Remember me
▼ Content

Do man-made climate change deniers prove man-made climate change exists?



Page 2 of 3<123>
13-10-2015 00:40
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
Hi Into the Night,

You stated:

There is no melted runoff from land ice.

If that's true, please define what a moulin is in geomorphology. Here's a link for reference:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moulin_%28geomorphology%29


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
13-10-2015 00:53
drm
★☆☆☆☆
(67)
For me, a "denier" is somebody whose disagreement is not backed by plausible arguments. A genuine skeptic can make (or provide links to!) a plausible argument for why they disagree with something. Deniers do not do that. It might just be some fill-in-the-blank conspiracy or maybe the bible says God wouldn't do that or just a denial of what science actually is. Of course that is subjective. For somebody who accepts that AGW is happening but isn't yet convinced the impacts will be a catastrophe, that would generally not be a denier to me.
13-10-2015 01:04
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@no one and everyone:

Who knows, maybe we're all deniers just denying each others point of view, in which case, Perhaps this guy is right after all:

13-10-2015 02:10
drm
★☆☆☆☆
(67)
I read Into the Nights statement about melting as applying to Antarctica. I'm not sure that there is surface melting in Antarctica, but as sea ice melts, land-based glaciers are sliding into the ocean and melting. So Antarctica is losing ice mass overall, but the process is not the same as it is in Greenland where there is vast surface melting, which drains into moulins, and sometimes via vast waterfalls straight into the sea. I've seen videos of these.
13-10-2015 02:23
drm
★☆☆☆☆
(67)
PS - I did find this on a website from an Antarctic researcher:

a few recent papers have highlighted the importance of surface processes and surface melt induced by warmer surface air temperatures and longer melt seasons, specifically on the Antarctic Peninsula.


I am attempting to contact the scientist for more details.
13-10-2015 03:42
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@drm - perhaps then Greenland is a dry run for what is going to happen shortly in Antarctica (no moulins yet, but many yet to come).


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
13-10-2015 03:51
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(4301)
trafn wrote:If that's true, please define what a moulin is in geomorphology. Here's a link for reference:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moulin_%28geomorphology%29

Do you have another non-wikipedia reference that is an authoritative source?


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

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

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
13-10-2015 04:04
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@IBdaMann

God, how you hate wikipedia. Your job from hell would be if you were it's editor in chief (scratch that - you'd just delete everything).

All right, how's this for another reference source for Moulin's (according to this author, they're all a rather nice shade of reddish pink):





The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!

Edited on 13-10-2015 04:05
13-10-2015 04:44
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(4301)
trafn wrote:God, how you hate wikipedia.

It's more like how Wikipedia hates me. As a contributor I tried to edit the Global Warming page to bring it into the stated standards and to correct wording errors that made the statements erroneous and unsupported.

Ooooh, my mistake. It turns out that Wikipedia is run by rabid political leftists who will not tolerate any word of their official dogma to be modified whatsoever.

As far as I am concerned, Wikipedia is an automatic summary dismissal.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

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

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
13-10-2015 05:22
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@IBdaMann - yeah wikipedia can be a challenge, but when you try and write at my level, you gotta keep it simple. It's kinda like the "Dick and Jane" primer version for the sciences ("See Science. See Science run. Run, Science, run."). In some ways, it's actually fascinating and challenging to find references there that open the door to an idea. It's certainly not the complete or final answer, but it's like that first snort of cocaine, just to get you hooked and started.

I think the average person on the planet is so clueless about how we are polluting it and how it's all gonna backfire on us (shortly in my opinion). They'd rather be on HBO than really thinking about what's happening. For better or worse, they're my target audience, and wikipedia is a big step up (See trafn. See trafn run. Run, trafn, run!).


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
13-10-2015 12:19
EarthlingProfile picture★☆☆☆☆
(107)
drm wrote:
For me, a "denier" is somebody whose disagreement is not backed by plausible arguments. A genuine skeptic can make (or provide links to!) a plausible argument for why they disagree with something. Deniers do not do that. It might just be some fill-in-the-blank conspiracy or maybe the bible says God wouldn't do that or just a denial of what science actually is. Of course that is subjective. For somebody who accepts that AGW is happening but isn't yet convinced the impacts will be a catastrophe, that would generally not be a denier to me.
Thanks for removing me from the denier category.
It won't last long.Ö¿Ö


"We have a vested interest in creating panic, because then money will flow to climate science." John Christy
13-10-2015 12:26
EarthlingProfile picture★☆☆☆☆
(107)
I doubt that M2C2 will ever catch on.
13-10-2015 14:40
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(4301)
trafn wrote:I think the average person on the planet is so clueless about how we are polluting it and how it's all gonna backfire on us (shortly in my opinion).

