| The planetary collapse continues forward11-10-2018 20:10 |
L8112★☆☆☆☆
(115) |
The arctic sea ice in the north pole region is not thickening or growing
https://mashable.com/article/low-arctic-ice-central-basin/#QJCHNPNJtPq9
"Parrot Killer" will absolutely love these numbers-estimates say the majority of wild vertebrates will be gone within the next 15 years.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OYE8_TsteA
invertebrate populations are showing significant decline http://science.sciencemag.org/content/345/6195/401a
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/10/germany-s-insects-are-disappearing
Do you see any trends?
Arctic ice - decline in extent and thickness
Amazon rainforest- 30% is already gone.
Invertebrate and vertebrate populations - major decline
ocean dead zones- 4x increase since 1950
great barrier reef-40% severely bleached
That is what a failing planet looks like.
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
The hottest place in Hell is reserved for those who remain neutral in times of great moral conflict.
The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy."-Martin Luther King Jr. |
| 11-10-2018 23:03 |
Into the Night ★★★★★
(21588) |
L8112 wrote:
The arctic sea ice in the north pole region is not thickening or growing
...deleted Holy Quote...
The National Snow and Ice data center would disagree with you. The 2018 ice extent is larger than the 2017 ice extent. They are both larger than the 2016 ice extent. This winter (the 2019 measurement) has not yet been taken. There are surface area covered, as measured by a polar orbiting satellite (which also measure the Antarctic ice extent every winter).
L8112 wrote:
"Parrot Killer" will absolutely love these numbers-estimates say the majority of wild vertebrates will be gone within the next 15 years.
...deleted Holy Quotes.
Do you see any trends?
No. Still see pretty much the same couger, deer, bear, and coyotes, racoon, and porcupine around here. Our bunny population is doing well though. So is the eagle and hawk population that feeds upon them.
L8112 wrote:
Arctic ice - decline in extent and thickness Not happening.
L8112 wrote:
Amazon rainforest- 30% is already gone. Nothing to do with temperatures.
L8112 wrote:
Invertebrate and vertebrate populations - major decline Not happening.
L8112 wrote:
ocean dead zones- 4x increase since 1950 Manufactured number. The oceans are full of life. They are so large they can seem a bit like a liquid desert though. That has always been.
L8112 wrote:
great barrier reef-40% severely bleached WRONG. The Great Barrier Reef is NOT severely bleached. Bleaching can occur during an El Nino year when colder than normal water appears over it, but it recovers completely within a year or two.
L8112 wrote:
That is what a failing planet looks like.
It's not failing.
L8112 wrote:
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
The hottest place in Hell is reserved for those who remain neutral in times of great moral conflict.
The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy."-Martin Luther King Jr.
There is no problem. Don't panic.
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 |
| 12-10-2018 00:04 |
L8112★☆☆☆☆
(115) |
Are you a christian 'into the night'? What principles do you live your life by? |
| 12-10-2018 01:19 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21588) |
L8112 wrote:
Are you a christian 'into the night'? What principles do you live your life by?
Irrelevant and off topic here.
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 |
| 12-10-2018 05:55 |
L8112★☆☆☆☆
(115) |
Is it? Im genuinely curious who put you up to the job of derailing any civil conversation on here. Do you work for Exxon Mobile as a paid professional troll?
Even more bizarre would be that you don't and this is just one of your major hobbies, a crusade that you fight daily on here.Your trolling is painfully obvious at this point.
Your rebuttal to my first point intentionally missed what I said, the overall ice extent is not the lowest, the difference is that it hasn't started gaining ice extent as it usually has between early august-october. But you can play stupid of you want, you're a pro at it.
If you refute the links I provided by saying "not happening" that is not a rebuttal.
