Schuylaar's Sesh - NASA.."We Have Reached The Point Of No Return..

Do you believe NASA?

  • YES..but it came from Bloomberg so therefore it's not true

    Votes: 3 37.5%

  • No..NASA has become bleeding heart liberals in order to bankroll now defunct space program

    Votes: 5 62.5%

  • No..because Karl Rove says Hillary Clinton wears "special brain damage glasses"

    Votes: 2 25.0%

  • Yes..because Hillary's "special glasses" are actually "polarized bullshit deflectors"

    Votes: 3 37.5%
  • Total voters
    8
  • Poll closed .
heckler73 said:
As a matter of fact, no.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermohaline_circulation
It has the acronym THC... how can you go wrong?
Click to expand...

Don't listen to these retards. I find independent thought is what separates us from the Partisan Monkey Class,.

Did you account for the fact that these Ice Shelves are not floating?

They are Shelves. So, the idea that the submerged volume doesn't count may not be cleared yet, in you calculations.

Also, did you account for the fact that this is very dense, fresh water Ice? It will submerge to 90%

The Shelves are self supported, not actually submerged yet, until they break.

Did you account for the idea of cascade failure? You break one shelf, perhaps the Ross first, that will raise the sea below another shelf, and it breaks, etc. Did you account for global Shelf Volume? I bet that is in the published calculation.

Another factor is that melting ice changes the salinity locally in the sea water and that speeds up melting. This is another cascade. Faster melting faster.

Did you account for the fact that if all this fresh water was dumped by the polar ice, over a short period, like 10 decades, it will not only raise the sea, it will stall the deep polar conveyer currents because fresh water will not sink like cold salt water.

That will stall the warm surface currents like the Gulf Stream and it's counter parts in the South Hemisphere and the world does not become a jungle heat tent, with runaway greenhouse effect.

IT BECOMES AN ICE BALL. No heat is conveyed from the Equator. The Albedo War is won by Ice and the Equatorial regions also freeze.

We are pretty sure that has happened before.

Did you tell them that? :) Did you tell them what the code words, Climate Change, actually means? I know why they changed it. Among the many Political, Chomski-driven reasons, also it regards the simple fact that the outcome is not Greenhouse it is Ice World.
 
Last edited:
a senile fungus said:
Not all phenomena have had studies done on them, contrary to the belief of many members here...
Click to expand...

Then it is not a phenomena we can study at this point, correct?

If we could we would. And why can we not? Whatever you may be talking about (and you gave no example. but just a general put down)
it cannot be studied, or we would. Science is big and we are clever.

Perhaps what you mean is woo-woo belief, and cannot be studied.
 
Doer said:
a 4 FOOT rise in sea Level is nothing, There have been 60 ft increases in a fairly short time.

Imagine a 4 foot drop in sea level. Which really would be worse?

The only way the sea can lower that much is by bitter cold and locking a lot of Ice, No shpping no harbors. A raise in sea level? No shipping no harbors.

And remember this is not including the tide, So, back to rise,

For 4 feet rise we have add between 1 and 40 feet of tide world wide,

For a visual, now add raging storm surge.

Now think about 630 million people world wide that live within 30 feet of sea level. In 150 years that will be over a billion,

4 feet of sea rise will kill the global economy if something is not done,

But doing anything about Man-made will not reverse this, It is gonna happen, We have to adapt, If an Ice shelf breaks it will displace the entire ocean somewhat. It is more dense than sea ice and sits deeper. And there are a lot of Ice Shelves around the world.

Where ie is Sky's house now?
sealevel_up6m-lrg.jpg
Click to expand...

thank you doer:clap:
 
Harrekin said:
You know the Journal Psychology (although being a pseudoscientific discipline) does infact institute peer review?
Click to expand...

I did, Lex Dysic. I said, (and thanks for the post review.)

Show me any peer review published work in Psychology or other respected Journal on this and I will read it.

----------

So, yes, you read it backwards. I am indeed aware, as I said in my sentence.
 
Doer said:
I did, Lex Dysic. I said, (and thanks for the post review.)

Show me any peer review published work in Psychology or other respected Journal on this and I will read it.

----------

So, yes, you read it backwards. I am indeed aware, as I said in my sentence.
Click to expand...
Maybe if you wrote a little less like someone with autism, your meaning would be more clear.
 
a senile fungus said:
I have worked in the ER for many years. I can tell you with certainty that full moons bring the traumas and the crazies in. I don't know why, certainly not causation, but most definitely correlation.

