Arctic waters not freezing

Climate-Debate.com > Discussion Forum > Climate debate in general > Arctic waters not freezing > Page 15

Page 15 of 20

07-04-2017 20:43
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	litesong wrote: ...deleted non-English portion...doesn't understand AGW & GHG effect. ...deleted non-English portion... Perhaps you could try to explain greenhouse effect without violating physics. Go ahead. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
07-04-2017 21:29
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: Perhaps you could try to explain greenhouse effect without violating physics. Go ahead. Don't need to. Thousands of scientists have already corrected your flopping fantasy of GHGs.
07-04-2017 22:40
GasGuzzler ★★★★★ (2932)	litesong wrote: "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: Perhaps you could try to explain greenhouse effect without violating physics. Go ahead. Don't need to. Thousands of scientists have already corrected your flopping fantasy of GHGs. Perhaps then you could give it a go? I'd be interested in your explanation, in YOUR words, no copyin an pastin. Radiation will not penetrate a perfect insulator, thus as I said space is not a perfect insulator.- Swan
07-04-2017 22:53
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	litesong wrote: ...deleted non-English portion...Perhaps you could try to explain greenhouse effect without violating physics. Go ahead. Don't need to. Thousands of scientists have already corrected your flopping fantasy of GHGs. Consensus isn't used in science. I knew you couldn't explain 'greenhouse' effect without violating physics. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
08-04-2017 00:30
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: I knew you couldn't explain..... Its been 'plained ta u lots of times. u neet ta keep shovelin' money into oil, energy, & business pockets.

