Remember me
▼ Content

the truth



Page 1 of 3123>
the truth08-02-2020 02:55
duncan61
☆☆☆☆☆
(41)
Hi all I am brand new and have been interested in the climate debate since the Greta saga.I have watched a lot of conflicting videos and if possible would like to get some real answers.These are my own questions as a denier of manmade climate change
.If the temperature has gone up a degree how does that melt ice that is at -40 or more.Regards Duncan
08-02-2020 03:48
keepit
★★★★☆
(1070)
It melts it at the edges and then after that it melts it at the new edge.
08-02-2020 04:09
duncan61
☆☆☆☆☆
(41)
But it is still at minus.To melt it has to be between 0-1 degree C.I have seen the glaciers calving and its spectacular when it happens watching ice form at the top of the hill is dull.do we all agree the glaciers are moving and it is how the rift valley in Africa was formed and all the locks in Scotland.My next question is where is the sea level rising.My local port is Fremantle West Australia and I contacted them and the sea level has been measured for the last 168 years and it has not moved at all.Is it a prediction or is it happening some where
08-02-2020 04:34
keepit
★★★★☆
(1070)
Sea level varies from place to place in the world so i wouldn't place an excess of stock in one reading. I don't know why sea level varies from place to place.
The thing about melting at the edges is that thermal energy flows from warm places to cold so that there will be a flow, molecule by molecule, at the edges of ice until there is melting. This is apparent especially in the south pole where even though the inland ice isn't really melting, the water of the southern ocean is warm enough to melt the edges of the ice that reaches down to the sea. The warmer the ocean gets the more this process takes place.
I agree that glaciers move. However there is an ice shelf (Ross Ice Shelf) at the south pole where the ice i just spoke of is holding back the movement of the glacier behind it. When the Ross melts enough it won't be holding back the glacier and the glacier will move to the sea. It is extremely large and is estimated to be able to raise the sea level of all the world's oceans from 4 to 10 feet.
Consider the fact that if the temp worldwide decreased by only 6 degrees c., we would enter another ice age. This is an example of how gradualism can make huge changes.
Edited on 08-02-2020 05:32
08-02-2020 04:54
duncan61
☆☆☆☆☆
(41)
Do we agree the Earth is .8 degree warmer than 1980 or is it more?That will not melt ice to the level it is being claimed.I subscribe to the fact the poles may be changing due to our orbit varying and when it is melting in the south it is gaining in the north.A bit of extra CO2 is not affecting that event and a you tube I watched recently the scientist claimed we could do with more CO2 as to gain another degree we would have to double the CO2 we have now.400/1000000 is not a lot and plants need it.The Amazon rainforest is larger now than before and the Northern hemisphere has deciduous plant life that releases massive amounts of CO2 in winter then sucks it all back in spring.Greenhouses run at 1600/1000000 and the International space station runs at 1000/1000000 it does not harm the people working in this enviroment.If the Earth cools a degree in the next 30 years will the alarmists go Ooops like has happened in the past
08-02-2020 05:18
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(2265)
duncan61 wrote:
Do we agree the Earth is .8 degree warmer than 1980 or is it more?

Accepting the measurements provided below it's ~ 0.5C , 0.9F


Personally I'm dubious about how accurate that is but accepting it to address your question:
duncan61 wrote: That will not melt ice to the level it is being claimed.

That's an odd statement in three respects:
0.1 degree is enough to melt ice that is 0.1 degree below freezing
The ice to water change is very visible (unlike CO2 increasing by a few ppm) and most of the claims I've seen are in photographic form.
(source
Also as above the earths temperature moves in waves, daily, and annually. Ice melts and reforms in this wave of temperature change.

duncan61 wrote:
I subscribe to the fact the poles may be changing due to our orbit varying and when it is melting in the south it is gaining in the north.
Are we gaining in the North?

duncan61 wrote:If the Earth cools a degree in the next 30 years will the alarmists go Ooops like has happened in the past
Yeah that will be tough to explain away.