Pollution is a serious matter. It differs from Global Warming in that it is real, it's empirical, we have a great deal of chemistry surrounding the issue and its impacts are clear and defined.

I'm a staunch advocate of antipollution laws. I'm not as juiced on the Global Warming but I definitely am on matters of pollution.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

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

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
13-10-2015 18:24
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@drm - I believe a denier is anyone who refuses to consider further analysis and avoids considering it at all costs through various means (i.e. - cherry picking, misinformation, misrepresentation, religion, politicization, etc.). This means even a scientist, or one who considers themself to speak from a scientific perspective, can be a denier if the mouth is still running, but their ears and eyes are closed.

@Earthling - You just posted above: I doubt that M2C2 will ever catch on. Guess what? It just did.

@IBdaMann - I wish you were right, but that would mean something can be real only after we have acknowledged its existence. Given how much data we already have in both the supporting and contrary camps, I'd still keep an open mind on things like GHG's, AGW, and M2C2 (which has now caught on thanks to Earthling).


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
13-10-2015 18:46
drm
★☆☆☆☆
(67)
trafn - Basically I use the word denier literally - people who deny something without good cause. A math denier would be somebody who denies that 2 + 2 = 4 and claims it equals 5, without offering plausible arguments to back it up. And I don't connect deniers of one thing (evolution or the holocaust) with deniers of anything else. Some of them are deniers of more than one thing, but by no means all of them. If they are a climate denier, that means they deny evidence regarding the climate. What you describe could also be a denier. You refer to "ears and eyes closed" and that would be another way of describing what I consider to be a denier - not willing to see the evidence.

The whole climate denier thing is an odd fish. It mostly is limited to the United States as a thing with any influence. There are deniers in Europe, but no major political party on any part of the political spectrum gives them any weight. They have a little influence in Australia, but not like in the US. It's also a short term thing because it won't be all that long till denial of AGW will be just silly. As the impacts kick in, they will dissipate as a political force just like the America First crowd did after Pearl Harbor, though the process will be slower.

The scientific consensus around AGW is accepted the world over by scientists and the political structures. The debate is what to do about it, and that is where the debate should be. So far I have not seen any clear set of policies that is clearly proven to be the best. Those who strongly agree with the AGW consensus argue fiercely about what that policy should be. Carbon taxes or cap and trade? Nuclear or not? Geoengineering? It's also critical for countries like India. It has contributed so little to creating this problem and yet it could surpass China as the single largest emitter in a decade or two. So it has to be a part of the solution.

Since deniers are people who deny evidence, by definition it is a waste of time to debate them because they will just ignore any evidence you find that they find inconvenient. That's why I stop responding to people once I decide that IMO they are deniers. And whining about the term is just a form of political correctness. It is a word. Words have meanings. I apply the literal meaning of the word as I see it. Since deniers by definition are not open to rational debate, saying that calling them a denier closes doors of communication is moot because they have already done that by refusing to consider valid evidence.
13-10-2015 19:39
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
Hi drm,

Agreed! 100%

Is it little wonder then that the M2C2 (man-made climate change) deniers are mostly in the United States. Politically and economically, the U.S. is the captain of Spaceship Earth. If we say jump, the rest of the world says, "How high?" If we sneeze, the rest of the world catches a cold. Thus, those most strongly/financially vested in the current petrochemical economy choose to protect their investment by manipulating both the economy and politics of the United States, regardless of whether or not their actions turn Earth into Spaceship Titanic. This, of course, has many historical parallels, like the U.S. CEO who was recently sentenced to prison over killing people with peanut butter he sold but knew was poisonous, to the entire tobacco debacle.


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
13-10-2015 19:44
drm
★☆☆☆☆
(67)
trafn wrote:
Politically and economically, the U.S. is the captain of Spaceship Earth. If we say jump, the rest of the world says, "How high?" If we sneeze, the rest of the world catches a cold.


