Al Gore another idiot, global warming myth

[miclo18d]

Originally Posted by DontPanic

miclo18d, how does your post directly respond to anything that I wrote? I never mentioned anything about being in an ice age or not - simply that the trend concerning the overall area of arctic ice is negative.

You made mention of being in a period of Global warming. Check you post and check your privilege.

[Paslode]

Originally Posted by DontPanic

the trend concerning the overall area of arctic ice is negative.

What makes you believe the trend is negative?

> Assuming you are right, we need that ice why?

"Arctic sea ice keeps the polar regions cool and helps moderate global climate. Sea ice has a bright surface; 80 percent of the sunlight that strikes it is reflected back into space. As sea ice melts in the summer, it exposes the dark ocean surface. Instead of reflecting 80 percent of the sunlight, the ocean absorbs 90 percent of the sunlight. The oceans heat up, and Arctic temperatures rise further.

A small temperature increase at the poles leads to still greater warming over time, making the poles the most sensitive regions to climate change on Earth. According to scientific measurements, both the thickness and extent of summer sea ice in the Arctic have shown a dramatic decline over the past thirty years. This is consisistent with observations of a warming Arctic. The loss of sea ice also has the potential to accelerate global warming trends and to change climate patterns."

https://nsidc.org/cryosphere/quickfacts/seaice.html

"Melting of sea ice releases molecular chlorine, which reacts with sunlight to produce chlorine atoms. Because chlorine atoms are highly reactive, they can expedite the degradation of methane and tropospheric ozone and the oxidation of mercury to more toxic forms. Cracks in sea ice are causing ozone and mercury uptake in the surrounding environment"

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ture12924.html

However, my response was targeted toward the original post, which states that the ice was growing in the last two years or so and then assumes that because of this global warming must be false. The trend however, is that the ice is melting which would support the argument for "global warming".

Originally Posted by miclo18d

You made mention of being in a period of Global warming. Check you post and check your privilege.

My mention of global warming is in reference to the original post's conclusion; that it does not exist, and that the last two years of ice growth is a rebuttal of the science concerning global warming. I simply pointed out that this conclusion was not an appropriate one, given the trend.

I'm sure that one could find articles which refute global warming, I am pointing out that this article does not.

Originally Posted by Paslode

What makes you believe the trend is negative?

The article and table at the bottom of the page, found here

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2011/10/

Also, you can find a host of information in the references section of this wiki

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_sea_ice_decline

[Paslode]

Al Gore's goal is to control the mindless masses by predicting cataclysmic events based on BS like some ancient Shaman calling for the worlds end because of an eclipse or blood moon....and all the while he is living large and planing on making a hefty profit off carbon credits.

NOAA/NASA Dramatically Altered US Temperatures After The Year 2000

'Right after the year 2000, NASA and NOAA dramatically altered US climate history, making the past much colder and the present much warmer. The animation below shows how NASA cooled 1934 and warmed 1998, to make 1998 the hottest year in US history instead of 1934. This alteration turned a long term cooling trend since 1930 into a warming trend.'

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2...the-year-2000/

Four Months After Predicting The Demise Of Antarctic Sea Ice, NSIDC Experts Said They Predicted Record Ice All Along

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2...ice-all-along/

"Now, in what might be the largest scientific fraud ever uncovered, NASA and the NOAA have been caught red-handed altering historical temperature data to produce a "climate change narrative" that defies reality. This finding, originally documented on the Real Science website, is detailed here.

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/i...3205358AAjH6NN


IMO you can't make heads to tails of what is fact or fiction. Too many people and businesses see the climate as being a new cash cow.

Al Gore's goal is to control the mindless masses by predicting cataclysmic events based on BS like some ancient Shaman calling for the worlds end because of an eclipse or blood moon....and all the while he is living large and planing on making a hefty profit off carbon credits.

Al Gore is a tool, without a doubt.

I can't say either way; I'm not a climate scientist. However, it seems like that vast majority of those engaged in the study of said science are on board with the idea of human influenced global warming. I can think of at least 15 organizations off the top of my head. These are the same people who make our modern lifestyle possible through innovations in technology; and the idea that they are all in league to some nefarious end is a little tin-foil hat for me.

