• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Arctic ice is almost gone.

Just one big jolt then we needn't worry about sea level for a thousand years.

The land is still rebounding from the last period of glaciation. For ~100,000 years the northern hemisphere had mile-high glaciers covering 20% of the planet. All that weight compressed the land underneath, and for the last 11,700 since the Holocene Interglacial Period began the land above the 45th parallel has been rebounding. Most of the sea level rise you see between 45°N and 45°S is caused by earth displacement, not melting ice. The vast majority of the melting ice is picked up by evaporation and contributes nothing to sea level increases.
 
You mean, how many climate scientists are climate scientists? :lamo



You must be new here. I routinely cite papers and research by actual climate scientists. The deniers spend 99% of their time spouting non-credible bull****, typically pushed by disinformation blog sites.

It was a serious question. I understand that the scientists who "agree" with the Climate Change whackos are not climate scientists. Is there a way to check?
 
Yes. We do that all the time. We humans are getting better at manipulating nature. It’s called science.

Great. Maybe you can stop hurricanes, snow storms, hot weather etc
 
Every single scientific organization in the entire planet. Every single textbook on the subject.

You're a high Priestess of the Climate Chance religion then.
 
Owl Bore predicted New York City would be under 20 feet of water by 2010. Looks like someone has been watching too many Hollywood movies.

Water World is their number one book they use in their Climate Change Bible Studies every Sunday
 
The land is still rebounding from the last period of glaciation. For ~100,000 years the northern hemisphere had mile-high glaciers covering 20% of the planet. All that weight compressed the land underneath, and for the last 11,700 since the Holocene Interglacial Period began the land above the 45th parallel has been rebounding. Most of the sea level rise you see between 45°N and 45°S is caused by earth displacement, not melting ice. The vast majority of the melting ice is picked up by evaporation and contributes nothing to sea level increases.

Most sea level rise is caused by thermal expansion. Heat up most things and they expand; the more the mass, the more the expansion. A mass the size of an ocean? A little increase in temperature, a small expansion translates into a measurable sea level rise.
Melting ice doesn't affect it much; if the ice was floating not at all.
 
It's the new phase of denial: "OK, the earth is warming. We can't change it."


That or you see:

1. It's the sun.

2. Soot.

CO2 helps warm. It's effect on sea level are probably in 3rd place. The problem is, you guys deny the other significant factors.

And yes, we can easily reduce soot emissions.
 
If cleaner air controls people then bring on the cleaner air. Maybe it will help people think more clearly when they're not breathing in all those fumes and gases. I think if people really had a choice they would chose clean air. As it stands, the polluters really aren't giving people much of a choice, are they? So in essence, they're the ones controlling the people and forcing them to breath dirty air and drink dirty water so they will die sooner.

.
Since man made carbon emissions don't show up in the Holocene period it would be difficult to say that GW today is a natural occurrence.


Where I live in the western US...we're experiencing very warm, short winters which affects the economy here that relies on the snow pack for it's ski and tourist industry. And in the summer it's getting too hot to go even go outside for any duration. Although I have to admit I like the more temperate winters...but it worries me what's happening in the ecosystem over all.

The reason for this weird weather we're having has to do with the loss of the old ice in the Arctic's Belfor Sea which is causing a very weak and wavy jet stream over the N. Hemisphere. The weaker the jet stream, the slower it moves...so it's not moving the storms out as fast it used to...instead the storms get stuck and stay in one place longer.

So currently, the western US is stuck under a loop in the jet stream that allows all this tropical air to come up from the equator...which in turn is causing longer hotter summers and shorter warmer winters which in turn has caused less rainfall, forest fires and disruption of wildlife migrations. Meanwhile, the eastern US is getting pounded with severe storms in winter and summer because they're stuck on the cold side of the jet stream and getting the brunt of the Arctic air coming down from the north.

180710110137_1_540x360.jpg


Average-Pattern-This-Winter.jpg


Canada reports that it's been colder there than it is on Mars.

Yes, and that vis another cyclical pattern of nature.

Do you have a point? Or just propaganda?
 
Yes, and that vis another cyclical pattern of nature.

Do you have a point? Or just propaganda?
Man made carbon emissions is cyclical? What period did that occur in that we may see a pattern? Even the Holocene doesn't show a pattern that could apply to today's GW. Why? Because it didn't have the out pouring of relentless man made carbon emissions speeding up the heating process and thwarting any attempt for the climate to reverse itself like it did in the past.

If science is what you call propaganda, I'll take it. It's far superior to anything you call science. Faux science is more like it. Do you get the point, now?
 
CO2 helps warm. It's effect on sea level are probably in 3rd place. The problem is, you guys deny the other significant factors.

