 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Energy Forum » Arctic ice to disappear completely by 2020... |
|
Page 3 of 5 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next |
|
| Author |
Message |
| leonard78sp at (no spam) gmail.com... |
 Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 3:02 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 21, 4:50 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 20, 8:08 pm, "leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com" <leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com
wrote:
On Oct 20, 4:57 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 17, 1:11 pm, ecotretas <ecotre... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Crap science.
Has it been peer-reviewed?
Ecotretas
On Oct 15, 3:52 am, Harry Hope <riv... at (no spam) ix.netcom.com> wrote:
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/280517
Arctic Ice Cap to Become an Open Sea in 10 years
By Leo Reyes.
Some sicentists and climate change explorers predict that the Artic
ice cover will be gone during warmer months in 10 years due to the
effects of global warming.
Veteran polar explorers who spent considerable time doing research in
the Arctic revealed that the Artctic ice cap will disappear in 20-30
years.
It will be largely ice-free during warmer months within a decade.
These observations were noted by a team of research and polar
explorers led by adventurer Pen Hadow and two other British explorers.
"The summer ice cover will completely vanish in 20 to 30 years but in
less than that it will have considerably retreated," said Professor
Peter Wadhams, head of the polar ocean physics group at Britain's
prestigious Cambridge University.
"In about 10 years, the Arctic ice will be considered as open sea..",
Wedhams added.
The Arctic ice cap is a very important mix in the climate system.
"Remove the Arctic ice cap and we are left with a very different and
much warmer world," said Dr. Martin Somerkorn, Senior Climate Change
Adviser to the Worldwide Fund for Nature.
He said that the ice meltdown is 'happening faster than we thought'.
Loss of sea ice cover will "set in motion powerful climate feedbacks
which will have an impact far beyond the Arctic itself," he added..
"This could lead to flooding affecting one quarter of the world's
population, substantial increases in greenhouse gas emission from
massive carbon pools and extreme global weather changes."
In the Philippines, flooding and landslides from devastating effects
of typhoons, have been linked to the issue of global warming.
Environmental experts are saying that similar occurences will bring
much more distractions to life and property.
Last year, the UN weather agency WMO said 'Ice volume around the
Arctic region hit the lowest level ever recorded this year as climate
extremes brought death and devastation to many parts of the world..http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/world/12/17/08/arctic-ice-volume-lowest-ev...
Hopeless Harry
You are crap science
•• poor pissypants can't argue the science so ...
– –
Either way short term or long term the data
doesn't support man made global warming?
short term
http://junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/RSSglobe.html
long term
http://junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/Moberg2005l.htm[/quote]
[quote]Junkscience is nothing but filthy rag sheet for the conservative
agenda
[/quote]
•• Why don't you check it out, you might learn
something. That might put you a bit ahead
of the game. You can't remain a fascist leftie
all of your life.
–– ––
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 6:21 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 17, 3:31 am, Leonard Pulver Sr. <last_thin... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote]I M at (no spam) good guy wrote
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 01:23:35 -0400, Mr.B1ack <b... at (no spam) barrk.net> wrote:
[quoted text muted]
An ice-free arctic is an economic boon ... making the shipping
of goods cheaper.
It has little chance of happening, so why
think about it.
Some of the people that write about it
had frostbite, which, in some cases, means
amputations.
Check just how much it would have to
warm up to be ice free.
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/northpole/
You know that you are just being shady.
15,000 years ago, where I live in Toronto, there was a lake that was so fucking
big that it took in the Great Lakes, it flooded the north Mississippi valley,
Lake Simcoe all of Michigan, all of Toronto, up to where I live. The shore of
Lake Iroquois.
The Finger lakes in upstte NY are just reminants of the glaciers.
But, what you really need to know when you say bull shit, like "it's happened
before" is that species, including mankind, need time to adapt.
Yeah, Alberta was a jungle, so was the bad lands. The artic was once a warm
sea. But that was millions of years ago, not even 1,000 years ago.