As for the other two replies- ODZs aren't increasing because the oceans are full of life, and wildlife populations are stable because you've seen critters in your back yard-seriously? Pathetic. |
|
| 12-10-2018 10:21 |
Tim the plumber★★★★☆
(1356) |
L8112 wrote:
The arctic sea ice in the north pole region is not thickening or growing
https://mashable.com/article/low-arctic-ice-central-basin/#QJCHNPNJtPq9
"Parrot Killer" will absolutely love these numbers-estimates say the majority of wild vertebrates will be gone within the next 15 years.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OYE8_TsteA
invertebrate populations are showing significant decline http://science.sciencemag.org/content/345/6195/401a
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/10/germany-s-insects-are-disappearing
Do you see any trends?
Arctic ice - decline in extent and thickness
Amazon rainforest- 30% is already gone.
Invertebrate and vertebrate populations - major decline
ocean dead zones- 4x increase since 1950
great barrier reef-40% severely bleached
That is what a failing planet looks like.
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
The hottest place in Hell is reserved for those who remain neutral in times of great moral conflict.
The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy."-Martin Luther King Jr.
I don't care about Arctic sea ice.
I do care about all the other stuff although the coral seems vastly over hyped as it recovers quickly and has survived loads of changes in it's very very long history.
The focus on CO2 by the ecco/communists is destroying any chance of progress on the real environmental concearns. |
| 12-10-2018 15:18 |
L8112★☆☆☆☆
(115) |
You should care about arctic sea ice, which has seen a 40% decline in maximum extent since 1979. As for the antarctic (from the national snow and ice data center):
"From 1997 to 2003, volumetric methods showed that average loss of ice in Greenland was 80 ± 12 cubic kilometers per year. This is compared to roughly 60 cubic kilometers per year for 1993 through 1994. About half the increased ice loss was from higher summer melt. The rest of the loss resulted from the velocities of some glaciers outstripping those needed to balance upstream snow accumulation (Krabill et al. 2004). Later research showed Antarctica and Greenland have both lost overall mass at about 120 gigatons of ice per year. The suspected triggers for accelerated ice discharge on both continents include surface warming and melt runoff, ocean warming, and circulation changes. Over the 21st century, the team predicted, ice loss would counteract snowfall gains predicted by some climate models (Shepherd and Wingham 2007). Recently an improved radar altimetry study confirms and extends earlier measurements (Flament and Rémy 2012).
The European Space Agency's CryoSat-2 mission has enhanced Antarctic ice sheet monitoring by including areas closer to the poles than earlier satellites, and by acquiring better data in moderately sloping areas, including ice sheet margins where most of the ice loss occurs. CryoSat-2 observations taken between November 2010 and September 2013 indicate annual ice sheet mass losses of 134 ± 27 gigatons in West Antarctica, 3 ± 36 gigatons in East Antarctica, and 23 ± 18 gigatons on the Antarctic Peninsula. The Amundsen Sea showed the largest signal of ice loss (McMillan et al. 2014)."
Lets get this straight. You don't care because you have been conditioned to not care. You hear "CO2, Ice loss, and global warming" and immediately think of Al Gore, democrats, and agenda, which you hate.
The melting of the sea ice, as well as inland glaciers, will be the nail in the coffin for humans. Why?
1) The ice loss changes the albedo, causing a dramatic rise in surface temperatures
2) earths thermohaline system which is already showing signs of slowing, will collapse. |
| 12-10-2018 15:30 |
James___★★★★★
(5513) |
L8112 wrote:
Is it? Im genuinely curious who put you up to the job of derailing any civil conversation on here. Do you work for Exxon Mobile as a paid professional troll?
Even more bizarre would be that you don't and this is just one of your major hobbies, a crusade that you fight daily on here.Your trolling is painfully obvious at this point.
Your rebuttal to my first point intentionally missed what I said, the overall ice extent is not the lowest, the difference is that it hasn't started gaining ice extent as it usually has between early august-october. But you can play stupid of you want, you're a pro at it.
If you refute the links I provided by saying "not happening" that is not a rebuttal.
As for the other two replies- ODZs aren't increasing because the oceans are full of life, and wildlife populations are stable because you've seen critters in your back yard-seriously? Pathetic.
