Jump to content
Check your account email address ×

It would take humans over 100,000 years to melt all the ice off Antarctica on purpose


Recommended Posts

  • Platinum Contributing Member
1 hour ago, revkevsdi said:

Well the main point here is that global warming is occurring and people have to change what they are doing. 

You can cherry pick stories here or there but when the scientist you quote says 

 

"With 2016 set to be the warmest year on record, it is urgent that all the world intensify efforts to reduce emissions of greenhouses gases," Richard Seager, a leading climate scientist at Columbia University, told The Mercury News.

Maybe you should listen. 

Dude a mmgw scientists kicked you in the pussy.   Face the facts.   I wasn't trying to debate the whole global warming topic.   Just what you were claiming about the gulf stream and temps in Europe.  

Edited by Highmark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, revkevsdi said:

Well the main point here is that global warming is occurring and people have to change what they are doing. 

You can cherry pick stories here or there but when the scientist you quote says 

 

"With 2016 set to be the warmest year on record, it is urgent that all the world intensify efforts to reduce emissions of greenhouses gases," Richard Seager, a leading climate scientist at Columbia University, told The Mercury News.

Maybe you should listen. 

Another one who uses computer modelling and manipulations. Yeah, we should definitely listen to this guy!! :lol:Again, Kevvy Wevvy, what is the climate emergency here in Canada and what have you seen for yourself that makes you believe, in that pea brained melon of your's, that GW is real and not just the weather? 

Throughout my career I have used numerical models, observations and proxy reconstructions of past climates to understand the physical mechanisms responsible for climate variability and change on seasonal to glacial-interglacial timescales. I have a particular interest in how the variation of the tropical atmosphere-ocean system organize climate on a global scale. I have also studied the reasons why the mean climate of the planet is the way it is and why Europe has mild winters, why there is a tropical Pacific warm pool, why there are subtropical anticyclones etc. My recent work has focused on the mechanisms of persistent North American drought and its relation to tropical Pacific and tropical Atlantic Ocean temperature variations. This work has led me into studies of Medieval megadroughts in the American West and studies of the hydrological future of the West.

sheepe.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, revkevsdi said:

Well the main point here is that global warming is occurring and people have to change what they are doing. 

You can cherry pick stories here or there but when the scientist you quote says 

 

"With 2016 set to be the warmest year on record, it is urgent that all the world intensify efforts to reduce emissions of greenhouses gases," Richard Seager, a leading climate scientist at Columbia University, told The Mercury News.

Maybe you should listen. 

No, people do not have to change what they are doing, and will not change what they are doing. Well some will. The poor will stop heating their homes and eat less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PDF of the study. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.00165.pdf

 

Conclusion We have proven that the GCM-models used in IPCC report AR5 cannot compute correctly the natural component included in the observed global temperature. The reason is that the models fail to derive the influences of low cloud cover fraction on the global temperature. A too small natural component results in a too large portion for the contribution of the greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide. That is why 6 J. KAUPPINEN AND P. MALMI IPCC represents the climate sensitivity more than one order of magnitude larger than our sensitivity 0.24°C. Because the anthropogenic portion in the increased CO2 is less than 10 %, we have practically no anthropogenic climate change. The low clouds control mainly the global temperature

Edited by ManOnManOral
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member

When we were kids nobody paid much attention to weather extremes other than what they were.....a current weather event.   Since the whole MMGW shit show now every record or every storm is evaluated not only to the past but what might be in the future.   Its nuts.  Records were broke and we just brushed them off.   Now one hot day and its somehow significantly important in mankind's existence.  

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Highmark said:

Dude a mmgw scientists kicked you in the pussy.   Face the facts.   I wasn't trying to debate the whole global warming topic.   Just what you were claiming about the gulf stream and temps in Europe.  

So you agree that mmgw is real?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ManOnManOral said:

No, people do not have to change what they are doing, and will not change what they are doing. Well some will. The poor will stop heating their homes and eat less.

They already have started changing. They aren’t waiting for fuxktards like you. Too bad Trump set things back. The idiot should have used this as an excuse in the trade negotiations. He’s too stupid just like you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Highmark said:

When we were kids nobody paid much attention to weather extremes other than what they were.....a current weather event.   Since the whole MMGW shit show now every record or every storm is evaluated not only to the past but what might be in the future.   Its nuts.  Records were broke and we just brushed them off.   Now one hot day and its somehow significantly important in mankind's existence.  

 

Anecdotal evidence vs scientific studies. 

Awesome. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ManOnManOral said:

what do we have here? https://arxiv.org/abs/1907.00165

Looks like a study. Has it been reviewed or is it just their theory?

Who paid for the study? Deniers always think there is big money in climate science  

why is the Trump whitehouse redacting any mention of climate change? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, revkevsdi said:

Looks like a study. Has it been reviewed or is it just their theory?

Who paid for the study? Deniers always think there is big money in climate science  

why is the Trump whitehouse redacting any mention of climate change? 

read it you fucktard. Now cornell university is  not legit in your mind? You are a fucking idiot.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, ManOnManOral said:

read it you fucktard. Now cornell university is  not legit in your mind? You are a fucking idiot.

What is their affiliation with Cornell? Do you understand how any of this works?

Remember when you lied and said I posted a study that proved trees created more CO2?  That was funny. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
4 hours ago, revkevsdi said:

Well the main point here is that global warming is occurring and people have to change what they are doing. 

You can cherry pick stories here or there but when the scientist you quote says 

 

"With 2016 set to be the warmest year on record, it is urgent that all the world intensify efforts to reduce emissions of greenhouses gases," Richard Seager, a leading climate scientist at Columbia University, told The Mercury News.

Maybe you should listen. 

So what have you changed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
5 minutes ago, steve from amherst said:

So what have you changed?

He recycles a bit more.  :lol:   

NEVER once heard someone actually make serious changes.   Its the same thing as wanting higher taxes.   There is a way to do it all by yourself but NOBODY does unless they are forced.  Think of all the money celebrities could give.  :lol:  

https://fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gifts-to-government.html

Edited by Highmark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
2 minutes ago, Highmark said:

He recycles a bit more.  :lol:   

NEVER once heard someone actually make serious changes.   Its the same thing as wanting higher taxes.   There is a way to do it all by yourself but NOBODY does unless they are forced.  Think of all the money celebrities could give.  :lol:  

https://fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gifts-to-government.html

Spend a little time on a industry specific forum. Dude there so green its even in his screen name. Rants and raves and starts a new GW thread everyday. As soon as he gets back from driving his kid to school. Even thou the bus goes right past his house.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Highmark said:

He recycles a bit more.  :lol:   

NEVER once heard someone actually make serious changes.   Its the same thing as wanting higher taxes.   There is a way to do it all by yourself but NOBODY does unless they are forced.  Think of all the money celebrities could give.  :lol:  

https://fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gifts-to-government.html

Exactly the point of carbon taxes. Increase the prices on those who pollute more and give a dividend to those that reduce their consumption. 

You know, monetary incentives. Something economists agree will work. 

Vs conservative plans that cost more and don’t work. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The current ice extent is among the highest ever measured (for June 25). The ice surface mass by the fourth week of June was found to be among the highest in 39 years, shooting well above the 1981-2010 mean.

The sudden gain in ice mass may not last longer. However, it does expose the alarmist predictions about historic melting and contradicts their claims that Greenland ice is on a rapid decline. 

This is not the first instance where the alarmists are caught hijacking weather phenomena to promote the climate apocalypse.

 

http://polarportal.dk/en/greenland/surface-conditions/

Edited by XCR1250
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, revkevsdi said:

Exactly the point of carbon taxes. Increase the prices on those who pollute more and give a dividend to those that reduce their consumption

You know, monetary incentives. Something economists agree will work. 

Vs conservative plans that cost more and don’t work. 

You are one brain dead, moronic ignorant idiot. :wacko:

Ottawa eases carbon tax thresholds to help Canada’s big industries compete

https://business.financialpost.com/commodities/energy/citing-competitiveness-pressures-feds-ease-carbon-tax-thresholds

Ottawa downplays carbon price plan that gives more tax relief to heavy polluters

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2018/08/02/ottawa-downplays-carbon-price-plan-that-gives-more-tax-relief-to-heavy-polluters.html

Tax on large polluters will now kick in at a higher level of emissions

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberals-carbon-price-lower-1.4769530

 

 

Edited by irv
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, revkevsdi said:

Ask the hayseed. He says the earth is cooling. 

The overall temperature trend of the earth is cooling. You are a science denier 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Trying to pay the bills, lol

×
×
  • Create New...