What in the past?
08-02-2020 06:08
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1642)
duncan61 wrote:
But it is still at minus.To melt it has to be between 0-1 degree C.I have seen the glaciers calving and its spectacular when it happens watching ice form at the top of the hill is dull.do we all agree the glaciers are moving and it is how the rift valley in Africa was formed and all the locks in Scotland.My next question is where is the sea level rising.My local port is Fremantle West Australia and I contacted them and the sea level has been measured for the last 168 years and it has not moved at all.Is it a prediction or is it happening some where


I live in Florida, on the other side of the planet. The sea levels haven't risen here either. Maybe further up north...

Personally, I think planet Earth is doing just fine, and there is nothing to worry about. The IPCC guys are just playing a virtual Earth video game, and sometimes get confused, since, geeks, don't like sunlight. They sort of lose a sense of which Earth is real, and which is a computer simulation, for their entertainment.
08-02-2020 06:32
duncan61
☆☆☆☆☆
(41)
I will answer the past first.In 1980 a bearded hippie guy claimed at the rate the Amazon was being cleared it will all be gone in 2000.He was good enough to be interveiwed again in 2000 and is now a 40ish clean cut businessman and he freely admitted that they had to sensationalize everything to get attention.I personally watched both shows at the time it was on.If you say it may happen no one cares.If it is all melting now why has the sea level remained constant and declaring its happening some where with out evidence is not cool.I read many moons ago a theory that if all the ice on earth melts the sea level will fall 30 feet because of all the trapped air and volume of frozen water allowing for land run off and warmer water having more volume than cold I liked that theory for some reason it made sense.Are people claiming that a bit more CO2 is going to melt all the ice on Earth that is below 60 degrees in places.P.S. I have joined this forum as it started on a gun forum I was on but rapidly became a slinging match and was moderated to the point if you write climate or Greta the post gets deleted.There were 3 posters that were adamant it was all real and the other 300 of us were not so sure.This is only one of my many queries that I am hoping to deal with.The starving polar bears were filmed when the spring thaw was late and the ringed seals did not pup it happens every 9-10 years.Polar bears are now so numerous they have been filmed fishing in rivers at the north west passage.Go live in Vancouver and get some idea what pest bears are.Why are we being told they are dying out???.One of the best interveiws I recently saw was a woman scientist who had been visiting the Artic for 35 years and was happy to announce that all the 70s theories of polar bears dying was completely wrong
08-02-2020 06:50
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5955)
keepit wrote:Sea level varies from place to place in the world

This contributor to your 0.000 batting average needs to be in my signature

keepit wrote: I don't know why sea level varies from place to place.

It doesn't. It cannot. This SHOULD be obvious. [hint: it has to do with the properties of water]

keepit wrote: The thing about melting at the edges is that thermal energy flows from warm places to cold so that there will be a flow, molecule by molecule, at the edges of ice until there is melting.

The reason you don't do well on tests is that you don't read the questions.

The correct answer is that ice at -40 does not melt when the temperature rises one degree to -39.

You are still batting 0.000

keepit wrote: When the Ross melts enough it won't be holding back the glacier and the glacier will move to the sea. It is extremely large and is estimated to be able to raise the sea level of all the world's oceans from 4 to 10 feet.

I'll let James__ address that one.

keepit wrote:Consider the fact that if the temp worldwide decreased by only 6 degrees c., we would enter another ice age.

... or everywhere would be 6degC cooler. That's not enough to bury everywhere under a mile of ice. I'm afraid you have been a wee bit on the gullible side there.


.


Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit

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
08-02-2020 06:56
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5955)
duncan61 wrote: Do we agree the Earth is .8 degree warmer than 1980 or is it more?

We do not agree. Nobody in the history of humanity has ever known the average temperature of the earth. Ergo, nobody in the history of humanity has been able to validly claim any change in average temperature of the earth.

If you insist that you are certain of an average temperature change, I will politely ask you for the valid dataset that shows this. There is no valid dataset for you to acquire that shows this.



