Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
If you want to understand why Global Warming is a religion...
Comments
-
Lol you fucking IDIOT!!HoustonHusky said:
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses2001400ex said:
Antarctic "Sea ice" is growing idiot. Not total ice in Antarctica. And it's very obvious why it's growing if your pee sized brain will sit and think about it for a minute.HoustonHusky said:
Antarctic ice coverage has been growing since satellites have been around to observe it back in 1979. Hit all-time records in 2014, had a pull-back, and is growing again. Simple, easy to measure fact. You can scream about land ice thickness (which has also been growing there despite HondoFS claims otherwise), but overall coverage for the reflection of solar energy has been growing.StrongArmCobra said:
The Antarctic ice is shrinking and breaking apart. How the fuck do you not know this? There are massive cracks forming in it and a chunk twice the size of Rhode island broke off of it two years ago.HoustonHusky said:
Where again did I say a degree increase? I said a meaningless amount. And the Arctic ice is shrinking and Antarctic ice is growing...minor details though.StrongArmCobra said:
Yeah no, you're wrong and uneducated. One degree of temperature change to the average global temperature is a massive difference in temperature that has big implications. Simply the polar ice caps melting is a huge deal and it doesn't take a big numeric temperature change for that to happen because obviously it's already happening. Those ice caps cool the planet by reflecting more solar radiation back out to space. With less of them, it causes a multiplier effect to the warming.HoustonHusky said:
In isolation sure. But in isolation it’s also raises temperatures a meaningless amount in the quantities we are talking about...you realize it’s measured in ppm levels, right? Even the climate modelers understand this which is why they have to add all these crazy amplifying/magnifying phenomenon that they think might maybe occur with increased CO2 levels to get global warming (which why the models have been horrible at predicting temps...)StrongArmCobra said:
That would be a lot more plausible than denying that more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere causes global warming.HoustonHusky said:
I heard the car companies have the technology to make cars run on water but they are keeping it from everybody because Big Oil paid them off.StrongArmCobra said:
It hasn't been man made for eons and it hasn't changed at such an accelerated rate before minus massive volcanic eruptions or asteroid impacts. That's the major difference. Natural climate change is fine and happen very slowly over millions of years. Man made climate change is not. We have the technology to move on from burning fossil fuels for energy. But there are trillions of dollars at stake that very powerful people are not willing to give up and will do anything to prevent us from moving away from.PurpleThrobber said:
Ax the people in New Orleans who live below sea level, too....because, well, gravity.StrongArmCobra said:
We're already feeling the negative effects of it already. Ask people in Houston who lived there for decades until there house was under water how they feel about climate change. It's not something that's coming 1,000 years from now. It's here and it's going to be here and getting worse the rest of our lives and our children's lives.MikeDamone said:
I’ll never forget the “people are going to starve to death” scare of 1973.StrongArmCobra said:
The melting of the ice caps will displace millions of coastal people. Some will be able to simply move further in land but others will be homeless and a massive economic burden around the world. Food will become increasingly difficult to grow. 7 billion people need to eat.MikeDamone said:I’m not convinced climate change is necessarily bad
So technology and people won’t adapt? We will just run in place flapping our arms?
Are we at peak oil yet? That would have solved everything.
Let’s assume we? Solve climate change. Whew! Dodged a bullet. You’ll be dead within 81 years. What do you think earth will be like in 1000 years? 10000? 1000000?
Or maybe the folks in Central/Eastern WA who get smoked out every summer because the timber companies are no longer allowed to properly manage the forest - so nature does it the old fashioned way by burning the shit growth.
This shit has gone on eons.
I think I read it on Wikipedia...
But you also think converting water into water can somehow power a car so we know thermodynamics is not your thing...you should stick to you big back theories and leave the trophy for giving threads aids around here to HondoFS.
I didn't say the car runs on water AND emits water. One invention is a car that runs on hydrogen and emits water. Another is a car that runs on water and emits water vapor. Both have already been invented and suppressed by the government. Inventions like this have been erased and ignored on purpose. Again, trillions of dollars at stake.
I’m the “uneducated” one, yet you broadcast your intelligence by saying that converting liquid water to water vapor somehow makes more sense than converting water to water...you can’t make this shite up, thermodynamics be damned...
HondoFS has to be smiling that you showed up...
You keep saying thermodynamics as if you know what the fuck you're talking about. Are you a scientist? I'm not. The point is the car could run on fucking water instead of gas. It had a water fuel cell. It split the water into pure oxygen and pure hydrogen and used both to power a combustion engine with the hydrogen being the combustible element and the oxygen being an oxidizer to make the internal combustion more powerful and the emission was water vapor. That's all I know. No car manufacturers have tried to replicate it since.
Yes, I am...or at least was before I moved on to other things although I still get dragged back into it every now and again. Even have patents on greet technology. No shite you aren't...what you are claiming on water somehow powering vehicles is the lunatic fantasy of perpetual motion which breaks all kind of thermodynamic realities. I'd try to explain it to you but I'm guessing that would go over like a lead brick...
Or, you could say its on par with a lot of the nutjob claims over the last 50 years on climate...
Go fuck yourself.
This is the first sentence of your article:
"A new NASA study says that an increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers."
So snow that has accumulated over thousands of years is compacting on itself and making new ice deep underneath it at a faster rate than the surface ice is melting. BUT, it states right fucking there for your dumb ass to read: "increased losses from it's thinning glaciers".
We haven't had THOUSANDS OF YEARS of man made global warming. You would expect snow accumulation over ten thousand years to be massive and the subsequent deep ice creation beneath it to still be more than the surface ice that is melting.
But that's fucking irrelevant. You know why? Because the melting of the ice is INCREASING and will intercept the amount of deep ice created by the compacting snow. It's just a matter of time. That's not at all proof that global warming isn't happening. It confirms it. Eat shit. -
You really are HondoFSv2. Even though the overall ice is increasing (and hey, according to CobraFS it’s been accumulating for thousands of years and doesn’t move so the pile is going to the moon soon...) and the overall ice coverage of Antarctica has been going up for 30 years it’s really proof of GW and everything shrinking. BRILLIANT!!!!StrongArmCobra said:
Lol you fucking IDIOT!!HoustonHusky said:
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses2001400ex said:
Antarctic "Sea ice" is growing idiot. Not total ice in Antarctica. And it's very obvious why it's growing if your pee sized brain will sit and think about it for a minute.HoustonHusky said:
Antarctic ice coverage has been growing since satellites have been around to observe it back in 1979. Hit all-time records in 2014, had a pull-back, and is growing again. Simple, easy to measure fact. You can scream about land ice thickness (which has also been growing there despite HondoFS claims otherwise), but overall coverage for the reflection of solar energy has been growing.StrongArmCobra said:
The Antarctic ice is shrinking and breaking apart. How the fuck do you not know this? There are massive cracks forming in it and a chunk twice the size of Rhode island broke off of it two years ago.HoustonHusky said:
Where again did I say a degree increase? I said a meaningless amount. And the Arctic ice is shrinking and Antarctic ice is growing...minor details though.StrongArmCobra said:
Yeah no, you're wrong and uneducated. One degree of temperature change to the average global temperature is a massive difference in temperature that has big implications. Simply the polar ice caps melting is a huge deal and it doesn't take a big numeric temperature change for that to happen because obviously it's already happening. Those ice caps cool the planet by reflecting more solar radiation back out to space. With less of them, it causes a multiplier effect to the warming.HoustonHusky said:
In isolation sure. But in isolation it’s also raises temperatures a meaningless amount in the quantities we are talking about...you realize it’s measured in ppm levels, right? Even the climate modelers understand this which is why they have to add all these crazy amplifying/magnifying phenomenon that they think might maybe occur with increased CO2 levels to get global warming (which why the models have been horrible at predicting temps...)StrongArmCobra said:
That would be a lot more plausible than denying that more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere causes global warming.HoustonHusky said:
I heard the car companies have the technology to make cars run on water but they are keeping it from everybody because Big Oil paid them off.StrongArmCobra said:
It hasn't been man made for eons and it hasn't changed at such an accelerated rate before minus massive volcanic eruptions or asteroid impacts. That's the major difference. Natural climate change is fine and happen very slowly over millions of years. Man made climate change is not. We have the technology to move on from burning fossil fuels for energy. But there are trillions of dollars at stake that very powerful people are not willing to give up and will do anything to prevent us from moving away from.PurpleThrobber said:
Ax the people in New Orleans who live below sea level, too....because, well, gravity.StrongArmCobra said:
We're already feeling the negative effects of it already. Ask people in Houston who lived there for decades until there house was under water how they feel about climate change. It's not something that's coming 1,000 years from now. It's here and it's going to be here and getting worse the rest of our lives and our children's lives.MikeDamone said:
I’ll never forget the “people are going to starve to death” scare of 1973.StrongArmCobra said:
The melting of the ice caps will displace millions of coastal people. Some will be able to simply move further in land but others will be homeless and a massive economic burden around the world. Food will become increasingly difficult to grow. 7 billion people need to eat.MikeDamone said:I’m not convinced climate change is necessarily bad
So technology and people won’t adapt? We will just run in place flapping our arms?
Are we at peak oil yet? That would have solved everything.
Let’s assume we? Solve climate change. Whew! Dodged a bullet. You’ll be dead within 81 years. What do you think earth will be like in 1000 years? 10000? 1000000?
Or maybe the folks in Central/Eastern WA who get smoked out every summer because the timber companies are no longer allowed to properly manage the forest - so nature does it the old fashioned way by burning the shit growth.
This shit has gone on eons.
I think I read it on Wikipedia...
But you also think converting water into water can somehow power a car so we know thermodynamics is not your thing...you should stick to you big back theories and leave the trophy for giving threads aids around here to HondoFS.
I didn't say the car runs on water AND emits water. One invention is a car that runs on hydrogen and emits water. Another is a car that runs on water and emits water vapor. Both have already been invented and suppressed by the government. Inventions like this have been erased and ignored on purpose. Again, trillions of dollars at stake.
I’m the “uneducated” one, yet you broadcast your intelligence by saying that converting liquid water to water vapor somehow makes more sense than converting water to water...you can’t make this shite up, thermodynamics be damned...
HondoFS has to be smiling that you showed up...
You keep saying thermodynamics as if you know what the fuck you're talking about. Are you a scientist? I'm not. The point is the car could run on fucking water instead of gas. It had a water fuel cell. It split the water into pure oxygen and pure hydrogen and used both to power a combustion engine with the hydrogen being the combustible element and the oxygen being an oxidizer to make the internal combustion more powerful and the emission was water vapor. That's all I know. No car manufacturers have tried to replicate it since.
Yes, I am...or at least was before I moved on to other things although I still get dragged back into it every now and again. Even have patents on greet technology. No shite you aren't...what you are claiming on water somehow powering vehicles is the lunatic fantasy of perpetual motion which breaks all kind of thermodynamic realities. I'd try to explain it to you but I'm guessing that would go over like a lead brick...
Or, you could say its on par with a lot of the nutjob claims over the last 50 years on climate...
Go fuck yourself.
This is the first sentence of your article:
"A new NASA study says that an increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers."
So snow that has accumulated over thousands of years is compacting on itself and making new ice deep underneath it at a faster rate than the surface ice is melting. BUT, it states right fucking there for your dumb ass to read: "increased losses from it's thinning glaciers".
We haven't had THOUSANDS OF YEARS of man made global warming. You would expect snow accumulation over ten thousand years to be massive and the subsequent deep ice creation beneath it to still be more than the surface ice that is melting.
But that's fucking irrelevant. You know why? Because the melting of the ice is INCREASING and will intercept the amount of deep ice created by the compacting snow. It's just a matter of time. That's not at all proof that global warming isn't happening. It confirms it. Eat shit.
Of course, this is the same idiot that somehow thinks boiling water somehow creates enough energy to power a car and magically recover all the energy used to boil the water... -
There wasn't much data of weather stations outside of North America available prior to the 1940's,so there's that.Gwad said:
We are talking about temperature data from 1850 to now bro. The hottest ever since we started recording. Look at the charts and graphs dawg.RaceBannon said:
My confusion?Gwad said:
Seems like a dementia question. I'm going to redirect your confusion toRaceBannon said:
What was the temp when Adam and Eve left the garden?Gwad said:
Dude we are talking about recording the temperature since the 1850s. Its pretty ez in 1850.... I thought you knew.RaceBannon said:
JFCGwad said:
What do you think recording air temperature is some kind of black magic? Its mercury dawg.RaceBannon said:
I clearly said that those 1830 weather stations were awesomeGwad said:
Race doesnt think temperature recording technology existed in 1830. I guess dementia has set in since he can't remember his child hood.RaceBannon said:Those 1830 weather stations were awesome
How many do you suppose there were world wide? In America? In the Antarctic?
Weather stations sucked 50 years ago
We have tree rings and ice cores though!
Your complete certain over that which can never be certain is pretty religious if you ask me. The need to demonize the "others" who don't share your belief.
Classic case IMO
Dumb as a rock
Yes we have the ability to record temperature for all of the 6,000 years the earth has been around
Its faith
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ef3a9nL_KI
The earth is billions of years old with a record of constant change.
99% unrecorded
To say a month is the hottest ever is about as fucking stupid as you can get.
What happened to logic in this country? Do you all think with your pussy now?
Its a religion. No doubt about it. Burn me at the stake as an apostate you fucking Spanish Inquisitor. -
You lefties have to stop eating Mexican food your gas is destroying the planet! In fact just stop eating all together.
-
Bump.UW_Doog_Bot said:The religious and apocalyptic Left does little help to actually come up with real long term solutions to this. "12 years" is the perfect type of idiotic statement that makes the entire discussion so dismissable. IT IS religion and ideology when there is no room for pragmatism.
Look no further than some of the poasters in this thread to see that they do more damage to the cause of moving the issue forward by arguing for it than they would if they just STFU. -
But you’re only talking about SEA ICE!!1!1! W wHoustonHusky said:
You really are HondoFSv2. Even though the overall ice is increasing (and hey, according to CobraFS it’s been accumulating for thousands of years and doesn’t move so the pile is going to the moon soon...) and the overall ice coverage of Antarctica has been going up for 30 years it’s really proof of GW and everything shrinking. BRILLIANT!!!!StrongArmCobra said:
Lol you fucking IDIOT!!HoustonHusky said:
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses2001400ex said:
Antarctic "Sea ice" is growing idiot. Not total ice in Antarctica. And it's very obvious why it's growing if your pee sized brain will sit and think about it for a minute.HoustonHusky said:
Antarctic ice coverage has been growing since satellites have been around to observe it back in 1979. Hit all-time records in 2014, had a pull-back, and is growing again. Simple, easy to measure fact. You can scream about land ice thickness (which has also been growing there despite HondoFS claims otherwise), but overall coverage for the reflection of solar energy has been growing.StrongArmCobra said:
The Antarctic ice is shrinking and breaking apart. How the fuck do you not know this? There are massive cracks forming in it and a chunk twice the size of Rhode island broke off of it two years ago.HoustonHusky said:
Where again did I say a degree increase? I said a meaningless amount. And the Arctic ice is shrinking and Antarctic ice is growing...minor details though.StrongArmCobra said:
Yeah no, you're wrong and uneducated. One degree of temperature change to the average global temperature is a massive difference in temperature that has big implications. Simply the polar ice caps melting is a huge deal and it doesn't take a big numeric temperature change for that to happen because obviously it's already happening. Those ice caps cool the planet by reflecting more solar radiation back out to space. With less of them, it causes a multiplier effect to the warming.HoustonHusky said:
In isolation sure. But in isolation it’s also raises temperatures a meaningless amount in the quantities we are talking about...you realize it’s measured in ppm levels, right? Even the climate modelers understand this which is why they have to add all these crazy amplifying/magnifying phenomenon that they think might maybe occur with increased CO2 levels to get global warming (which why the models have been horrible at predicting temps...)StrongArmCobra said:
That would be a lot more plausible than denying that more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere causes global warming.HoustonHusky said:
I heard the car companies have the technology to make cars run on water but they are keeping it from everybody because Big Oil paid them off.StrongArmCobra said:
It hasn't been man made for eons and it hasn't changed at such an accelerated rate before minus massive volcanic eruptions or asteroid impacts. That's the major difference. Natural climate change is fine and happen very slowly over millions of years. Man made climate change is not. We have the technology to move on from burning fossil fuels for energy. But there are trillions of dollars at stake that very powerful people are not willing to give up and will do anything to prevent us from moving away from.PurpleThrobber said:
Ax the people in New Orleans who live below sea level, too....because, well, gravity.StrongArmCobra said:
We're already feeling the negative effects of it already. Ask people in Houston who lived there for decades until there house was under water how they feel about climate change. It's not something that's coming 1,000 years from now. It's here and it's going to be here and getting worse the rest of our lives and our children's lives.MikeDamone said:
I’ll never forget the “people are going to starve to death” scare of 1973.StrongArmCobra said:
The melting of the ice caps will displace millions of coastal people. Some will be able to simply move further in land but others will be homeless and a massive economic burden around the world. Food will become increasingly difficult to grow. 7 billion people need to eat.MikeDamone said:I’m not convinced climate change is necessarily bad
So technology and people won’t adapt? We will just run in place flapping our arms?
Are we at peak oil yet? That would have solved everything.
Let’s assume we? Solve climate change. Whew! Dodged a bullet. You’ll be dead within 81 years. What do you think earth will be like in 1000 years? 10000? 1000000?
Or maybe the folks in Central/Eastern WA who get smoked out every summer because the timber companies are no longer allowed to properly manage the forest - so nature does it the old fashioned way by burning the shit growth.
This shit has gone on eons.
I think I read it on Wikipedia...
But you also think converting water into water can somehow power a car so we know thermodynamics is not your thing...you should stick to you big back theories and leave the trophy for giving threads aids around here to HondoFS.
I didn't say the car runs on water AND emits water. One invention is a car that runs on hydrogen and emits water. Another is a car that runs on water and emits water vapor. Both have already been invented and suppressed by the government. Inventions like this have been erased and ignored on purpose. Again, trillions of dollars at stake.
I’m the “uneducated” one, yet you broadcast your intelligence by saying that converting liquid water to water vapor somehow makes more sense than converting water to water...you can’t make this shite up, thermodynamics be damned...
HondoFS has to be smiling that you showed up...
You keep saying thermodynamics as if you know what the fuck you're talking about. Are you a scientist? I'm not. The point is the car could run on fucking water instead of gas. It had a water fuel cell. It split the water into pure oxygen and pure hydrogen and used both to power a combustion engine with the hydrogen being the combustible element and the oxygen being an oxidizer to make the internal combustion more powerful and the emission was water vapor. That's all I know. No car manufacturers have tried to replicate it since.
Yes, I am...or at least was before I moved on to other things although I still get dragged back into it every now and again. Even have patents on greet technology. No shite you aren't...what you are claiming on water somehow powering vehicles is the lunatic fantasy of perpetual motion which breaks all kind of thermodynamic realities. I'd try to explain it to you but I'm guessing that would go over like a lead brick...
Or, you could say its on par with a lot of the nutjob claims over the last 50 years on climate...
Go fuck yourself.
This is the first sentence of your article:
"A new NASA study says that an increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers."
So snow that has accumulated over thousands of years is compacting on itself and making new ice deep underneath it at a faster rate than the surface ice is melting. BUT, it states right fucking there for your dumb ass to read: "increased losses from it's thinning glaciers".
We haven't had THOUSANDS OF YEARS of man made global warming. You would expect snow accumulation over ten thousand years to be massive and the subsequent deep ice creation beneath it to still be more than the surface ice that is melting.
But that's fucking irrelevant. You know why? Because the melting of the ice is INCREASING and will intercept the amount of deep ice created by the compacting snow. It's just a matter of time. That's not at all proof that global warming isn't happening. It confirms it. Eat shit.
Of course, this is the same idiot that somehow thinks boiling water somehow creates enough energy to power a car and magically recover all the energy used to boil the water...
