Russia gets heaviest snowstorm in 100 years!!!

[Saigon]

Oddball -

Ok, I had thought you might be interested in an adult debate for once, but obviously not.

Thank God for ignore mode!

It's always very, very telling on these threads how quickly sceptics will turn and run as soon as they realise the facts are against them. That must really take a set of balls!

 

[Oddball]

Blow it out your ass, misanthrope.

Malthus, Keynes, Galbraith, Ehrlich, Gore.....The line of self-loathing is self perpetuating.....You're nothing new.

 

[polarbear]

Oddballl -

Some 97% of the world's glaciers are in decline.

That is tens of thousands of glaciers, spread around the entire world. You can confirm this from a dozen sources. The rate of decline is unprecedented (some glaciers have reduced by half since 1970) and is accelerating at a speed double that of the 1950's.

Forget politics - would you say that collapse in glaciers could be significant in terms of climate?

By the way all that has been discussed at length already...not just here.
Haven`t You heard..????...No, of course not !

IPCC Chairman Refuses to Apologise for Himalayan Glaciers Debacle

He said the IPCC had issued a statement expressing regret and he was not personally responsible for that part of the report.
"You can't expect me to be personally responsible for every word of a 3,000 page report," he said, dismissing the idea of an apology as a "populist" move.
But there is no evidence the claim was published in a peer-reviewed journal, a cornerstone of scientific credibility, and reports in Britain have said the reference came from green group the WWF.

Again no peer review, and if there is it`s "peer reviewed" by "experts" who turn out to be green- activists many without any degree in science what so ever...and no matter which report is later peer reviewed by "oil lobby scientists" is found to be either wildly exaggerated or false altogether.

The only thing these IPCC "experts" are experts in is making up excuses.
" You can't expect me to be personally responsible for every word of a 3,000 page report"

A 3000 page long lie...and the excuse is that no one can be held responsible "for every word" in the report...
So how many pages have been written about these "tens of thousands of glaciers, spread around the entire world." You are referring to...and who can be held responsible for the content...?
Please do tell me who did the peer review for all the other glaciers...!!!

Was it the same panel that "peer reviewed" the Himalayan glaciers ?

Obviously You are still blissfully ignorant what was in the IAC audit about these "scientists" you keep referring to and how fraudulent this "peer review" has and still is conducted.

I brought up the glaciers because lately every AGW freak is trying to link blizzards to AGW just like the after the fact Nostradamus cult...You included....and pointed out that glaciers form from snow deposits.

This Nostradamus "science", You especially wanted it both ways.
First this "science" claimed:
http://www.independent.co.uk/environ...st-724017.html

Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past

Global warming, the heating of the atmosphere by increased amounts of industrial gases, is now accepted as a reality by the international community
However, the warming is so far manifesting itself more in winters which are less cold than in much hotter summers. According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become "a very rare and exciting event".
"Children just aren't going to know what snow is," he said.

And when the opposite is happening then this Nostradamus rubber "science" is stretched in the opposite direction.

So, answer this simple question:
Was all that snow which formed these "tens of thousands of glaciers, spread around the entire world." deposited during a warm period ?

Nobody here asked if there are any glaciers that are shrinking and if those that do, do so because of CO2 emissions.

By the way, most of the Greenland glacier ice calves off, the same goes for antarctica





Unlike you I do check what is a verifiable fact and what are mere assertions.

 

[Saigon]

Polarbear -

It seems to did not entirely understand what was posted.

again - 97% of the world's glaciers are in decline.

This is not a disputed fact.

Please check this from any source you trust, acknowledge the fact, and then we can move on.

 

[polarbear]

Polarbear -

It seems to did not entirely understand what was posted.

again - 97% of the world's glaciers are in decline.

This is not a disputed fact.

Please check this from any source you trust, acknowledge the fact, and then we can move on.

Are You that stupid or are You just pretending.
The question was not if glaciers are declining or not...and if that is due to CO2 is a whole other topic...
the question was:
Was that then a warm period when all that snow which formed the Greenland glaciers was deposited...?
Yes or no.
Make up your mind

 

[Saigon]

Polarbear -

We seem to be talking at cross-purposes. I was discussing the present issue of glaciers, not glacier formation in the past.