.


Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit

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
08-02-2020 07:17
duncan61
☆☆☆☆☆
(41)
The reason I lead with the .8 degree is that is the common claim and I would like to set a benchmark we can get started on.I have been looking into this claim and at this point am further away from believing man made climate change because of CO2 than I was when I started. NASA are showing this data conveniently in a way that shows a major change but if you read the side bar it is calibrated in tiny amounts.More shock value.I like the 6 degree call.how does that make an ice age.It is nice to know I am not alone on this mythical journey
08-02-2020 07:22
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(2265)
duncan61 wrote:...he freely admitted that they had to sensationalize everything...
always lame and not unique to any one topic or any one part of the political spectrum. Take your pick throughout history: terrorism, witches, communism, radiation...

IBdaMann wrote:
keepit wrote: I don't know why sea level varies from place to place.
It doesn't. It cannot.
IBD isn't one of you own critiques of the over confidence in sea level measurement that land can rise and fall? Is there even a way to measure sea level independent of a comparison with a land base?
08-02-2020 07:29
duncan61
☆☆☆☆☆
(41)
Fremantle port has a buoy transmitting.The tidal influence locally is about 400mm on average with up to a metre and some times as little as 100mm over 24 hours
08-02-2020 07:33
keepit
★★★★☆
(1070)
Duncan,
Re: 6 degree decrease to ice age.
I left out a word. Sorry. Put in AVERAGE just before the words worldwide temp. to decrease to ice age.
IBDM,
You can read in several internet sources that the sea level varies around the world.
Also, you say i don't do well on tests. The fact of the matter is that i do extremely well on tests.
Also, you say that ice does not melt at minus 39 or 40 degrees. As i explained in my post the sea water gradually adds kinetic energy to the ice, molecule by molecule, until a small portion of ice becomes at melting temp. then the process continues molecule by molecule.
Your response is a good example of static vs dynamic reasoning.
I remember when i said the ice is melting, you can see it in the pictures. Your response was "you can't see anything change in a picture". I should have known then about your static thinking. Move ahead, think more dynamically. Look for the figurative and the metaphors.
Edited on 08-02-2020 07:34
08-02-2020 07:37
keepit
★★★★☆
(1070)
By the way, they can measure sea level from planes and satellites with radar (NASA).
08-02-2020 07:41
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5955)
duncan61 wrote:The reason I lead with the .8 degree is that is the common claim

... and that is not science. That is religion.

A scientific approach would lead with establishing a temperature change and I just told you that no one has ever done that. No one. It has merely been claimed by warmizombies and never supported with any valid datasets.

A scientific approach would lead with an unambiguous definition of the global Climate and remain consistent with that definition throughout the discussion (i.e. not try to shift goalposts).

duncan61 wrote: ... and I would like to set a benchmark we can get started on.

I'm sorry. You can't start with a benchmark for something before showing that it even exists. Tell me, what are the benchmarks for the Loch Ness monster?


.


Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit

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
08-02-2020 08:02
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5955)
tmiddles wrote: IBD isn't one of you own critiques of the over confidence in sea level measurement that land can rise and fall?

Land is constantly moving, both laterally and in elevation. All landmarks are moving/shifting relative to each other.

The ocean is never devoid of waves, and the waves do not follow any sort of differential function. The ocean also has swells which are random and when combined with waves, make it impossible to detrmine a "sea level" with a mere floating device.

As land moves it is never known exactly how much because it is all relative to other land that is moving. Ergo, for any given point, the estimated sea level will change over time and then one needs to guess "which is more accurate, the one in the past or the new one in the present?" In any event, since any estimate is based on waves, there is no way to know which time of day yields the most accurate estimate.

At this point, there are always a few people who try to play the "technology gambit" and claim that "satellites tell us that information." Not only can satellites not be anywhere nearly as accurate as survey equipment, we have only to look at GPS satellites to understand the limits of accuracy. Who would be willing to accept a sea-level measurement with an error not of +/- multiple inches but of +/- multiple meters?