...L8112,
..He's doing this on his own. It's his passion in life. You've probably seen where I say Into Ignorance. His friend Litesong got banned for posting links about Arctic warming. And apparently when they updated the links ITN's friend who owns this forum (I sometimes wonder if he owns this forum under an alias) considered that spamming and banned Litesong.
..Litesong did not agree with ITN. Could be the actual reason they were banned, they know who ITN is in reality and he didn't want anyone in here knowing who he is. |
| 12-10-2018 20:58 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21588) |
L8112 wrote:
Is it? Im genuinely curious who put you up to the job of derailing any civil conversation on here.
No one. The only ones wandering off topic around here are you, James, and spot.
L8112 wrote:
Do you work for Exxon Mobile as a paid professional troll?
Learn what a 'troll' is. No. I do not work for Exxon (although I have sold instrumentation to them).
L8112 wrote:
Even more bizarre would be that you don't and this is just one of your major hobbies, a crusade that you fight daily on here.Your trolling is painfully obvious at this point.
Learn what a 'troll' is. A 'troll' is not someone that disagrees with you.
L8112 wrote:
Your rebuttal to my first point intentionally missed what I said, the overall ice extent is not the lowest, the difference is that it hasn't started gaining ice extent as it usually has between early august-october.
Yes it has.
L8112 wrote:
But you can play stupid of you want, you're a pro at it.
It is YOU that is denying the data, dude. You would rather believe junk from news organizations.
L8112 wrote:
If you refute the links I provided by saying "not happening" that is not a rebuttal.
They are not a valid source. It is a rebuttal. A Holy Link is not a proof.
L8112 wrote:
As for the other two replies- ODZs aren't increasing because the oceans are full of life, and wildlife populations are stable because you've seen critters in your back yard-seriously? Seriously. Not just my back yard either. I happen to live next to the ocean and I'm quite familiar with the life in it that you say isn't there.
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 |
| 12-10-2018 20:59 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21588) |
Tim the plumber wrote:
L8112 wrote:
The arctic sea ice in the north pole region is not thickening or growing
https://mashable.com/article/low-arctic-ice-central-basin/#QJCHNPNJtPq9
"Parrot Killer" will absolutely love these numbers-estimates say the majority of wild vertebrates will be gone within the next 15 years.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OYE8_TsteA
invertebrate populations are showing significant decline http://science.sciencemag.org/content/345/6195/401a
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/10/germany-s-insects-are-disappearing
Do you see any trends?
Arctic ice - decline in extent and thickness
Amazon rainforest- 30% is already gone.
Invertebrate and vertebrate populations - major decline
ocean dead zones- 4x increase since 1950
great barrier reef-40% severely bleached
That is what a failing planet looks like.
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
The hottest place in Hell is reserved for those who remain neutral in times of great moral conflict.
The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy."-Martin Luther King Jr.
I don't care about Arctic sea ice.
I do care about all the other stuff although the coral seems vastly over hyped as it recovers quickly and has survived loads of changes in it's very very long history.
The focus on CO2 by the ecco/communists is destroying any chance of progress on the real environmental concearns.
Not completely. People still DO have concerns about the environment and actually do something about it that's useful. People like me. That's part of what my instrumentation does.
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 |
| 12-10-2018 21:12 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21588) |
L8112 wrote:
You should care about arctic sea ice, which has seen a 40% decline in maximum extent since 1979. Manipulated number...essentially random.
L8112 wrote:
As for the antarctic (from the national snow and ice data center):
...removed Ancient Holy Quote...(Flament and Rémy 2012).
You are out of date. Did you know that in 2014 Antarctica recorded the largest maximum ice extend since record keeping began?
[quote]L8112 wrote:
...deleted Holy Quote...
Lets get this straight. You don't care because you have been conditioned to not care.
WRONG. I care because you keep pushing the Church of Global Warming. You keep pushing the Church of Karl Marx that goes with it.
