Search results

No I don't and that's the problem as I see it here, posters who claim to know so much about the issue to the point where they keep telling us that climate change and it's human linkage are completely wrong, also post no real evidence. Just obscure references and pointed putdowns. It's amazing...

Why are almost all the stickies here on the climate change subforum about denial of the issue when most of the science is in support of Anthropogenic Global Warming. From what I've seen here most people post opinions as evidence that climate change isn't happening as opposed to real science...

We're talking about the entire global climate being changed. That's inaccurate. Much of the loss of ice in Greenland is due to surface melt creating freshwater lakes on the ice sheet surface which are then rapidly emptied to the sheet base by moulins where they lubricate the flow and...

I'm just calling it as I see it. If people are using one of the most technologically innovative developments in history to constantly piss on the very knowledge base that allows them to do so then why not point out how ridiculous it is. And to be accurate a lot of what goes on here isn't...

YEs science funny, me I make me own compooter and hook up to unternet with cable from my 73 Mustang. Stupid people rule, woot, woot.

Exactly, I believe the models that have been in operation since the late 1970s at places like GISS have closely reproduced the conditions that we see now. And every new generation of model includes more detail and refines the results. AND THEY'RE CONSTANTLY CHECKED BY REAL WORLD OBSERVATIONS...

The issue isn't about some small pool of water opening up at the North Pole, it' about the eventual and probably permanent disappearance of sea ice in the Arctic in the summer months with serious consequences for the biotas(biological communities) and the regional climate. Having dark sea water...

This is conspiracy theory BS. BTW how is encouraging the murder of people based on their occupation in any way compatible with the rule of law or morality. I'm surprised the same kind of mindless **** that provoked the Rawanda killings is allowed on this forum.

Wow, somebodies got a fragile ego. Just to make it clear, the Arctic pack ice which will almost certainly disappear in the summertime in the near future(including the ice over the North Pole), is a separate body from the Greenland ICE SHEET. Why even bring it up here, do you want to confuse...

The prediction isn't that ice will melt in the summertime, it's that the Arctic ocean will be ice free in summertime, there's a huge difference. And the delayed timing is undersandable in light of the strongest La Nina and the deepest and most prolonged solar sunspot minimum in recorded...

You still miss the point, scientists are predicting a complete loss of Arctic sea ice in the summertime which is the subject here, not the Greenland Ice Sheet which IS ON LAND. It's two different topics.

Still at it eh, The prediction isn't for the ice cover to be gone over the entire Arctic in the summertime, it's for the sea ice to melt in the summertime. There's a huge difference between a thin several metres thick layer of ice floating on water and a huge ice sheet thousands of feet thick...

Do you have anything to offer besides pointless personal observations. If not then you`re just another troll.

And it has little or nothing to do with the topic, there`s more than enough confusion around climate change without adding to it. Bringing the Greenland Ice Sheet into a discussion about the disappearance of Arctic sea ice cover in the summer could easily bring some people to conclude there`s...

Fourier wasn`t making models of the global climate he was taking measurements that have been refined constantly over the almost 200 years since his work. Most of modern climate science is still taking real-world measurements, the modelling is based on that and is intended to refine not replace...

The topic is Arctic sea ice not the Greenland Ice Sheet. If you`re aware of the difference then why are you posting articles about the Greenland Ice Sheet on this thread.

If you`re that far off base then it`s hard to know where to start. First off some of the most important breakthoughs in understanding what we call AGW were made before the turn OF THE LAST CENTURY. There`s actually very little controversial about it other than the fact it has certain...

OPEC was paying him $2,500 a day, that integrity doesn't come cheap I guess. Lindzen's "research" doesn't disprove anything, it's main intent like so much of the other stuff that's meant to lull us into a false sense of security is to confuse the issue, and has far more uncertainty to it than...

Antrhopogenic global warming has been around for over a century, it's only become a political hot-button issue since it was realized we'd need to curtail CO2 emissions to avoid serious environmental change. And a lot of the most modern evidence supporting our role in changing the climate has...

And guess who funds him. Richard S. Lindzen - SourceWatch The guy has worked for OPEC and Western Fuels Association, it hardly makes him an objective source in this discussion. nice rant btw, it's entertaining even if it does lack the most basic foundation in fact.