.


Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit

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
08-02-2020 08:04
duncan61
☆☆☆☆☆
(41)
IBdaMann.This is interesting we both appear to agree it is being made up but you are having a go at me.In this debate I am willing to concede some of the claims made by the alarmists and that the weather stations around the world claim the temperature has gone up .8 globally on average.I say so what that is not going to matter in the big scheme of things.Part of my research I discovered that the sea temperature of Perth goes from 17.6 in winter to 23.7 in summer and all the coral at Rottnest Island does not die.Why does David Attenborough declare that if the sea temperature goes up 1 degree all the coral will die
08-02-2020 08:29
James___
★★★★★
(2249)
duncan61 wrote:
IBdaMann.This is interesting we both appear to agree it is being made up but you are having a go at me.In this debate I am willing to concede some of the claims made by the alarmists and that the weather stations around the world claim the temperature has gone up .8 globally on average.I say so what that is not going to matter in the big scheme of things.Part of my research I discovered that the sea temperature of Perth goes from 17.6 in winter to 23.7 in summer and all the coral at Rottnest Island does not die.Why does David Attenborough declare that if the sea temperature goes up 1 degree all the coral will die



While you say Perth, don't you really mean Freemantle? IBDM likes to get his facts straight. Still, it is odd that both Alice Springs and Death Valley, California are both warm. Is that because of CO2?
That's strange because both Sydney and Los Angeles are cooler yet have more CO2 and hydrocarbons.
08-02-2020 08:38
duncan61
☆☆☆☆☆
(41)
IBdaMann.Regards the satellite claims made I had this out with some one before.My GPS mapping in my car cant put me in the right street and they claim it can pick up sea level rise.Again where people.No one has ever answered that query.Surely Holland would be the first to go in Europe and people are not evacuating.P.S. whats a lock ness monster
08-02-2020 08:42
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5955)
duncan61 wrote: In this debate I am willing to concede some of the claims made by the alarmists and that the weather stations around the world claim the temperature has gone up .8 globally on average.

You now have given yourself two insurmountable problems:

1) You have committed to establishing benchmarks ... for something that doesn't exist. This will not work out well for you. You never answered my question about benchmarks for the Loch Ness monster.

2) The purpose of any religious dogma is to get you accept the assumptions as true, i.e. God is real and active in our lives, without having those assumptions scrutinized because they clearly cannot be proven. However, you are saying that you are willing to accept that Global Warming is real and active in our lives without it having to be scrutinized. Well, you have just ended the discussion and the "alarmists" are happy that you accept their dogma. The actual amount that the earth might be warming is immaterial, just as whether or not an atheist ends up agreeing with any Christian on the extent that a particular sin might keep him out of heaven. If the atheist already accepts the idea of being prevented from getting into heaven, he has already bought into Christianity. Ergo, you have already proclaimed your devotion to the faith.


.


Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit

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
08-02-2020 08:46
duncan61
☆☆☆☆☆
(41)
My sounder has a temperature function and I normally go out of Hillary's but I sourced the data from tides4fishing that gives the sea temperature.I am enjoying this forum and hope to learn something.Sydney and L.A. are on the coast so it is always cooler.I have been on this forum for a heatbeat and IBdaMann is in to me big time and I agree with him.Hate to ever disagree
08-02-2020 09:05
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5955)
duncan61 wrote: they claim it can pick up sea level rise.

Sure. Even I can identify a wave. Even I can tell when it's high tide.

One thing you can do to investigate this claim is to ask a jet pilot if he would turn off all other instruments and land his aircraft based on the vertical accuracy of your GPS.


duncan61 wrote:.P.S. whats a lock ness monster

A nock-less monster is one that pings very little.


.


.


Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit

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
08-02-2020 11:05
duncan61
☆☆☆☆☆
(41)
I watched a doco on the loch ness monster and there is good sign it may be a Greenland shark as they come to the surface some times and its the right area and would explain a lot
08-02-2020 11:56
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(2265)
IBdaMann wrote:
keepit wrote: I don't know why sea level varies from place to place.
It doesn't. It cannot.
IBdaMann wrote:As land moves it is never known exactly how much because it is all relative to other land that is moving. Ergo, for any given point, the estimated sea level will change over time...

You can see how I think you're trying to have it both ways right?

You are saying in effect:
No one can know
But I know it's not changing

Am I wrong?
Edited on 08-02-2020 12:06
08-02-2020 12:28
duncan61
☆☆☆☆☆
(41)
I would like some clarity on that as well.
08-02-2020 13:52
keepit
★★★★☆
(1070)
Sea level varies because winds, ocean currents and river discharges vary from place to place around the earth. The condition is not static. It's a very dynamic and changing situation.
Edited on 08-02-2020 13:53
08-02-2020 14:01
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(2265)
keepit wrote:
Sea level varies because winds, ocean currents and river discharges vary from place to place around the earth. The condition is not static. It's a very dynamic and changing situation.
Also the moon's gravitation causes high and low tide.

https://scijinks.gov/tides/


"When the gravitational pull of the sun and moon are combined, you get more extreme high and low tides. This explains high and low tides that happen about every two weeks."
" Note: this figure is not to scale. The sun is much bigger and farther away."
08-02-2020 18:21
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5955)
tmiddles wrote:You are saying in effect:
No one can know
But I know it's not changing

Am I wrong?

That is not my position. The short answer is that it is not known. The longer answer is as follows:

Sea level, at any given point, rises and lowers with waves, tides and swells. Waves do not conform to any differentiable function and their amplitudes vary in standard deviation. Swells are random, like wind. There is no way to determine an accurate absolute sea level with a floating measure.

There ARE relationships in sea level, e.g. a high tide in one location signifies a low tide in some other location.

To know absolute sea level one must know the quantity of water in the ocean and must have an accurate topography of the earth (specifically of the ocean floor). I will grant the existence of an accurate topography of earth. Unfortunately, no one ever knows, nor has ever known, the quantity of water in the ocean to any useful accuracy. Current estimates are entirely speculative.

Attempts to estimate the sea level rise from a given volume of water are hampered by the earth not being a perfect sphere which induces substantial error into calculations. Warmizombies often attempt to pull a Christopher Columbus and pretend the earth is much smaller than it really is in order to exaggerate the effects of sea level rise by a given volume.


.


Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit

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
08-02-2020 18:42
Harry CProfile picture★☆☆☆☆
(124)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
keepit wrote: I don't know why sea level varies from place to place.
It doesn't. It cannot.
IBdaMann wrote:As land moves it is never known exactly how much because it is all relative to other land that is moving. Ergo, for any given point, the estimated sea level will change over time...

You can see how I think you're trying to have it both ways right?

You are saying in effect:
No one can know
But I know it's not changing

Am I wrong?


I don't want to speak for IBdM. I will interpret that he is saying that in order to validate the claims that are being made there is not enough precision in what they think they know to determine them as facts. They are invalid datasets for the purpose of the claims made. That's the problem with anecdotal evidence. We are at risk for being taken advantage of by people who are trying to implement an agenda.

I would ask everyone to not take IPCC pronouncements as fact and demand answers to their fallacies for the sake of your own future. Climate change is an illegitimate attempt to subordinate the world to socialism at best which will devolve to Marxism at the worst.


You learn something new every day if you are lucky!
08-02-2020 18:45
keepit
★★★★☆
(1070)
In areas where there is much less precipitation and river flow such as Namibia or near the Atacama desert there would be less water entering the ocean. And where there is more precip and river flow there would be more water entering the ocean. I takes time for this unevenness to equillibrate. Ocean currents and winds have an effect that moves water and this effect varies through time.
08-02-2020 21:33
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5955)
Harry C wrote: I don't want to speak for IBdM. I will interpret that he is saying that in order to validate the claims that are being made there is not enough precision in what they think they know to determine them as facts.