L8112 wrote:
You hear "CO2, Ice loss, and global warming" and immediately think of Al Gore, democrats, and agenda, which you hate.
CO2 has no capability to warm the Earth. It is not possible to measure the amount of snow and ice on Earth. You can't even define 'global warming'.
L8112 wrote:
The melting of the sea ice, Sea ice melts every year. Big deal.
L8112 wrote:
as well as inland glaciers, No one is monitoring all the glaciers. What about the ones that are growing?
L8112 wrote:
will be the nail in the coffin for humans. Why? Oooo. Here comes the doom and gloom part!
L8112 wrote:
1) The ice loss changes the albedo, causing a dramatic rise in surface temperatures
Okay...just for grins I'll assume this is true, that albedo is reduced. This means emissivity goes up as well. So does absorptivity. Planet temperature remains the same. There is no feedback.
L8112 wrote:
2) earths thermohaline system which is already showing signs of slowing, will collapse.
No, it isn't. There is still a temperature difference between the equator and the poles, in case you haven't noticed. The ocean currents are still there.
You need to get your science from somewhere besides the movie 'Day After Tomorrow'.
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 |
| 12-10-2018 21:17 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21588) |
James___ wrote:
L8112 wrote:
Is it? Im genuinely curious who put you up to the job of derailing any civil conversation on here. Do you work for Exxon Mobile as a paid professional troll?
Even more bizarre would be that you don't and this is just one of your major hobbies, a crusade that you fight daily on here.Your trolling is painfully obvious at this point.
Your rebuttal to my first point intentionally missed what I said, the overall ice extent is not the lowest, the difference is that it hasn't started gaining ice extent as it usually has between early august-october. But you can play stupid of you want, you're a pro at it.
If you refute the links I provided by saying "not happening" that is not a rebuttal.
As for the other two replies- ODZs aren't increasing because the oceans are full of life, and wildlife populations are stable because you've seen critters in your back yard-seriously? Pathetic.
...L8112,
..He's doing this on his own. It's his passion in life. You've probably seen where I say Into Ignorance.
Insulting people and concentrating on off topic material is what a troll does. You are trolling right now.
James___ wrote:
His friend Litesong got banned for posting links about Arctic warming.
Not my friend. He got banned for spamming.
James___ wrote:
And apparently when they updated the links ITN's friend who owns this forum (I sometimes wonder if he owns this forum under an alias) considered that spamming and banned Litesong.
No, it was spamming. I'll ignore your usual conspiracy theory that I actually own this forum.
James___ wrote:
..Litesong did not agree with ITN.
True. He was also in his own world, posting to no one.
James___ wrote:
Could be the actual reason they were banned, they know who ITN is in reality and he didn't want anyone in here knowing who he is.
You are trolling again.
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 |
| 12-10-2018 22:02 |
James___★★★★★
(5513) |
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
L8112 wrote:
Is it? Im genuinely curious who put you up to the job of derailing any civil conversation on here. Do you work for Exxon Mobile as a paid professional troll?
Even more bizarre would be that you don't and this is just one of your major hobbies, a crusade that you fight daily on here.Your trolling is painfully obvious at this point.
Your rebuttal to my first point intentionally missed what I said, the overall ice extent is not the lowest, the difference is that it hasn't started gaining ice extent as it usually has between early august-october. But you can play stupid of you want, you're a pro at it.
If you refute the links I provided by saying "not happening" that is not a rebuttal.
As for the other two replies- ODZs aren't increasing because the oceans are full of life, and wildlife populations are stable because you've seen critters in your back yard-seriously? Pathetic.
...L8112,
..He's doing this on his own. It's his passion in life. You've probably seen where I say Into Ignorance.
Insulting people and concentrating on off topic material is what a troll does. You are trolling right now.
James___ wrote:
His friend Litesong got banned for posting links about Arctic warming.
Not my friend. He got banned for spamming.
James___ wrote:
And apparently when they updated the links ITN's friend who owns this forum (I sometimes wonder if he owns this forum under an alias) considered that spamming and banned Litesong.
No, it was spamming. I'll ignore your usual conspiracy theory that I actually own this forum.
James___ wrote:
..Litesong did not agree with ITN.
True. He was also in his own world, posting to no one.
James___ wrote:
Could be the actual reason they were banned, they know who ITN is in reality and he didn't want anyone in here knowing who he is.
You are trolling again.
...Seriously? You're that much of a jerk? Posting about the effects of climate change is spamming? The next thing you know gasguzzler will post something about the Republican party and ask the question, enough said? |
| 12-10-2018 22:49 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21588) |
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
L8112 wrote:
Is it? Im genuinely curious who put you up to the job of derailing any civil conversation on here. Do you work for Exxon Mobile as a paid professional troll?
Even more bizarre would be that you don't and this is just one of your major hobbies, a crusade that you fight daily on here.Your trolling is painfully obvious at this point.
Your rebuttal to my first point intentionally missed what I said, the overall ice extent is not the lowest, the difference is that it hasn't started gaining ice extent as it usually has between early august-october. But you can play stupid of you want, you're a pro at it.
If you refute the links I provided by saying "not happening" that is not a rebuttal.
As for the other two replies- ODZs aren't increasing because the oceans are full of life, and wildlife populations are stable because you've seen critters in your back yard-seriously? Pathetic.
...L8112,
..He's doing this on his own. It's his passion in life. You've probably seen where I say Into Ignorance.
Insulting people and concentrating on off topic material is what a troll does. You are trolling right now.
James___ wrote:
His friend Litesong got banned for posting links about Arctic warming.
Not my friend. He got banned for spamming.
James___ wrote:
And apparently when they updated the links ITN's friend who owns this forum (I sometimes wonder if he owns this forum under an alias) considered that spamming and banned Litesong.
No, it was spamming. I'll ignore your usual conspiracy theory that I actually own this forum.
James___ wrote:
..Litesong did not agree with ITN.
True. He was also in his own world, posting to no one.
James___ wrote:
Could be the actual reason they were banned, they know who ITN is in reality and he didn't want anyone in here knowing who he is.
You are trolling again.
...Seriously?
Seriously.
James___ wrote:
You're that much of a jerk?
No, YOU are. It is YOU that is trolling.
James___ wrote:
Posting about the effects of climate change is spamming?
You are not posting about the effects of this buzzword. You are posting about the Republican Party, insulting people, and fixating on off topic subthreads. That is trolling.
...deleted off topic material...
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 |
| 12-10-2018 23:21 |
James___★★★★★
(5513) |
Into the Night wrote:
No, YOU are. It is YOU that is trolling.
...I used to live in Seattle. I know what trolling is. It's when lines are dragged behind a trawler. Anyone who has ever lived in Seattle for any length of time knows this. Then again maybe you've never been to Golden Gardens, Fisherman's Warf or out on a boat.
..Who knows, if you ever lived there and spent any amount of time on the Puget Sound (not the Selah Sea as some mistakenly call it) you would know what trolling is about. |
|
| 13-10-2018 03:12 |
L8112★☆☆☆☆
(115) |
WRONG. The Great Barrier Reef is NOT severely bleached. Bleaching can occur during an El Nino year when colder than normal water appears over it, but it recovers completely within a year or two.
Source?
The National Snow and Ice data center would disagree with you. The 2018 ice extent is larger than the 2017 ice extent. They are both larger than the 2016 ice extent. This winter (the 2019 measurement) has not yet been taken. There are surface area covered, as measured by a polar orbiting satellite (which also measure the Antarctic ice extent every winter).
Selectively using data, while on the same hand rejecting data from the same source that doesn't support your belief.
It is YOU that is denying the data, dude. You would rather believe junk from news organizations.
You haven't presented a shred of credible data. Non-sequitur comment.
They are not a valid source. It is a rebuttal. A Holy Link is not a proof.
Manipulated number...essentially random.
No link to support claim=opinion.
CO2 has no capability to warm the Earth. It is not possible to measure the amount of snow and ice on Earth. You can't even define 'global warming'.
Wrong, you are getting all your information from a fraudulent website, 'scientific principia', I reject your baseless claim.
Sea ice melts every year. Big deal.
non sequiter.
Okay...just for grins I'll assume this is true, that albedo is reduced. This means emissivity goes up as well. So does absorptivity. Planet temperature remains the same. There is no feedback.
Same garbage from one fraudulent website.
No, it isn't. There is still a temperature difference between the equator and the poles, in case you haven't noticed. The ocean currents are still there.
non sequitur
You need to get your science from somewhere besides the movie 'Day After Tomorrow'.
You need to provide sources for your claims that is from a credible journal/university. Until then you're just shouting your opinion and unproven hypotheses, and rejecting an avalanche of data. |
| 13-10-2018 11:10 |
Tim the plumber★★★★☆
(1356) |
L8112 wrote:
You should care about arctic sea ice, which has seen a 40% decline in maximum extent since 1979. As for the antarctic (from the national snow and ice data center):
"From 1997 to 2003, volumetric methods showed that average loss of ice in Greenland was 80 ± 12 cubic kilometers per year. This is compared to roughly 60 cubic kilometers per year for 1993 through 1994. About half the increased ice loss was from higher summer melt. The rest of the loss resulted from the velocities of some glaciers outstripping those needed to balance upstream snow accumulation (Krabill et al. 2004). Later research showed Antarctica and Greenland have both lost overall mass at about 120 gigatons of ice per year. The suspected triggers for accelerated ice discharge on both continents include surface warming and melt runoff, ocean warming, and circulation changes. Over the 21st century, the team predicted, ice loss would counteract snowfall gains predicted by some climate models (Shepherd and Wingham 2007). Recently an improved radar altimetry study confirms and extends earlier measurements (Flament and Rémy 2012).
The European Space Agency's CryoSat-2 mission has enhanced Antarctic ice sheet monitoring by including areas closer to the poles than earlier satellites, and by acquiring better data in moderately sloping areas, including ice sheet margins where most of the ice loss occurs. CryoSat-2 observations taken between November 2010 and September 2013 indicate annual ice sheet mass losses of 134 ± 27 gigatons in West Antarctica, 3 ± 36 gigatons in East Antarctica, and 23 ± 18 gigatons on the Antarctic Peninsula. The Amundsen Sea showed the largest signal of ice loss (McMillan et al. 2014)."
Lets get this straight. You don't care because you have been conditioned to not care. You hear "CO2, Ice loss, and global warming" and immediately think of Al Gore, democrats, and agenda, which you hate.
The melting of the sea ice, as well as inland glaciers, will be the nail in the coffin for humans. Why?
1) The ice loss changes the albedo, causing a dramatic rise in surface temperatures
2) earths thermohaline system which is already showing signs of slowing, will collapse.
I don't care about Arctic sea ice because the direct effect of more or less of it on humans is nill.
That it changes the albedo is a factor but a very tiny one. Almost as soon as high summer is over the ice starts to form again. The impact of such changes is very tiny on the Arctic climate. It's impact is mostly to produce more snowfall over Greenland.
I am something of a Social Democrat. I am British and would vote Democrat if I lived in the US.
Greenland has about 320mm precipitation per year. To break even on ice mass it has to have the equivalent of 18 months worth of the Mississippi flowing out of it.
If you look at google maps and have a scan around you will see that there is nowhere near that sort of flow rate coming out of Greenland. Greenland is gaining ice mass no matter what NASA says.
Antarctica is gaining ice mass even according to NASA. The Peninuslar has lost ice mass but it is the most warm bit of Antarctica. The West Antarctic ice sheet is only losing ice mass over the very active volcanoes. Even then still overall agining ice mass.
