Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
wilbeer
Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
|
|
|
Sep 23, 2013 - 09:13pm PT
|
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Sep 23, 2013 - 09:28pm PT
|
^^^^^^^^^^Ch-Ch-ch-Chia!^^^^^^^^^^^
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
Sep 23, 2013 - 09:29pm PT
|
chief,
yes, the daily Koss is populated by leftists, people who generally prefer voting Democratic
however, that fact is irrelevant, given that I was posting my link to a major study coming out
and THAT information is what is important, and NOT what web site i happened to get it from
you can bet your boopy that a right wing blog site would not even mention such a study due,
because they would be scared shitless it would debunk their concluded ideology
attack me chief, attack the science, fine
but come on, it IS irrelevant to attack the source of the fact that a study is due out Friday
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
|
|
|
Sep 23, 2013 - 09:29pm PT
|
No matter who's going to say it,you are not going to believe it.
You and yours are not going to like the AR5,dude.
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Sep 23, 2013 - 09:32pm PT
|
Norton, that "surface ice", after sept 20 which it is, is new multi year ice since it will do nothing but freeze deeper till about June 2014.
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
|
|
|
Sep 23, 2013 - 09:45pm PT
|
Models are what they are ,MODELS,Data is real.
There is NO argument.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
Sep 23, 2013 - 09:47pm PT
|
Norton, that "surface ice", after sept 20 which it is, is new multi year ice since it will do nothing but freeze deeper till about June 2014.
Rick, you have a good grasp of the obvious...
yes indeed, we all know that winters are cold and thus ice freezes that time of year..
your comment offers no new information
want to try again?
or just wait until Friday when the study results are released?
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
|
Sep 23, 2013 - 10:14pm PT
|
Norton writes:
"yes indeed, we all know that winters are cold and thus ice freezes that time of year.."
Ice freezes? Freezes into what?
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 23, 2013 - 10:55pm PT
|
Norton, that "surface ice", after sept 20 which it is, is new multi year ice since it will do nothing but freeze deeper till about June 2014.
Yes indeed Ricky, just like the "multi-year ice" that formed last year (and melted this summer). And that's why the Russians can run shipping lanes across the arctic--for the first time ever.
It's because that "new" ice melted.
|
|
dave729
Trad climber
Western America
|
|
|
Sep 23, 2013 - 11:15pm PT
|
The climate is not changing because of people and Warmists cannot point out
any changes no matter how much they spray about it.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Sep 23, 2013 - 11:16pm PT
|
Wow, that's an intelligent argument, well supported by peer reviewed science.
|
|
dave729
Trad climber
Western America
|
|
|
Sep 23, 2013 - 11:19pm PT
|
hayzookristo....dirtbag the only peering you ever done has nothing to do
with the atmosphere.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Sep 24, 2013 - 12:35am PT
|
Ch-ch-ch-Chiaf
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 24, 2013 - 02:01am PT
|
@ The Chief: you are right, it isn't the first time ever. But how about this:
Russia’s military said it planned to sail regular naval patrols along shipping lanes in its territory in the Arctic Ocean that opened to commercial vessels only in the last few years, as Arctic ice began melting at a record pace.
That is, The Chief, without ice breakers.
Yeah, you can get me on a few semantic errors in my post, but you know deep down... You're just blowing smoke.
But no matter. Crank out the bull horn, let us all have it. Cause you, for some reason, need to show everyone just how big you really are.
Please cite the ref that indicates the Russians went from any port in Russia ACROSS the arctic to let's say ICELAND.
Ok, how's this:
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/new-unexpected-shipping-route-243485.aspx
|
|
Wade Icey
Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
|
|
|
Sep 24, 2013 - 09:30am PT
|
so little man, so much hate...
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
|
Sep 24, 2013 - 11:21am PT
|
Ron, when you look at the integrated temperature difference you want to go deep enough that your measurements are not appreciably affected by seasonal temperature variations at the surface. You also want to measure temperature profiles to the same depth, regardless of latitude.
At what depth do the seasonal temperature fluctuations stop becoming important?
hint: it is where T is approximately 5C, regardless of latitude.
extra hint: it is about 700m depth.
Stop being such a fuking idiot. Post some actual measurements of OCEAN temperatures with depth that clearly show the 700m thermocline doesn't exist, or STFU. And stop pretending the ocean behaves like the little mud holes you fished "professionally." All this sh#t was worked out in FAR more detail than your little ba sshole head can comprehend.
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Sep 24, 2013 - 11:57am PT
|
Ah yes, "it is not the reality of knowledge that matters just the appearance"- such a wise observation Bruce. Now let's apply it to the 97.1% consensus where it really fits.
Ron kicked ass.
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
Sep 24, 2013 - 12:09pm PT
|
This is like arguing with a schizophrenic, reality just melts down to fit the mold of Rick's beliefs.
Your reference for Ian Plimer's volcanism causing El Nino, La Nina was a 2007 article that interpreted what he said at a meeting, not an interview and not his 2009 book, Larry.
I know what it was. I posted that link to the 2007 article by a journalist who attended Plimer's talk, and seemed to be reporting it sympathetically, to counter your fabrication that
"Your guys spent considerable effort in putting words in Plimer's mouth that didn't originate from him."
