the glacier thread. please post your glacier info here.

[jreeves]

Man, I don't like posting this. I would much prefer being able to trust NASA. Has this thing become that politicized?

Is the earth getting warmer, or cooler? • The Register

Further examination of the NASA site might give us a clue as to what is happening.

NASA staff have done some recent bookkeeping and refined the data from 1930-1999. The issues has been discussed extensively at science blog Climate Audit. So what is the probability of this effort consistently increasing recent temperatures and decreasing older temperatures? From a statistical viewpoint, data recalculation should cause each year to have a 50/50 probability of going either up or down - thus the odds of all 70 adjusted years working in concert to increase the slope of the graph (as seen in the combined version) are an astronomical 2 raised to the power of 70. That is one-thousand-billion-billion to one. This isn't an exact representation of the odds because for some of the years (less than 15) the revisions went against the trend - but even a 55/15 split is about as likely as a room full of chimpanzees eventually typing Hamlet. That would be equivalent to flipping a penny 70 times and having it come up heads 55 times. It will never happen - one trillion to one odds (2 raised to the power 40.)

And the scientific journal that this article was in is..............

Always happy to help you out....
straight from the article
A paper published in scientific journal Nature this week has reignited the debate about Global Warming, by predicting that the earth won't be getting any warmer until 2015.

 

[Chris]

Man, I don't like posting this. I would much prefer being able to trust NASA. Has this thing become that politicized?

Is the earth getting warmer, or cooler? • The Register

Further examination of the NASA site might give us a clue as to what is happening.

NASA staff have done some recent bookkeeping and refined the data from 1930-1999. The issues has been discussed extensively at science blog Climate Audit. So what is the probability of this effort consistently increasing recent temperatures and decreasing older temperatures? From a statistical viewpoint, data recalculation should cause each year to have a 50/50 probability of going either up or down - thus the odds of all 70 adjusted years working in concert to increase the slope of the graph (as seen in the combined version) are an astronomical 2 raised to the power of 70. That is one-thousand-billion-billion to one. This isn't an exact representation of the odds because for some of the years (less than 15) the revisions went against the trend - but even a 55/15 split is about as likely as a room full of chimpanzees eventually typing Hamlet. That would be equivalent to flipping a penny 70 times and having it come up heads 55 times. It will never happen - one trillion to one odds (2 raised to the power 40.)

And the scientific journal that this article was in is..............

Always happy to help you out....
straight from the article
A paper published in scientific journal Nature this week has reignited the debate about Global Warming, by predicting that the earth won't be getting any warmer until 2015.

Want to bet?

 

[FactFinder]

Man, I don't like posting this. I would much prefer being able to trust NASA. Has this thing become that politicized?

Is the earth getting warmer, or cooler? • The Register

Further examination of the NASA site might give us a clue as to what is happening.

NASA staff have done some recent bookkeeping and refined the data from 1930-1999. The issues has been discussed extensively at science blog Climate Audit. So what is the probability of this effort consistently increasing recent temperatures and decreasing older temperatures? From a statistical viewpoint, data recalculation should cause each year to have a 50/50 probability of going either up or down - thus the odds of all 70 adjusted years working in concert to increase the slope of the graph (as seen in the combined version) are an astronomical 2 raised to the power of 70. That is one-thousand-billion-billion to one. This isn't an exact representation of the odds because for some of the years (less than 15) the revisions went against the trend - but even a 55/15 split is about as likely as a room full of chimpanzees eventually typing Hamlet. That would be equivalent to flipping a penny 70 times and having it come up heads 55 times. It will never happen - one trillion to one odds (2 raised to the power 40.)

And the scientific journal that this article was in is..............

It is a peer site for fellow scientists crunching numbers amongst themselves. If you know how to do statistics you would know that his probabilities are correct.

 

[Old Rocks]

Man, I don't like posting this. I would much prefer being able to trust NASA. Has this thing become that politicized?

Is the earth getting warmer, or cooler? • The Register

Further examination of the NASA site might give us a clue as to what is happening.

NASA staff have done some recent bookkeeping and refined the data from 1930-1999. The issues has been discussed extensively at science blog Climate Audit. So what is the probability of this effort consistently increasing recent temperatures and decreasing older temperatures? From a statistical viewpoint, data recalculation should cause each year to have a 50/50 probability of going either up or down - thus the odds of all 70 adjusted years working in concert to increase the slope of the graph (as seen in the combined version) are an astronomical 2 raised to the power of 70. That is one-thousand-billion-billion to one. This isn't an exact representation of the odds because for some of the years (less than 15) the revisions went against the trend - but even a 55/15 split is about as likely as a room full of chimpanzees eventually typing Hamlet. That would be equivalent to flipping a penny 70 times and having it come up heads 55 times. It will never happen - one trillion to one odds (2 raised to the power 40.)

And the scientific journal that this article was in is..............

Always happy to help you out....
straight from the article
A paper published in scientific journal Nature this week has reignited the debate about Global Warming, by predicting that the earth won't be getting any warmer until 2015.

Name of article, and name of the author. Kind of nice if you would post the abstract.

 

[del]

 

[Chris]

Why are the glaciers melting?

 

[del]

Why are the glaciers melting?

hot air. i blame you and old rocks.

 

[FactFinder]

I guess I better post this one here since it's the glacier thread.

Volcano Monitor

Volcanic eruptions reshaped Arctic ocean floor -- study
June 26, 2008 09:30:00
Agence France-Presse

PARIS -- Recent massive volcanoes have risen from the ocean floor deep under the Arctic ice cap, spewing plumes of fragmented magma into the sea, scientists who filmed the aftermath reported Wednesday.
.
.
.
The mid-ocean ridge runs 84,000 kilometers (52,000 miles) beneath all the world's major seas except the Southern Ocean, and marks the boundary between many of the tectonic plates that make up the surface of the Earth.

