Should climate scientist try to regrow the glacial maximum dropping sea levels

Climate-Debate.com > Discussion Forum > Consequences > Should climate scientist try to regrow the glacial maximum dropping sea levels

Page 1 of 3

Should climate scientist try to regrow the glacial maximum dropping sea levels27-01-2021 21:15
Swan★★★★★ (5723)	by over 400 feet? This would open massive land areas near the sea, however it would cover the Earth in thousands of feet of ice reducing land areas elsewhere. So reducing global warming is a loss either way. I hate winter anyway Edited on 27-01-2021 21:16
27-01-2021 23:09
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	Swan wrote: by over 400 feet? This would open massive land areas near the sea, however it would cover the Earth in thousands of feet of ice reducing land areas elsewhere. So reducing global warming is a loss either way. I hate winter anyway That's politics for you. I don't think Russia or Canada would go for having more glaciers in their countries. This would also cool the US. It'd be good for Mexico.
27-01-2021 23:47
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	Swan wrote: by over 400 feet? This would open massive land areas near the sea, however it would cover the Earth in thousands of feet of ice reducing land areas elsewhere. So reducing global warming is a loss either way. I hate winter anyway What is this "global warming" of which you speak? Could you define the term for me?
27-01-2021 23:55
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	gfm7175 wrote: Swan wrote: by over 400 feet? This would open massive land areas near the sea, however it would cover the Earth in thousands of feet of ice reducing land areas elsewhere. So reducing global warming is a loss either way. I hate winter anyway What is this "global warming" of which you speak? Could you define the term for me? Do you know how tired that line is? You must be a Marxist who can't define a free and fair election. p.s., Thank You for reminding me that I was watching an educational video, a part of a lesson plan, on how to deal with negative powers. Please note that sin^-1. And yet you reminded me of this. Of course everyone knows that sin^-1 is 1/2. Can you do the math? And all they did was to convert sin into a fraction of the radians. So sqrt3/2 is nothing more than a fraction of 1 or 2 Pi. This is where math gets weird because 1/2 of sqrt3/2 might be 1/2 sin in reality but it's their game, right? Attached image: Edited on 28-01-2021 00:15
28-01-2021 00:17
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	James___ wrote: gfm7175 wrote: Swan wrote: by over 400 feet? This would open massive land areas near the sea, however it would cover the Earth in thousands of feet of ice reducing land areas elsewhere. So reducing global warming is a loss either way. I hate winter anyway What is this "global warming" of which you speak? Could you define the term for me? Do you know how tired that line is? Do you know how tired the logically invalid responses to that question are? Edited on 28-01-2021 00:18

28-01-2021 01:20
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	gfm7175 wrote: James___ wrote: gfm7175 wrote: Swan wrote: by over 400 feet? This would open massive land areas near the sea, however it would cover the Earth in thousands of feet of ice reducing land areas elsewhere. So reducing global warming is a loss either way. I hate winter anyway What is this "global warming" of which you speak? Could you define the term for me? Do you know how tired that line is? Do you know how tired the logically invalid responses to that question are? Our Father, which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy Name. Thy Kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, As it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our trespasses, As we forgive them that trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation, But deliver us from evil. For thine is the kingdom, The power, and the glory, For ever and ever. Amen. Read more at: https://www.lords-prayer-words.com/lord_traditional_king_james.html And for any forum member, gfm is a devout Christian. Edited on 28-01-2021 01:30
28-01-2021 01:33
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	The truth is that mankind doesn't have the might, or the magic to pull off any of the global stunts, you read about in the science fiction books We've had pandemic many times in the past. We were told by scientists and experts, we could control this one, and end it quickly. If you check the CDC.gov website, the have a section on pandemics, and you will notice that most lasted 2-3 years. Aside from the media hype, this one has been kind of mild. Though a little early to predict the end, even with the vaccinations, we are looking at almost 2 years of mask wearing, and stranger-danger. Unlikely that we accomplished anything, except ruining the economy, destroying small business, and trained old people to hide in their basement. The inactivity, and isolation causing much worse health problems, than catching a simple cold virus. When they achieve carbon-neutrality, it will prove to have been just as futile, and much worse, than had they done nothing at all. We discovered a hole, in the ozone, over Norway, did a bunch of crap, to fix it, and yet we still have a great big O-hole, that grows bigger during the winter, and shrinks a little during the summer. Sort of like arctic ice. Turned out to be a non-issue, be an O-hole, forever, and of no consequence (except for Norway, and their mental hygiene issues, though likely genetic).
