Experts quiet climate-change skeptics: Warming leads to longer cold snaps
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
You're right, it will soon be posted on small skanky animals and throughout the rest of the bubblesphere.
MF you better get the redditors ready! :lol:
Could be ice free...as I already said to one trick pony Captain Morgan, that was a pretty foolish claim, and other scientists criticized that work.
But, perhaps one of you could make the link between that faulty work, and the findings MF is talking about.
Thanks in advance. M'kay.
It's also wrong logically to claim that because one model of global warming is incorrect, therefore there is no global warming. All you can validly say is that that one model is incorrect.
The analysis MF is linking to didn't use models. Fail.
It's observational analysis. Read for yourself:
http://marine.rutgers.edu/~francis/pres/Francis_Vavrus_2012GL051000_pub.pdf
Wrong. If the empirical data say the temperature is rising steadily, that means it's warming. Even if all the models proposed prove incorrect.
Ahhh, the sting of settled science.
Say, ya know what might be fun?... You, as a hardened scientician and all, post those old graphs that detailed how the Artic was gonna be ice free by 2013.
I seem to recall that they were the definitive sources that confirmed, beyond shadow of doubt, that the science was settled.
That be fun just for olde tyme's sake, non?
Bull****.
I can't believe some people are still gullible to believe some climate scientists' "global warming data" after the University of East Anglia scandal.
Even when that scandal proved that we are being lied to by the green nutters there are some people out there who STILL believe it, and you're one of them.
There are no 'global warming' models. There are climate models, general circulation models, used by scientists studying aspects of the climate. And there are plenty of observations.
No models are correct, but they're used by most all branches of science, because they are useful. I use models to study disease. They aren't true reflections of reality, but they are close, and the evidence they provide, when confirmed by large clinical trials, give us more information about the systems we study, and allow us to produce effective medications and vaccines.
Are you a vaccine denier too?
There are plenty of global warming models, and they're usually found in no time at all to be wrong.
I believe in vaccines because they exist (and were invented by a Brit). I don't believe in global warming because that DOESN'T exist. Unlike you, I'm not a gullible fool.
The Arctic Ocean is warming up. Icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulafft, at Bergen, Norway.
Reports from fishermen, seal hunters, and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes!
Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the Gulf Stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared.
Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds.
Within a few years it is predicted that due to the ice melt the sea will rise and make most coastal cities uninhabitable.”
My apologies... I neglected to mention that this report was from November 2, 1922, as reported by the AP and published in The Washington Post
Give it up, Ton. He's already said that he will deny global warming forever, regardless of past, present, or future evidence.
Correct. You aren't going to fool me over to the dark side. I have too much commonsense for that. Just give up trying.
There is no global warming. More fool you for believing in it.
You're assuming I agreed with that finding. How about first you provide some evidence that your assumption is true. Then I'll be happy to explain how either I was wrong, or how you've misinterpreted what I've said.
Hardly. Your powers of recollection are failing you. That entire thread, as with any climate themed thread in here, never stays on the original topic long. A few parrots come along and the thread (d)evolves into the same as the rest, deniers, trumped up media stories, and then rinse and repeat.
For old times sake.
Yes, not enough good sense.
True dat. I'm a global warming sceptic myself, for reasons I've stated now and then. But most of the denial I've seen on this board is faith-based. Or possibly the result of failure to understand the difference between data, hypothesis, and theory.