Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

K Wave Rider

Global Warming Debate

Recommended Posts

Conclusive proof:

 

- 1. Make some ice blocks.

 

- 2. Float them in a glass of water.

 

- 3. Let the ice melt.

 

Did the water level rise?

 

post-2117-12771135878502.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even the Warmists have to acknowledge the accuracy of the High School Level Science Experiments using floating ice in a glass that sea ice melt/gain has no measurable impact on overall sea levels.

 

That is why they have to spread fear, such as in the alarmist video linked above, that glacier retreat threatens coastal civilizations with catastrophe.

 

Release of land locked ice in great volumes, such as significant melting of the Greenland and Antartic deep ice packs or the Himilayan Glacers will cause sea levels to rise since that ice is not floating on water. It should be remembered that sea levels have been rising since the end of the last global glaciation approxiamately 12,000 years ago.

 

As the Greenland ice pack retreats, it is revealing more and more archeological sites showing the extent of the Viking settlements, of the Medieval Warm Period of 1,000 years ago. At that time the earth was warmer than it is today.

 

A more conclusive proof of the rate of sea level rise is in measuring the speed of the earth's rotation. Due to first principles of the conservation of angular momentum, rising sea levels should be seen in an increase in earth's rotational deceleration.

 

Or more simply, rising sea levels should make the earth spin increasingly more slowly.

 

It's not happening.

 

Therefore, the sea level rate of rise shows no evidence of global warming accelerating over the baseline of the last 150 or so years.

 

This observational fact is one of many that falsifies the theory of man-made global warming, or AGW.

 

Another observational fact that falsifies the theory of man-made global warming is the lack of high enough temperatures in the atmosphere over the tropics.

 

In a real greenhouse, the roof is a "hot spot" since it is the boundary layer. Although the mechanism is different, the same principle applies to the theory of AGW. There has to be a "roof" and the science says that roof must be above the tropics.

 

But it's not there. Radiosonde balloons can't find it. Satellites can't find it. It's not there.

 

It's the "missing heat" that the Warmists are desperate to find. (Translational-Send us more money or the whole house of cards will collapse into a pile of steaming, stinking junk science.)

 

Therefore, the theory of AGW is also false based upon this scientific observation.

 

There are more falsifications of the theory of AGW, but these 2 are the most compelling and the ones the warmists have no answer for.

 

post-67-12771196403657.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Conclusive proof:

 

- 1. Make some ice blocks.

 

- 2. Float them in a glass of water.

 

- 3. Let the ice melt.

 

Did the water level rise?

 

20100621.PNG

 

The melting glaciers rise hundreds of feed above the water. They are anchored to the land. So lets pile ice cubes 6 inches high on a screen sitting on top of the water at its edge and melt them. Does the water level rise then, jackass?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The melting glaciers rise hundreds of feed above the water. They are anchored to the land. So lets pile ice cubes 6 inches high on a screen sitting on top of the water at its edge and melt them. Does the water level rise then, jackass?

Sure does!

 

But the not from the floating ice burg in the picture.

 

Seems I'm a jackass in every forum :blush:

 

I try not to call people names though... :closedeyes:

 

p.s. While I'm probably one of the few posters who works on a trade floor, and could post lots more real life info on IDS & M2M, this kind of discouragement makes me again reluctant to post much. Probably for the best. ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The melting glaciers rise hundreds of feed above the water. They are anchored to the land. So lets pile ice cubes 6 inches high on a screen sitting on top of the water at its edge and melt them. Does the water level rise then, jackass?

 

Your stunning grasp of the obvious overwhelms me!!

 

As a matter of fact (to continue this non sequitur), deglacation has occurred before, about 10,000 years BP.

 

Sheesh!

:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Conclusive proof:

 

- 1. Make some ice blocks.

 

- 2. Float them in a glass of water.

 

- 3. Let the ice melt.

 

Did the water level rise?

 

post-2117-12771135878502.png

 

"An investigation into allegations that former Vice President Al Gore groped a masseuse has been reopened, the police in Portland, Oregon, said in a statement. "

 

http://noir.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aY0pPOlcLIlI

 

Rub the tip of the iceberg baby. :lol:

 

post-2117-12771135878502.png

 

/Foil hat on

 

The workings of the evil dirty industries?

 

/Foil hat off

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure does!

 

But the not from the floating ice burg in the picture.

