presumably then you know the way that the current models predict and explain the slight antarctic increase?

I'd be interested in seeing if you have that level of knowledge of the topic - or are you just repeating something fox news told you to repeat? It's a simple answer, something that has been in the news over and over again - what is it?

...

ultimately it's pointless to try to argue something as complex as the science behind the models with people who have intentionally chosen to promote a simplistic political model.

you also have to accept that the science haters WILL win, in the short term.

So, when did we enter the higher orbit phase of this 100,000 year cycle?

I believe you are referring to the Maunder Minimum which was between 1645–1715 during a "Little Ice Age".

Also, I believe that the recent period of little to no sun spots has ended recently and many say that the earth has been cooling the last 10 years.

you ... what?! serious, you claim antarctic ice has BUILD UP!? OMFG! i cant believe it ... you skipped ALL the the latest docus and sciene reports bout that didnt ya? :disgust ppl like YOU are bringing it down to a total disaster :2 cents:

bam! hammer to the nail! THAT is 100% my thots bout US ignorants (focus on RANTS, lol) ... they will know when everyone is doing better then them and then they start a war to catch up or bring others down :2 cents: its the problem of a country considering itself "above" ... germany did last century but we LEARNED instead of insisting on "what is good today will be good anytime" ... why do US folks think "green" is bad? (mind you, what color is a dollar?) ... because some idiots spill "information" it will kill jobs - whereas the OPPOSITE is the truth! inventing new technology to keep the environment clean CREATES jobs! and hey, you want yer kids to be in need for a gas mask when going out? hmm? what are ya going to tell them when they ask "why didnt ya do anything?" ... and yeah, lobbyism is a BIG US problem ... buggers dont even label their GE milk ... holy smoke - more ignorance can only be found looking at FUNDEMENTALISTS!

edit ... MaDalton - are you EU or DE?

It is. Even people supporting you position say it is: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...e-environment/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...arts-here.html

http://www.washingtontimes.com/weblo...e-cap-growing/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...oomsayers.html

It is funny how many of the questions/comments in this thread that Overload just ignores.

Thats cause we is all ignorants...:1orglaugh

DE in CZ :winkwink:

presumably then you also know the part of the global warming model that explains why this happens? and why more ice and snow in the antarctic is probably caused by global warming?

a news magazine like nat geo is not science, its news, but there does seem to be a slight increase in snow deposit in antartica, and the northern hemisphere, especially the northern arctic, does seem to be warming faster than the southern hemisphere and antarctic.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

again, these are not science, this is news at best, altho arguably it's mostly not news, its editorial opinion. It's certainly not nat geo, but nat geo is not science either.

However, I'll ask you the same thing, since you want to use the antarctic measurements in your rhetoric.

What part of the global warming model explains why this happens? And why is more ice and snow in the antarctic probably caused by global warming? Why, logically, can it not be caused in this case by global cooling?

I know you are posting on antartica because your political opinion sources have told you to do so, but there actually is a science behind it, beyond the opinion. What is the current most common scientific explanation?

A lot of pro-AGW scientists don't do science either. Their specialty is propaganda.

I just grabbed the first link I found. There are thousands about this.

Yes, I read the theory about how global warming is leading to more ice in Antarctica. I do not think it will hold up under scrutiny.

"According to the US National Snow and Ice Data Centre in Colorado, Arctic summer sea ice has increased by 409,000 square miles, or 26 per cent, since 2007"

These things called "articles" quote things called "sources" said sources are listed in the articles.... :uhoh

Has nothing to do with any political afflictions sorry. Has to do with watching these scientific prophets over and over again just during my lifespan being ridiculously off. Always a new "threat" always a new "scare" its ridiculous.

If you link to a news story and the conclusion is different than his own he says it is not science and if you quote a study he says it was funded by the oil industry as if they are the only ones with an agenda.

the reason freon is now bad is that dupont's patent on it was about to expire so they wanted it off the market.

If I recall their patent was on R-12 and maybe R-22 Lucky for them I bet they have the new patent on R-134 :winkwink:

Btw though the newer stuff is more "ozone friendly" overall its much more toxic.

Do you have some aversion to stating the most common explanation? It only requires one sentence, maybe two.

So let me get this right ... if i pay extra tax on ... well ... everything, ... it will cure the climate change that has been happening the last few billion years.

Cool.

So, you're argument is, the arctic measurements are flawed? And that one source of measurements is superior to others?

So, then, the disagreement in this case can be resolved by examining the sources of arctic measurements. I dont have time now, but might give it a shot sometime soon.

I dont recognize the measurement you quote - what's your source?

What about the argument that the US is falling behind technologically? Does that carry any weight with you and your side?

What about oil security? Does that concern you and your side?