As I imagine you are aware, your English is extremely difficult to make sense of, hence it is not always clear what your point is.

 

[Oddball]

Oddball -

Ok, I had thought you might be interested in an adult debate for once, but obviously not.

Thank God for ignore mode!

It's always very, very telling on these threads how quickly sceptics will turn and run as soon as they realise the facts are against them. That must really take a set of balls!

Blow your holier-than-thou sanctimony out your ass.

 

[polarbear]

Polarbear -

We seem to be talking at cross-purposes. I was discussing the present issue of glaciers, not glacier formation in the past.

As I imagine you are aware, your English is extremely difficult to make sense of, hence it is not always clear what your point is.

No You were not!
The issue was if large snow deposits in a cold region are "evidence of warming". I was the one who mentioned glaciers..NOT YOU...!!!
Again...the question was :
Is that huge snow pack which formed the glaciers on Greenland then a result of a warm period ?

I don`t really need You to lecture me about glaciers, because I am confident, that I know a lot more about glacier dynamics than You do !!!

I`m insisting that You answer this question because I also know why You want to avoid it.
So now You pretend "your English is extremely difficult to make sense of,"
Well, then take some English lessons...or ask your mommy to translate
You should talk..:
"cross-purposes"...from where did You get that ?
Sounds to me a lot like Google page or Babelfish translate gibberish


@Oddball:
In case "Saigon`s" mommy is out milking reindeer, would You be good enough to explain it to him..
I`m sure You understand "my extremely difficult to make sense of English"
**** this asshole reminds me of the kind of people who only understand English when they want to file a refugee claim but "find it too difficult to understand" when You caught them in a lie and want an explanation

 

[Saigon]

Polabear -

This was your original statement.

So why don`t you apply the same argument to the Greenland Glaciers..??
Their rate of growth depends on precipitation and they have grown in the past to a thickness of several kms.

My point was that glaciers in Greenland are not growing, hence it's a moot point.


btw. Your English is terrible. That is not my fault or responsibility. One example - we do not capitalise the word "you"!!!

 

[polarbear]

Polabear -

This was your original statement.

So why don`t you apply the same argument to the Greenland Glaciers..??
Their rate of growth depends on precipitation and they have grown in the past to a thickness of several kms.

My point was that glaciers in Greenland are not growing, hence it's a moot point.


btw. Your English is terrible. That is not my fault or responsibility. One example - we do not capitlise the word "you"!!!

By the way I wrote 3 U.S. Patents for Clathrates..and none of the Attorneys had any trouble understanding "my terrible English".
You seem to have a problem with anything that exceeds a Tweety brain format texting limit.
My English is terrible?
we do not "capitlise" (w.t.f. is that??)
My English is not the issue here!
Your point was not that

that glaciers in Greenland are not growing,

Your point was that snow in cold regions are supposed to fit into the after the fact Global warming Nostradamus mentality interpretation of events.
You wrote:

Climate change in my part of the world means more snow. It is more humid and warm than it was, thus it also snows more. It just depends where you live.

The funny thing is, we have posters here claiming they love science and want science - not one can admit that this issue with snow is a clear, known, simple fact.

Just go to that page:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/envir...est-snowstorm-in-100-years-6.html#post6807104
Hold down the [control] key and hit F, then type "glacier" into the popup.
This will show You who mentioned glaciers, and in which context:

So why don`t you apply the same argument to the Greenland Glaciers..??

Or is "my English" again too difficult to understand ?
That raises the question what else You find too difficult to understand.
Again..here is what YOU said:

this issue with snow is a clear, known, simple fact.

So, explain this "clear and simple fact" :
was it then a (lengthy) warm period that deposited this huge snow mass on Greenland ?
answer it..
It`s not a moot point.
You want to mute the question...

 

[Saigon]

Your point was that snow in cold regions are supposed to fit into the after the fact Global warming Nostradamus mentality interpretation of events.

Exactly.

As areas like Russia and Finland become warmer and more humid, it will snow more.

And yes, your English is terrible. And we still don't capitalise the word "you". Not in patents nor anywhere else.