08-04-2017 00:32
GasGuzzler ★★★★★ (2932)	Its been 'plained ta u lots of times. Not from you! u neet ta keep shovelin' money into oil, energy, & business pockets. Certainly Radiation will not penetrate a perfect insulator, thus as I said space is not a perfect insulator.- Swan
08-04-2017 01:03
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	litesong wrote: ...deleted non-English portion...I knew you couldn't explain..... Its been 'plained ta u lots of times. u neet ta keep shovelin' money into oil, energy, & business pockets. I don't shovel money anywhere. I buy and use oil products just like anybody else. As far as a business making profit, what's wrong with that? Still can't explain 'greenhouse' effect without violating physics, can you? The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
08-04-2017 05:35
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	Robert Scribbler shows the present continuing massive AGW GHG Arctic sea ice VOLUME loss, which take its own lonely path away from years past "minor" loss trails: https://robertscribbler.com/2017/04/06/arctic-sea-ice-volume-continues-to-crater/ This present year's sea ice melt loss anomaly, is represented by the equivalent of 5+ times the annual U.S. energy consumption.... a stunning development. Edited on 08-04-2017 05:36
08-04-2017 05:40
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	litesong wrote: Robert Scribbler shows the present continuing massive AGW GHG Arctic sea ice VOLUME loss, which take its own lonely path away from years past "minor" loss trails: https://robertscribbler.com/2017/04/06/arctic-sea-ice-volume-continues-to-crater/ This present year's sea ice melt loss anomaly, is represented by the equivalent of 5+ times the annual U.S. energy consumption.... a stunning development. Right back to quoting manufactured data. Guess you can't describe a greenhouse effect free of physics violations at all, eh? What a robot. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
08-04-2017 18:07
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	[b]litesong wrote: 2017 Arctic sea ice maximum extent was well LESS THAN 2 million square kilometers than for the year 1979. 2017 Arctic sea ice extent is so low as of Mar. 22, that 1980 DECADE average sea ice extent was NOT as low until MAY 9. Beyond that tidbit was this largebit: At these divergent times WHEN ARCTIC SEA ICE EXTENT WAS THE SAME, 1980 decade average VOLUME WAS 30,000+ cubic kilometers, while 2017 VOLUME was 18,600 cubic kilometers. As mentioned above, 2+million KM2 is water that was sea ice in 1979 & readily absorbing solar energy, instead of reflecting solar heat to space. April 1, 2017 Arctic sea ice VOLUME continues its anomalous fall. At 20,400KM3, that is 9800KM3 less than the average year of the 1980's decade. Compared to April 1, 1979, April 1, 2017 VOLUME is 11000+KM3 less. The energy needed to melt such a continuing anomalous VOLUME (an ice cube 22KMx22KMx22KM) is almost 34 times the yearly energy consumption of the U.S. Edited on 08-04-2017 18:11
08-04-2017 22:25
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	litesong wrote: [b]litesong wrote: 2017 Arctic sea ice maximum extent was well LESS THAN 2 million square kilometers than for the year 1979. 2017 Arctic sea ice extent is so low as of Mar. 22, that 1980 DECADE average sea ice extent was NOT as low until MAY 9. Beyond that tidbit was this largebit: At these divergent times WHEN ARCTIC SEA ICE EXTENT WAS THE SAME, 1980 decade average VOLUME WAS 30,000+ cubic kilometers, while 2017 VOLUME was 18,600 cubic kilometers. As mentioned above, 2+million KM2 is water that was sea ice in 1979 & readily absorbing solar energy, instead of reflecting solar heat to space. April 1, 2017 Arctic sea ice VOLUME continues its anomalous fall. At 20,400KM3, that is 9800KM3 less than the average year of the 1980's decade. Compared to April 1, 1979, April 1, 2017 VOLUME is 11000+KM3 less. The energy needed to melt such a continuing anomalous VOLUME (an ice cube 22KMx22KMx22KM) is almost 34 times the yearly energy consumption of the U.S. ALL solar heating goes to space, litebeer. You can't trap heat. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