The vertical circulation of the oceans is driven by the way the density of water maximizes at 4c. Where a cld sea (less than 4c) meets a warm sea (over 4c) the water will mix and the water that becomes 4c will drop to the ocean floor. It has nothing at all to do with salinity.
The Gulf stream/North Atlantic convayor is massive. The flow rate is about 100 times the supposed maximum coming out of Greenland. It will not be affected by the tiny alteration of salinity that such additional melt water would have. |
| 13-10-2018 11:13 |
Tim the plumber★★★★☆
(1356) |
James___ wrote:
L8112 wrote:
Is it? Im genuinely curious who put you up to the job of derailing any civil conversation on here. Do you work for Exxon Mobile as a paid professional troll?
Even more bizarre would be that you don't and this is just one of your major hobbies, a crusade that you fight daily on here.Your trolling is painfully obvious at this point.
Your rebuttal to my first point intentionally missed what I said, the overall ice extent is not the lowest, the difference is that it hasn't started gaining ice extent as it usually has between early august-october. But you can play stupid of you want, you're a pro at it.
If you refute the links I provided by saying "not happening" that is not a rebuttal.
As for the other two replies- ODZs aren't increasing because the oceans are full of life, and wildlife populations are stable because you've seen critters in your back yard-seriously? Pathetic.
...L8112,
..He's doing this on his own. It's his passion in life. You've probably seen where I say Into Ignorance. His friend Litesong got banned for posting links about Arctic warming. And apparently when they updated the links ITN's friend who owns this forum (I sometimes wonder if he owns this forum under an alias) considered that spamming and banned Litesong.
..Litesong did not agree with ITN. Could be the actual reason they were banned, they know who ITN is in reality and he didn't want anyone in here knowing who he is.
I requested Litesong's banning.
I did so due to the meaningless prattle that he posted. Banner, the site's owner, obviously agreed with me.
I am close to requesting the same for ITN. But so far my strategy of not reading his denier of everything drivel is working for me.
Banner (or is it bammer?) does not seem to read the forum often. |
| 14-10-2018 06:55 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21588) |
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
No, YOU are. It is YOU that is trolling.
...I used to live in Seattle. I know what trolling is. It's when lines are dragged behind a trawler. Anyone who has ever lived in Seattle for any length of time knows this. Then again maybe you've never been to Golden Gardens, Fisherman's Warf or out on a boat.
..Who knows, if you ever lived there and spent any amount of time on the Puget Sound (not the Selah Sea as some mistakenly call it) you would know what trolling is about.
Still trying to be a troll, eh?
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 |
| 14-10-2018 06:56 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21588) |
L8112 wrote:
WRONG. The Great Barrier Reef is NOT severely bleached. Bleaching can occur during an El Nino year when colder than normal water appears over it, but it recovers completely within a year or two.
Source?
The National Snow and Ice data center would disagree with you. The 2018 ice extent is larger than the 2017 ice extent. They are both larger than the 2016 ice extent. This winter (the 2019 measurement) has not yet been taken. There are surface area covered, as measured by a polar orbiting satellite (which also measure the Antarctic ice extent every winter).
Selectively using data, while on the same hand rejecting data from the same source that doesn't support your belief.
It is YOU that is denying the data, dude. You would rather believe junk from news organizations.
You haven't presented a shred of credible data. Non-sequitur comment.
They are not a valid source. It is a rebuttal. A Holy Link is not a proof.
Manipulated number...essentially random.
No link to support claim=opinion.
CO2 has no capability to warm the Earth. It is not possible to measure the amount of snow and ice on Earth. You can't even define 'global warming'.
Wrong, you are getting all your information from a fraudulent website, 'scientific principia', I reject your baseless claim.
Sea ice melts every year. Big deal.
non sequiter.
Okay...just for grins I'll assume this is true, that albedo is reduced. This means emissivity goes up as well. So does absorptivity. Planet temperature remains the same. There is no feedback.