Some of you assholes think that because Christ was 2,000 years ago, that it's a
long time. It isn't at all. Not considerin how the UK, most of North America
and the northern hemisphere was under a mile of ice 10,000 years back.
You need to know this. Nobody is saving the earth. Mankind has only been here
50,000 years. Species have been whiped out. Over and over.
But your life? We're not a big deal to the planet.
Who wants to bet that we will be here in 1,000,000,000 years?
We were mot here 70,000 years ago
The dinosaurs are the most successful life here, not the egyptians or the
Romans.
[/quote]
The only species of biodiversity that doesn't belong on Earth, is
humans.
Humans consume at least 100 fold more of Earth's limited resources
than any other species.
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 6:36 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 21, 9:29 pm, "n---bo" <k... at (no spam) l.com> wrote:
[quote]"BradGuth" <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ddf40cbd-d32e-4494-a364-84f18097070a at (no spam) e4g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 17, 3:31 am, Leonard Pulver Sr.
last_thin... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
I M at (no spam) good guy wrote
The dinosaurs are the most successful life here,
not the egyptians or the
Romans.
The only species of biodiversity that doesn't
belong on Earth, is
humans.
=====================================
And your "solution" is .....??
Regards
Bonz0
[/quote]
An average of <10 kw of clean and dirt cheap electrons for every soul
on Earth. That's only 100 TW for 1e10 humans.
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| n---bo... |
| Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 10:29 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"BradGuth" <bradguth at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ddf40cbd-d32e-4494-a364-84f18097070a at (no spam) e4g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 17, 3:31 am, Leonard Pulver Sr.
<last_thin... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote]I M at (no spam) good guy wrote
The dinosaurs are the most successful life here,
not the egyptians or the
Romans.
[/quote]
The only species of biodiversity that doesn't
belong on Earth, is
humans.
======================================
And your "solution" is .....??
Regards
Bonz0
"I care about the environment (I grew up in a
solar house) and think there are a dozen good
reasons why we should burn less fossil fuels,
but.global warming is not one of them."
Nir Shaviv, Israeli physicist 2009 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Leonard... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 1:31 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Re: Emissions of Global-Warming Gases Grows for 7th Year..NOT
On Oct 22, 12:16 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 21, 8:50 pm, "leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com" <leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com
wrote:
On Oct 21, 11:37 pm, "noob." <k... at (no spam) l.com> wrote:
"Harry Hopeless" <riv... at (no spam) ix.netcom.com> wrote in
messagenews:11cvd51uod8ikahkbtjuq4nlaoqblean8t at (no spam) 4ax.com...
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,568922,00.html
U.N.: Emissions of Global-Warming Gases Grows
for 7th Year
The warming will severely disrupt the climate,
they say, unless
emissions are cut back sharply, by at least 80
percent by 2050.
Disclaimer
The projections are based on results from
computer models that involve simplifications of
real physical processes that are not fully
understood.
Accordingly, no responsibility will be accepted
for the accuracy of the projections inferred from
this brochure or for any person's interpretations,
deductions, conclusions or actions in reliance on
this information.
€€ In other words they do not know shit from shinola
Climate model responses are most uncertain in
how they represent feedback effects, particularly
those dealing with changes to cloud regimes,
biological effects and ocean-atmosphere
interactions.
The coarse spatial resolution of climate models
also remains a limitation on their ability to
simulate the details of regional climate change.
Future climate change will also be influenced by
other, largely unpredictable, factors such as
changes in solar radiation, volcanic eruptions and
chaotic variations within the climate system
itself.
Rapid climate change, or a step-like climate
response to the enhanced greenhouse effect, is
possible but its likelihood cannot be defined.
Because changes outside the ranges given here
cannot be ruled out, these projections should be
considered with caution.
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics.
That's pure bullshit, as will as a typical kosher cop-out, much like
calling anyone that disagrees an anti-Semitic.
[/quote]
€€ ROTFLMAO
Boruch Hashem you will get your
brains out of the manure pile.
[quote]
So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena.
Now that's a lie, pure and simple because you either can't or refuse
to do the math. Isn't that also why you guys foiled our spendy OCO
mission?