28-01-2021 01:47
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	HarveyH55 wrote: The truth is that mankind doesn't have the might, or the magic to pull off any of the global stunts, you read about in the science fiction books Are you talking about those clamshell smartphones they used in the original Star Trek back in 1966 - 1969. We had better technology 20 years ago. Other shows had flat screen TVs. Even laptop PCs were in shows before they existed. I guess it depends on what matters to us, right? Edited on 28-01-2021 01:54
28-01-2021 01:51
Swan★★★★★ (5723)	gfm7175 wrote: Swan wrote: by over 400 feet? This would open massive land areas near the sea, however it would cover the Earth in thousands of feet of ice reducing land areas elsewhere. So reducing global warming is a loss either way. I hate winter anyway What is this "global warming" of which you speak? Could you define the term for me? Global warming means that the Earth is warming as it has been for 20000 or so years.
28-01-2021 05:16
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	James___ wrote: HarveyH55 wrote: The truth is that mankind doesn't have the might, or the magic to pull off any of the global stunts, you read about in the science fiction books Are you talking about those clamshell smartphones they used in the original Star Trek back in 1966 - 1969. We had better technology 20 years ago. Other shows had flat screen TVs. Even laptop PCs were in shows before they existed. I guess it depends on what matters to us, right? Yeah, for got to mention boats, planes, automobiles, rocketships... If you can dream it, you can achieve it... Sometimes. We don't have any technology, to control the planet though, or the forces of nature. We don't get rain on demand, where we want, and only what we want. Been a dream for thousands of years. We don't control the wind. Can't steer a hurricane away from landfall, or destroy them. There is no global thermostat, we have no control.
28-01-2021 05:26
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	HarveyH55 wrote: James___ wrote: HarveyH55 wrote: The truth is that mankind doesn't have the might, or the magic to pull off any of the global stunts, you read about in the science fiction books Are you talking about those clamshell smartphones they used in the original Star Trek back in 1966 - 1969. We had better technology 20 years ago. Other shows had flat screen TVs. Even laptop PCs were in shows before they existed. I guess it depends on what matters to us, right? Yeah, for got to mention boats, planes, automobiles, rocketships... If you can dream it, you can achieve it... Sometimes. We don't have any technology, to control the planet though, or the forces of nature. We don't get rain on demand, where we want, and only what we want. Been a dream for thousands of years. We don't control the wind. Can't steer a hurricane away from landfall, or destroy them. There is no global thermostat, we have no control. Do you know what's sad? I can drink but think, save it. Why today? For me, thankfully you guys know one country, one way. Must be nice. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BSgb-WTn9o Edited on 28-01-2021 05:28
28-01-2021 05:34
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14414)	Swan wrote:Global warming means that the Earth is warming as it has been for 20000 or so years. So Global Cooling means the earth is cooling as it has also done over those same 20,000 years or so. It would appear that you could use a lesson on the term "equilibrium." . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles 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
28-01-2021 13:40
Into the Night★★★★★ (21599)	Swan wrote: by over 400 feet? This would open massive land areas near the sea, however it would cover the Earth in thousands of feet of ice reducing land areas elsewhere. So reducing global warming is a loss either way. I hate winter anyway Define 'global warming'. 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
28-01-2021 13:43
Into the Night★★★★★ (21599)	Swan wrote: gfm7175 wrote: Swan wrote: by over 400 feet? This would open massive land areas near the sea, however it would cover the Earth in thousands of feet of ice reducing land areas elsewhere. So reducing global warming is a loss either way. I hate winter anyway What is this "global warming" of which you speak? Could you define the term for me? Global warming means that the Earth is warming as it has been for 20000 or so years. So 'global warming' is defined as 'global warming'?? Circular definition. You cannot define a phrase using an undefined phrase. Try again. Define 'global warming'. Why 20000 years? Why not 10000 years? Why not 1 second? What is magickal about 20000 years? Who measured the temperature of the Earth 20000 years ago? Who measured the temperature of the Earth today? We don't have anywhere near thermometers. 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 28-01-2021 13:44