 

[polarbear]

Your point was that snow in cold regions are supposed to fit into the after the fact Global warming Nostradamus mentality interpretation of events.

Exactly.

As areas like Russia and Finland become warmer and more humid, it will snow more.

And yes, your English is terrible. And we still don't capitalise the word "you". Not in patents nor anywhere else.

I didn`t ask You about Finland...I know more about Finland than You think.. I asked You to answer this question:
Was it a lengthy warm period that deposited the huge mass of snow which formed the glaciers on Greenland.
Try Your idiotic "Your English is terrible" debating tactics on someone else You dimwit.
I can "capitalise" anything I want to,...don`t include ME into YOUR "WE", it`s rather insulting. I`m an accomplished engineer,(+ a Chem Prof.) You are just a dumb hippie in Finland, (scamming tourist Euros maybe?) .. and YOU should first learn how to spell "capitalise".
It may come in handy when You want to "capitalise" on German tourists.

I had to come back here and ask, because I`m curious after Westwall mentioned that You claim to be a journalist.
Are You by chance "Matty" in that funny costume ? One of my ex-classmates is a publisher in Germany and "Matty" occasionally writes "Tourist-info" in some of his magazines ..like the one he is holding in this picture.
But most of his income stems from letting tourists split some firewood and then he sits in his tent with them and lights up a joint.
No, these bikers are not part of my "we", they were just 2 bodyguards my friend hired for his 18 year old daughter..after he gave her a Harley and a trip to Finland for her birthday present...But they would no doubt fit quite well into YOUR "we".
You should be ashamed how YOU guys messed up this part of the arctic. You (as in plural) made a Disney-land style Kitsch Tourist trap out of it.

And ripping off 30 Euros per person to see the midnight sun from a kitsch hotel with kitsch background music.(lower right=entrance to the huge parking lot airport size, about the size of LAX)
Wow...some "industry" You got going there in Finland...and You (plural) in Your disfigured "nature paradise" tourist trap want to complain if we build
a pipeline from A to B in our huge Canadian arctic.
Looks to me as if all that European "nature lover" tourism has a larger "carbon footprint" than the cars we drive in Canada !
It sure as hell has a more destructive effect than any of our pipelines that`s for sure.
As an afterthought I might just ask my publisher friend in Germany to do me a favor and send some of his for hire biker body guards to Finland.
How hard could it be to find You?
How about it SSDD, Oddball, Westwall, bripat9643 or Skookerasbil...do You have a specific message they should deliver to our esteemed "friend" in Finland ?

 

[Oddball]

How about it SSDD, Oddball, Westwall, bripat9643 or Skookerasbil...do You have a specific message they should deliver to our esteemed "friend" in Finland ?

I suppose you could tell him what a pious, mealy-mouthed, hypocrite dickweed he is, for insisting that others play by rules of conversation that he refuses to follow himself...But I guess that would be a bit of an insult to pious, mealy-mouthed, hypocrite dickweeds who can.

 

[Saigon]

I know more about Finland than You think

Well, my guess is that you couldn't locate it on a map, so if you know more than that, you're right.

How hard could it be to find You?

You might want to check the board policies and making threats before following that line of reasoning.

There is still no capital letter in the word "you", by the way.

 

[beagle9]

More k00k losing..................

Heaviest Snowfall in a Century Hits Moscow | News | The Moscow Times


The OC warmists will say this is expected with global warming. OK........and the only people who buy that narrative are the other like nutters on the internet. The rest of the world is saying ( especially in Russia )........."WTF??!!! Global warming is gay!!!"

Perception is 95% reality s0ns!!!!!

!!! How melodramatic can you get. BTW, Lake-effect snow is produced during cooler atmospheric conditions when cold winds move across long expanses of warmer lake water, providing energy and picking up water vapor, which freezes and is deposited on the leeward shores. The same effect over bodies of salt water also occurs (e.g. ocean-effect snow, bay-effect snow). The effect is enhanced when the moving air mass is uplifted by the orographic influence of higher elevations on the downwind shores. This uplifting can produce narrow but very intense bands of precipitation, which deposit at a rate of many inches of snow each hour, often resulting in copious snowfall totals.

