Antarctic Ice mass changes

Tim the plumber wrote:Can you really measure the sea level to the tenths of mm??? I can't. [/color]

Tim the plumber wrote:
http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses

It's gaining ice.

Faster than anywhere else is losing ice.

Can you really measure the sea level to the tenths of mm??? I can't.

Totototo wrote: Well, I suppose that counts as a legit source haha.

Ceist wrote:
If anyone wants an example of an intelligent discussion of the Zwally paper backed up by references to research papers and knowledge of the research being done, read the blog article and the comments here:

http://blog.hotwhopper.com/2015/11/antarctic-ice-growing-or-shrinking-nasa.html

Ceist wrote: Cliff Harris: No qualifications in any field of science

Ceist wrote: He is a devout Christian who believes only God can change the climate and that he can predict the climate using the Bible.

trafn wrote: Well, I've seen you have found yet another way to try and insult and humiliate people, by adding their quotes in your signature in a way that manipulates the quote to say the exact opposite of what the author intended.

trafn wrote:
@IBdaMann - You continue, in your signature, to post Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

Well, I've seen you have found yet another way to try and insult and humiliate people, by adding their quotes in your signature in a way that manipulates the quote to say the exact opposite of what the author intended.

You never cease at coming up with new ways of showing that you are not just a troll, but an asshole as well.

Ceist wrote:The internet is full of crackpot cranks making all sorts of bizarre evidence-free claims. Does anyone take them seriously? (except other crackpot cranks or people so desperate to find anything at all to 'confirm' their religious/ideological beliefs, that they'll use anything they find on the internet, no matter how ridiculous)

That's why when making claims about science, I think it's preferable to use evidence-based authoritative sources like the major science institutions, current science textbooks, science Journals etc.

Ceist wrote:
If anyone wants an example of an intelligent discussion of the Zwally paper backed up by references to research papers and knowledge of the research being done, read the blog article and the comments here:

IBdaMann wrote:
This is from another site but it is appropriate in this thread.

[QUOTE who="Patriot AKA Bozo"]Recently there has been a frenzy in the anti-global warming arena that Antarctica is gaining ice. (Note I didn't day the d----r word) But how solid is this evidence?

It's not "evidence" so much as it is an observation, in both Antarctica and Greenland. Objects that are just left out on the ice invariably get buried under ice, lots of it. If Antarctica and Greenland were losing ice, what happens there would not happen.

Tim the plumber wrote:


This is very much evidence. It might not have a fancy graph attached to it but it is very definately evidence.

Ceist wrote:
So back on topic, here are some useful links to recent studies, including Zwally et al 2015. The time periods, satellite datasets and methods used in these studies are all different:

Tim the plumber wrote:
Ceist,

You have posted a lot of data sets and stuff.

What do they each say? Why is each important? If you wish to make an argument then do so but just posting such links does nothing.

Ceist wrote: Read them. Or not.

Ceist wrote: I'm not making any argument.

Ceist wrote:

Tim the plumber wrote:
Ceist,

You have posted a lot of data sets and stuff.

What do they each say? Why is each important? If you wish to make an argument then do so but just posting such links does nothing.

Read them. Or not. I'm not making any argument. Note I mentioned the different time periods and different satellites used in those 4 recent studies.

This is directly relevant recent research re Antarctic ice mass and information re the satellites used (from valid sources) for people who want to be more informed, rather than just making stuff up or repeating crap from conspiracy blogs or tabloid press.

Or do you think science is all about the uninformed evidence-free opinions of laypeople?

For example: Some people are blathering on about Zwally et al 2015 having not even read it, and not even realising the data was over 2 periods of time ending in 2008, (not 2015) or what the study was even measuring, or what other recent research has shown, or what the current data shows from the various satellites using different types of measurements in different areas.

If you want to stay uninformed and give your useless uneducated evidence-free layperson's opinions gleaned from conspiracy blogs or the tabloid press, go right ahead. Other people might like to learn about the science involved.