The journalist ain't one of my guys, and the words did originate from Plimer. As did the words I quoted from page 413 of his own book, and the words Plimer spoke in the 2009 TV interview I cited with George Monbiot and Tony Jones, where they both asked Plimer about that specific point from his book. Here's the transcript, for chrissake.
TONY JONES: Let's hear Ian Plimer respond to that. Do you stand by the claim in your book that volcanoes produce more CO2 than the world's cars and industries combined?
IAN PLIMER: Well I'm very heartened that a journalist is correcting me on my geology. Now Mr Monbiot wrote to me when I asked him some questions of science and said he was not qualified to answer these questions of science. So he's a journalist and he's asking me a scientific question. He has not read this book ...
GEORGE MONBIOT: Could you answer the question, please?
IAN PLIMER: He has not read this book.
GEORGE MONBIOT: Do you stand by your claim or not?
IAN PLIMER: He has not - it is the height of bad manners to interrupt.
GEORGE MONBIOT: Do you stand by your claim or not?
IAN PLIMER: It is the height of bad manners to interrupt.
GEORGE MONBIOT: Could you answer the question. Could you just answer the question.
Plimer never does answer the question. It turns out that Monbiot and Jones have both read the book after all. Anybody but Rick can read this transcript and see that Plimer is weaseling, and guess why.
But back to what else Rick says:
And no I didn't get it straight backwards, the paper said Antarctica's climate didn't necessarily follow global climate i.e. global warming is not global as far as Antarctica
First part of this sentence is true enough, local is not the same as global, everyone knows that. The second part makes no sense, have you changed the meaning of "global" in mid-paraphrase? For people who can read with comprehension, here's how the scientists (Shakun et al.) actually put it:
although the structure of the global stack is similar to the pattern of Antarctic temperature change, it lags Antarctica by several centuries to a millennium throughout most of the deglaciation (Fig. 2a). Thus, the small apparent lead of Antarctic temperature over CO2 in the icecore records12,14 does not apply to global temperature.
Back to Rick:
Now, Larry, the past certainly does have a bearing on the future
Did somebody deny that? Where?
What causes increased atmospheric CO2 if you rule out anthropogenic and geological sources as primary causation?
Huh? Where did I or anybody else rule these things out? I mentioned that volcanoes don't explain CO2 rise in the last few decades, you took off to the Mesozoic and started making up claims about what I'd ruled out. Geological processes have certainly influenced CO2 in the past, some times more than others. And not just through volcanoes. For reality-based readers, a glimpse of the complexity could be seen in Wikipedia's section on possible causes of the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum. Whatever the triggering events (volcanic, orbital forcing?) the magnitude of subsequent changes implies strong positive feedbacks (marine clathrates, ocean circulation?).
Also, hasn't CO2 atmospheric content varied from 220 to 320 ppm in the last 100,000 years? What could cause such a swing?
You've gone in a circle. Recall those 3 papers that I cited a while back? This is what they are about. You claimed that you had read the abstracts, then proved that you hadn't by declaring them to be "just rehashes of previous suppositions dressed up as studies." Here's a quote from one of those abstracts, directly addressing the question you just asked:
We conclude that a pronounced 0.3 per mil decrease in d13Catm during the early deglaciation can be best explained by upwelling of old, carbon-enriched waters in the Southern Ocean. Later in the deglaciation, regrowth of the terrestrial biosphere, changes in sea surface temperature, and ocean circulation governed the d13Catm evolution. During the Last Glacial Maximum, d13Catm and atmospheric CO2 concentration were essentially constant, which suggests that the carbon cycle was in dynamic equilibrium and that the net transfer of carbon to the deep ocean had occurred before then.
I could go on, but it's like arguing with a schizophrenic.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 24, 2013 - 12:10pm PT
|
Like everything else you people attempt to dissemenate [sic] here, it is full of bullshet propaganda regardless Semantics.
Yes The Chief. How could I ever contradict you, because of course you are always right. Your charts are not propaganda and are always generated by scientists with the highest respect from the scientific community. That they don't stand up to peer review means nothing, as I am sure you will tell us.
Your science if good, "ours" is junk.
BTW, how's your daughter? Is she full of love for you?
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 24, 2013 - 12:22pm PT
|
I could go on, but it's like arguing with a schizophrenic.
chiloe, this is kind of true. My brother is a schizophrenic, and trying to have an intelligent discourse with him is about like what we're experiencing here. The thing is, Kenny knows he's in a locked facility because of his mental illness. Still, he believes that he's talking to the FBI on the pay phone, and we go along with his ruse so as to not upset him.
We could try to say the FBI isn't on the other end of the phone, and we know this to be true because of the disconnect tones coming out of the phone receiver. However, Kenny fully believes he's hatching a plot with the FBI, CIA, or whatever back-opt-of-the-day he imagines, the voices in his head tell him so.
this is almost the same as it is with Rick, and the other deniers here; you can point out that their "scientific" inputs are just disconnected buzzes. But it makes no matter, because the voices in their heads can't make sense of what you are telling them.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!