Your graph is wrong.
climate model graphs fail - Bing Images
This does nothing to disprove what I posted.
Your graph is wrong.
climate model graphs fail - Bing Images
So the Antarctic is not gaining ice even though it is.I don't think that's going to matter as much now that we know that the west antarctic ice sheet are undergoing breakup. The denial crowd has gotten a lot of mileage out of the "antarctic gaining ice" thing for some time, but this mutes that argument.
So the Antarctic is not gaining ice even though it is.
So more ice means it's warmer even when there is more ice in the summer. OK, got it. I've noticed more ice in the summer around here, too.The antarctic is gaining ice. The water is warmer which is the critical factor that will lead to breakup of the glaciers. So the argument that the antarctic is gaining ice is no longer an efefctive excuse for teh so-called skeptics.
So more ice means it's warmer even when there is more ice in the summer. OK, got it. I've noticed more ice in the summer around here, too.
The antarctic is gaining ice. The water is warmer which is the critical factor that will lead to breakup of the glaciers. So the argument that the antarctic is gaining ice is no longer an efefctive excuse for teh so-called skeptics.
Another example of "LA LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOUUUU!"
Is it like they told us there would be more severe hurricanes and tornadoes and now there are fewer hurricanes and tornadoes?Another example of "LA LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOUUUU!"
Yes that's how it works coldstream. At the end of the day all the scientists get together and figure out new lies to tell everyone. Just for sh*ts and giggles. Or the money. We all know that reserach scientists make incomes several orders of magnitude more than oil company CEOs.
The internal consistency of your argument is melting faster than the arctic sea ice. :lol:
That is how it works. And if you don't submit to an imposed bureaucratic orthodoxy.. you will find yourself 'frozen' out of appointments, tenure, research grants, and media acknowlegement. You are only hearing from those who've been 'absorbed' by the Borg.. resistance is futile.
Calling them scientists is joke.. they are 'priests'.. in an occult
spiritualism. There is NO science to AGW... there are only devotees. It's more
worrying because this particular cult is driven by the axioms of radical
environmentalism .. and its agendas to depopulate the earth to bring on an
eco-utopia. There is no more sure way to do that than to limit the essential
life providing element of carbon.. the mainstay of energy and agriculture... and
to bring on the economic collapse the this would foment.
They are insane of course. But they have been crafty enough to completely put the educational and media establishments under their power and control. Still any person wilth an independent intellect.. who doesn't capitulate to some high sounding but empty rhetoric.. will see that they are dealing with LIES and LIARS
If the oceans have already risen some 400ft from maximinum ice the if that extra ice is evenly divided the ice in the south would be 2X what it is now. Would that come only as depth or would it also expand outwards at the same rate as ice in the Arctic forms, as fresh water due to salt-water freezing to a depth of less than 10 meters. Ice 2 miles deep on land would have 75% of that submerged once you got into the deep ocean water, it is more likely it was much thinner and covered a much greater area to get that 400 ft drop in where the beaches were back in that era.If all of the ice was to melt at the poles, the National Academy of Sciences predicts the sea level rise approximately 60 meters — about 200 feet. That would result in “storm surges more likely to cause severe impacts” and “coastal inundation.”
I think I'm going to go with the 97% of scientists on Climate change.
Neil Degrasse Tyson on Global Warming - YouTube
"But perhaps the most difficult question is this: How can you make serious political decisions based on scientific likelihoods when politics thrives on the feeding of ideological certainties?"
Michael Gerson: Americans’ aversion to science carries a high price - The Washington Post
I think I'm going to go with the 97% of scientists on Climate change.
Which is also yet another myth Twila. However they got you to believe and that is just one more pave stone to their ultimate goal.
I'm a fan of Neil DeGrasse Tyson. I don't think he's lying about this.
I think you might be speaking politics. I'm thinking science.
Give your head a shake... it's politics and $$$... lots and lots of $$$.
Believe what you wish, the religion needs followers like you.
At the end the priests are always asked...
"What can we do to stop it?"
"Cap and Trade, Taxes and fees... more and more taxes and fees."
Give your head a shake... it's politics and $$$... lots and lots of $$$.
Believe what you wish, the religion needs followers like you.
I'm an Atheist.
It shouldn't worry you what I believe. I've not got any money do make a difference for either side.
And I love animals.
There certainly is alot at stake, including money. But it's rather naive to assume that just the AGW proponents are motivated by money, whereas all the so-called skeptics are acting purely out of the goodness of their hearts. There are vested interests on both sides of the equation.
Twila is already lost as I am sure you are.Way to convince someone to come around to your way of thinking! :lol: