Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List

This thread has been locked

Messages 6221 - 6240 of total 17219 in this topic

<< First | < Previous | Show All | Next > | Last >>

Chiloe

Trad climber

Lee, NH

Jul 26, 2013 - 07:24pm PT

Is that a current picture of the north pole Norton or Chiloe? Let's give you guys a chance to come clean.

Did someone tell you this was a gotcha? First, why not look up what I said it was when I first posted that pic on the Birds thread?

But in the spirit of asking other folks to "come clean," how about you start posting the sources that feed you these talking points you're so eager to belligerently repeat?

Chiloe

Trad climber

Lee, NH

Jul 26, 2013 - 07:33pm PT

Here's an image from the same NPEO webcam 2 taken yesterday. It seems to be drifting faster toward Fram Strait, the map shows about 85N. The bird is gone, hopefully to somewhere more friendly. And the lake is getting deeper.

k-man

Gym climber

SCruz

Topic Author's Reply - Jul 26, 2013 - 07:39pm PT

Whoever said we're in a drought period obviously does not live at the North Pole.

Dr. Christ

Mountain climber

State of Mine

Jul 26, 2013 - 07:40pm PT

And whoever writes something like that obviously has no idea what a drought actually is.

rick sumner

Trad climber

reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska

Jul 26, 2013 - 10:00pm PT

Well Chiloe, after the usual CAGW community rant from both Christ and Norton you come clean with the information that webcam is at 85 degrees north- actually more like 84 something. Why is this important Norton? Well it illustrates how those in the CAGW community twist and misinform and others don't question while they follow blindly. You yourself are probably innocent- you probably didn't investigate the actual location. I noticed the other UW webcam at 86 north showed different conditions.

rick sumner

Trad climber

reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska

Jul 26, 2013 - 10:20pm PT

Ed, i have never previously been a religious man but the more i learn about this field, all the incredibly complex mechanisms working through and in concert with life to sustain life on this planet, the closer i come to sensing a god or all powerful directing force.Yeah i always liked that song until the place became the gay area.

Chiloe

Trad climber

Lee, NH

Jul 26, 2013 - 10:26pm PT

you come clean with the information

Fantasy/reality issues again, Rick. I didn't "come clean with the information," I led with it. Here's my entire post from yesterday on the birds thread, where I first posted that webcam photo:

"Anybody recognize this bird?
From North Pole webcam 2 on July 22, currently at about 87N, sitting in a melt pond and drifting toward Fram Strait."

Still curious about the bird.

Dr. Christ

Mountain climber

State of Mine

Jul 26, 2013 - 10:46pm PT

I believe that posting a picture of a bird and water and claiming that it is at 87 degrees latitude, when it is IN FACT ONLY 87 DEGREES latitude, invalidates all climate science and proves beyond reason (far, far beyond reason) that anthropogenic climate change is an elaborate hoax.

Chiloe

Trad climber

Lee, NH

Jul 26, 2013 - 10:50pm PT

Rick has been fed, I think, the talking point that NPEO webcam 2 is not exactly at the North Pole, but has drifted some degrees south in the direction of Fram Strait. It's the diamond at the end of the squiggly green line in this photo, now at about 85N:

It probably was not given with Rick's talking point that the webcam is nevertheless drifting in *relatively* thick ice, close to what satellite measurements are still showing as one of the last major 100% sea ice concentrations in the Arctic Ocean, according to today's map from Uni Bremen. Dark purple here represents 100% ice, lighter purple down to about 85%, yellow in the 70s and so forth. The ice is solid almost nowhere.

Original source, with other graphs and maps, here:
http://www.iup.uni-bremen.de:8084/ssmis/index.html

Dr. Christ

Mountain climber

State of Mine

Jul 26, 2013 - 11:02pm PT

the 1800s were the worst fires we know about followed by the early 1900s

Please provide references. Were these the worst in total area, duration, or burn severity?

Thanks

Dr. Christ

Mountain climber

State of Mine

Jul 26, 2013 - 11:10pm PT

Did someone just sh#t their pants? It reeks like chief in here.

dirtbag

climber

Jul 26, 2013 - 11:14pm PT

LOL at Chief. What an idiot.

Too busy yapping to hear everyone laughing at him. Too stupid to know better.

kunlun_shan

Mountain climber

SF, CA

Jul 26, 2013 - 11:22pm PT

it was a CURRENT picture of the Arctic Pole having turned into a melting lake

^ reality in a nutshell.

http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/np2013/2013-cam2.mov

rick sumner

Trad climber

reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska

Jul 26, 2013 - 11:37pm PT

Ok Bruce. You say I am a reasonable student and then in the next paragraph say my beliefs are irrational and immoral, perhaps criminal. You go on to say Ed may be high on crack or a raving eco terrorist. In a later post you say the gift that goes on giving. Well bubba, it is after all entertainment, isn't it? When in Rome do as the Romans.

Bruce you seem to be an intelligent man yet you seem to have an irrational belief that their is an overwhelming consensus of science behind the CAGW hypothesis. All I can tell you is to exercise a little humility buddy. While you are doing your morning self appraisal in the mirror ask yourself am I certain in my beliefs or am i being misdirected. I know this is hard to accept but their are tens of thousands of scientists, some of which were recognized previous to the CAGW hit jobs as some of the worlds foremost authorities, worldwide that do not sign on to the idea of anthropogenic catastrophe or the agenda behind it. I've read extensively on this subject and am satisfied that we don't face imminent catastrophe. Can you say the same about your belief in catastrophe?

rick sumner

Trad climber

reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska

Jul 27, 2013 - 12:29am PT

I didn't because the evidence is there, all around you Bruce. Look at the empirical rather than the modeled. Face it buddy, you are at least the 180 opposite but equal idealogue to that which you accuse me of being. Like I said before- I used to accept this AGW theory as fact and entrusted the "science" that made reference to its most prominent effects taking place in the arctic-where I just happened to live. But a funny thing happened, after I voted for Gore in 2000 the warming reversed course here in Alaska and I started to educate myself on the subject. It is now 13 years later and the state has cooled, on average 2.4 f at 19 out of 20 officially recognized stations, observed realities have convincingly refuted the catastrophe narrative, yet the shrill and desperate cries of catastrophe continue-in my mind exposing them as false.

Ok so why don't the CAGW proponents embrace nat gas, nuclear, hydro? You know Bruce that solar and wind is not a realistic replacement. And out of curiosity you make reference to kids, how many do you have Bruce?

monolith

climber

SF bay area

Jul 27, 2013 - 12:30am PT

Marcott reconstruction shows that we are at the highest global temp in the last 10k years, so The Chiefs claim that 10K years ago was 5 degrees higher is going to need a source.

monolith

climber

SF bay area

Jul 27, 2013 - 12:44am PT

The Chief chooses to give Joann Nova's interpretation of the Antarctic paper, which she retracts in an update:

http://joannenova.com.au/2013/04/antarctica-gaining-ice-mass-and-is-not-extraordinary-compared-to-800-years-of-data/

But you can read the abstract directly here. No mention of Zwally.

http://www.the-cryosphere.net/7/303/2013/tc-7-303-2013.html

Our SMB reconstructions indicate that the SMB changes over most of Antarctica are statistically negligible and that the current SMB is not exceptionally high compared to the last 800 yr. High-accumulation periods have occurred in the past, specifically during the 1370s and 1610s. However, a clear increase in accumulation of more than 10% has occurred in high SMB coastal regions and over the highest part of the East Antarctic ice divide since the 1960s

And again Chief, SMB (surface mass balance) is not TMB (total mass balance). Even Joanne Nova has corrected herself. We've been thru this with you before, Chief.

Chief, are you having a senior moment?

rick sumner

Trad climber

reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska

Jul 27, 2013 - 12:48am PT

Yes, you are correct Bruce with the ideology question. So let's go back to your mirror test. For my own part, when I look in the morning I am satisfied and confident in what I know to be the truth, 100% no, 95 % yes. This is after a journey beginning from closer to your present ideology than you imagine.

Ok so you have some skin of your loins in the game and I now know it is not a selfish belief on your part. Natgas-45% less CO2 and readily available, cheap, and would put a very significant dent in the unemployment if fully utilized, latest generation reactors nearly 100% safe if located correctly and would employ tens of thousands in construction, Dams-safe and reasonably eco friendly if careful thought is incorporated in their design. So Bruce, why wont the eco freaks allow this and instead cry the sky is falling while 100,000's of Chinese and other non north americans are employed in construction of solar panels and windmills which are wholly insufficient as replacement?