Afterthought: also Mondays are busy, and days after holidays, especially the Monday after the holidays. And I work near Detroit, so sporting events are always busy nights as well. Lots of inebriated individuals assaulting each other at bars...
Click to expand...

tides shift during full moon; what about the fluid surrounding your brain?
 
Hmmmm.....

Show me any peer review published work in Psychology or other respected Journal on this, and I will read it.

OK, let's see if this is King English.

Show me any... (x).... and I will read it.

(x) is .... peer review published work in Psychology or other respected Journal on this.

Sorry Charlie, this is not autism, t'iz education in phrasing for effect, and I did it again.
 
Doer said:
Did you account for the fact that these Ice Shelves are not floating?

Also, did you account for the fact that this very dense, fresh water Ice?
Did you account for the idea of cascade? You break one shelf, perhaps the Ross first, that will rise the sea below another shelf, and it breaks, etc. Did you account for global Shelf Volume? I bet that is the published calculation.
Click to expand...
Yes, Yes, and Yes.

Did you account for the fact that if all this fresh water was dumped by the polar ice, over a short period, like 10 decades, it will not only raise the sea, it will stall the deep polar conveyer currents because fresh water will not sink like cold salt water.
Click to expand...
Yes (cf. THC)

We are pretty sure that has happened before.

Did you tell them that? :) Did you tell them what the code words, Climate Change, actually means? I know why they changed it. Among the many Political, Chomski-driven reasons, also,it regards the simple fact that the outcome is not Greenhouse it is Ice World.
Click to expand...

Actually, no, and no...I'm not too concerned with what has "happened before", rather I want to know "what is". Besides, trying to prove that angle is rougher (I seem to recall another thread along those lines), having to establish cyclic connections with extraterrestrial processes...not the easiest task. And what level of development were humans at during that "last time", as it were?

It's enough to know what ice and where. If I'm wrong, then it should be simple enough for an AGW pundit to prove it, and I leave that possibility open. After all, I am doing my own "guesswork" in the process. ;)

I could be wrong.
 
heckler73 said:
Yes, Yes, and Yes.


Yes (cf. THC)


Actually, no, and no...I'm not too concerned with what has "happened before", rather I want to know "what is". Besides, trying to prove that angle is rougher (I seem to recall another thread along those lines), having to establish cyclic connections with extraterrestrial processes...not the easiest task. And what level of development were humans at during that "last time", as it were?

It's enough to know what ice and where. If I'm wrong, then it should be simple enough for an AGW pundit to prove it, and I leave that possibility open. After all, I am doing my own "guesswork" in the process. ;)

I could be wrong.
Click to expand...
Your math works out better for me than the IPCC report math does...

Bravo for defeating your indifference and doing the math, I wasn't bothered.

My mind is set on a bottle of Tennessee's Finest, chilling in my fridge...

It is Friday afterall.
 
Doer said:
Don't listen to these retards. I find independent thought is what separates us from the Partisan Monkey Class,.

Did you account for the fact that these Ice Shelves are not floating?

They are Shelves. So, the idea that the submerged volume doesn't count may not be cleared yet, in you calculations.

Also, did you account for the fact that this very dense, fresh water Ice?
It will submerge to 90%

The Shelves are self supported, not actually submerged yet, until the break.

Did you account for the idea of cascade? You break one shelf, perhaps the Ross first, that will rise the sea below another shelf, and it breaks, etc. Did you account for global Shelf Volume? I bet that is the published calculation.

Another factor is that melting ice changes the salinity locally in the sea water and that speeds up melting. This is another cascade. Faster melting faster.

Did you account for the fact that if all this fresh water was dumped by the polar ice, over a short period, like 10 decades, it will not only raise the sea, it will stall the deep polar conveyer currents because fresh water will not sink like cold salt water.

That will stall the warm surface currents like the Gulf Stream and it's counter parts in the South Hemisphere and the world does not become a jungle heat tent, with runaway greenhouse effect.

IT BECOMES AN ICE BALL. No heat is conveyed from the Equator. The Albedo War is won by Ice and the Equatorial regions also freeze.

We are pretty sure that has happened before.

Did you tell them that? :) Did you tell them what the code words, Climate Change, actually means? I know why they changed it. Among the many Political, Chomski-driven reasons, also,it regards the simple fact that the outcome is not Greenhouse it is Ice World.
Click to expand...

good job doer! standing o! :clap:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top