[/quote]
€€ Oh, just another oh so clever one, citing a snippet
from a signature, divorced from context and
without any reference to the subject.
€€ Sorry Bud - You lose. I've done the "math" and
every thing the alarmist bunch puts out is based
on fraudulent data. You see, if they used the real
figures, you would find little change even
accounting for a spike in the 1940's.
BTW - there were 4 spikes over 390 before
1857 and 3 more above 400 in the 1940s.
Emissions vary by the hour depending on the
weather location, and the seasons. Taking
advantage of that, the Mauna Loa techs manage
to flatten the curve.
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Leonard... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 1:45 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On 10/21/09 9:02 PM, in article
0484d738-2346-4f25-95fe-29690e347525 at (no spam) q14g2000vbi.googlegroups.com,
"leonard78sp at (no spam) gmail.com" <leonard78sp at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 21, 4:50 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 20, 8:08 pm, "leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com" <leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com
wrote:
On Oct 20, 4:57 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 15, 3:52 am, Harry Hope <riv... at (no spam) ix.netcom.com> wrote:
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/280517
Arctic Ice Cap to Become an Open Sea in 10 years
By Leo Reyes.
Some sicentists and climate change explorers predict that the Artic
ice cover will be gone during warmer months in 10 years due to the
effects of global warming.
Veteran polar explorers who spent considerable time doing research in
the Arctic revealed that the Artctic ice cap will disappear in 20-30
years.
€€ Hog wash !![/quote]
[quote]It will be largely ice-free during warmer months within a decade.
[/quote]
€€ Total falsehood.
[quote]Hopeless Harry
You are crap science
€€ poor pissypants can't argue the science so ...
Either way short term or long term the data
doesn't support man made global warming?
short term
http://junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/RSSglobe.html
long term
http://junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/Moberg2005l.htm
Junkscience is nothing but filthy rag sheet for the conservative
agenda
€€ Why don't you check it out, you might learn
something. That might put you a bit ahead
of the game. You can't remain a fascist leftie
all of your life.
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena.[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| ... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 4:05 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 22, 3:29 pm, "n---bo" <k... at (no spam) l.com> wrote:
[quote]"BradGuth" <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ddf40cbd-d32e-4494-a364-84f18097070a at (no spam) e4g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 17, 3:31 am, Leonard Pulver Sr.
last_thin... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
I M at (no spam) good guy wrote
The dinosaurs are the most successful life here,
not the egyptians or the
Romans.
The only species of biodiversity that doesn't
belong on Earth, is
humans.
=====================================
And your "solution" is .....??
[/quote]
Probably suicide but he wants others to go first. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Leonard... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 5:33 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 22, 12:16 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 21, 8:50 pm, "leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com" <leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com
wrote:
On Oct 21, 11:37 pm, "noob." <k... at (no spam) l.com> wrote:
"Harry Hope" <riv... at (no spam) ix.netcom.com> wrote in
messagenews:11cvd51uod8ikahkbtjuq4nlaoqblean8t at (no spam) 4ax.com...
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,568922,00.html
U.N.: Emissions of Global-Warming Gases Grows
for 7th Year
The warming will severely disrupt the climate,
they say, unless
emissions are cut back sharply, by at least 80
percent by 2050.
Disclaimer
The projections are based on results from
computer models that involve simplifications of
real physical processes that are not fully
understood.
Accordingly, no responsibility will be accepted
for the accuracy of the projections inferred from
this brochure or for any person's interpretations,
deductions, conclusions or actions in reliance on
this information.
€€ In other words they do not know shit from shinola
Climate model responses are most uncertain in
how they represent feedback effects, particularly
those dealing with changes to cloud regimes,
biological effects and ocean-atmosphere
interactions.
The coarse spatial resolution of climate models
also remains a limitation on their ability to
simulate the details of regional climate change.
Future climate change will also be influenced by
other, largely unpredictable, factors such as
changes in solar radiation, volcanic eruptions and
chaotic variations within the climate system
itself.