I agree with the latter but not the former. I don't see many countries jumping at our request (nor should they really). And even the latter is less true as time goes on. I think that the influence of climate denial in the US has more to do with the idiosyncrasies of our political structure than our relationship to the rest of the world.
13-10-2015 19:52
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@drm - perhaps the former was a weak metaphor, but keep mind that when the United States says jump, it's usually dressed like this while saying so:





The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
13-10-2015 21:18
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(4301)
drm wrote: If they are a climate denier, that means they deny evidence regarding the climate.

Simple question: Must something be true to be deniable?

drm wrote: ["Climate denial"] mostly is limited to the United States as a thing with any influence.

It would be better to say that "Climate" worship is mostly concentrated in Europe.

Europe is far more leftist and far more inclined to allow governments to become more invasive and controlling and to suck more and more money out of the people to feed ever more ravenous appetites for new revenues. Global Warming has certainly found a comfortable home in Europe.


drm wrote:It's also a short term thing because it won't be all that long till denial of AGW will be just silly.

AGW is dying and probably won't be around in fifteen years. By then we'll most likely be in the throes of a solar minimum and of Global Cooling. At such a time people will think back to the silliness of the Globo-Bake movement that anticipated the heat death of life on earth.

drm wrote: The scientific consensus around AGW is accepted the world over by scientists and the political structures.

It is acknowledged the world over that "science" and "consensus" are incompatible terms. Those few who don't understand this typically delude themselves into thinking that scientists and politicians the world over are equally deluded.

drm wrote: The debate is what to do about it, and that is where the debate should be.

There is no debate about what to about elves, gremlins, undead, Loki, Global Warming, Darth Vader, Romulans, etc.; they're not real. The only debates about "what to do about them" should occur entirely within their respective related conventions.

drm wrote: Since deniers are people who deny evidence,

I thought "deniers" denied conclusions. Isn't Global Warming the conclusion that is being denied? What piece of evidence are you claiming is being denied?

drm wrote:Words have meanings.

...and you don't feel obligated to adhere to them.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

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

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
13-10-2015 22:45
EarthlingProfile picture★☆☆☆☆
(107)
trafn wrote:
@Earthling - You just posted above: I doubt that M2C2 will ever catch on. Guess what? It just did.
You wish.

Google "Glowbull warming", you'll find about 7,680 results.

"M2C2", about 111,000 results, not one of them to do with climate change.


"We have a vested interest in creating panic, because then money will flow to climate science." John Christy
14-10-2015 00:26
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@Earthling - every avalanche starts with one single snowflake.

Hello Snowflake Earthling!


You are such a pretty little snowflake, Snowflake Earthling!


Fall, Snowflake Earthling, fall!



The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!

Edited on 14-10-2015 00:30
14-10-2015 00:51
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(4301)
trafn wrote:@IBdaMann - I wish you were right,

Be prepared to be happy then.

trafn wrote: but that would mean something can be real only after we have acknowledged its existence.

False, as stated. Improper use of the word "acknowledged" which carries the implication of existence. Belief in the existence of something is insufficient to bring it into existence.

trafn wrote: Given how much data we already have in both the supporting and contrary camps,

How can there be data supporting something's non-existence?

What falsifiable model is supported by what data?


trafn wrote:I'd still keep an open mind on things like GHG's, AGW, and M2C2 (which has now caught on thanks to Earthling).

Of all this data we apparently have, does any of it support any violations of science?


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

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

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
14-10-2015 01:18
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@IBdaMann - I think your denial of GHG's, AGW, and M2C2 (man-made climate change) is very consistent with the overall position of the United States. Addicted to petrochemicals, the U.S. has taken a "why rock the boat" approach, even though an environmental iceberg is approaching (no, I'm not talking about global cooling - gotcha
).

That's okay IBdaMann! It will only mean that the United States will be left behind as the rest of the world transitions to carbon neutral economies, and the U.S. recedes into a second rate technology nation. After all, given the mess the U.S. has made of world affairs since the end of WWII, it's probably time someone else took the reins of leadership for a little while. So, I applaud your denialist stance as, overall, it serves the greater good. And don't worry, once the greater good has finally been served, there will be no taxes, only greater good fees.


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
14-10-2015 01:40
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(4301)
trafn wrote: That's okay IBdaMann![/b] It will only mean that the United States will be left behind as the rest of the world transitions to carbon neutral economies, and the U.S. recedes into a second rate technology nation.

I look at it a little differently.

I have long since encouraged Europe to proceed with their new taxation policies, their economy-crushing regulations and their bloating of governments with Global Warming clergy positions while we sit back and watch how that works out for them.

If it turns out to be a good thing then we can always join the party with the added benefit of Europe already having worked out most of the kinks for us, and Europe with the benefit of not having had the big bully globo-boss USA getting in the way and mandating how everything should be done.

So let's just wait and see.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

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

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
14-10-2015 01:57
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@IBdaMann - I welcome you comrade into the socialist dream of a carbon neutral world! By the way, did you receive your food allotment stamps this month? If not, let me know and I'll take it up with someone at party headquarters.


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
14-10-2015 02:12
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(4301)
trafn wrote:
@IBdaMann - I welcome you comrade into the socialist dream of a carbon neutral world! By the way, did you receive your food allotment stamps this month? If not, let me know and I'll take it up with someone at party headquarters.

Venezuela has performed a successful dry run of all the economy killing techiques involved in implementing a solid "Climate" protectiIon campaign, ...without even implementing any "Global Warming" policies!

We should look to Venezuela for indicators of how we should expect it to work for us.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

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

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
14-10-2015 02:24
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@IBdaMann - yes, but you forget comrade, Venezuela's downfall was that they left out one key in their plans: Martinis!

(Martinis - the one thing that dries everything. Just ask Dean Martin. He's pretty dry by now!)


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
14-10-2015 02:26
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8688)
trafn wrote:
Hi Into the Night,

You stated:

There is no melted runoff from land ice.

If that's true, please define what a moulin is in geomorphology. Here's a link for reference:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moulin_%28geomorphology%29

You took my quote out of context. I am not talking about glaciers.
14-10-2015 02:29
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@Into the Night - my apologies. To what were you referring then?


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
14-10-2015 02:31
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8688)
drm wrote:
I read Into the Nights statement about melting as applying to Antarctica. I'm not sure that there is surface melting in Antarctica, but as sea ice melts, land-based glaciers are sliding into the ocean and melting. So Antarctica is losing ice mass overall, but the process is not the same as it is in Greenland where there is vast surface melting, which drains into moulins, and sometimes via vast waterfalls straight into the sea. I've seen videos of these.

Antarctica is not losing ice mass overall. The land ice is thicker than before (it buried the original South Polar Station). The mean sea ice is more extensive than it was before. This is documented by the numerous camps scattered across Antarctica.

The melting of mean sea ice at all is in one portion of Antarctica, where the sea ice grew so far it now extends out into a warm current. There the ice is melting.
14-10-2015 02:33
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8688)
IBdaMann wrote:
trafn wrote:God, how you hate wikipedia.

It's more like how Wikipedia hates me. As a contributor I tried to edit the Global Warming page to bring it into the stated standards and to correct wording errors that made the statements erroneous and unsupported.

Ooooh, my mistake. It turns out that Wikipedia is run by rabid political leftists who will not tolerate any word of their official dogma to be modified whatsoever.

As far as I am concerned, Wikipedia is an automatic summary dismissal.


Nice try, fella. Sorry about the rude awakening.
14-10-2015 02:44
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8688)
trafn wrote:
@Into the Night - my apologies. To what were you referring then?

Antarctica, specifically the area around the South Polar Station, but extending generally across the landmass of the continent.
14-10-2015 02:46
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@IBdaMann and Into the Night - at least you gotta admit Wikipedia's good for something:




The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
14-10-2015 02:47
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@Into the Night - ah, yes. Probably not much significant runoff yet, even during their version of summer. But the calvings up dramatically which, in turn, increases the mean sea ice (that last bits for you drm
)


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!