28-01-2021 15:59
Swan★★★★★ (5723)	IBdaMann wrote: Swan wrote:Global warming means that the Earth is warming as it has been for 20000 or so years. So Global Cooling means the earth is cooling as it has also done over those same 20,000 years or so. It would appear that you could use a lesson on the term "equilibrium." . There is no global cooling in the last 20000 years however. Sure there are fluctuations but from 20000 BC to 10000 BC most of the worlds glaciation melted, from 10000 BC to present the rate of melt has slowed however it is still happening thus all is normal

28-01-2021 16:15
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14414)	Swan wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Swan wrote:Global warming means that the Earth is warming as it has been for 20000 or so years. So Global Cooling means the earth is cooling as it has also done over those same 20,000 years or so. It would appear that you could use a lesson on the term "equilibrium." . There is no global cooling in the last 20000 years however. Sure there are fluctuations but from 20000 BC to 10000 BC most of the worlds glaciation melted, from 10000 BC to present the rate of melt has slowed however it is still happening thus all is normal You are gullible. Someone fed you a WACKY religious dogma and you took it as thettled thienth because you apparently aren't smart enough to distinguish between actual science and WACKY cult religion. Enjoy your faith. I'd be interested in knowing who specifically is doing your thinking for you. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles 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
28-01-2021 16:47
Swan★★★★★ (5723)	IBdaMann wrote: Swan wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Swan wrote:Global warming means that the Earth is warming as it has been for 20000 or so years. So Global Cooling means the earth is cooling as it has also done over those same 20,000 years or so. It would appear that you could use a lesson on the term "equilibrium." . There is no global cooling in the last 20000 years however. Sure there are fluctuations but from 20000 BC to 10000 BC most of the worlds glaciation melted, from 10000 BC to present the rate of melt has slowed however it is still happening thus all is normal You are gullible. Someone fed you a WACKY religious dogma and you took it as thettled thienth because you apparently aren't smart enough to distinguish between actual science and WACKY cult religion. Enjoy your faith. I'd be interested in knowing who specifically is doing your thinking for you. . Sorry kid the glacial maximum happened in the range of 20000 years ago, you for some reason never heard of it. The ice was 1000 to 2000 feet thick Edited on 28-01-2021 16:48
28-01-2021 18:02
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	Swan wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Swan wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Swan wrote:Global warming means that the Earth is warming as it has been for 20000 or so years. So Global Cooling means the earth is cooling as it has also done over those same 20,000 years or so. It would appear that you could use a lesson on the term "equilibrium." . There is no global cooling in the last 20000 years however. Sure there are fluctuations but from 20000 BC to 10000 BC most of the worlds glaciation melted, from 10000 BC to present the rate of melt has slowed however it is still happening thus all is normal You are gullible. Someone fed you a WACKY religious dogma and you took it as thettled thienth because you apparently aren't smart enough to distinguish between actual science and WACKY cult religion. Enjoy your faith. I'd be interested in knowing who specifically is doing your thinking for you. . Sorry kid the glacial maximum happened in the range of 20000 years ago, you for some reason never heard of it. The ice was 1000 to 2000 feet thick A lot of different guesses, about what happened, and when, back when we all were still squatting in caves, and smearing feces on the wall, calling it art... When we get a tome machine, we'll know who guessed right. This is our first inter-glacial period, where we observed, and recorded anything. We really have no idea when the thawing start. Not entirely sure how long it would take. We don't even know for sure there is going to be another ice age. Everything on earth, seems to want to find a balance, equilibrium. Shit happens, and the balance gets disturbed, swings back and forth for a while, and settles out some, but never actually comes to rest, before something else rocks the boat. There is no measure of time for any of it. What happened before, won't necessarily be repeat, precisely the same. We do know that life continues to exist, through all these changes. It's a huge planet, and can take a beating, with little serious damage done.
28-01-2021 18:38
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	Swan wrote: gfm7175 wrote: Swan wrote: by over 400 feet? This would open massive land areas near the sea, however it would cover the Earth in thousands of feet of ice reducing land areas elsewhere. So reducing global warming is a loss either way. I hate winter anyway What is this "global warming" of which you speak? Could you define the term for me? Global warming means that the Earth is warming as it has been for 20000 or so years. Circular definition. So you believe that the Earth is warming (and has been for 20,000ish years), eh? Do you have any valid data set that supports this notion, or is this simply a faith based belief on your part?
28-01-2021 18:41
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	Swan wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Swan wrote:Global warming means that the Earth is warming as it has been for 20000 or so years. So Global Cooling means the earth is cooling as it has also done over those same 20,000 years or so. It would appear that you could use a lesson on the term "equilibrium." . There is no global cooling in the last 20000 years however. Sure there are fluctuations but from 20000 BC to 10000 BC most of the worlds glaciation melted, from 10000 BC to present the rate of melt has slowed however it is still happening thus all is normal Paradox. Has there been global cooling in the last 20,000 years or has there not?
28-01-2021 18:45
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14414)	James___ wrote: Of course everyone knows that sin^-1 is 1/2. No, it does not. It cannot. sin^-1(theta) = 1/sin(theta). sin can never equal 2 (it must be a value between -1.0 and 1.0 inclusive) and therefore 1/sin can never equal 1/2 James___ wrote: Can you do the math? Fortunately I can. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles 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 Edited on 28-01-2021 18:47
28-01-2021 18:48
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	IBdaMann wrote: Swan wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Swan wrote:Global warming means that the Earth is warming as it has been for 20000 or so years. So Global Cooling means the earth is cooling as it has also done over those same 20,000 years or so. It would appear that you could use a lesson on the term "equilibrium." . There is no global cooling in the last 20000 years however. Sure there are fluctuations but from 20000 BC to 10000 BC most of the worlds glaciation melted, from 10000 BC to present the rate of melt has slowed however it is still happening thus all is normal You are gullible. Someone fed you a WACKY religious dogma and you took it as thettled thienth because you apparently aren't smart enough to distinguish between actual science and WACKY cult religion. Enjoy your faith. I'd be interested in knowing who specifically is doing your thinking for you. . My guess is that it involves all or some of the following: NASA, NOAA, IPCC, PBS's "Nature" program, CNN (and other ministers of societal manipulation, such as MSNBC and CBS).
28-01-2021 18:51
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	Swan wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Swan wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Swan wrote:Global warming means that the Earth is warming as it has been for 20000 or so years. So Global Cooling means the earth is cooling as it has also done over those same 20,000 years or so. It would appear that you could use a lesson on the term "equilibrium." . There is no global cooling in the last 20000 years however. Sure there are fluctuations but from 20000 BC to 10000 BC most of the worlds glaciation melted, from 10000 BC to present the rate of melt has slowed however it is still happening thus all is normal You are gullible. Someone fed you a WACKY religious dogma and you took it as thettled thienth because you apparently aren't smart enough to distinguish between actual science and WACKY cult religion. Enjoy your faith. I'd be interested in knowing who specifically is doing your thinking for you. . Sorry kid the glacial maximum happened in the range of 20000 years ago, you for some reason never heard of it. The ice was 1000 to 2000 feet thick http://www.cosmographicresearch.org/Images/glacial_maximum_map2.jpg Holy link dismissed on sight. How do you know what happened 20,000 years ago? Were you there? Was ANYONE there? I'm not interested in your faith; I am interested in valid data sets supporting your otherwise religious dogma, of which you have yet to provide... Edited on 28-01-2021 18:58
28-01-2021 18:57
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14414)	Swan wrote:Sorry kid the glacial maximum happened in the range of 20000 years ago, Why should any rational adult believe that? Swan wrote: The ice was 1000 to 2000 feet thick Where exactly? . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles 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
28-01-2021 22:05
Swan★★★★★ (5723)	IBdaMann wrote: Swan wrote:Sorry kid the glacial maximum happened in the range of 20000 years ago, Why should any rational adult believe that? Swan wrote: The ice was 1000 to 2000 feet thick Where exactly? . Why would anyone not believe that the glacial maximum was in place approximately 20000 years ago? LOL are you claiming that the last ice age never happened? The Last Glacial Period (LGP) occurred from the end of the Eemian to the end of the Younger Dryas, encompassing the period c. 115,000 – c. 11,700 years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_Glacial_Period As for thickness I was off a bit as the largest thickness of ice was 2900 meters or 8700 feet https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/last-glacial I find it really sad that people like you do not know these facts. Edited on 28-01-2021 22:06
28-01-2021 23:19
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	Swan wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Swan wrote:Sorry kid the glacial maximum happened in the range of 20000 years ago, Why should any rational adult believe that? Swan wrote: The ice was 1000 to 2000 feet thick Where exactly? . Why would anyone not believe that the glacial maximum was in place approximately 20000 years ago? Why would anyone not believe that God created the heaven and the Earth? Swan wrote: LOL LOL Swan wrote: are you claiming that the last ice age never happened? Are you claiming that Noah's Flood never happened? Swan wrote: The Last Glacial Period (LGP) occurred from the end of the Eemian to the end of the Younger Dryas, encompassing the period c. 115,000 – c. 11,700 years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_Glacial_Period Noah's Flood occurred 4,368 years ago. https://answersingenesis.org/bible-timeline/timeline-for-the-flood/ Swan wrote: As for thickness I was off a bit as the largest thickness of ice was 2900 meters or 8700 feet https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/last-glacial See above. Swan wrote: I find it really sad that people like you do not know these facts. I find it really sad that people like you do not know these facts.
28-01-2021 23:25
Swan★★★★★ (5723)	gfm7175 wrote: Swan wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Swan wrote:Sorry kid the glacial maximum happened in the range of 20000 years ago, Why should any rational adult believe that? Swan wrote: The ice was 1000 to 2000 feet thick Where exactly? . Why would anyone not believe that the glacial maximum was in place approximately 20000 years ago? Why would anyone not believe that God created the heaven and the Earth? Swan wrote: LOL LOL Swan wrote: are you claiming that the last ice age never happened? Are you claiming that Noah's Flood never happened? Swan wrote: The Last Glacial Period (LGP) occurred from the end of the Eemian to the end of the Younger Dryas, encompassing the period c. 115,000 – c. 11,700 years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_Glacial_Period Noah's Flood occurred 4,368 years ago. https://answersingenesis.org/bible-timeline/timeline-for-the-flood/ Swan wrote: As for thickness I was off a bit as the largest thickness of ice was 2900 meters or 8700 feet https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/last-glacial See above. Swan wrote: I find it really sad that people like you do not know these facts. I find it really sad that people like you do not know these facts. I find it really sad that your entire life revolves around complete fiction
28-01-2021 23:40
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	Swan wrote: gfm7175 wrote: Swan wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Swan wrote:Sorry kid the glacial maximum happened in the range of 20000 years ago, Why should any rational adult believe that? Swan wrote: The ice was 1000 to 2000 feet thick Where exactly? . Why would anyone not believe that the glacial maximum was in place approximately 20000 years ago? Why would anyone not believe that God created the heaven and the Earth? Swan wrote: LOL LOL Swan wrote: are you claiming that the last ice age never happened? Are you claiming that Noah's Flood never happened? Swan wrote: The Last Glacial Period (LGP) occurred from the end of the Eemian to the end of the Younger Dryas, encompassing the period c. 115,000 – c. 11,700 years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_Glacial_Period Noah's Flood occurred 4,368 years ago. https://answersingenesis.org/bible-timeline/timeline-for-the-flood/ Swan wrote: As for thickness I was off a bit as the largest thickness of ice was 2900 meters or 8700 feet https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/last-glacial See above. Swan wrote: I find it really sad that people like you do not know these facts. I find it really sad that people like you do not know these facts. I find it really sad that your entire life revolves around complete fiction I could say the same to you.
28-01-2021 23:54
Swan★★★★★ (5723)	gfm7175 wrote: Swan wrote: gfm7175 wrote: Swan wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Swan wrote:Sorry kid the glacial maximum happened in the range of 20000 years ago, Why should any rational adult believe that? Swan wrote: The ice was 1000 to 2000 feet thick Where exactly? . Why would anyone not believe that the glacial maximum was in place approximately 20000 years ago? Why would anyone not believe that God created the heaven and the Earth? Swan wrote: LOL LOL Swan wrote: are you claiming that the last ice age never happened? Are you claiming that Noah's Flood never happened? Swan wrote: The Last Glacial Period (LGP) occurred from the end of the Eemian to the end of the Younger Dryas, encompassing the period c. 115,000 – c. 11,700 years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_Glacial_Period Noah's Flood occurred 4,368 years ago. https://answersingenesis.org/bible-timeline/timeline-for-the-flood/ Swan wrote: As for thickness I was off a bit as the largest thickness of ice was 2900 meters or 8700 feet https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/last-glacial See above. Swan wrote: I find it really sad that people like you do not know these facts. I find it really sad that people like you do not know these facts. I find it really sad that your entire life revolves around complete fiction I could say the same to you. Actually the ice age left quite real glacial moraines that I ride my bicycle up and down frequently, so they are very real. You on the other hand believe in a fictional man who lived to 950 years old and was able to capture 2 of every animal in North America from where he built his mythical ship in the mideast. How exactly did he do that?
29-01-2021 00:17
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	Swan wrote: gfm7175 wrote: Swan wrote: gfm7175 wrote: Swan wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Swan wrote:Sorry kid the glacial maximum happened in the range of 20000 years ago, Why should any rational adult believe that? Swan wrote: The ice was 1000 to 2000 feet thick Where exactly? . Why would anyone not believe that the glacial maximum was in place approximately 20000 years ago? Why would anyone not believe that God created the heaven and the Earth? Swan wrote: LOL LOL Swan wrote: are you claiming that the last ice age never happened? Are you claiming that Noah's Flood never happened? Swan wrote: The Last Glacial Period (LGP) occurred from the end of the Eemian to the end of the Younger Dryas, encompassing the period c. 115,000 – c. 11,700 years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_Glacial_Period Noah's Flood occurred 4,368 years ago. https://answersingenesis.org/bible-timeline/timeline-for-the-flood/ Swan wrote: As for thickness I was off a bit as the largest thickness of ice was 2900 meters or 8700 feet https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/last-glacial See above. Swan wrote: I find it really sad that people like you do not know these facts. I find it really sad that people like you do not know these facts. I find it really sad that your entire life revolves around complete fiction I could say the same to you. Actually the ice age left quite real glacial moraines that I ride my bicycle up and down frequently, so they are very real. You on the other hand believe in a fictional man who lived to 950 years old and was able to capture 2 of every animal in North America from where he built his mythical ship in the mideast. How exactly did he do that? Did the fictional ice age do that, or did very real space aliens do that? My underlying point during this whole exchange seems to be going right over your head...

29-01-2021 00:33
Swan★★★★★ (5723)	gfm7175 wrote: Swan wrote: gfm7175 wrote: Swan wrote: gfm7175 wrote: Swan wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Swan wrote:Sorry kid the glacial maximum happened in the range of 20000 years ago, Why should any rational adult believe that? Swan wrote: The ice was 1000 to 2000 feet thick Where exactly? . Why would anyone not believe that the glacial maximum was in place approximately 20000 years ago? Why would anyone not believe that God created the heaven and the Earth? Swan wrote: LOL LOL Swan wrote: are you claiming that the last ice age never happened? Are you claiming that Noah's Flood never happened? Swan wrote: The Last Glacial Period (LGP) occurred from the end of the Eemian to the end of the Younger Dryas, encompassing the period c. 115,000 – c. 11,700 years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_Glacial_Period Noah's Flood occurred 4,368 years ago. https://answersingenesis.org/bible-timeline/timeline-for-the-flood/ Swan wrote: As for thickness I was off a bit as the largest thickness of ice was 2900 meters or 8700 feet https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/last-glacial See above. Swan wrote: I find it really sad that people like you do not know these facts. I find it really sad that people like you do not know these facts. I find it really sad that your entire life revolves around complete fiction I could say the same to you. Actually the ice age left quite real glacial moraines that I ride my bicycle up and down frequently, so they are