09-04-2017 06:23
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: ALL solar heating goes to space, litebeer. But solar energy is delayed while in Earth's biosphere, thus heatin' Earth's biosphere. Yeah, solar energy (TSI) comes in at the same rate, altho a bit low for the last ten years (& for 3+ years so low, setting a 100 year record), but exits Earth biosphere at a lesser rate. Sorra, ya don' unnerstant. Na, I ain't sorra. I like miserable science chemistry astronomy physics algebra & pre-calc short & egotistical long AGW denier liar whiners keep prattlin' its BS. Edited on 09-04-2017 06:31
09-04-2017 16:15
Tim the plumber ★★★★☆ (1356)	litesong wrote: "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: ALL solar heating goes to space, litebeer. But solar energy is delayed while in Earth's biosphere, thus heatin' Earth's biosphere. Yeah, solar energy (TSI) comes in at the same rate, altho a bit low for the last ten years (& for 3+ years so low, setting a 100 year record), but exits Earth biosphere at a lesser rate. Sorra, ya don' unnerstant. Na, I ain't sorra. I like miserable science chemistry astronomy physics algebra & pre-calc short & egotistical long AGW denier liar whiners keep prattlin' its BS. If you mean by that there is an inbalance between incoming and outgoing heat energy levels then, according to that satilite they have up there with the +/- 4 Watts/meter accuracy there is a 1.5 Watts/meter warming effecty or whatever the numbers are then yes there is a warming effect. How much temperature change would a 1 watt per meter have per year over the whole ocean assuming that the water below 700m does not change temperature? If you gannot answer that question you have no clue what you aretalking about.
09-04-2017 18:08
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" plugged: litesong wrote: "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: ALL solar heating goes to space, litebeer. But solar energy is delayed while in Earth's biosphere, thus heatin' Earth's biosphere. Yeah, solar energy (TSI) comes in at the same rate, altho a bit low for the last ten years (& for 3+ years so low, setting a 100 year record), but exits Earth biosphere at a lesser rate. Sorra, ya don' unnerstant. Na, I ain't sorra. I like miserable science chemistry astronomy physics algebra & pre-calc short & egotistical long AGW denier liar whiners keep prattlin' its BS. inbalance .... satilite .... effecty or whatever the numbers are .....gannot .... aretalking..... Sorra, ya don' unnerstant. Na, I ain't sorra. I like a miserable science chemistry astronomy physics algebra & pre-calc short & egotistically-long AGW denier liar whiner to keep prattlin' its BS. Edited on 09-04-2017 18:12
09-04-2017 22:17
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	litesong wrote: ...deleted non-English portion...ALL solar heating goes to space, litebeer. But solar energy is delayed while in Earth's biosphere, thus heatin' Earth's biosphere. Yeah, solar energy (TSI) comes in at the same rate, altho a bit low for the last ten years (& for 3+ years so low, setting a 100 year record), but exits Earth biosphere at a lesser rate. Sorra, ya don' unnerstant. Na, I ain't sorra. I like miserable science chemistry astronomy physics algebra & pre-calc short & egotistical long AGW denier liar whiners keep prattlin' its BS. You can't trap heat, litebeer. Not even to delay it. That violates the 1st law of thermodynamics. You can't reduce radiance and increase the temperature of the Earth at the same time either. The Magick Bouncing Photon argument doesn't work. It violates the Stefan-Boltzmann law. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan Edited on 09-04-2017 22:18

