the solid increases, typically by the application of heat or pressure, which increases the substance's temperature to the melting point. At the melting point, the ordering of ions or molecules in the solid breaks down to a less ordered state, and the solid melts to become a liquid



Show us the liquid water on Antarctica....

 

[Anomalism]

Melting - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Melting, or fusion, is a physical process that results in the phase transition of a substance from a solid to a liquid. This occurs when the internal energy of the solid increases, typically by the application of heat or pressure, which increases the substance's temperature to the melting point. At the melting point, the ordering of ions or molecules in the solid breaks down to a less ordered state, and the solid melts to become a liquid



Show us the liquid water on Antarctica....

Net ice loss doesn’t mean liquid pools everywhere. Most Antarctic ice loss occurs through calving of icebergs and thinning of glaciers, which eventually adds water to the ocean. “Melting” in glaciology includes both surface melt and dynamic ice loss, not just visible ponds.

 

[sealybobo]

Lol

"I don't understand anything happening here, and I'm not interested in learning.

LALALALALALA!"

He’s 80 what does he care? Everyone younger than him can expect to get cancer or something else from trumps epa deregulations. **** sea levels

 

[EMH]

Net ice loss

loss occurs through calving of icebergs

correct, even though the icebergs are STILL FROZEN when they break off

and thinning of glaciers

and this is the "big lie" tossed in. The ice cores prove the glaciers are growing every year. That is not "thinning." Antarctica did not get to more than 2 miles thick in ice coverage because of "thinning." "Thinning" requires MELTING on land and on Antarctica YOU HAVE NO LIQUID WATER....

 

[Anomalism]

correct, even though the icebergs are STILL FROZEN when they break off







and this is the "big lie" tossed in. The ice cores prove the glaciers are growing every year. That is not "thinning." Antarctica did not get to more than 2 miles thick in ice coverage because of "thinning." "Thinning" requires MELTING on land and on Antarctica YOU HAVE NO LIQUID WATER....

Thinning = net loss of ice mass. Glaciers flow to the ocean, icebergs calve, surface drops. Antarctica stays frozen, but it’s still losing ice overall.

Some areas gain snow, some lose faster. Satellite data shows net decline. Liquid water isn’t required for thinning; solid ice moving off the continent counts.

 

[EMH]

but it’s still losing ice overall.

This is absolutely hilarious.

So how did Antarctica ever acquire ice in the first place?

We know what the ice cores document, it grows a new layer of ice every year. Explain to us how that causes "ice loss."

LOL!!!


Funny thing is, even after 40 million years in ice age, Antarctica has not yet reached that "equilibrium point" where the mass of icebergs lost exceeds ice gained in the annual top ice layer. It may eventually reach that point, but it is still growing.

We went to court on that issue in 2007

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.

 

[Anomalism]

This is absolutely hilarious.

So how did Antarctica ever acquire ice in the first place?

We know what the ice cores document, it grows a new layer of ice every year. Explain to us how that causes "ice loss."

LOL!!!


Funny thing is, even after 40 million years in ice age, Antarctica has not yet reached that "equilibrium point" where the mass of icebergs lost exceeds ice gained in the annual top ice layer. It may eventually reach that point, but it is still growing.

We went to court on that issue in 2007

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.

Ice cores showing a new layer each year prove accumulation happens. They do not prove net growth. You’re confusing gross gain with net balance. If 1 unit of snow falls but 2 units flow into the ocean as icebergs, the sheet thins, even if a fresh layer forms on top. Annual layering and overall mass balance are different measurements.

Antarctica acquired its ice over millions of years when accumulation exceeded loss. That doesn’t mean it’s permanently in growth mode.

 

[EMH]

If 1 unit of snow falls but 2 units flow into the ocean as icebergs

LOL!!!

Then there would be no ice on Antarctica. The truth is the annual ice core layer exceeds the mass of the iceberg loss on AA, has for 40 million years and is still doing so.