Rapid climate change, or a step-like climate
response to the enhanced greenhouse effect, is
possible but its likelihood cannot be defined.
Because changes outside the ranges given here
cannot be ruled out, these projections should be
considered with caution.
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics.
That's pure bullshit, as will as a typical kosher cop-out, much like
calling anyone that disagrees an anti-Semitic.
So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena.
Now that's a lie, pure and simple because you either can't or refuse
to do the math. Isn't that also why you guys foiled our spendy OCO
mission?
[/quote]
€€ Oh, just another oh so clever one, citing a snippet
from a signature, divorced from context and
without any reference to the subject.
€€ Sorry Bud - You lose. I've done the "math" and
every thing the alarmist bunch puts out is based
on fraudulent data. You see, if they used the real
figures, you would find little change even
accounting for a spike in the 1940's.
BTW - there were 4 spikes over 390 before
1857 and 3 more above 400 in the 1940s.
Emissions vary by the hour depending on the
weather and the seasons. Taking advantage
of that, the Mauna Loa techs manage to flatten
the curve.
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| richp... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 9:36 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 21, 6:02 pm, "leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com" <leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com>
wrote:
[quote]On Oct 21, 4:50 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 20, 8:08 pm, "leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com" <leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com
wrote:
On Oct 20, 4:57 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 17, 1:11 pm, ecotretas <ecotre... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Crap science.
Has it been peer-reviewed?
Ecotretas
On Oct 15, 3:52 am, Harry Hope <riv... at (no spam) ix.netcom.com> wrote:
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/280517
Arctic Ice Cap to Become an Open Sea in 10 years
By Leo Reyes.
Some sicentists and climate change explorers predict that the Artic
ice cover will be gone during warmer months in 10 years due to the
effects of global warming.
Veteran polar explorers who spent considerable time doing research in
the Arctic revealed that the Artctic ice cap will disappear in 20-30
years.
It will be largely ice-free during warmer months within a decade.
These observations were noted by a team of research and polar
explorers led by adventurer Pen Hadow and two other British explorers.
"The summer ice cover will completely vanish in 20 to 30 years but in
less than that it will have considerably retreated," said Professor
Peter Wadhams, head of the polar ocean physics group at Britain's
prestigious Cambridge University.
"In about 10 years, the Arctic ice will be considered as open sea.",
Wedhams added.
The Arctic ice cap is a very important mix in the climate system.
"Remove the Arctic ice cap and we are left with a very different and
much warmer world," said Dr. Martin Somerkorn, Senior Climate Change
Adviser to the Worldwide Fund for Nature.
He said that the ice meltdown is 'happening faster than we thought'.
Loss of sea ice cover will "set in motion powerful climate feedbacks
which will have an impact far beyond the Arctic itself," he added.
"This could lead to flooding affecting one quarter of the world's
population, substantial increases in greenhouse gas emission from
massive carbon pools and extreme global weather changes."
In the Philippines, flooding and landslides from devastating effects
of typhoons, have been linked to the issue of global warming.
Environmental experts are saying that similar occurences will bring
much more distractions to life and property.
Last year, the UN weather agency WMO said 'Ice volume around the
Arctic region hit the lowest level ever recorded this year as climate
extremes brought death and devastation to many parts of the world.http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/world/12/17/08/arctic-ice-volume-lowest-ev...
Hopeless Harry
You are crap science
•• poor pissypants can't argue the science so ...
– –
Either way short term or long term the data
doesn't support man made global warming?
short term
http://junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/RSSglobe.html> > long term
http://junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/Moberg2005l.htm
Junkscience is nothing but filthy rag sheet for the conservative
agenda
•• Why don't you check it out, you might learn
something. That might put you a bit ahead
of the game. You can't remain a fascist leftie
all of your life.
–– ––
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
I already have checked it out you moron |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| richp... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 9:36 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 22, 12:45 pm, Leonard <leonard7... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
[quote]On 10/21/09 9:02 PM, in article
0484d738-2346-4f25-95fe-29690e347... at (no spam) q14g2000vbi.googlegroups.com,
"leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com" <leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 21, 4:50 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 20, 8:08 pm, "leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com" <leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com
wrote:
On Oct 20, 4:57 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 15, 3:52 am, Harry Hope <riv... at (no spam) ix.netcom.com> wrote:
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/280517
Arctic Ice Cap to Become an Open Sea in 10 years
By Leo Reyes.
Some sicentists and climate change explorers predict that the Artic
ice cover will be gone during warmer months in 10 years due to the
effects of global warming.
Veteran polar explorers who spent considerable time doing research in
the Arctic revealed that the Artctic ice cap will disappear in 20-30
years.
€€ Hog wash !!
It will be largely ice-free during warmer months within a decade.
€€ Total falsehood.
Hopeless Harry
You are crap science
€€ poor pissypants can't argue the science so ...
Either way short term or long term the data
doesn't support man made global warming?
short term
http://junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/RSSglobe.html
long term
http://junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/Moberg2005l.htm
Junkscience is nothing but filthy rag sheet for the conservative
agenda
€€ Why don't you check it out, you might learn
something. That might put you a bit ahead
of the game. You can't remain a fascist leftie
all of your life.
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
Maybe two decades |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| leonard78sp at (no spam) gmail.com... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 10:52 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 27, 3:36 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 22, 12:45 pm, Leonard <leonard7... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
On 10/21/09 9:02 PM, in article
0484d738-2346-4f25-95fe29690e347... at (no spam) q14g2000vbi.googlegroups.com,
"leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com" <leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 21, 4:50 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 20, 8:08 pm, "leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com" wrote:
On Oct 20, 4:57 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 15, 3:52 am, Harry Hope <riv... at (no spam) ix.netcom.com> wrote: > >>>>>>http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/280517
Arctic Ice Cap to Become an Open Sea in 10 years
By Leo Reyes.
Some sicentists and climate change explorers predict that the Artic
ice cover will be gone during warmer months in 10 years due to the
effects of global warming.
Veteran polar explorers who spent considerable time doing research in
the Arctic revealed that the Artctic ice cap will disappear in 20-30
years.
•• Hog wash !!
It will be largely ice-free during warmer months within a decade..
•• Total falsehood.
•• poor pissypants can't argue the science so ..
•• Why don't you check it out, you might learn
something. That might put you a bit ahead
of the game. You can't remain a fascist lefty
all of your life.
Maybe two decades
[/quote]
•• ROTFLMAO |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| leonard78sp at (no spam) gmail.com... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 11:02 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 27, 3:36 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 22, 12:45 pm, Leonard <leonard7... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
On 10/21/09 9:02 PM, in article
0484d738-2346-4f25-95fe-29690e347... at (no spam) q14g2000vbi.googlegroups.com,
"leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com" <leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 21, 4:50 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 20, 8:08 pm, "leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com" <leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com
wrote:
On Oct 20, 4:57 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 15, 3:52 am, Harry Hope <riv... at (no spam) ix.netcom.com> wrote:
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/280517
Arctic Ice Cap to Become an Open Sea in 10 years
By Leo Reyes.
Some sicentists and climate change explorers predict that the Artic
ice cover will be gone during warmer months in 10 years due to the
effects of global warming.
Veteran polar explorers who spent considerable time doing research in
the Arctic revealed that the Artctic ice cap will disappear in 20-30
years.
€€ Hog wash !!
It will be largely ice-free during warmer months within a decade..
€€ Total falsehood.
Hopeless Harry
You are crap science
€€ poor pissypants can't argue the science so ...
Either way short term or long term the data
doesn't support man made global warming?
short term
http://junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/RSSglobe.html
long term
http://junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/Moberg2005l.htm
Junkscience is nothing but filthy rag sheet for the conservative
agenda
•• Why don't you check it out, you might learn
something. That might put you a bit ahead
of the game. You can't remain a fascist leftie
all of your life.
Maybe two decades
[/quote]
•• Now what does that mean?
Perhaps in means you have a
screw loose somewhere.
–– ––
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| leonard78sp at (no spam) gmail.com... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 11:02 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 27, 3:36 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 21, 6:02 pm, "leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com" <leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com
wrote:
On Oct 21, 4:50 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 20, 8:08 pm, "leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com" <leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com
wrote:
On Oct 20, 4:57 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 17, 1:11 pm, ecotretas <ecotre... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Crap science.
Has it been peer-reviewed?
Ecotretas
On Oct 15, 3:52 am, Harry Hope <riv... at (no spam) ix.netcom.com> wrote:
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/280517
Arctic Ice Cap to Become an Open Sea in 10 years
By Leo Reyes.
Some sicentists and climate change explorers predict that the Artic
ice cover will be gone during warmer months in 10 years due to the
effects of global warming.
Veteran polar explorers who spent considerable time doing research in
the Arctic revealed that the Artctic ice cap will disappear in 20-30
years.
It will be largely ice-free during warmer months within a decade.
These observations were noted by a team of research and polar
explorers led by adventurer Pen Hadow and two other British explorers.
"The summer ice cover will completely vanish in 20 to 30 years but in
less than that it will have considerably retreated," said Professor
Peter Wadhams, head of the polar ocean physics group at Britain's
prestigious Cambridge University.
"In about 10 years, the Arctic ice will be considered as open sea.",
Wedhams added.
The Arctic ice cap is a very important mix in the climate system.
"Remove the Arctic ice cap and we are left with a very different and
much warmer world," said Dr. Martin Somerkorn, Senior Climate Change
Adviser to the Worldwide Fund for Nature.
He said that the ice meltdown is 'happening faster than we thought'.
Loss of sea ice cover will "set in motion powerful climate feedbacks
which will have an impact far beyond the Arctic itself," he added.
"This could lead to flooding affecting one quarter of the world's
population, substantial increases in greenhouse gas emission from
massive carbon pools and extreme global weather changes."
In the Philippines, flooding and landslides from devastating effects
of typhoons, have been linked to the issue of global warming.
Environmental experts are saying that similar occurences will bring
much more distractions to life and property.
Last year, the UN weather agency WMO said 'Ice volume around the
Arctic region hit the lowest level ever recorded this year as climate
extremes brought death and devastation to many parts of the world.http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/world/12/17/08/arctic-ice-volume-lowest-ev....
Hopeless Harry
You are crap science
•• poor pissypants can't argue the science so ...
– –
Either way short term or long term the data
doesn't support man made global warming?
short term
http://junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/RSSglobe.html> > long term
http://junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/Moberg2005l.htm
Junkscience is nothing but filthy rag sheet for the conservative
agenda
•• Why don't you check it out, you might learn
something. That might put you a bit ahead
of the game. You can't remain a fascist leftie
all of your life.
–– ––
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I already have checked it out you moron
[/quote]
•• Those who would call others, "moron"
need only look in a mirror to see a real one.
–– ––
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Mitchell Holman... |
| Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:00 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"leonard78sp at (no spam) gmail.com" <leonard78sp at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in
news:7c80afd2-67e1-4a81-85d8-08675d9a13ca at (no spam) 2g2000prl.googlegroups.com:
[quote]
–– ––
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics.
[/quote]
Then post the proof of your claim.
"Currently more glaciers are growing than shrinking."
"Leonard78sp", unproven claim, 6/20/09 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Last Post... |
| Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 11:59 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 28, 9:00 am, Mitchell Holman <noem... at (no spam) comcast.net> wrote:
[quote]"leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com" <leonard7... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote innews:7c80afd2-67e1-4a81-85d8-08675d9a13ca at (no spam) 2g2000prl.googlegroups.com:
–– ––
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics.
Then post the proof of your claim.
"Currently more glaciers are growing than shrinking."
"Leonard78sp", unproven claim, 6/20/09
[/quote]
•• Oh, just another oh so clever one, citing a snippet
from a signature, divorced from context and
without any reference to the subject.
Hollowman--–– 4Q |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Fri Dec 04, 2009 6:10 pm
|
|