Same garbage from one fraudulent website.
No, it isn't. There is still a temperature difference between the equator and the poles, in case you haven't noticed. The ocean currents are still there.
non sequitur
You need to get your science from somewhere besides the movie 'Day After Tomorrow'.
You need to provide sources for your claims that is from a credible journal/university. Until then you're just shouting your opinion and unproven hypotheses, and rejecting an avalanche of data.
Go visit the reef. Go visit any coral reef. Coral is a living organism. It recovers.
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 |
| 14-10-2018 06:59 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21588) |
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
L8112 wrote:
Is it? Im genuinely curious who put you up to the job of derailing any civil conversation on here. Do you work for Exxon Mobile as a paid professional troll?
Even more bizarre would be that you don't and this is just one of your major hobbies, a crusade that you fight daily on here.Your trolling is painfully obvious at this point.
Your rebuttal to my first point intentionally missed what I said, the overall ice extent is not the lowest, the difference is that it hasn't started gaining ice extent as it usually has between early august-october. But you can play stupid of you want, you're a pro at it.
If you refute the links I provided by saying "not happening" that is not a rebuttal.
As for the other two replies- ODZs aren't increasing because the oceans are full of life, and wildlife populations are stable because you've seen critters in your back yard-seriously? Pathetic.
...L8112,
..He's doing this on his own. It's his passion in life. You've probably seen where I say Into Ignorance. His friend Litesong got banned for posting links about Arctic warming. And apparently when they updated the links ITN's friend who owns this forum (I sometimes wonder if he owns this forum under an alias) considered that spamming and banned Litesong.
..Litesong did not agree with ITN. Could be the actual reason they were banned, they know who ITN is in reality and he didn't want anyone in here knowing who he is.
I requested Litesong's banning.
I did so due to the meaningless prattle that he posted. Banner, the site's owner, obviously agreed with me.
I am close to requesting the same for ITN. But so far my strategy of not reading his denier of everything drivel is working for me.
Banner (or is it bammer?) does not seem to read the forum often.
Several people requested it, including me. You go ahead and request to ban me. You will get nowhere. Branner's not stupid. He checks the forum more often than you think.
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 14-10-2018 07:02 |
| 28-10-2018 02:19 |
James___★★★★★
(5513) |
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
L8112 wrote:
Is it? Im genuinely curious who put you up to the job of derailing any civil conversation on here. Do you work for Exxon Mobile as a paid professional troll?
Even more bizarre would be that you don't and this is just one of your major hobbies, a crusade that you fight daily on here.Your trolling is painfully obvious at this point.
Your rebuttal to my first point intentionally missed what I said, the overall ice extent is not the lowest, the difference is that it hasn't started gaining ice extent as it usually has between early august-october. But you can play stupid of you want, you're a pro at it.
If you refute the links I provided by saying "not happening" that is not a rebuttal.
As for the other two replies- ODZs aren't increasing because the oceans are full of life, and wildlife populations are stable because you've seen critters in your back yard-seriously? Pathetic.
...L8112,
..He's doing this on his own. It's his passion in life. You've probably seen where I say Into Ignorance. His friend Litesong got banned for posting links about Arctic warming. And apparently when they updated the links ITN's friend who owns this forum (I sometimes wonder if he owns this forum under an alias) considered that spamming and banned Litesong.
..Litesong did not agree with ITN. Could be the actual reason they were banned, they know who ITN is in reality and he didn't want anyone in here knowing who he is.
I requested Litesong's banning.
I did so due to the meaningless prattle that he posted. Banner, the site's owner, obviously agreed with me.
I am close to requesting the same for ITN. But so far my strategy of not reading his denier of everything drivel is working for me.
Banner (or is it bammer?) does not seem to read the forum often.
Tim the plumber,
..as you said about itn, is working for me .
..That's not debating or discussing. Am glad to know that TIN Man, er, itn works for you.
Edited on 28-10-2018 02:22 |