Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by mocgator, Sep 9, 2013.
"One scientist. ..".
Wow that is totally underwhelming.
He sounds pretty level-headed to me actually. In fact, I'm looking forward to his upcoming book, "How we tortured and killed the Arctic and forced it's kids to watch before melting them too: a level-headed approach to Arctic sea ice modeling".
Indeed it is tough for many of these scientists not to transition into advocates. Once one's models predict something dire with what they perceive as good confidence, I can't imagine anybody not feeling the need to get their message out. The only real question is whether this passion introduces bias, to which my signature quote would probably suggest an answer.
"The Arctic is screaming"? "How we tortured and killed the Arctic (etc)".
Rade, I can understand him getting wrapped up in things and becoming an advocate, but that's being a drama queen.
It's not like the Arctic has never had periods with little sea ice. We may be causing this particular event, or partially contributing to it. But the Arctic has survived this scenario just fine in prior episodes that had nothing to do with us, and will survive again.
Watch the series "life below zero". Don't think those cats are worried about any global warming up around or north of the Arctic circle.
I was agreeing with you, man. I made up the book title, in case that actually came off as a possible text.
My later point was a bit more general with regards to scientists' use of normative vs. positive language.
Levelheaded?? And you criticize Dr Roy Spencer?
I gave you two names. Stop being lazy and look them up.
Check my post right above yours. For clarity, I really try to minimize my sarcastic nature on the climate threads, so I think I need to make it a bit more clear when I let it come through.
Didn't think so.
This is why you are not taken seriously and are so often ignored. You have not one, but two names of scientists. From a link that takes you to several links.
One man made the prediction. The other agreed with the prediction. But rather than instigate the men and the prediction, your small little mind resorts to this silliness.
"1 Where's the link?
2 Where's the part where "scientists" - I assume you mean more than one and presumably some sort of consensus - "insisted" that arctic ice would be gone by 2013?"
Read more: http://www.gatorcountry.com/swampgas/showthread.php?t=270804&page=2#ixzz2eRDkv8uu
I feel the need to correct this each time I see it. Sorry. The good news is that you're right that it is a spoon-fed talking point, just not from where you think. And you're the target.
"The phrase "global warming" should be abandoned in favour of "climate change", Mr Luntz says, and the party should describe its policies as "conservationist" instead of "environmentalist", because "most people" think environmentalists are "extremists" who indulge in "some pretty bizarre behaviour... that turns off many voters"."
Do you guys think the 60% increase in ice than what was expected might have anything to do with the sun? I see that Mars's ice cap is growing and getting deeper as well. Odd is it not?
Each winter the ice cap grows by adding 1.5-2 m of dry ice, with seasonal ice deposits extending as far south as 45°.
Strong prevailing winds at the poles are thought to be responsible for shaping the spiral troughs, which seem to pinwheel around the ice cap.
Biting into the spirals at the lower left in this image is a 318 km-long, 2 km-deep chasm called Chasma Boreale. The plunging canyon formed before the spiral troughs, growing deeper as new ice deposits built up around it.
Asked you a simple question. Thin skinned much?
The Warmists just despise contrapuntal data. They quickly get their panties in a wad and start talking about insulting people. Perhaps there will be a really hot year in the Arctic in the next decade or so and they won't have to be so grumpy. :wave:
Gotcha. We really need a sarcasm emoticon for the slow folks like me. :laugh:
Except, well, when large parts are cooling.
Interesting articles... So they are the same thing and not two wholly different climate patterns. Some on the Left insist that those two phrases are entirely different things.
Give Row a break--he's just snippy the last few months because his savior in the WH has had a bad run as of late and has run out of ways to react. :laugh:
But to add to the list of two scientists--here is the God of Global Warming making sure his dire predictions were out there for the world to see back in 2009. His remarks starting at the 1:55 are laughable.
"some of the models suggest to Dr. Maslowski that there is a 75% chance that the entire north polar ice cap during some of the summer months could be completely ice free within the next 5-7 years."
Notice all the interesting ways which EeGore left his ass open for backpeddeling with his wording...should the need arise in a few years when it is shown to be utter gullible fodder he has been scamming folks with. A new height in CYA.
What a tool...not sure who is worse--EeGore or the idiots who have fallen for his con job.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/MsioIw4bvzI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>