Too many people and businesses see the climate as being a new cash cow.

True. Though inevitably, technological innovation will render oil and gas obsolete. I say the sooner the better.

[miclo18d]

Originally Posted by DontPanic

>
My mention of global warming is in reference to the original post's conclusion; that it does not exist, and that the last two years of ice growth is a rebuttal of the science concerning global warming. I simply pointed out that this conclusion was not an appropriate one, given the trend.

I'm sure that one could find articles which refute global warming, I am pointing out that this article does not.

The article states that the ice trend has been declining for decades.

You seem to have trouble with reading, and seem like you are here to stir up some trouble. I will direct you to a section you may want to read before your continuation of eating shoe leather. http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/...splay.php?f=98

The article states that the ice trend has been declining for decades.

Once again, my original response is to point out this fact, and to compare it with the title of this thread "Al Gore another idiot, global warming myth"

The first part of which, is a fact. The second part, "...global warming myth" would not be supported by the data, which states that sea ice has been declining for decades.

The idea of global warming is concerned with long term trends, not what happens in the span of two years. With the long term trend being ice melt, that would actually support the idea of human influenced global warming, making the title of this thread inappropriate.

In regard to your other comments, I would direct you to the following link:

http://professionalsoldiers.com/foru...ead.php?t=3102

But I will quote for your convenience -

While lively debate is encouraged, please do not engage in personal attacks.

I don't believe that I am in violation of any of the forum rules - and that my posts lie well within the context of this forum, which encourages debate, not repetition of the same opinions or points of view. Please do not take any of my counter-points as personal attacks.

[PSM]

Originally Posted by Panic! Panic!

Instead of reflecting 80 percent of the sunlight, the ocean absorbs 90 percent of the sunlight. The oceans heat up, and Arctic temperatures rise further.

And that's a problem why, exactly?

Pat

p.s.: I think miclo18d has predicted your future better than government funded "climate" scientists have predicted Global Bullshit.

Originally Posted by PSM

And that's a problem why, exactly?

Are you asking why it would be a problem if all the ice on the poles melted?

As for your other comments - This is a forum where debate is encouraged, correct? I'm sorry that my posts seem to make you uncomfortable, however I am under the impression that I have not violated any rules.

predicted your future better than government funded "climate" scientists have predicted Global Bullshit.

I'm curious as to what you would consider a good analysis of the current climate situation? Are there any studies that support your opinion that you could send me to?

[PSM]

Originally Posted by DontPanic

Are you asking why it would be a problem if all the ice on the poles melted?

As for your other comments - This is a forum where debate is encouraged, correct? I'm sorry that my posts seem to make you uncomfortable, however I am under the impression that I have not violated any rules.

I'm not uncomfortable and, yes, that was my question.

Pat

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by DontPanic

The article and table at the bottom of the page, found here

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2011/10/

Also, you can find a host of information in the references section of this wiki

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_sea_ice_decline

You do realize that the next time you use wiki as a source for scientific data we will have to ban you........

No really........

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant

You do realize that the next time you use wiki as a source for scientific data we will have to ban you........

No really........

I specifically said the reference section of the wiki article, which contains direct links to the scientific articles (good source) which are discussed within the wiki itself (bad source). I would assume the same ban warning extends to other users who say, would link to a blog, or yahoo answers page as a source for their scientific data?

yes, that was my question.

Are you under the impression that life with simply go on as usual, or that in the time it took for the ice to melt (100+ years easy) would give humanity enough time to move from the current coasts? I'm sure if you were interested in the other possible scenarios, it would only be a google search away.

[Team Sergeant]

And you don't find it amusing that the current administration went from "global warming" to "climate change" as their liberal yell?

[Paslode]

Originally Posted by DontPanic

I'm curious as to what you would consider a good analysis of the current climate situation? Are there any studies that support your opinion that you could send me to?

DP there are just as many studies out that 'PROVE' it is BS as there are that 'PROVE' that the sky is falling!!!! And there are scientists on both sides of the issue.... THAT FOR THE RIGHT PRICE (or GRANT) they will come up with a study that PROVES THE MERIT OF YOUR AGENDA.

Originally Posted by DontPanic

I can't say either way; I'm not a climate scientist.

So why are you pimping one side of the issue?