(02-14-2013 03:34 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 12:14 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  Seriously, I don't know why the global warming alarmists on the left continue to push global warming. Do they so much need to believe in a cause they believe to be noble that they're willing to look insanely ignorant in the process?

In other words, we have once again an environmental problem that is a normal problem, but not a world-ending problem that requires we surrender more power and wealth to government, which is the left's default position to every "crisis" problem.

Clearly you've not seen Day After Tomorrow. That sh!t is real.

(02-14-2013 03:37 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Mankind can't destroy the earth. All mankind can do is run himself into the ground, and if/when that happens, the earth will keep right on rotating on its axis and not miss us one bit.

Watch out for self-replicating nanobots turning everything into a grey goo, eating themselves right to the earth's core!!!


(I'm currently reading some nanobot sci-fi....)

(02-14-2013 04:44 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 03:37 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Mankind can't destroy the earth. All mankind can do is run himself into the ground, and if/when that happens, the earth will keep right on rotating on its axis and not miss us one bit.

Watch out for self-replicating nanobots turning everything into a grey goo, eating themselves right to the earth's core!!!

(I'm currently reading some nanobot sci-fi....)

Don't forget self-replicating Benders...

Good news everyone!

(02-14-2013 12:06 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/02/12/se...ew-record/

Difference between Arctic "norms" and Antarctic norms are interesting.

Sea ice area is still lower than 2 standard deviations below average for this time of year. Ice volume is at an all time low for this time of the year. Last year saw the lowest amount of sea ice area and volume on record. Yet you tout ice area gained in one season as meaning something? The only thing it means is that we started at the lowest value for Arctic sea ice area on record. Congrats!!!

(02-14-2013 08:00 PM)plaidtiger Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 12:06 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/02/12/se...ew-record/

Difference between Arctic "norms" and Antarctic norms are interesting.

Sea ice area is still lower than 2 standard deviations below average for this time of year. Ice volume is at an all time low for this time of the year. Last year saw the lowest amount of sea ice area and volume on record. Yet you tout ice area gained in one season as meaning something? The only thing it means is that we started at the lowest value for Arctic sea ice area on record. Congrats!!!

That's true. Check out the 2nd image on this link. It shows Arctic ice levels quite clearly in time lapsed photography, as well as a large section of Greenland losing its ice cover...

http://news.cnet.com/2300-11386_3-10015751-2.html

(02-14-2013 08:36 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 08:00 PM)plaidtiger Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 12:06 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/02/12/se...ew-record/

Difference between Arctic "norms" and Antarctic norms are interesting.

Sea ice area is still lower than 2 standard deviations below average for this time of year. Ice volume is at an all time low for this time of the year. Last year saw the lowest amount of sea ice area and volume on record. Yet you tout ice area gained in one season as meaning something? The only thing it means is that we started at the lowest value for Arctic sea ice area on record. Congrats!!!

That's true. Check out the 2nd image on this link. It shows Arctic ice levels quite clearly in time lapsed photography, as well as a large section of Greenland losing its ice cover...

http://news.cnet.com/2300-11386_3-10015751-2.html

I wonder why they ever named it Greenland??

(02-14-2013 09:15 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 08:36 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 08:00 PM)plaidtiger Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 12:06 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/02/12/se...ew-record/

Difference between Arctic "norms" and Antarctic norms are interesting.

Sea ice area is still lower than 2 standard deviations below average for this time of year. Ice volume is at an all time low for this time of the year. Last year saw the lowest amount of sea ice area and volume on record. Yet you tout ice area gained in one season as meaning something? The only thing it means is that we started at the lowest value for Arctic sea ice area on record. Congrats!!!

That's true. Check out the 2nd image on this link. It shows Arctic ice levels quite clearly in time lapsed photography, as well as a large section of Greenland losing its ice cover...

http://news.cnet.com/2300-11386_3-10015751-2.html

I wonder why they ever named it Greenland??

An attempt to attract more settlers.

(02-14-2013 08:00 PM)plaidtiger Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 12:06 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/02/12/se...ew-record/

Difference between Arctic "norms" and Antarctic norms are interesting.

Sea ice area is still lower than 2 standard deviations below average for this time of year. Ice volume is at an all time low for this time of the year. Last year saw the lowest amount of sea ice area and volume on record. Yet you tout ice area gained in one season as meaning something? The only thing it means is that we started at the lowest value for Arctic sea ice area on record. Congrats!!!

It's crazy isn't it, ice melting and reforming. I wonder how many times it has done that over the last 1,000,000 years.

Another funny point is you like to point out 1 year in the grand scheme of things is minuscule and doesn't mean much....sure it is.....but the averages you speak of, are a mere blip up the graph in the grand scheme of things as well

(02-14-2013 09:53 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 08:00 PM)plaidtiger Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 12:06 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/02/12/se...ew-record/

Difference between Arctic "norms" and Antarctic norms are interesting.

Sea ice area is still lower than 2 standard deviations below average for this time of year. Ice volume is at an all time low for this time of the year. Last year saw the lowest amount of sea ice area and volume on record. Yet you tout ice area gained in one season as meaning something? The only thing it means is that we started at the lowest value for Arctic sea ice area on record. Congrats!!!

It's crazy isn't it, ice melting and reforming. I wonder how many times it has done that over the last 1,000,000 years.

Another funny point is you like to point out 1 year in the grand scheme of things is minuscule and doesn't mean much....sure it is.....but the averages you speak of, are a mere blip up the graph in the grand scheme of things as well

It's more than one year. It's a trend. Look up sea ice volume. We are setting records every year.

That chart simply shows new ice formation. The other side of the story is that there are record losses. http://www.ctvnews.ca/sci-tech/record-lo...-1.1156941

Wild swings are not good. Cherrypicking your data is not good.

Why is there so much controversy on this from people who aren't scientists? No one argues with a doctor when they discover a breakthrough on cancer or heart disease. If your doctor told you that if you didn't stop smoking you'll die, you'd stop (or, as some people do, you'd at least acknowledge the fact but keep doing it). Why is this particular area of science so hard to believe? You drive across bridges that stand because of science. You fly in airplanes designed by science. You go to the doctor based on research from science. I really do not understand how the brain of someone who denies actual facts and evidence works.

(02-14-2013 10:18 PM)plaidtiger Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 09:53 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 08:00 PM)plaidtiger Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 12:06 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/02/12/se...ew-record/

Difference between Arctic "norms" and Antarctic norms are interesting.

Sea ice area is still lower than 2 standard deviations below average for this time of year. Ice volume is at an all time low for this time of the year. Last year saw the lowest amount of sea ice area and volume on record. Yet you tout ice area gained in one season as meaning something? The only thing it means is that we started at the lowest value for Arctic sea ice area on record. Congrats!!!

It's crazy isn't it, ice melting and reforming. I wonder how many times it has done that over the last 1,000,000 years.

Another funny point is you like to point out 1 year in the grand scheme of things is minuscule and doesn't mean much....sure it is.....but the averages you speak of, are a mere blip up the graph in the grand scheme of things as well

It's more than one year. It's a trend. Look up sea ice volume. We are setting records every year.

and once again, in the grand scheme of things (using time as a variable as you are doing) its a blip

It's been fluctuating for eons

(02-14-2013 12:26 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 12:14 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  An overheated planet will do that.

Seriously, I don't know why the global warming alarmists on the left continue to push global warming. Do they so much need to believe in a cause they believe to be noble that they're willing to look insanely ignorant in the process?

Maybe we care for more than our pocketbook? Maybe we can see what is gong on and actually understand/beleive in science(unlike Torchy). Maybe we want future generations to be able to live comfortably on this planet since it is the only one we have-even if I never have kids.

(02-14-2013 12:26 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 12:14 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  An overheated planet will do that.

Seriously, I don't know why the global warming alarmists on the left continue to push global warming. Do they so much need to believe in a cause they believe to be noble that they're willing to look insanely ignorant in the process?

Maybe we care for more than our pocketbook? Maybe we can see what is gong on and actually understand/beleive in science(unlike Torchy). Maybe we want future generations to be able to live comfortably on this planet since it is the only one we have-even if I never have kids.

Thank you Lord.

(02-14-2013 10:18 PM)plaidtiger Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 09:53 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 08:00 PM)plaidtiger Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 12:06 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/02/12/se...ew-record/

Difference between Arctic "norms" and Antarctic norms are interesting.

Sea ice area is still lower than 2 standard deviations below average for this time of year. Ice volume is at an all time low for this time of the year. Last year saw the lowest amount of sea ice area and volume on record. Yet you tout ice area gained in one season as meaning something? The only thing it means is that we started at the lowest value for Arctic sea ice area on record. Congrats!!!

It's crazy isn't it, ice melting and reforming. I wonder how many times it has done that over the last 1,000,000 years.

Another funny point is you like to point out 1 year in the grand scheme of things is minuscule and doesn't mean much....sure it is.....but the averages you speak of, are a mere blip up the graph in the grand scheme of things as well

It's more than one year. It's a trend. Look up sea ice volume. We are setting records every year.

And??? 30 years ago the earth was going to enter a new ice age!!

These things are cyclical, it will get warm and the ice will melt, it will get cold and it will freeze up again but the general trend is a natural warming of the earth since the last ice age.

There is absolutely nothing human beings can do from preventing the Earth from getting Warner. 10 and 20 year patterns, it the grand scheme of Earth, are absolutely MEANINGLESS......there is no counter argument to this fact.

(02-15-2013 12:52 AM)Razor Ramon Monarch Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 10:18 PM)plaidtiger Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 09:53 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 08:00 PM)plaidtiger Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 12:06 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/02/12/se...ew-record/

Difference between Arctic "norms" and Antarctic norms are interesting.

Sea ice area is still lower than 2 standard deviations below average for this time of year. Ice volume is at an all time low for this time of the year. Last year saw the lowest amount of sea ice area and volume on record. Yet you tout ice area gained in one season as meaning something? The only thing it means is that we started at the lowest value for Arctic sea ice area on record. Congrats!!!

It's crazy isn't it, ice melting and reforming. I wonder how many times it has done that over the last 1,000,000 years.

Another funny point is you like to point out 1 year in the grand scheme of things is minuscule and doesn't mean much....sure it is.....but the averages you speak of, are a mere blip up the graph in the grand scheme of things as well

It's more than one year. It's a trend. Look up sea ice volume. We are setting records every year.

And??? 30 years ago the earth was going to enter a new ice age!!

These things are cyclical, it will get warm and the ice will melt, it will get cold and it will freeze up again but the general trend is a natural warming of the earth since the last ice age.

There is absolutely nothing human beings can do from preventing the Earth from getting Warner. 10 and 20 year patterns, it the grand scheme of Earth, are absolutely MEANINGLESS......there is no counter argument to this fact.

Hey RR Moron, most scientists actually DO say there is NATURAL warming. THe thing is the intelligent ones(meaning 95%+ of them) are saying that man is SPEEDING UP the process.

(02-15-2013 02:13 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(02-15-2013 12:52 AM)Razor Ramon Monarch Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 10:18 PM)plaidtiger Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 09:53 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 08:00 PM)plaidtiger Wrote:  Sea ice area is still lower than 2 standard deviations below average for this time of year. Ice volume is at an all time low for this time of the year. Last year saw the lowest amount of sea ice area and volume on record. Yet you tout ice area gained in one season as meaning something? The only thing it means is that we started at the lowest value for Arctic sea ice area on record. Congrats!!!

It's crazy isn't it, ice melting and reforming. I wonder how many times it has done that over the last 1,000,000 years.

Another funny point is you like to point out 1 year in the grand scheme of things is minuscule and doesn't mean much....sure it is.....but the averages you speak of, are a mere blip up the graph in the grand scheme of things as well

It's more than one year. It's a trend. Look up sea ice volume. We are setting records every year.

And??? 30 years ago the earth was going to enter a new ice age!!

These things are cyclical, it will get warm and the ice will melt, it will get cold and it will freeze up again but the general trend is a natural warming of the earth since the last ice age.

There is absolutely nothing human beings can do from preventing the Earth from getting Warner. 10 and 20 year patterns, it the grand scheme of Earth, are absolutely MEANINGLESS......there is no counter argument to this fact.

Hey RR Moron, most scientists actually DO say there is NATURAL warming. THe thing is the intelligent ones(meaning 95%+ of them) are saying that man is SPEEDING UP the process.

You haven't done the world a favor and killed yourself yet????

The intelligent ones ehhhh? Is that why the Earth hasn't warmed at all over the last 5 years despite the dire predictions from your "95%ers"?

You know less about climate change than you know about politics which is incredible because you quite literally know NOTHING about politics.

If you did, you'd know that all the warming alarmists, much like the ones who were touting global cooling 30 years ago, are all on the governments dime. Unfortunately, you are your liberal ilk are not just ignorant on the subject, you are ignorant AND opinionated which is the worst kind of stupid.

Who keeps letting you in the house to use the computer Toby?

(02-14-2013 10:27 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  That chart simply shows new ice formation. The other side of the story is that there are record losses. http://www.ctvnews.ca/sci-tech/record-lo...-1.1156941

Wild swings are not good. Cherrypicking your data is not good.

Why is there so much controversy on this from people who aren't scientists?

Excuse me?

Check mate, now go sit down in the corner where you belong.

BTW, the charts in my original link showed the "long-term" difference between Arctic sea ice loss and Antarctic growth, so it's you who's cherry picking the data by ignoring Antarctia.

Quote:Why is this particular area of science so hard to believe? You drive across bridges that stand because of science. You fly in airplanes designed by science. You go to the doctor based on research from science. I really do not understand how the brain of someone who denies actual facts and evidence works.

Classic!

(02-15-2013 02:13 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(02-15-2013 12:52 AM)Razor Ramon Monarch Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 10:18 PM)plaidtiger Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 09:53 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 08:00 PM)plaidtiger Wrote:  Sea ice area is still lower than 2 standard deviations below average for this time of year. Ice volume is at an all time low for this time of the year. Last year saw the lowest amount of sea ice area and volume on record. Yet you tout ice area gained in one season as meaning something? The only thing it means is that we started at the lowest value for Arctic sea ice area on record. Congrats!!!

It's crazy isn't it, ice melting and reforming. I wonder how many times it has done that over the last 1,000,000 years.

Another funny point is you like to point out 1 year in the grand scheme of things is minuscule and doesn't mean much....sure it is.....but the averages you speak of, are a mere blip up the graph in the grand scheme of things as well

It's more than one year. It's a trend. Look up sea ice volume. We are setting records every year.

And??? 30 years ago the earth was going to enter a new ice age!!

These things are cyclical, it will get warm and the ice will melt, it will get cold and it will freeze up again but the general trend is a natural warming of the earth since the last ice age.

There is absolutely nothing human beings can do from preventing the Earth from getting Warner. 10 and 20 year patterns, it the grand scheme of Earth, are absolutely MEANINGLESS......there is no counter argument to this fact.

Hey RR Moron, most scientists actually DO say there is NATURAL warming. THe thing is the intelligent ones(meaning 95%+ of them) are saying that man is SPEEDING UP the process.

your 95% is way off

All of this stuff is based on "recorded history" Well, am I the only one that realizes the earth has been around a hell of a lot longer than anyting we humans ever recorded? So, just because something may trend one way "in recorded history" by no means equates that the earth is ending.