The North Pole could melt this year

[Charles_Main]

What's to dispute? The ice at the pole is thinner and wider than it was last year. There are some year to year variations, but we haven't hit the minimum time period yet.

None of that changes the fact that it does not appear their "prediction" will come true this year, or IMO anytime soon for that matter. Care to place a bet right now.

Here are my terms.

If the North pole indeed ends up totally ice free before sept of this year. I will make a post stating that you are completely right, and I am completely wrong, and then I will leave USMB and never return.

If the North pole does not end up totally free of ice before sept of this year, you will make the same post for me, and then leave USMB and never return?

 

[Chris]

None of that changes the fact that it does not appear their "prediction" will come true this year, or IMO anytime soon for that matter. Care to place a bet right now.

Here are my terms.

If the North pole indeed ends up totally ice free before sept of this year. I will make a post stating that you are completely right, and I am completely wrong, and then I will leave USMB and never return.

If the North pole does not end up totally free of ice before sept of this year, you will make the same post for me, and then leave USMB and never return?

Why would I want you to leave? You are an interesting poster. Besides the scientists are saying that the area around the north pole may be free of ice, not that all the ice will melt. The winds may push the ice that is left away from the north pole in other words.

 

[Charles_Main]

Why would I want you to leave? You are an interesting poster. Besides the scientists are saying that the area around the north pole may be free of ice, not that all the ice will melt.

Why then do we keep being told the results will be rising sea levels?

The winds may push the ice that is left away from the north pole in other words.

Really well that is the first time I heard anything like that.

also why do you always seem to portray it in the worst light.

How many times have you asked people when the last time the NP was free of ice, when you admit right not it is not free of ice, and it may well not be soon?

I do not think your alarmist tactics help the cause of curbing global warming, I think they just make most people think you are wacked.

I find that the truth usually lies in the middle some where. So in the case the truth would be somewhere between your doom and gloom predictions and those who say we have nothing to worry about.

I think we just need to take reasonable steps to curb our impact on the earth, and not jump head long into programs that could very well send us into a full fledged depression that will make these current economic troubles seem like the good old days.

as I have said, I am all for getting off of oil, there are many good reasons to do so. GW is only one of them, However I am sure you know, even if you will not admit it, that realistically this is going to take some time, and cost a butt load of money to do. So we can not hope to fix it over night, and trying to do so could have dire results of it's own.

I am not sure why you can not debate on this subject with out constantly claiming people said things they never said, please do not deny it, you do it all the time. Just one page up on this thread you twisted my words to try and make it sound like I was saying GW is caused by politics, Which of course I never said. When you do stuff like that you lose credibility with people.

 

[Wow]

None of that changes the fact that it does not appear their "prediction" will come true this year, or IMO anytime soon for that matter. Care to place a bet right now.

Here are my terms.

If the North pole indeed ends up totally ice free before sept of this year. I will make a post stating that you are completely right, and I am completely wrong, and then I will leave USMB and never return.

If the North pole does not end up totally free of ice before sept of this year, you will make the same post for me, and then leave USMB and never return?

I want some of this bet! LOL

 

[Chris]

Why then do we keep being told the results will be rising sea levels?

Really well that is the first time I heard anything like that.

also why do you always seem to portray it in the worst light.

How many times have you asked people when the last time the NP was free of ice, when you admit right not it is not free of ice, and it may well not be soon?

I do not think your alarmist tactics help the cause of curbing global warming, I think they just make most people think you are wacked.

I find that the truth usually lies in the middle some where. So in the case the truth would be somewhere between your doom and gloom predictions and those who say we have nothing to worry about.

I think we just need to take reasonable steps to curb our impact on the earth, and not jump head long into programs that could very well send us into a full fledged depression that will make these current economic troubles seem like the good old days.

as I have said, I am all for getting off of oil, there are many good reasons to do so. GW is only one of them, However I am sure you know, even if you will not admit it, that realistically this is going to take some time, and cost a butt load of money to do. So we can not hope to fix it over night, and trying to do so could have dire results of it's own.

I am not sure why you can not debate on this subject with out constantly claiming people said things they never said, please do not deny it, you do it all the time. Just one page up on this thread you twisted my words to try and make it sound like I was saying GW is caused by politics, Which of course I never said. When you do stuff like that you lose credibility with people.

You must not have read any of the links I posted. The north pole is a geographic location and the scientists were talking about it being free of ice, because so much ice has melted that the little remaining ice would be blown away from the north pole by the wind.

I think it is funny that you keep referring to "alarmist tactics." What alarmist tactics? Most of the pole has melted in the last 50 years, and that is the reality. The alarm comes when the South Pole melts because that is the one that can raise sea levels 20 feet. That will be harder to do because most of the ice at the South Pole is on land and less susceptible to warming ocean waters.

 

[Charles_Main]

You must not have read any of the links I posted. The north pole is a geographic location and the scientists were talking about it being free of ice, because so much ice has melted that the little remaining ice would be blown away from the north pole by the wind.

I think it is funny that you keep referring to "alarmist tactics." What alarmist tactics? Most of the pole has melted in the last 50 years, and that is the reality. The alarm comes when the South Pole melts because that is the one that can raise sea levels 20 feet. That will be harder to do because most of the ice at the South Pole is on land and less susceptible to warming ocean waters.

Well then, I am glad you at least agree we are not all going to be killed by massive sea level rising. Al though It seems Al Gore would not agree. The south is only not melting, it actually has more Ice now, than in the past, oh and not all of the ice at the south pole if over land, vast parts of it are in fact sea ice.

Further more, I am looking all over the many links you have provided, and no where have I found them saying the worry is it will "blow away" on the contrary I see them talking about it mostly being new ice from the winter freeze, which they claim is "primed to melt"

 

[Chris]

Well then, I am glad you at least agree we are not all going to be killed by massive sea level rising. Al though It seems Al Gore would not agree. The south is only not melting, it actually has more Ice now, than in the past, oh and not all of the ice at the south pole if over land, vast parts of it are in fact sea ice.

Further more, I am looking all over the many links you have provided, and no where have I found them saying the worry is it will "blow away" on the contrary I see them talking about it mostly being new ice from the winter freeze, which they claim is "primed to melt"

The Antarctic ice is melting, I posted a link about that, and the link below which is post #478 in this thread talks about the ice being blown against the continental shelf of Canada. Like I said, you aren't even reading my posts.

North Pole May Be Ice-Free for First Time This Summer

 

[Charles_Main]

The Antarctic ice is melting, I posted a link about that, and the link below which is post #478 in this thread talks about the ice being blown against the continental shelf of Canada. Like I said, you aren't even reading my posts.

North Pole May Be Ice-Free for First Time This Summer

I have seen links that say that at this time there is more ice at the south pole, then ever recorded, then I have seen your links too. Seems there are some conflicting reports on the subject.

Ice being blown against the continental shelf of Canada is hardly the same thing as it being "blow away"

 

[Chris]

I have seen links that say that at this time there is more ice at the south pole, then ever recorded, then I have seen your links too. Seems there are some conflicting reports on the subject.

Ice being blown against the continental shelf of Canada is hardly the same thing as it being "blow away"

Sorry, perhaps my wording was not clear. I always seem to be posting in a hurry. I meant that the ice would be blown by the wind away from the north pole against the shelf.

 

[jreeves]

You must not have read any of the links I posted. The north pole is a geographic location and the scientists were talking about it being free of ice, because so much ice has melted that the little remaining ice would be blown away from the north pole by the wind.

I think it is funny that you keep referring to "alarmist tactics." What alarmist tactics? Most of the pole has melted in the last 50 years, and that is the reality. The alarm comes when the South Pole melts because that is the one that can raise sea levels 20 feet. That will be harder to do because most of the ice at the South Pole is on land and less susceptible to warming ocean waters.

That is just a bold face lie, temperatures haven't changed since 1938....

 

[Charles_Main]

[/B]
That is just a bold face lie, temperatures haven't changed since 1938....

Not shocking at all that Kirk would do that now is it

 

[Chris]

Not shocking at all that Kirk would do that now is it

Personal attacks are not convincing arguments.

 

[jreeves]

Personal attacks are not convincing arguments.

Neither are lies...

 

[Charles_Main]

Personal attacks are not convincing arguments.

sure, why don't you go make up more shit that Bush never said again. Or maybe you could Imply I said things I never said, Which is something you do ALL the time.

 

[jreeves]

sure, why don't you go make up more shit that Bush never said again. Or maybe you could Imply I said things I never said, Which is something you do ALL the time.

Come on Charles, be easy on him, he should be able to lie without being exposed don't you know? It's a personal attack if you expose his lies...

 

[Chris]

[/B]
That is just a bold face lie, temperatures haven't changed since 1938....

 

[jreeves]

Nice try but you were talking about artic temperatures correct?


http://junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/Arctic1880-2004_2.gif

 

[Charles_Main]

I wonder if kirk notices how it looks to be leveling off right at the end of this graph, and how that fits into his views on the subject

Could it be there are factors at work we do not fully understand. In fact I have seem some data which suggests that things have actually cooled a bit in the last 8 to 10 years. Now how could that be, I though it would just get warmer and warmer. Could it be those mitigating factors we don't know about again. Maybe that is why people think the Doom And Gloomers are getting ahead of themselves when they talk about taking drastic measures in the name of global warming.

I favor a reasonable, level headed approach to it. I do not think we must jump out of the frying pan and into the fire(economically) to fix things. I think we have time, and can do it at a pace that will not ruin us, and send us into a depression that will make todays economy look like the good old days. Yet kirk would have you believe I am just a denier who does not even believe global warming is a problem at all.

 

[Angel Heart]

I'm sitting her in Portland Oregon and we're braking temperature records....












No not for being hot... We are breaking record low highs. For those that don't understand. We don't just record the highest high and the lowest low but the lowest high and the highest low. Oregon has had several lowest highs fall this year. We peaked at 69 degrees Tuesday and Wednesday this week.

 

[editec]

IF the Greenland Glaciers melt AND Antarctic Icecaps melt THEN the rise in oceans levels will be catastrophic BECAUSE THEIR ice is not IN the ocean, already.

duh!