And yes, we can easily reduce soot emissions.
What is it with denalists and sea levels? It's like your programing got stuck on sea levels and now that's your response to everything. "But what about the sea levels..I don't see any sea levels...how can we talk about GW without sea levels...waaa, what about the sea levels?"

The problem is, you guys can't seem to get it through your thick skulls that melted sea ice does not raise sea levels.

Again...melted sea ice does not raise sea levels. Melted sea ice affects the jet stream which affects the weather. And that's the point you keep missing.
 
Last edited:
What is it with denalists and sea levels? It's like your programing got stuck on sea levels and now that's your response to everything. "But what about the sea levels..I don't see any sea levels...how can we talk about GW without sea levels...waaa, what about the sea levels?"
Not true.

The sea level is rising. Just not at any catastrophic rate. there are several things that contribute to sea level rise. You guys are stuck on only two.

The problem is, you guys can't seem to get it through your thick skulls that melted sea ice does not raise sea levels.
Not true.

Please show me where any of us, who you call deniers, have said that. Floating ice does not raise the sea level when melted. We know that. Some of your side are those who don't know it.

Again...melted sea ice does not raise sea levels. Melted sea ice affects the jet stream which affects the weather. And that's the point you keep missing.
Many other factors your side denies, also affects the jet steams and polar cell. You only know what your religious prophets tell you to believe. Melted sea ice is not the largest among them. What might be the largest significant factor is the same effect that cause the auroras. The sun, and it's interaction in the upper atmosphere from the solar winds and magnetic changes.
 
Man made carbon emissions is cyclical? What period did that occur in that we may see a pattern? Even the Holocene doesn't show a pattern that could apply to today's GW. Why? Because it didn't have the out pouring of relentless man made carbon emissions speeding up the heating process and thwarting any attempt for the climate to reverse itself like it did in the past.

If science is what you call propaganda, I'll take it. It's far superior to anything you call science. Faux science is more like it. Do you get the point, now?

No, the changing pattern of the jet steams are normal cyclical events.
 
I find it curious why you think that you can just cut and paste charts and whatnot from a discredited source and website and think that somehow proves anything or that anyone would even bother reading them. As it stands I don't think you even understand half the crap you post because I have yet to see you carry on discussion that shows you do. But you're more than welcome to try now and explain in your own words what you just posted and why I or anyone else should care.

I'm sorry you can't follow the argument. In a nutshell, in my #268 highly respected climate scientists refute the claims in your #266. Unusual polar weather patterns are neither more severe nor more frequent.
 
I'm sorry you can't follow the argument. In a nutshell, in my #268 highly respected climate scientists refute the claims in your #266. Unusual polar weather patterns are neither more severe nor more frequent.

Pierre Gosselin, whose words you cited in #268, is not a highly respected climate scientist. If fact he's not a climate scientist at all, or even a scientist. He has a degree in mechanical engineering and, as fas as I can see, no academic publication record at all. He's just another blogger spreading misinformation.
 
Pierre Gosselin, whose words you cited in #268, is not a highly respected climate scientist. If fact he's not a climate scientist at all, or even a scientist. He has a degree in mechanical engineering and, as fas as I can see, no academic publication record at all. He's just another blogger spreading misinformation.

Gosselin put the story together. The quoted scientists are John Christy, Roy Spencer and Jorg Kachelmann.
 
I find it curious why you think that you can just cut and paste charts and whatnot from a discredited source and website and think that somehow proves anything or that anyone would even bother reading them. As it stands I don't think you even understand half the crap you post because I have yet to see you carry on discussion that shows you do. But you're more than welcome to try now and explain in your own words what you just posted and why I or anyone else should care.

Translation from babble into reality:

I am distressed that you came up with a rational reply I can't address, therefore make a complaint of your cut/paste reply (Which I admit doing it myself in post 266, without a source) to avoid a debate with you on it.

:lol:
 
Gosselin put the story together. The quoted scientists are John Christy, Roy Spencer and Jorg Kachelmann.

"Story" is certainly the right word for Gosselin's works of fiction.

A tip, Jack: If you want people to take you seriously, cite the scientists themselves rather than the bloggers who mangle their words.
 
"Story" is certainly the right word for Gosselin's works of fiction.

A tip, Jack: If you want people to take you seriously, cite the scientists themselves rather than the bloggers who mangle their words.

The quotes are direct and accurately present the views of the scientists. The scientists themselves are cited.
If you want people to take you seriously you should leave your irrational prejudice behind.
 
The quotes are direct and accurately present the views of the scientists. The scientists themselves are cited.
If you want people to take you seriously you should leave your irrational prejudice behind.