very real. You on the other hand believe in a fictional man who lived to 950 years old and was able to capture 2 of every animal in North America from where he built his mythical ship in the mideast. How exactly did he do that? Did the fictional ice age do that, or did very real space aliens do that? My underlying point during this whole exchange seems to be going right over your head... Sorry that does not explain how Noah captured 2 of every North and South American animal to put on his fictional ark from the mideast. The fact seems to be that nothing is real in your life if it clashes with the fiction that you believe is real. Again I live near some of these glacial terminal lines that you dispute are real https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/aGMkSuF6wXl6lfxh8MmvT-axVIS2zexRq65At5tOaOLsVYHxrAcNb5KBfEdPYXTER1ZjNQxRJB1ibKIbEdSff8YV4yCz2o-aZ-feXnE581a8LplUxAS23k5z24R897ZMfX_5pSrqLMI Edited on 29-01-2021 00:46
29-01-2021 00:55
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14414)	Swan wrote:Actually the ice age left quite real glacial moraines that I ride my bicycle up and down frequently, so they are very real. The existence of past ice is not the issue. I will grant (speaking only for myself) that there was very thick ice in the area you mention. The problem here is rooted in your horrendous logic and your resulting extreme gullibility. When you say "ice age" you are expressing your belief that far more of the earth was all covered in thick ice all at the same time. My question remains: Why should any rational adult believe that? Instead of answering my question, you gave the completely religious retort of "you can't prove God doesn't exist" or "you can't prove that there was no ice age." We know that it is normal for there to be ice sheets like Greenland with places nearby like Iceland that are not buried in ice. I'm imagining you traveling forward in time and arguing with a future you who is insisting that all of the Northern Hemisphere was covered in the Ice Age of 20th century because Greenland had a lot of ice that left evidence. Perhaps you can see the cognitive malpractice involved in jumping to that erroneous conclusion. We surmise, from historical written records as well as the exact same kind of physical evidence that you mentioned that the location of whatever ice sheet there is moves around, that Greenland was once green (ice free) but parts of Europe were buried in ice. Nobody has ever produced any evidence whatsoever indicating that all of these places were somehow buried under ice at the same time ... as you are insisting is the case. So I ask once again, why should any rational adult be as gullible as you and simply believe that all of the Northern Hemisphere, or more, was somehow buried under ice all at the same time? Why should any rational adult believe what you are peddling? Swan wrote: You on the other hand believe in a fictional man Why should anyone believe your affirmative claim that Noah and the great flood never happened? Are you saying that it is impossible for the ocean to prevail/rise 15 cubits (27 feet) by the end of the century and for extreme weather to pose an existential threat to humanity? I'd like to hear this one. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles 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
29-01-2021 01:03
Swan★★★★★ (5723)	IBdaMann wrote: Swan wrote:Actually the ice age left quite real glacial moraines that I ride my bicycle up and down frequently, so they are very real. The existence of past ice is not the issue. I will grant (speaking only for myself) that there was very thick ice in the area you mention. The problem here is rooted in your horrendous logic and your resulting extreme gullibility. When you say "ice age" you are expressing your belief that far more of the earth was all covered in thick ice all at the same time. My question remains: Why should any rational adult believe that? Instead of answering my question, you gave the completely religious retort of "you can't prove God doesn't exist" or "you can't prove that there was no ice age." We know that it is normal for there to be ice sheets like Greenland with places nearby like Iceland that are not buried in ice. I'm imagining you traveling forward in time and arguing with a future you who is insisting that all of the Northern Hemisphere was covered in the Ice Age of 20th century because Greenland had a lot of ice that left evidence. Perhaps you can see the cognitive malpractice involved in jumping to that erroneous conclusion. We surmise, from historical written records as well as the exact same kind of physical evidence that you mentioned that the location of whatever ice sheet there is moves around, that Greenland was once green (ice free) but parts of Europe were buried in ice. Nobody has ever produced any evidence whatsoever indicating that all of these places were somehow buried under ice at the same time ... as you are insisting is the case. So I ask once again, why should any rational adult be as gullible as you and simply believe that all of the Northern Hemisphere, or more, was somehow buried under ice all at the same time? Why should any rational adult believe what you are peddling? Swan wrote: You on the other hand believe in a fictional man Why should anyone believe your affirmative claim that Noah and the great flood never happened? Are you saying that it is impossible for the ocean to prevail/rise 15 cubits (27 feet) by the end of the century and for extreme weather to pose an existential threat to humanity? I'd like to hear this one. . The ocean has already risen over 400 feet since the end of the ice age? Still waiting to hear how Noah gathered 2 of every North and South American animal from continents that were not even known at the time. You avoid this because there is no answer so as a result you are existing in denial. Edited on 29-01-2021 01:04
29-01-2021 01:03
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14414)	Swan wrote: Sorry that does not explain how Noah captured 2 of every North and South American animal to put on his fictional ark from the mideast. God helped Noah by orchestrating all of the minutia so His plan would come to fruition. There, you have your answer Now, you explain how you know this did not happen. Were you there? Where did you get eyewitnesses that something else transpired instead? . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles 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
29-01-2021 01:07
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14414)	Swan wrote:The ocean has already risen over 400 feet since the end of the ice age? What I'm reading is that you have no rational basis whatsoever for your WACKY beliefs and that the ocean has not risen at all as far as you can show. Got it. So you are a loon who believes that his fabricated delusions are "what we know." Dismissed. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles 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
29-01-2021 01:09
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14414)	gfm7175 wrote: Swan wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Swan wrote:Sorry kid the glacial maximum happened in the range of 20000 years ago, Why should any rational adult believe that? Swan wrote: The ice was 1000 to 2000 feet thick Where exactly? . Why would anyone not believe that the glacial maximum was in place approximately 20000 years ago? Why would anyone not believe that God created the heaven and the Earth? Swan wrote: LOL LOL Swan wrote: are you claiming that the last ice age never happened? Are you claiming that Noah's Flood never happened? Swan wrote: The Last Glacial Period (LGP) occurred from the end of the Eemian to the end of the Younger Dryas, encompassing the period c. 115,000 – c. 11,700 years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_Glacial_Period Noah's Flood occurred 4,368 years ago. https://answersingenesis.org/bible-timeline/timeline-for-the-flood/ Swan wrote: As for thickness I was off a bit as the largest thickness of ice was 2900 meters or 8700 feet https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/last-glacial See above. Swan wrote: I find it really sad that people like you do not know these facts. I find it really sad that people like you do not know these facts. gfm7175, this was an excellent post. Your rebuttal style clearly flew right over Swan's head. Well done. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles 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
29-01-2021 01:10
Swan★★★★★ (5723)	IBdaMann wrote: Swan wrote:The ocean has already risen over 400 feet since the end of the ice age? What I'm reading is that you have no rational basis whatsoever for your WACKY beliefs and that the ocean has not risen at all as far as you can show. Got it. So you are a loon who believes that his fabricated delusions are "what we know." Dismissed. . So you are still in denial that Noah could not have gathered two of every North and South American animal from the Mideast, merely because this question clashes with your chosen reality. Were there really dinosaurs on the ark too?
29-01-2021 02:20
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	Stick it to em Swan
29-01-2021 02:29
Swan★★★★★ (5723)	duncan61 wrote: Stick it to em Swan I am trying not to be rude, but there is more to reality that a 950 year old fake man
29-01-2021 02:33
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14414)	Swan wrote: So you are still in denial that Noah could not have gathered two of every North and South American animal from the Mideast, merely because this question clashes with your chosen reality. No, I am not in any denial on this matter. So are you insisting that it is not possible for the ocean to rise 15 cubits (27 feet) by the end of the century and for extreme weather to pose an existential threat to humans? I'm waiting for your answer. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles 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

Page 1 of 3

Join the debate Should climate scientist try to regrow the glacial maximum dropping sea levels:

Threads	Replies	Last post
Lake Mead Water Levels Stage A Comeback?	4	31-05-2023 23:03
FASTER GLACIER MELTING MECHANISM COULD CAUSE HUGE SEA LEVEL RISES	4	20-05-2023 19:54
BREAKING NEWS. Transhauser Busch stock dropping off the charts, SELL NOW	0	12-05-2023 20:39
Glacial terminal moraine map	43	16-11-2022 09:52
Rip current in the Caspian Sea	0	24-08-2022 11:59