When continental plates collide into each other, they can thrust up mountain ranges such as the Himalayas.

But along most of the mid-ocean ridge -- including the Gakkal Ridge -- the plates are pulling apart, allowing molten magna and gases trapped beneath the crust to escape.

 

[Old Rocks]

I guess I better post this one here since it's the glacier thread.

Volcano Monitor

Volcanic eruptions reshaped Arctic ocean floor -- study
June 26, 2008 09:30:00
Agence France-Presse

PARIS -- Recent massive volcanoes have risen from the ocean floor deep under the Arctic ice cap, spewing plumes of fragmented magma into the sea, scientists who filmed the aftermath reported Wednesday.
.
.
.
The mid-ocean ridge runs 84,000 kilometers (52,000 miles) beneath all the world's major seas except the Southern Ocean, and marks the boundary between many of the tectonic plates that make up the surface of the Earth.

When continental plates collide into each other, they can thrust up mountain ranges such as the Himalayas.

But along most of the mid-ocean ridge -- including the Gakkal Ridge -- the plates are pulling apart, allowing molten magna and gases trapped beneath the crust to escape.

It is called plate tectonics, hardly new. And the people who took the pictures stated that the amount of heat was not enough to make any differance in what we are seeing in the Arctic. Not only that, but it has been doing this for millions of years.

Interesting but hardly revelant to the disapearing of the ice caps.

 

[FactFinder]

I guess I better post this one here since it's the glacier thread.

Volcano Monitor

Volcanic eruptions reshaped Arctic ocean floor -- study
June 26, 2008 09:30:00
Agence France-Presse

PARIS -- Recent massive volcanoes have risen from the ocean floor deep under the Arctic ice cap, spewing plumes of fragmented magma into the sea, scientists who filmed the aftermath reported Wednesday.
.
.
.
The mid-ocean ridge runs 84,000 kilometers (52,000 miles) beneath all the world's major seas except the Southern Ocean, and marks the boundary between many of the tectonic plates that make up the surface of the Earth.

When continental plates collide into each other, they can thrust up mountain ranges such as the Himalayas.

But along most of the mid-ocean ridge -- including the Gakkal Ridge -- the plates are pulling apart, allowing molten magna and gases trapped beneath the crust to escape.

It is called plate tectonics, hardly new. And the people who took the pictures stated that the amount of heat was not enough to make any differance in what we are seeing in the Arctic. Not only that, but it has been doing this for millions of years.

Interesting but hardly revelant to the disapearing of the ice caps.

Must be oneof them thar Inconvenient Truths. How would know if it is relevant or not if noone has a clue how much volcanic activity is occurring under the arctic? You don't. No one does.

 

[Old Rocks]

There is a worldwide system of seismic monitors. Were there really major activity anywhere, we would know about it in minutes.

IRIS Seismic Monitor

 

[FactFinder]

There is a worldwide system of seismic monitors. Were there really major activity anywhere, we would know about it in minutes.

IRIS Seismic Monitor

Your map shows none in the arctic. Besdies what do seismic monitors have to do with volcanoes. You're really stretching now.

 

[Chris]

There is a worldwide system of seismic monitors. Were there really major activity anywhere, we would know about it in minutes.

IRIS Seismic Monitor

Your map shows none in the arctic. Besdies what do seismic monitors have to do with volcanoes. You're really stretching now.

Why is Venus hotter than Mercury?

 

[del]

There is a worldwide system of seismic monitors. Were there really major activity anywhere, we would know about it in minutes.

IRIS Seismic Monitor

Your map shows none in the arctic. Besdies what do seismic monitors have to do with volcanoes. You're really stretching now.

Why is Venus hotter than Mercury?

mercury has no atmosphere.
we covered this already, chrissie, do try to keep up.

 

[Old Rocks]

There is a worldwide system of seismic monitors. Were there really major activity anywhere, we would know about it in minutes.

IRIS Seismic Monitor

Your map shows none in the arctic. Besdies what do seismic monitors have to do with volcanoes. You're really stretching now.

Large volcanic eruptions have large, identifiable seismic signatures.

 

[necritan]

There is a worldwide system of seismic monitors. Were there really major activity anywhere, we would know about it in minutes.

IRIS Seismic Monitor

Your map shows none in the arctic. Besdies what do seismic monitors have to do with volcanoes. You're really stretching now.

Why is Venus hotter than Mercury?

Cuzz women are from venus....duh

 

[FactFinder]

There is a worldwide system of seismic monitors. Were there really major activity anywhere, we would know about it in minutes.

IRIS Seismic Monitor

Your map shows none in the arctic. Besdies what do seismic monitors have to do with volcanoes. You're really stretching now.

Large volcanic eruptions have large, identifiable seismic signatures.

Busted again there rocks.

Seismic Arctic Earthquakes G.P. Avetisov.
The conducted investigation has allowed the following conclusions to be drawn:

- both types of seismically active zones, interplate and intraplate, .exist in the Arctic:

 

[FactFinder]

Conclusion: Volcanic activity under the artic could be the cause of glacial melting. Obviously AGW isn't a rational answer because it does not account for the glaciers that are expanding.

Arctic Volcanoes Found Active at Unprecedented Depths

Arctic Volcanoes Found Active at Unprecedented Depths
Kimberly Johnson for National Geographic News
June 26, 2008
Buried under thick ice and frigid water, volcanic explosions are shaking the Arctic Ocean floor at depths previously thought impossible, according to a new study.

Using robot-operated submarines, researchers have found deposits of glassy rock—evidence of eruptions—scattered over more than 5 square miles (15 square kilometers) of the seabed.