Making a false but foolish looking caricature and then claiming it represents your opponents argument is called "straw man" - and its a typical form of false logic rhetoric.

do you have enough self-awareness and knowledge to actually state the argument that you are straw-manning?

and, nothing can cure global warming. nor will we actually do anything effective to stop it.

it's the american descendents that will be dealing with most of the problems, if they happen. thats why it's inevitable that your side will win politically in the short term.

even tho it means falling behind technologically for the US - the US is fucked anyway, our prosperity is already sold off, we pretty much gave up on the ideal of technological supremacy.

Is the earth warming? Yes. Is it man made, natural or man assisted?

The problem is to stop it or slow it down will mean people have to give up consuming the earths resources faster than the earth can replace them. It will mean a major cut in the earths population, people will have to stop churning out shit into the atmosphere and they will definitely have to stop driving SUVs and fuel prices will rocket.

The cost of protecting most of us from the consequences will be enormous and people will not pay that bill. Until the hit hits the fan and they start screaming why nothing was done.

do you watch the news????????

Put these magnets on your head and chill the fuck out, dumbass.

thats why there is a population control agenda in place

It's August. I'm wearing a jumper.

Global warming can fuck off.

1> It is called a Maunder Minimum, not a 'mounder period' and it is in reference to the 1650s through the early 1700s.

2> We are currently on the cusp of a Solar Max which is the 50 year high point of solar flare and sunspot activity. They are projecting it to be anywhere from 30% to 50% stronger than the last one.

3> To think we as humans have even have a basic understanding of how the earth 'works' is just... plain stupid. If a earthquake or the building of large dams in China can shift the planet on its axis, how can we possibly understand the intricate details of the weather systems, ecosystems, etc?

4> You should be embarrassed by how ignorant you are. Please put down your keyboard and walk away for a while before your retardation infects the rest of teh interwebz.

Yes you are the only smart one here. Only you have the rock solid data to prove your point I pull mine out of thin air.

This is on the wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_ice

It sites the source as National Snow and Ice Data Center which as a part of Univ. of Colorado which I'm sure you will say is not a credible source.

There are a billion things that effect the planet's weather. We don't know one tenth of them, nor can we predict how one issue affects another issue. You might be naive and believe what you read in the papers, but some of us have been around long enough to remember when they were telling us all signs were pointing towards us entering an ice age.

If we are in a higher orbit, we are closer to the sun - and thus should be getting warmer. Fuck, my college degree isn't in this area and I can tell you that.

Yes, but because of ten thousand other things - and the fact we are closer to the sun - we are getting warmer. Just because "one thing" is happening doesn't mean "we should be getting colder" when there are ten thousand other things causing the direct opposite. Top taking one thing and blowing it out of context and telling us we are all going to die.

And exactly how often does this happen? Doesn't this happen like once every thirty years for as long as we've been tracking it?

Are we getting warmer? Maybe, perhaps. I live in California and it's fucking sixty degrees outside. In fact, it's been a cool summer here.

Or maybe this is just part of a much larger cycle that we have no control over. I mean, tens of thousands of years all of the land mass was in one great lump and since then everything has drifted apart. Maybe this is all just weather patterns changing, a cycle that's been going on since the earth was created.

Maybe instead of bitching about the causes, maybe you and your friends should figure out how we are going to move all of our shit underground and live there.

Let's say that is true, and maybe it is. Why is that bad?

so when it gets too hot it's global warming/climate change

and when it gets too cold it's global warming/climate change

just making sure

Yes it's all an illusion.

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=hotte...da7e67d4bf69d3

If Global Warming, and now "Climate Change," is on the up and up, what is with all the scientific fraud and why are the scientist critics being demonized and ignored?

Why can't there be a straight up debate?

How come Al Gore's massive investment in the business is not a red flag for his possible bias?

I usually don't post in threads like this, but TS... the 2 points you've made are both wrong according to everything I've heard/read. In fact, they're the complete opposite of what I have read. Admittedly, I'm rather ignorant on this topic, but when I've read in 15+ scientific journals(peer-reviewed) the exact opposite... leads me to believe them over you.

And I'm not a denier. I'm well aware that global warming is "real" - the humans causing it BS is what I don't buy(because there's no proof yet). If someone provides empirical evidence for humans causing it, I'll bite. Who caused it really doesn't matter though.. it's a reality, we should deal with it.

ocean-view is not necessarely beach front .... but, if you can twist and spin, why not ...:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

:1orglaugh

Do you expect people paid to monitor it are going to say "No worries it's nothing to bother about"?

My fear is, if they're wrong we're in the clear. If they're right and we wait for undeniable proof we're fucked.

The thing is, there is no 'global warming' as they're trying to sell it. Is there climate change? Of course! The global climates have been changing from day one and will continue to change until the planet dies.

People like Al Gore will sell you doom and dismay to make a profit, not because they actually think there is a problem.

I'll see you your BBC and raise you my Channel 4.



Entire documentary here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...0191369613647#