09-04-2017 23:23
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	Into the Night wrote: You can't trap heat, litebeer. Not even to delay it. Of course IR energy is delayed, after out-going IR energy is absorbed by man-made non-phase change, infra-red energy absorbing GHGs from Earth's surface & radiating half of it back at Earth's surface. "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" knows the above, but must still continue its lies to support the inordinate flow of money into the hands of undeserving upper crust oil-can, energy & business paper pushers & people shovers.
10-04-2017 03:53
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	litesong wrote: Into the Night wrote: You can't trap heat, litebeer. Not even to delay it. Of course IR energy is delayed, after out-going IR energy is absorbed by man-made non-phase change, infra-red energy absorbing GHGs from Earth's surface & radiating half of it back at Earth's surface. "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" knows the above, but must still continue its lies to support the inordinate flow of money into the hands of undeserving upper crust oil-can, energy & business paper pushers & people shovers. Oh, oh..... found mistakes in my answer to "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight": Here's the corrected version: litesong wrote: "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: You can't trap heat, litesong. Not even to delay it. Of course IR energy is delayed, after out-going IR energy is absorbed by man-made non-phase change, infra-red energy absorbing GHGs from Earth's surface & radiating half of it back at Earth's surface. "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" knows the above, but must still continue its lies to support the inordinate flow of money into the hands of undeserving upper crustee oil-can, energy & business paper pushers & people shovers.
10-04-2017 08:36
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	litesong wrote: Into the Night wrote: You can't trap heat, litebeer. Not even to delay it. Of course IR energy is delayed, after out-going IR energy is absorbed by man-made non-phase change, infra-red energy absorbing GHGs from Earth's surface & radiating half of it back at Earth's surface. ...deleted non-English portion and usual assumption of 'corporate' influence... Nope. You can't delay or trap heat. That violates the 1st law of thermodynamics. You can't heat the warmer surface using a colder gas either. That violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics. You can't reduce radiance to increase temperature. That violates the Stefan-Boltzmann law. You still can't describe 'greenhouse' effect without violating physics, can you? The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
10-04-2017 17:04
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	Into the Night wrote: litesong wrote: Of course IR energy is delayed, after out-going IR energy is absorbed by man-made non-phase change, infra-red energy absorbing GHGs from Earth's surface & radiating half of it back at Earth's surface. ...deleted non-English portion and usual assumption of 'corporate' influence... You can't delay or trap heat. It is good that "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" is a stupid "it". Atmospheric infra-red energy absorption, radiation back to the ground, then re-radiated into the atmosphere again, is similar to light being bounced off mirrors & the light path lengthened (infra-red energy spending more time in the bio-sphere). I am so glad that "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" is a stupid "it". Edited on 10-04-2017 17:05
10-04-2017 19:22
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	litesong wrote: Into the Night wrote: litesong wrote: Of course IR energy is delayed, after out-going IR energy is absorbed by man-made non-phase change, infra-red energy absorbing GHGs from Earth's surface & radiating half of it back at Earth's surface. ...deleted non-English portion and usual assumption of 'corporate' influence... You can't delay or trap heat. ...deleted non-English portion... Atmospheric infra-red energy absorption, radiation back to the ground, then re-radiated into the atmosphere again, is similar to light being bounced off mirrors & the light path lengthened (infra-red energy spending more time in the bio-sphere. ...deleted non-English portion... Still trying to violate Stefan-Boltzmann and the 2nd LoT, eh? Just can't seem to get around that, so you just religiously ignore that you're doing it. Now...are you going to go back to quoting manufactured data? The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
11-04-2017 06:36
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" barfed: Still trying to violate.... Non-scientist "badnight" bellyaches that scientists aren't sigh-an-tific. Edited on 11-04-2017 07:34
11-04-2017 07:32
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	Despite El Nino ending & anomalous upwelling cold waters surfacing, the beginning of 2017 hasn't slacked much from the record heats of 2016: https://summitcountyvoice.com/2017/04/04/march-2017-ends-up-as-2d-warmest-on-record-for-earth/ With AGW denier liar whiners' decade or two predictions that Earth is returning to an ice age, such evidence is NOT making itself known. Edited on 11-04-2017 07:33
11-04-2017 07:35
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	litesong wrote: "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" barfed: Still trying to violate.... Non-scientist "badnight" continually bellyaches that scientists aren't sigh-an-tific. Oh...so you've gone back to claiming what some unnamed 'scientists' said. Did you know that science isn't scientists? It isn't people at all! It is just the falsifiable theories themselves. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
11-04-2017 18:26
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bleats: Did you know that science isn't scientists? Whiners bleat.
11-04-2017 19:26
James_ ★★★★★ (2230)	litesong wrote: "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bleats: Did you know that science isn't scientists? Whiners bleat. is this your forum litesong ?
11-04-2017 20:57
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	James_ wrote: litesong wrote: "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bleats: Did you know that science isn't scientists? Whiners bleat. is this your forum litesong ? No. It's his spam storage system. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
12-04-2017 00:47
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	James_ jested:....is this your forum litesong ? Good to hear from "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig i b da no sigh-ants mann".
13-04-2017 03:53
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: ...violate Stefan-Boltzmann and the 2nd LoT It is good that religiously wrong "badnight" bluffs that it knows sigh-ants better than AGW scientists know science. "The farce is strong in "badnight".
13-04-2017 04:29
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	litesong wrote: "...deleted non-English portion...: ...violate Stefan-Boltzmann and the 2nd LoT ...deleted non-English portion... better than AGW scientists know science. ...deleted non-English portion... There is no such thing as an AGW 'scientist'. Climate 'scientists' do not create or use science. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
13-04-2017 08:39
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	"badnight" bluffed: There is no such thing as an AGW 'scientist'. There is no such thing as an AGW denier liar whiner bluffer redefining science.

13-04-2017 09:15
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	litesong wrote: There is no such thing as an AGW denier ...deleted insulting portion... redefining science. Generally correct. There are exceptions of course. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan Edited on 13-04-2017 09:16
13-04-2017 16:37
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	"badnight" wrote: There is no such thing as an AGW denier ...deleted insulting portion... redefining science. I do NOT insult. I describe more accurately. Therefore, "badnight" is an AGW denier liar whiner bluffer. More accurately, "badnight" is "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner bluffer badnight". Many past old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiners liked their new names. "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner bluffer badnight" will also like its new name.
13-04-2017 17:51
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	22-11-2016: litesong wrote: IBdaMann wrote: [quote] litesong wrote: But, all your cartoon characters look like T-rump, Steve Bannon, or General Flynn. Like ass-kickers who get the job done and who win. general flynn is gone, steve bannon banned from Security Council (further demotions?) & six "Don'T rump" aides were earliest "bootees" as security risks. Even with re-pubic-lick-un stiff armers, "Don'T rump" has suffered many losses. Early, Ass-kicker "Don'T rump" had his ass handed him. "Don'T rump" still plays with the russians & now with Tomahawks. Woulda been the earliest president on the impeachment list, but re-pubic-lick-uns still lick the "Don't rump" pubic.
13-04-2017 19:05
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	Corrections: 22-11-2016: litesong wrote: "i b da no sigh-ants mann" muffed: litesong wrote: But, all your cartoon characters look like T-rump, Steve Bannon, or General Flynn. Like ass-kickers who get the job done and who win. general flynn is gone, steve bannon banned from Security Council (further demotions?) & six "Don'T rump" aides were earliest "bootees" as security risks. Even with re-pubic-lick-un stiff armers, "Don'T rump" has suffered many losses. Early, Ass-kicker "Don'T rump" had his ass handed him. "Don'T rump" still plays with the russians & now with Tomahawks. Woulda been the earliest president on the impeachment list, but re-pubic-lick-uns still lick the "Don't rump" pubic. Edited on 13-04-2017 19:08
13-04-2017 20:49
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	litesong wrote: "badnight" wrote: There is no such thing as an AGW denier ...deleted insulting portion... redefining science. I do NOT insult. I describe more accurately. ...deleted non-English portion... Trying to redefine the word 'insult' now? You already have trouble with English. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan Edited on 13-04-2017 20:49
13-04-2017 23:46
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: You already have trouble with English. "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" doesn't understand accuracy. Edited on 13-04-2017 23:47
14-04-2017 01:00
Wake ★★★★★ (4034)	Into the Night wrote: litesong wrote: "badnight" wrote: There is no such thing as an AGW denier ...deleted insulting portion... redefining science. I do NOT insult. I describe more accurately. ...deleted non-English portion... Trying to redefine the word 'insult' now? You already have trouble with English. On his best day litebeer couldn't explain urine to his toilet. But he'd try. The sick little punk who hides his total ignorance behind insults is nothing more than the defecation of a rat.
14-04-2017 01:17
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" woofed:... couldn't explain.... Meanwhile: 2017, like 2015 & 2016, did not reach 14 million square kilometers extent maximum.... just remarkable!! Robert Scribbler makes mention of this year's Arctic sea ice maximum extent: https://robertscribbler.com/2017/03/20/frailest-ever-winter-sea-ice-facing-a-cruel-cruel-summer/ March 2017 Arctic sea ice VOLUME was 9600 cubic kilometers less than the average of the 1980's, & 11,000(+?) cubic kilometers less than 1979, itself. It is good that AGW denier liar whiners double-down & triple-down(?) on their bets that Earth is returning to an ice age. 2017 Arctic sea ice maximum extent was well LESS THAN 2 million square kilometers than for the year 1979. 2017 Arctic sea ice extent is so low as of Mar. 22, that 1980 DECADE average sea ice extent was NOT as low until MAY 9. Beyond that tidbit was this largebit: At these divergent times WHEN ARCTIC SEA ICE EXTENT WAS THE SAME, 1980 decade average VOLUME WAS 30,000+ cubic kilometers, while 2017 VOLUME is 18,600 cubic kilometers. All this while solar TSI has been languid for decades, & low for 10 years (including 3+ years where the solar TSI set a 100 year record low). "wake-me-up" can't explain its 3 exponent error.
14-04-2017 03:04
Frescomexico ★★☆☆☆ (179)	James_ wrote: @Don, What scientists acknowledge is that the Greenland Sea abyss is warming 10 times faster than other bodies of water. They also acknowledge that the Arctic is warming twice as fast as the rest of the planet. It's these 2 facts that helped me to consider hydrothermal vents. What many people are not aware of is that as glaciers melt tectonic plates move upward. This helps to open up the North Atlantic Ridge. And it would be in my opinion that we can close some hydrothermal vents. "The observation of hydrothermal plumes on approximately 80 percent of the [miniature autonomous plume recorder] profiles was completely unexpected," said Baker. "These observations will be a challenge to interpret correctly, especially the determination, or estimation, of how many vent fields actually produce the plumes." Researchers offered several possible explanations for the number of plumes they discovered. One theory is that a concentration of magma in a few areas efficiently drives hydrothermal venting along the ridge. Another holds that unusually deep faults along the ridge allows seawater access to heat sources not typically available to vents. "The fact that we found so many vents, and where we found them, is telling us something fundamental about how heat is delivered from the interior of Earth to the surface at these slowest spreading rates," said Edmonds. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/01/0123_030123_hotspring_2.html IMO unusually deep faults might allow cooled magma to sink while hotter magma rises to replace it. If so then that fault might not be sealed when magma cools. As they stated, when magma cools it helps to form a new area of the sea floor. Jim If we can manipulate global climate, closing a few hydrothermal vents should be a piece of cake. How much do you think the Greenland Sea warming affects global warming? Don
14-04-2017 03:49
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	litesong wrote: ...deleted non-English portionYou already have trouble with English. ...deleted non-English portion... doesn't understand accuracy. So now you're not only attempting to redefine 'insult', you are attempting to redefine 'accuracy'??? Your lack of English is definitely giving you problems. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan

Page 15 of 20

Join the debate Arctic waters not freezing:

Threads	Replies	Last post
Arctic sea ice cover	19	09-04-2022 08:29
Arctic ice cover	2	02-04-2022 09:26
Polar vortex regains it's shape and position over the Arctic Video!!!	5	01-06-2021 06:54
Is Western Arctic Warming related to Magnetic Pole Movement?	8	17-03-2020 03:59
Warm Waters	20	23-12-2019 22:20