No, your quotes are the opinionated ravings of an anti-AGW blogger. If you want us to read what the scientists say, then cite their words.
 
No, your quotes are the opinionated ravings of an anti-AGW blogger. If you want us to read what the scientists say, then cite their words.

Jorg Kachelmann: "Thus the PIK has definitely gone off base among the scientific community and is only cherry picking. Freely made up that there would be an increase in frequency of weak polar vortices. This has always happened almost every winter.”


Linked within the NTZ post (and source of the graph) is this from Roy Spencer:
Source.

In the wake of the current cold wave, John Christy skated into my office this morning with a plot of U.S. winter cold waves since the late 1800s. He grouped the results by region, and examined cold waves lasting a minimum of 2 days at a station, and 5 days at a station. The results were basically the same.As can be seen in the plot below, there is no evidence in the data supporting the claim that decreasing Arctic sea ice in recent decades is causing more frequent displacement of cold winter air masses into the eastern U.S., at least through the winter of 2017-18:
Nov-Mar-cold-waves-550x413.jpg
The trend is markedly downward in the most recent 40 years (since 1979) which is the earliest we have reliable measurements of Arctic sea ice from satellite microwave radiometers (my specialty).
Now, I suppose that Arctic sea ice decline could have some influence. But weather is immensely complex. Cause and effect is often difficult to ascertain.
At a minimum we should demand good observational support for any specific claim. In this case I would say that the connection between Eastern U.S. cold waves and Arctic sea ice is speculative, at best.
Just like most theories of climate change.

 
The quotes are direct and accurately present the views of the scientists. The scientists themselves are cited.
If you want people to take you seriously you should leave your irrational prejudice behind.

You can always find a handful of scientists who believe all sorts of crazy things. Like any profession, they are not immune from their fair share of kooks and charlatans. And no, one is NOT all it takes.

It's been the subject of campfire stories for decades. A camera-elusive, grooming-challenged, bipedal ape-man that roams the mountain regions of North America. Some call it Sasquatch. Others know it as Bigfoot.

Thousands of people claim to have seen the hairy hominoid, but the evidence of its existence is fuzzy. There are few clear photographs of the oversized beast. No bones have ever been found. Countless pranksters have admitted to faking footprints.

Yet a small but vociferous number of scientists remain undeterred. Risking ridicule from other academics, they propose that there's enough forensic evidence to warrant something that has never been done: a comprehensive, scientific study to determine if the legendary primate actually exists.

"Given the scientific evidence that I have examined, I'm convinced there's a creature out there that is yet to be identified," said Jeff Meldrum, a professor of anatomy and anthropology at Idaho State University in Pocatello.
Forensic Expert Says Bigfoot Is Real

What matters is what the overwhelming majority of those specializing in that field say. Finding and quoting the occasional kooks here and there means nothing.
 
If cleaner air controls people then bring on the cleaner air. Maybe it will help people think more clearly when they're not breathing in all those fumes and gases. I think if people really had a choice they would chose clean air. As it stands, the polluters really aren't giving people much of a choice, are they? So in essence, they're the ones controlling the people and forcing them to breath dirty air and drink dirty water so they will die sooner.

.
Since man made carbon emissions don't show up in the Holocene period it would be difficult to say that GW today is a natural occurrence.


Where I live in the western US...we're experiencing very warm, short winters which affects the economy here that relies on the snow pack for it's ski and tourist industry. And in the summer it's getting too hot to go even go outside for any duration. Although I have to admit I like the more temperate winters...but it worries me what's happening in the ecosystem over all.

The reason for this weird weather we're having has to do with the loss of the old ice in the Arctic's Belfor Sea which is causing a very weak and wavy jet stream over the N. Hemisphere. The weaker the jet stream, the slower it moves...so it's not moving the storms out as fast it used to...instead the storms get stuck and stay in one place longer.

So currently, the western US is stuck under a loop in the jet stream that allows all this tropical air to come up from the equator...which in turn is causing longer hotter summers and shorter warmer winters which in turn has caused less rainfall, forest fires and disruption of wildlife migrations. Meanwhile, the eastern US is getting pounded with severe storms in winter and summer because they're stuck on the cold side of the jet stream and getting the brunt of the Arctic air coming down from the north.

180710110137_1_540x360.jpg


Average-Pattern-This-Winter.jpg


Canada reports that it's been colder there than it is on Mars.

I just realized. You are using Tunis Daily News | Breaking news and videos of today's latest news stories and Geoengineering Watch | Exposing the climate engineering cover-up. Really now... Just how credible are they?
 
Back
Top Bottom