Link: Lake-effect snow - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Something that's been happening forever, and so your point is ?

 

[Wicked Jester]

How about it SSDD, Oddball, Westwall, bripat9643 or Skookerasbil...do You have a specific message they should deliver to our esteemed "friend" in Finland ?

I suppose you could tell him what a pious, mealy-mouthed, hypocrite dickweed he is, for insisting that others play by rules of conversation that he refuses to follow himself...But I guess that would be a bit of an insult to pious, mealy-mouthed, hypocrite dickweeds who can.

He is a douchebag......no doubt about it!

 

[mamooth]

Look at all the hardcore denialists here.

SSDD
Oddball
Westwall
bripat9643
Skookerasbil
polarbear

Without exception, every single one the them is sworn member of the nutball-righty-fringe political cult. They all regularly goes into crazy rants about the phantom socialists who haunt their every waking moment, usually as a diversion just after someone just spanked them over the science.

As I keep pointing out, denialism isn't the cult itself. Denialism is just one symptom of the whackaloon right-wing political cult. There are almost no denialists who aren't members of that cult. In contrast, all the rational people on the AGW side don't talk about politics. They talk about science. Imagine that. The AGW side is non-political, having people of all political stripes in it. We don't care about anyone's politics, just their science.

 

[Oddball]

In contrast, all the rational people on the AGW side don't talk about politics. They talk about science. Imagine that. The AGW side is non-political, having people of all political stripes in it. We don't care about anyone's politics, just their science.

Liar.

Every "solution" to Goebbels warming requires fascistic central control and rationing of virtually all energy resources....There's nothing more political than that.

Little wonder the political cult is overrun with displaced Euro communists.

 

[mamooth]

The issue was if large snow deposits in a cold region are "evidence of warming".

Is that huge snow pack which formed the glaciers on Greenland then a result of a warm period ?

Of course not. You see, in warm periods ... get this ... the snow that falls and then some more will melt in the summer, so it doesn't accumulate. Such as is happening RIGHT NOW, as the measurements in Greenland have shown, or as the record low land snow extents in the arctic summer show.

Strange that your amazing knowledge of glaciers didn't include that data, data which is commonly known to everyone in the field. Did the University of FOX and Drudge neglect to inform you of those facts?

I don`t really need You to lecture me about glaciers, because I am confident, that I know a lot more about glacier dynamics than You do !!!

You stink so badly at logic, you think that having walked on glaciers makes you informed on the topic. It doesn't. A bright middle-schooler knows more on the topic than you do.

And your English sucks hard. Saigon, not a native, writes English much better than you do. Don't whine at us for pointing out how awful your writing is. I pity the poor tech writers who have to have to turn your ignorance into something comprehensible. If you can't succinctly describe your point, it's clear you're using your crazy word salad as cover for your belligerent ignorance.

And you certainly turn from friendly guy into nasty bully when you get challenged, resorting to the implied threats of finding where someone lives. You might want to take a break and cool off. Otherwise, you might end up like the totally nadless Oddball.

 

[mamooth]

Every "solution" to Goebbels warming requires fascistic central control and rationing of virtually all energy resources....There's nothing more political than that.

Which of you masters ordered you to say something that dumb, bootlicker? And how's the shoe leather taste? Yes, we know, you love the taste of your masters' boots.

I'm very cross with Oddball. He forced me to go out and find a bunch of people to give positive rep to, just so I could counter-neg him as usual. See, being that Oddball is an uberpansy who knows he can't face me in discussion, he vainly keeps trying the neg-bullying, negging me as often as possible because I keep mocking his stupidity.

Now, being that I have testicles, I never have and never will initiate a neg on anyone. Be as nasty to me as you like, I can take it. But I always respond to a neg with the same. It's not a lot of rep, but enough to let them know there are consequences for being a neg-bully. However, that requires I've spread enough rep around enough to be able to give more rep again to one individual, which is why I had to find a bunch of rational people to give positive rep to. In effect, Oddball forced me to get off my butt and increase the rep of a whole bunch of dirty liberals.