Yes, for the most part.

The vocabulary we have at our disposal is inadequate. The term sea level has been bastardized in the same way the word "climate" has been bastardized.

The earth has millions of climates. Nonetheless we have legitimized the concept of a contradictory "global climate" and we expect to have productive discussions about something that doesn't exist.

The ocean has countless sea levels, one for every wave and ripple. Nontheless we want to discuss a theoretical singular sea level that does not exist and expect to have productive discussions.

To this end I will invent a term to clarify what I mean: Eigenlevel. I define the ocean's "eigenlevel" (Greek symbol lambda "λ" for "level") as the theoretical curved plane of what would be the ocean's surface if there were magickally no waves, no swells, no ripples, no tides, no wind and no activity whatsoever, with any given point on that plane being represented as a distance from the earth's center of mass.

The earth has one eigenlevel at any given moment, i.e. λ(t). When people talk about sea level rise they are referring to a new eigenlevel, i.e. λ(t+1), with each new point on that plane having a new distance from the earth's center of mass.

Harry, to answer your question, we don't know the ocean's eigenlevel. We can accurately measure the level of a point on a wave at any given moment.



.


Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit

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
08-02-2020 22:16
James___
★★★★★
(2249)
IBdaMann wrote:
Harry C wrote: I don't want to speak for IBdM. I will interpret that he is saying that in order to validate the claims that are being made there is not enough precision in what they think they know to determine them as facts.

Yes, for the most part.

The vocabulary we have at our disposal is inadequate. The term sea level has been bastardized in the same way the word "climate" has been bastardized.

The earth has millions of climates. Nonetheless we have legitimized the concept of a contradictory "global climate" and we expect to have productive discussions about something that doesn't exist.

The ocean has countless sea levels, one for every wave and ripple. Nontheless we want to discuss a theoretical singular sea level that does not exist and expect to have productive discussions.



You inglorious bastardizer you. You're basically talking about the attached image.
Sea level can be known. https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/tide-gauge.html
That you would say that a wave has to be considered, then you're getting into the Navier-Stokes equation. Waves are not representative of sea level but are representative of atmospheric and geographic conditions that influence the motion of water.
An example is that the outgoing tide will be calmer than a rising tide because of a lack of compression caused by the seafloor. It sounds like you've never been on a boat or a ship before. I've crossed 3 oceans on ships.
Your lack of context does not allow for any understanding of what idea or expression of thought that you are trying to convey. Your query is to vague to be defined, ergo, it lacks any relevant meaning.
Can you show where wave height changes the way that sea level should be considered? I mean a tsunami is an extreme example of where sea level drops because it is becoming a part of a wave. Those are caused by earthquakes below bodies of water.
Should we have to consider earthquakes when considering sea level when such waves are an event?
With waves, if rough seas matter to you because you are on a crabbing boat in Alaska, could prove fatal. But sea level doesn't matter, just the seas.
In about any instance, when people stay on land, the sea level as measured by a gauge is sufficient. To say it isn't is to impose your ignorance on accepted standards of practice.
Attached image:

09-02-2020 00:01
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(2265)
This is very clear:
IBdaMann wrote:
...I will invent a term to clarify what I mean: Eigenlevel. I define the ocean's "eigenlevel"....
The earth has one eigenlevel at any given moment, i.e. λ(t). When people talk about sea level rise they are referring to a new eigenlevel, i.e. λ(t+1), ....we don't know the ocean's eigenlevel..

So to clarify the following:
IBdaMann wrotewrote: (sea level varies) It doesn't. It cannot. This SHOULD be obvious. [hint: it has to do with the properties of water]
Harry C wrote:
.... They are invalid datasets for the purpose of the claims made. ....Climate change is an illegitimate attempt ....

I understand you're both agreeing the Eigenlevel cannot be measured. Are either of you saying, in spite of that, you somehow know it's not rising?

Just to get it out of the way does anyone dispute that the formation of glaciers would drop the Eigenlevel and the melting of glaciers raise it?
Edited on 09-02-2020 00:10
09-02-2020 01:36
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5955)
tmiddles wrote: I understand you're both agreeing the Eigenlevel cannot be measured. Are either of you saying, in spite of that, you somehow know it's not rising?

I am not. I am saying that no one knows whether it is changing or not, ergo no one can seriously claim to know that the ocean is rising.

The extent of my comment to keepit has to do with water remaining "level" and that water cannot seek different levels in different locations but there can certainly be waves and swells and ripples ... and tides (given a planet).

tmiddles wrote: Just to get it out of the way does anyone dispute that the formation of glaciers would drop the Eigenlevel and the melting of glaciers raise it?

I agree with your intent but you are not using the right wording. If a glacier in the middle of Antarctica has a bad day and just melts, that water flows a while a refreezes. The glacier is gone. The eigenlevel hasn't changed because the ice is still in Antarctica, just redistributed.

Also, let's say that an Antarctic glacier were levitated by prankster space aliens and dropped into the ocean at the equator. Yes, the eigenlevel would rise. However, Antarctic calving would therefore be reduced by the amount contributed by that glacier and thus overall ice accumulation would increase until eventually the same quantity of ice were reformed in Antarctica. This, of course, brings the eigenlevel back to its original point.

So the Global Warming argument includes the assumption that temperatures are increasing, the global climate is changing, and that Antarctica is no longer accumulating ice like it was and so the eigenlevel will not return to its former self, i.e. it will remain at a higher level.

... and the response to that is "You just pulled that out of your azz. You do not know this. You have no reason for assuming any of that."



.


Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit

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
09-02-2020 02:08
duncan61
☆☆☆☆☆
(41)
I have seen the level marker at Fremantle harbour it is 4 yellow poles with a captive buoy that is mostly immersed with a large antenna sticking out the top.There is a lot of recreational boating in the area but this thing hardly moves it just goes up and down.Its 100m from the ocean so it gives accurate sea level readings before that technology a bloke in a boat just read the stick in the sand which is still there.The heights have not changed at all in 168 years.Go melt all the ice.I bet it goes down.some seasons there is masses of ice formed in winter and others not so much and it makes no difference
09-02-2020 02:51
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5955)
duncan61 wrote: I have seen the level marker at Fremantle harbour it is 4 yellow poles with a captive buoy that is mostly immersed with a large antenna sticking out the top.There is a lot of recreational boating in the area but this thing hardly moves it just goes up and down.Its 100m from the ocean so it gives accurate sea level readings before that technology a bloke in a boat just read the stick in the sand which is still there.The heights have not changed at all in 168 years.Go melt all the ice.I bet it goes down.some seasons there is masses of ice formed in winter and others not so much and it makes no difference

If you visit Barcelona I recommend visiting Mar Bella beach and taking a look at Espigó de la Mar Bella which was built in 1992 for the Summer Olympics held in Barcelona. There doesn't seem to have been any perceptible sea level rise relative to the structure or to the beach.

As I have mentioned previously, the British built an air base on a very low atoll (highest point less than two meters) in the Maldives in 1941. There are many common sense things any rational person can do to clarify in one's own mind that there is no rational basis for believing in a sea level rise.

IBdaMann wrote (23 September 2019):
There are simple things any person can do to verify that there is no sea level rise:

1. Go to a particular beach with landmarks like lifeguard towers/shacks and notice that the surf is just as far out from the towers as it was fifty years ago (dig up old photgraphs of the beach and recall that lifeguard towers are built a certain distance from the surf for obvious reasons, and that those towers/shacks have not been moved during those decades and that the surf is not washing up to the base of the towers/shacks.

2. Notice that the British began building an air base ("Gan") on the Addu atoll in 1941. It was completed and used more heavily a decade later.
The elevation was, and is, very low (average just over one meter above sea level). The base is still there. The atoll is still there. The sea level has not changed to any perceptible degree.





Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit

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
09-02-2020 03:07
James___
★★★★★
(2249)
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote: I understand you're both agreeing the Eigenlevel cannot be measured. Are either of you saying, in spite of that, you somehow know it's not rising?

I am not. I am saying that no one knows whether it is changing or not, ergo no one can seriously claim to know that the ocean is rising.

The extent of my comment to keepit has to do with water remaining "level" and that water cannot seek different levels in different locations but there can certainly be waves and swells and ripples ... and tides (given a planet).

tmiddles wrote: Just to get it out of the way does anyone dispute that the formation of glaciers would drop the Eigenlevel and the melting of glaciers raise it?

I agree with your intent but you are not using the right wording. If a glacier in the middle of Antarctica has a bad day and just melts, that water flows a while a refreezes. The glacier is gone. The eigenlevel hasn't changed because the ice is still in Antarctica, just redistributed.

Also, let's say that an Antarctic glacier were levitated by prankster space aliens and dropped into the ocean at the equator. Yes, the eigenlevel would rise. However, Antarctic calving would therefore be reduced by the amount contributed by that glacier and thus overall ice accumulation would increase until eventually the same quantity of ice were reformed in Antarctica. This, of course, brings the eigenlevel back to its original point.

So the Global Warming argument includes the assumption that temperatures are increasing, the global climate is changing, and that Antarctica is no longer accumulating ice like it was and so the eigenlevel will not return to its former self, i.e. it will remain at a higher level.

... and the response to that is "You just pulled that out of your azz. You do not know this. You have no reason for assuming any of that."



.



With your post, you ignore basic common sense. When glaciers in the mountains become less, the water is still in the mountains, right? That's your basic claim.
Maybe you should use the world population to demonstrate the eigen level?
Even if sea levels aren't rising much, they're still rising. Your position is that no change occurs. Change does occur. History has proven this.
Harbors and lifeguard stations have changed/moved because the land itself is always changing. Yet you say the land never changes. It doesn't stop changing.
It's ignorance like yours that prevents change from being understood.
09-02-2020 03:18
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(2265)
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote: Just to get it out of the way does anyone dispute that the formation of glaciers would drop the Eigenlevel and the melting of glaciers raise it?

I agree with your intent but you are not using the right wording.
Does that mean you agree with the following?

First the main theories about higher/lower sea levels related to global temperature and the volume of glaciers are those about Earth having had ice ages and interglacial periods in the past.

This long predates anything political motivated like the current climate hysteria.

So: If the mean temperature of Earth was 7C lower 20000 years ago this would icrease the amount of ice trapped at the polls, theteby reducing the amount of water in the oceans, and dropping the sea level.
09-02-2020 03:25
duncan61
☆☆☆☆☆
(41)
Again the question where are sea levels rising???.I watched a show on the navy base at Norfolk and a claim was made the sea level has gone up 18 inches,Thats a lot why are they lying.Then they show the spring tide going over the footpath.Is the U.S. navy moving the base??? doubt it.The WWF has now raised enough money to fund the BBC to make the OUR PLANET documentary hosted by David Attenborough A show was also made on the making of the show and one segment shows the film crew attempting to film polar bears fishing in rivers for Artic char which they claim is due to desperation as all the ice has melted.To get there they had to fly in in a float plane and for the 2 weeks the char run the weather was too inclement for the plane to safely fly and they missed it.Guess what they blamed,you got it,Climate Change.If a layman Plumbing contractor like me can see the holes in that claim so should others
Page 1 of 3123>





Join the debate the truth:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Finally.....the truth....Tell me I'm wrong and if so, why?1808-02-2020 04:44
The Fastest & Only Way To Find Out The Real Life Truth About Global Warming & CO2 Emission2124-01-2020 19:21
Uncertain projections help to reveal the truth about future climate change719-03-2019 16:10
Is this man telling a lot of truth about our world??? (YouTube Video)020-02-2019 22:54
100% Truth about Global Warming, Climate Change1004-12-2017 04:56
▲ 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 © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact