RE: 0 + 0 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

DomKen -> RE: 0 + 0 (1/5/2014 6:29:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

you mean climate change or global warming?


They have rescued everyone off the ship and It's blazing hot in Australia, with temperatures, in some regions, set to possibly soar above 120 degrees Fahrenheit in the coming days.

Oh Antarctica is losing land ice at an accelerating rate. Sea ice around Antarctica is increasing. and... omg it was sea ice they got stuck in


Sorry. Factually not true. Antarctica has right now a 35 year record on ice. Record thickness, record volume - record just about any way you care to measure it.

Try reading actual science, instead of global alarmist crap.


As I've already proven that is not correct. You are talking about sea ice which is increasing in extent because the ice is moving off land faster than previously because it is thinning.



Phydeaux -> RE: 0 + 0 (1/5/2014 1:54:28 PM)

And I've already debunked your explanation in its entirety.

The article mentioned above (scroll back) specifically is *not* sea ice. The only spot on the continent where the ice is not thicker is the western ross peninsula.

And the cause of the thinner ice there is not "global warming" but rather a newly discovered volcano range that are melting the ice from below and causing it to shift to the sea faster.




DomKen -> RE: 0 + 0 (1/5/2014 5:01:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

And I've already debunked your explanation in its entirety.

The article mentioned above (scroll back) specifically is *not* sea ice. The only spot on the continent where the ice is not thicker is the western ross peninsula.

And the cause of the thinner ice there is not "global warming" but rather a newly discovered volcano range that are melting the ice from below and causing it to shift to the sea faster.



Once again, you never posted any such article. You made a completely unsupported claim after I presented multiple sources proving that the land ice is thinning.

And now you're claiming, again without any evidence, that some new volcano is causing the ice to thin, so which is it, is the ice getting thinner or thicker? You've claimed both in one post.



Phydeaux -> RE: 0 + 0 (1/5/2014 5:04:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

And I've already debunked your explanation in its entirety.

The article mentioned above (scroll back) specifically is *not* sea ice. The only spot on the continent where the ice is not thicker is the western ross peninsula.

And the cause of the thinner ice there is not "global warming" but rather a newly discovered volcano range that are melting the ice from below and causing it to shift to the sea faster.



Once again, you never posted any such article. You made a completely unsupported claim after I presented multiple sources proving that the land ice is thinning.

And now you're claiming, again without any evidence, that some new volcano is causing the ice to thin, so which is it, is the ice getting thinner or thicker? You've claimed both in one post.


Since you're trying to pass off bullshit as truth, I will debunk it *again*.
You used articles from 2008 to try to state the status of anarctic ice in 2013. Remember?



DomKen -> RE: 0 + 0 (1/5/2014 5:07:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

And I've already debunked your explanation in its entirety.

The article mentioned above (scroll back) specifically is *not* sea ice. The only spot on the continent where the ice is not thicker is the western ross peninsula.

And the cause of the thinner ice there is not "global warming" but rather a newly discovered volcano range that are melting the ice from below and causing it to shift to the sea faster.



Once again, you never posted any such article. You made a completely unsupported claim after I presented multiple sources proving that the land ice is thinning.

And now you're claiming, again without any evidence, that some new volcano is causing the ice to thin, so which is it, is the ice getting thinner or thicker? You've claimed both in one post.


Since you're trying to pass off bullshit as truth, I will debunk it *again*.
You used articles from 2008 to try to state the status of anarctic ice in 2013. Remember?

So? You could not present anything more recent that shows otherwise. You still cannot.



Phydeaux -> RE: 0 + 0 (1/5/2014 5:19:13 PM)

If you read the thread from the beginning, it is clear that I posted articles proving the point. The fact that you got them pulled for personal attacks doesn't make the fact that I pulled them less true.

But no matter - it is the work of just a few seconds to prove that Anarctic ice is, once again, at 35 year highs.


For example:
media stories rarely if ever mention that ice is accumulating over the larger area of East Antarctica and that the continent as a whole is gaining snow and ice mass.

Not only land ice, but also sea ice:
NPR failed to mention anywhere in its article that Antarctic sea ice has been growing since satellites first began measuring the ice 33 years ago and the sea ice has been above the 33-year average throughout 2012.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2012/09/19/antarctic-sea-ice-sets-another-record/



Phydeaux -> RE: 0 + 0 (1/5/2014 5:24:36 PM)

Now turning to the Artic:

Al Gore claimed the artic would be bereft of ice by now, in 2008. How did he do?
Well, arctic ice is up 50% since he made that comparison.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/16/global-warming-satellite-data-shows-arctic-sea-ice-coverage-up-50-percent/



DomKen -> RE: 0 + 0 (1/5/2014 5:27:57 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Of course I can. With scant seconds.

For example:
media stories rarely if ever mention that ice is accumulating over the larger area of East Antarctica and that the continent as a whole is gaining snow and ice mass.

Not only land ice, but also sea ice:
NPR failed to mention anywhere in its article that Antarctic sea ice has been growing since satellites first began measuring the ice 33 years ago and the sea ice has been above the 33-year average throughout 2012.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2012/09/19/antarctic-sea-ice-sets-another-record/

The Forbes article is about sea ice and references a famous denialist. Absolutely nothing based in reality.

So still nothing and no explanation of why you tried to argue both that the Antarctic land ice was thinning and thickening.



Phydeaux -> RE: 0 + 0 (1/5/2014 5:39:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Of course I can. With scant seconds.

For example:
media stories rarely if ever mention that ice is accumulating over the larger area of East Antarctica and that the continent as a whole is gaining snow and ice mass.

Not only land ice, but also sea ice:
NPR failed to mention anywhere in its article that Antarctic sea ice has been growing since satellites first began measuring the ice 33 years ago and the sea ice has been above the 33-year average throughout 2012.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2012/09/19/antarctic-sea-ice-sets-another-record/

The Forbes article is about sea ice and references a famous denialist. Absolutely nothing based in reality.

So still nothing and no explanation of why you tried to argue both that the Antarctic land ice was thinning and thickening.



Snicker. Keep trying.

So your position is that there is less ice, eh?

How about NASA. I suppose they are deniers too. Why don't you go google: NASA Announces New Record Growth Of Antarctic Sea Ice Extent...


Nice way to deceptively edit.

Ice and snow over antarctica has increased: The exception is in one area. Amana Lough & team discovered a range of volcanoes, and it is surmised that the magma from these volcanos may be responsible for the (ONE) area in antartica with thinning ice mass.



Phydeaux -> RE: 0 + 0 (1/5/2014 5:56:39 PM)

Or go look at the national snow & ice data center:
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

Arctic ice is the highest its been since 2008.

Antarctic ice is at record levels for 35 years.





DomKen -> RE: 0 + 0 (1/5/2014 6:42:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Of course I can. With scant seconds.

For example:
media stories rarely if ever mention that ice is accumulating over the larger area of East Antarctica and that the continent as a whole is gaining snow and ice mass.

Not only land ice, but also sea ice:
NPR failed to mention anywhere in its article that Antarctic sea ice has been growing since satellites first began measuring the ice 33 years ago and the sea ice has been above the 33-year average throughout 2012.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2012/09/19/antarctic-sea-ice-sets-another-record/

The Forbes article is about sea ice and references a famous denialist. Absolutely nothing based in reality.

So still nothing and no explanation of why you tried to argue both that the Antarctic land ice was thinning and thickening.



Snicker. Keep trying.

So your position is that there is less ice, eh?

How about NASA. I suppose they are deniers too. Why don't you go google: NASA Announces New Record Growth Of Antarctic Sea Ice Extent...


Nice way to deceptively edit.

Ice and snow over antarctica has increased: The exception is in one area. Amana Lough & team discovered a range of volcanoes, and it is surmised that the magma from these volcanos may be responsible for the (ONE) area in antartica with thinning ice mass.


I edited nothing. Why must you lie all the time?

And you have presented nothing by NASA. This is a claim you keep making and never actually back it up. It is boring.

As to your next post, they're talking about Antarctic sea ice.
quote:

While it is early winter in the Arctic, it is early summer in the Antarctic. Continuing patterns seen in recent years, Antarctic sea ice extent remains unusually high

So again you tried to misrepresent your source.

This is all you do present denialists who lie or directly lie about reality based sources.



Phydeaux -> RE: 0 + 0 (1/5/2014 6:48:17 PM)

Eh Ken,

Still no counter to the washington post article:

"media stories rarely if ever mention that ice is accumulating over the larger area of East Antarctica and that the continent as a whole is gaining snow and ice mass"



DomKen -> RE: 0 + 0 (1/5/2014 6:52:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Eh Ken,

Still no counter to the washington post article:

"media stories rarely if ever mention that ice is accumulating over the larger area of East Antarctica and that the continent as a whole is gaining snow and ice mass"


Already did. You simply handwaved away reality.

Now about that lie you told about me editing something, where is your retraction?



Hillwilliam -> RE: 0 + 0 (1/5/2014 6:56:00 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Eh Ken,

Still no counter to the washington post article:

"media stories rarely if ever mention that ice is accumulating over the larger area of East Antarctica and that the continent as a whole is gaining snow and ice mass"


Didn't we already go over the 8th grade physical science necessary to know that Antarctica must warm before it can snow appreciably?



DomKen -> RE: 0 + 0 (1/5/2014 8:58:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Eh Ken,

Still no counter to the washington post article:

"media stories rarely if ever mention that ice is accumulating over the larger area of East Antarctica and that the continent as a whole is gaining snow and ice mass"


Didn't we already go over the 8th grade physical science necessary to know that Antarctica must warm before it can snow appreciably?

Yes, but he ignored it.



Phydeaux -> RE: 0 + 0 (1/5/2014 10:31:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Eh Ken,

Still no counter to the washington post article:

"media stories rarely if ever mention that ice is accumulating over the larger area of East Antarctica and that the continent as a whole is gaining snow and ice mass"


Already did. You simply handwaved away reality.

Now about that lie you told about me editing something, where is your retraction?


You certainly have snipped my posts; and you've done so to make things look idiotic. Nowhere, for example, did I make the argument that any particular spot in the antartic is the ice thinning and thickening.

Still no quote yet to counter the WP post that said "larger area of East Antarctica and that the continent as a whole is gaining snow and ice mass."

So are you prepared to admit again, you are factually in accurate and their is, in fact more ice in the Antarctic ?





Phydeaux -> RE: 0 + 0 (1/5/2014 10:38:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Eh Ken,

Still no counter to the washington post article:

"media stories rarely if ever mention that ice is accumulating over the larger area of East Antarctica and that the continent as a whole is gaining snow and ice mass"


Didn't we already go over the 8th grade physical science necessary to know that Antarctica must warm before it can snow appreciably?

Yes, but he ignored it.


Lets see - data from about 1982 to 2000 show a cooling trend for the antarctic. Kind of blows a hole in your theory right there doesn't it?

Doran et al. (2002)[14][15] find that "Although previous reports suggest slight recent continental warming our spatial analysis of Antarctic meteorological data demonstrates a net cooling on the Antarctic continent between 1966 and 2000, particularly during summer and autumn.

The point is - that IF global warming were true - that 18 year period would show continuous warming reflecting the increasing co2 concentration.

The Anarctic may have subsequently warmed. But this is just another indication that your theory is shit. You can't predict when it will warm - or why.

Most of the recent reports are saying that wind patterns are shifting closer to the poles. Which has the effect of causing the ice to ridge up - and thus causes less melting.
Thus neither the accumulation of ice - or the lack thereof are evidence of global warming.

It is quite ironic - that those intrepid explorers trying to retrace Mawson's expedition are trapped in ice - when Mawson's video reveals an ice free bay... in 1912



DomKen -> RE: 0 + 0 (1/6/2014 2:14:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Eh Ken,

Still no counter to the washington post article:

"media stories rarely if ever mention that ice is accumulating over the larger area of East Antarctica and that the continent as a whole is gaining snow and ice mass"


Already did. You simply handwaved away reality.

Now about that lie you told about me editing something, where is your retraction?


You certainly have snipped my posts; and you've done so to make things look idiotic. Nowhere, for example, did I make the argument that any particular spot in the antartic is the ice thinning and thickening.

Still no quote yet to counter the WP post that said "larger area of East Antarctica and that the continent as a whole is gaining snow and ice mass."

So are you prepared to admit again, you are factually in accurate and their is, in fact more ice in the Antarctic ?

No, I never edited your posts. You simply lied. And I still await your retraction and apology.

As to your cognitive dissonance:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
The article mentioned above (scroll back) specifically is *not* sea ice. The only spot on the continent where the ice is not thicker is the western ross peninsula.

And the cause of the thinner ice there is not "global warming" but rather a newly discovered volcano range that are melting the ice from below and causing it to shift to the sea faster.


And the Forbes, Post, op-ed is not backed up by facts. It is simply the assertion of a guy who makes a living working for the oil industry. And has been explained to you before if it is snowing more over Antarctica it is because the air over the continent has gotten substantially warmer.




DomKen -> RE: 0 + 0 (1/6/2014 2:16:18 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
The point is - that IF global warming were true - that 18 year period would show continuous warming reflecting the increasing co2 concentration.

Actually that is bullshit. Locally weather may not reflect worldwide trends.



Phydeaux -> RE: 0 + 0 (1/6/2014 2:20:25 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
The point is - that IF global warming were true - that 18 year period would show continuous warming reflecting the increasing co2 concentration.

Actually that is bullshit. Locally weather may not reflect worldwide trends.


I wasn't aware you really could use the word "locally" to refer to an entire continent.

But you know Ken - that really does explain AGW. We're having AGW - except locally. Where locally is the entire planet.



Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875