PM to Death
Antarctic ice is retreating. Just curious on your thoughts on the matter.
Comments
-
Funny...up, down, left, or right it's all due to global warming:
Why is Antarctic sea ice at record levels despite global warming?
Lemming. -
What, me worry? Rube.HoustonHusky said:Funny...up, down, left, or right it's all due to global warming:
Why is Antarctic sea ice at record levels despite global warming?
Lemming. -
Why don't you look up the difference between sea ice and land ice.HoustonHusky said:Funny...up, down, left, or right it's all due to global warming:
Why is Antarctic sea ice at record levels despite global warming?
Lemming. -
You mean this? Make you feel better?2001400ex said:
Why don't you look up the difference between sea ice and land ice.HoustonHusky said:Funny...up, down, left, or right it's all due to global warming:
Why is Antarctic sea ice at record levels despite global warming?
Lemming.
Lemming. -
I think you should research more. Why cherry pick 2003-2008?HoustonHusky said:
You mean this? Make you feel better?2001400ex said:
Why don't you look up the difference between sea ice and land ice.HoustonHusky said:Funny...up, down, left, or right it's all due to global warming:
Why is Antarctic sea ice at record levels despite global warming?
Lemming.
Lemming.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/antarctica-gaining-ice.htm
"There is variation between regions within Antarctica (Figure 2, top panel), with the West Antarctic Ice Sheet and the Antarctic Peninsula Ice Sheet losing ice mass, and with an increasing rate. The East Antarctic Ice Sheet is growing slightly over this period but not enough to offset the other losses. There are of course uncertainties in the estimation methods but independent data from multiple measurement techniques (explained here) all show the same thing, Antarctica is losing land ice as a whole, and these losses are accelerating quickly."
Funny how two different websites say two different things. Do you go with the one that cherry picks or the one that uses the whole picture? -
Every researcher comes up with a new way to measure the "land" ice, and they amazingly enough come up with a different measure of how much there is and whether it is increasing, and/or decreasing. Hence we can play links galore. Meanwhile, the amount of ice covering the South Pole (much more easily measured by simple satellite images) has been and continues to increase and that is not under dispute. Add that to the fact that ALL (well...I think its really 95%) of the climate "models" says that specific measure should be DECREASING and you get morons (like yourself) twisting in the wind saying any observed behavior any which way is now "proof" of global warming.
Lemming.
And classic linking to the "skepticalscience"...I think its appropriate you pick the website hosted by John Cook after he's had his own honesty/mathematical abilities exposed...
-
Oh really. Show me where that's not disputed. You say some stupid shit.HoustonHusky said:Every researcher comes up with a new way to measure the "land" ice, and they amazingly enough come up with a different measure of how much there is and whether it is increasing, and/or decreasing. Hence we can play links galore. Meanwhile, the amount of ice covering the South Pole (much more easily measured by simple satellite images) has been and continues to increase and that is not under dispute. Add that to the fact that ALL (well...I think its really 95%) of the climate "models" says that specific measure should be DECREASING and you get morons (like yourself) twisting in the wind saying any observed behavior any which way is now "proof" of global warming.
Lemming.
And classic linking to the "skepticalscience"...I think its appropriate you pick the website hosted by John Cook after he's had his own honesty/mathematical abilities exposed... -
Already posted and measured by satellite.
Moron.
-
I'm pretty sure I posted a dispute....HoustonHusky said:Already posted and measured by satellite.
Moron. -
No, I posted links to 2 sites that had actual data. You posted a link to a story that had some guy saying the sky is falling.2001400ex said:
I'm pretty sure I posted a dispute....HoustonHusky said:Already posted and measured by satellite.
Moron.
There have been satellite images since something like the 70s that show pictures of the Antarctica, and those show increasing overall ice coverage (in one of my links). Simple fact to most (but I'm sure not you...).
To balance that, there have been all sorts of scientists down there trying to find some way to measure how much ice is underneath to say 'even though the coverage is up, the overall amount must be down'. The methods and data sets are pretty arbitrary and the data is anything but consistent. The latest (and probably best) is a satellite that got launched in 2010 to measure heights of the ice, and that is where some of the latest numbers come from. Although it is better, believing a brand new measurement system with a relatively small time window suddenly proves all then you have to be FS.
Oh yeah...
-
Houston say:
-
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/big-melt-antarcticas-retreating-ice-shape-earth-29263411HoustonHusky said:
No, I posted links to 2 sites that had actual data. You posted a link to a story that had some guy saying the sky is falling.2001400ex said:
I'm pretty sure I posted a dispute....HoustonHusky said:Already posted and measured by satellite.
Moron.
There have been satellite images since something like the 70s that show pictures of the Antarctica, and those show increasing overall ice coverage (in one of my links). Simple fact to most (but I'm sure not you...).
To balance that, there have been all sorts of scientists down there trying to find some way to measure how much ice is underneath to say 'even though the coverage is up, the overall amount must be down'. The methods and data sets are pretty arbitrary and the data is anything but consistent. The latest (and probably best) is a satellite that got launched in 2010 to measure heights of the ice, and that is where some of the latest numbers come from. Although it is better, believing a brand new measurement system with a relatively small time window suddenly proves all then you have to be FS.
Oh yeah...
Learn the difference between sea ice and land ice. Question for you when ice from the land moves and goes somewhere, where do you think that somewhere is? -
Fixed for you.2001400ex said:HoustonHusky said:
No, I posted links to 2 sites that had actual data. You posted a link to a story that had some guy saying the sky is falling.2001400ex said:
I'm pretty sure I posted a dispute....HoustonHusky said:Already posted and measured by satellite.
Moron.
There have been satellite images since something like the 70s that show pictures of the Antarctica, and those show increasing overall ice coverage (in one of my links). Simple fact to most (but I'm sure not you...).
To balance that, there have been all sorts of scientists down there trying to find some way to measure how much ice is underneath to say 'even though the coverage is up, the overall amount must be down'. The methods and data sets are pretty arbitrary and the data is anything but consistent. The latest (and probably best) is a satellite that got launched in 2010 to measure heights of the ice, and that is where some of the latest numbers come from. Although it is better, believing a brand new measurement system with a relatively small time window suddenly proves all then you have to be FS.
Oh yeah...
I Love Lamp