 

Seems I'm a jackass in every forum :blush:

 

I try not to call people names though... :closedeyes:

 

p.s. While I'm probably one of the few posters who works on a trade floor, and could post lots more real life info on IDS & M2M, this kind of discouragement makes me again reluctant to post much. Probably for the best. ..

 

Oh, poor you. The ice thing was asinine, so I called you out on it. Get over it. And stop and think before you post something stupid like that again. Melting glaciers have absolutely nothing to do with ice in a glass. Like, for example, what happens when you drop a couple of icecubes into a bathtub from your drink on the edge? Does that raise the water level? Yes. Can you see it? No.

 

Why am I even explaining this. Sheesh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I respect KW's trick of presenting market data by using tick charts with multiple moving averages to better visualize areas of 'support' and 'resistance'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NY Times environmental commentator Andrew Revkin has been punished by Greenie Wing Nut/Wacko Joe Romm in Joe's blog.

 

Revkin's crime?

 

Tolerating opposing views.

 

Link to Joe's profane rant-

 

http://climateprogress.org/2010/08/29/andy-revkin-climate-science-aclimate-journalism/

 

What Romm typed is an indication of just how desperate the warmists have become as the pillars of their junk science crumbles into dust.

 

First Monckton's expose of the truth behind the Climategate emails, then the falsification of the tropical tropospheric hotspot by McKitrick et al (2010), followed by the smashing of the once glorious "hockey stick" by McShane and Wyner (2010) and now the report by the thought to be friendly IAC with its polite but scathing evaluation of the IPCC organisation.

 

Against that background we have record cold snaps in South America, early snow fall in Russia, increasing global sea ice extent and a growing La Nina promising more cold days ahead and a continuation of the global cooling trend evidenced by the satellite data since 1998.

 

All and all not a good time to be a member of the Church of AGW and Joe Romm's comments show the extent of the strain the Church is experiencing.

 

I applaud Mr. Revkin for maintaining a balanced view and allowing all to have a voice in the important discussions about the latest scientific results about climate change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't grounded ice in Antarctica represent like 90% of the fresh water reserves on Earth? It is currently residing outside your glass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't grounded ice in Antarctica represent like 90% of the fresh water reserves on Earth? It is currently residing outside your glass.

Yes yes .. lots of grounded ice. That's a fact.

 

The example posted is supposed to get ppl thinking about the relationships, moving parts, and actually working the processes through.

 

This-leads-to-this-leads-to-that. Logic & reason, rather then blind rote learning.

 

It's a neat example to give to high school students, to get them thinking for themselves.

 

Just like in markets, following the flock is for sheep, whilst traveling in the same direction as then can be OK, so long as you really know how you got there, and why you're going that way! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The loss of sea ice in the Arctic at the end of the 20th Century is “unprecedented” in the past 1,450 years in its duration and magnitude, an indication of human-influenced climate change, a study said. "

 

"Arctic sea ice influences the global climate, since 80 percent of the sunlight that strikes it is reflected back to space. When the ice melts in the summer, it exposes the ocean surface, which absorbs about 90 percent of the light, heating the water, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center. That influences climate patterns. "

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-23/loss-of-sea-ice-is-unprecedented-in-1-450-years-study-says.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This global warming debate has gone dead cold :lol:

 

Germany to invest 8% of GDP to obtain 80% of energy from wind and solar compared to US's lack of renewable energy planning. Warning: Democrats are pictured as tree huggers while Republicans are dirty fossil polluters :lol:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greenland ice thawing faster than expected.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk...europe-18978483

Spin from BBC:

 

According to ice core records, such pronounced melting at Summit station and across the ice sheet has not occurred since 1889.

 

From a reasonable scientist (from the same article)-

 

"Ice cores from Summit show that melting events of this type occur about once every 150 years on average. With the last one happening in 1889, this event is right on time," said Lora Koenig, a glaciologist from Nasa's Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland and a member of the research team analysing the satellite data.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Stock market portfolio giving you the runs? See Dr. Stool.

Take a subscribatory!
Download 
The Anals of Stock Proctology now!



The Daily Stool - Stock Market Message Board
Stool's Gold- Gold and Precious Metals Forum
Look Out Below Message Board

Support your local Stool Board.


The Al E. Greenspeuman designer line at Stoolmart. Get yours today! Click here now!



Old Stool Depository


The Wall Street Examiner
Subscribe to the Wall Street Examiner
Contact Us




Market Quotes are powered by Investing.com.
×