Edited on 14-10-2015 02:49
14-10-2015 03:13
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
Hi Into the Night,

Here's a final bonus post for you before I sign off tonight. I was looking through my M2C2 (man-made climate change) archives earlier today and I came across this newspaper editorial from Grotvik, Antarctica, dating back to the start of the pliocene age. And I qoute:

Well dear readers, do you remember how I was telling you last week about Mary Plumkin, who lives down at the end of Old East Post Road with her husband Joseph and their nine goats, and how she had just received that box in the mail from her cousin Pandora who lives across the big pond from us? Well, guess what? She finally open the darn thing and out popped M2C2! So, that 's why we don't got no more ice or snow here in Grotvik. Gosh, how I do miss snow boarding. Nice work Mary. You really did an immaculate job with that one! Oh well, perhaps future generations will read this editorial and not repeat our foolish mistake.

Oh wait, let me know if this violates any of your 9000 rules on data and I'll redact it.


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
14-10-2015 04:54
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8688)
trafn wrote:
@Into the Night - ah, yes. Probably not much significant runoff yet, even during their version of summer. But the calvings up dramatically which, in turn, increases the mean sea ice (that last bits for you drm
)

Nope. There is only one way to create sea ice. Freeze the seawater. Calvings do not create ice.
14-10-2015 04:56
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8688)
trafn wrote:
Hi Into the Night,

Here's a final bonus post for you before I sign off tonight. I was looking through my M2C2 (man-made climate change) archives earlier today and I came across this newspaper editorial from Grotvik, Antarctica, dating back to the start of the pliocene age. And I qoute:

Well dear readers, do you remember how I was telling you last week about Mary Plumkin, who lives down at the end of Old East Post Road with her husband Joseph and their nine goats, and how she had just received that box in the mail from her cousin Pandora who lives across the big pond from us? Well, guess what? She finally open the darn thing and out popped M2C2! So, that 's why we don't got no more ice or snow here in Grotvik. Gosh, how I do miss snow boarding. Nice work Mary. You really did an immaculate job with that one! Oh well, perhaps future generations will read this editorial and not repeat our foolish mistake.

Oh wait, let me know if this violates any of your 9000 rules on data and I'll redact it.

There are only 8 rules and they do not affect this thread.
Edited on 14-10-2015 04:57
14-10-2015 11:08
EarthlingProfile picture★☆☆☆☆
(107)
trafn wrote:
@Earthling - every avalanche starts with one single snowflake.

Hello Snowflake Earthling!


You are such a pretty little snowflake, Snowflake Earthling!


Fall, Snowflake Earthling, fall!
Time to grow up, child.


"We have a vested interest in creating panic, because then money will flow to climate science." John Christy
14-10-2015 11:16
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@Into the Night - actually, the calving does because the icebergs from calving do start to melt in the Southern Ocean, thus diluting the overall saline content which makes it easier for the upper levels to freeze.

@Into the Night - since your 8 commandments (where are the other 2?) don't effect this thread, I'll assume that includes my prior post from the Grotvik Times. So, I'll just add this follow-up piece on M2C2 (man-made climate change) I found from that newspaper dated "start of the pliocene, plus one week." And, again, I quote:

Well dear readers, this will be the last edition of our beloved Grotvik Times, as this is also the end of our beloved Grotvik. As I told you in last week's edition, Mary Plumkin had finally opened that box her cousin Pandora sent her, and wouldn't you know it, M2C2 popped out and has turned our beloved snow and iced draped paradise into a barren dry desert. Of course, we had all hoped that Mary's son - you know, the one who left us for the big city cause he had this sellable talent of turning water into wine - might come back to us and turn water into ice and snow, but he never returned. Oh well, cross that one off. See ya!

I'll let you know if I find anymore back issues.


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!

Edited on 14-10-2015 11:20
14-10-2015 11:19
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@Earthling - Yes, my pretty little Snowflake Earthling, it is time to grow up.

I think you once mentioned that you're retired.

Does that mean you've graduated from the diapers stage to the Depends stage?


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
Page 2 of 3<123>





Join the debate Do man-made climate change deniers prove man-made climate change exists?:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Florida Man...121-08-2019 20:51
Naomi Klein: 'Big Green Groups Are More Damaging Than Climate Deniers'313-08-2019 14:20
There is no evidence there is global warming, either natural or man made8006-08-2019 19:38
No man can fool god.028-04-2019 18:43
How can hippies beat CO2? CO2 is power of nature? Man is nothing compared to nature.224-02-2019 22:55
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact