Global Warming

[USMC the Almighty]

MODS -- let's take out the trash...

 

[Abraxis Axis]

Massive melt in Antarctica, says Nasa

May 16 2007 at 10:09AM

In 2005, west Antarctica experienced the worst ice melt ever recorded during three decades of observation using satellites, Nasa scientists said.

The findings were released on Tuesday by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in California, which co-operates with environmental researchers at the University of Colorado in measuring and interpreting the satellite data.

The team measured snowfall accumulation and melt in Antarctica and Greenland from July 1999 to July 2005.

The South Pole melt occurred 900 kilometres inland, at high latitudes only 500 kilometres from the South Pole and at elevations of 2 000 metres, where "melt had been considered unlikely," the scientists said.

Air temperatures were abnormally high, reaching five degrees Celsius at one point and remaining above the melting point for a week.

"Antarctica has shown little to no warming in the recent past with the exception of the Antarctic Peninsula, but now large regions are showing the first signs of the impacts of warming as interpreted by this satellite analysis," said Konrad Steffen of the University of Colorado.

"Increases in snowmelt, such as this in 2005, definitely could have an impact on larger-scale melting of Antarctica's ice sheets if they were severe or sustained over time."

The 2005 melt was intense enough to create an extensive ice layer when water refroze after the melt. However, the melt was not prolonged enough for the melt water to flow into the sea.

However, large amounts of polar melt could cause ice sheets to slide into the ocean, raising global sea levels. The water flowing from the melt could also raise levels.

This year's round of reports by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change offered the most dire evidence to date that global warming has occurred due to man-made greenhouse emissions.

In three reports released this year, thousands of scientists agreed that temperatures will continue to rise this century, and if left unchecked, could have disastrous impact on parts of the world population. - Sapa-DPA

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&am...95056729C854935

 

[palerider]

This year's round of reports by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change offered the most dire evidence to date that global warming has occurred due to man-made greenhouse emissions.

Actually, they reduced the "direness" of their reports this year and trimmed back their "estimates" because it was blatantly obvious that the datat from thier simulations was not matching observed data. And there isn't a shred of rock solid proof that any warming is due to anthropogenic causes.

I fail to see why the panic over arctic ice melting. The ice has melted back from most of the northern hemisphere. Since it has melted back approximately 3,700 miles since we began exiting the present ice age, what exactly is it about some additional melting that you find so alarming?

 

[Abraxis Axis]

May 16 2007 at 10:09AM

ask nasa

 

[palerider]

May 16 2007 at 10:09AM

ask nasa

I am asking you. NASA didn't come here speaking as if they understood the subject. You did. Now you have been asked a question by way of rebuttal. Can you answer or not?

By the way, you have misquoted Jefferson in your sig line.

 

[mr universe]

wow palerider never addressed his deficiencies in this subject. I left for a week to give you time to prove that you can learn, but it's pretty obvious that a doushebag has no ability to comprehend things that are out of his sphere.

 

[palerider]

wow palerider never addressed his deficiencies in this subject. I left for a week to give you time to prove that you can learn, but it's pretty obvious that a doushebag has no ability to comprehend things that are out of his sphere.

Insult and name calling in lieu of actual argument? This is your response to having your pissy little arguments put down? Typical.

 

[Abraxis Axis]

I am asking you. NASA didn't come here speaking as if they understood the subject. You did. Now you have been asked a question by way of rebuttal. Can you answer or not?

By the way, you have misquoted Jefferson in your sig line.

i posted an article about what NASA said it was pertinent to the conversation. Its theyre words I only conveyed them to you all. I really dont know what they are talking about?
seemed global warming related to me. and it was from NASA?

 

[Abraxis Axis]

Insult and name calling in lieu of actual argument? This is your response to having your pissy little arguments put down? Typical.

you seem to have some anger problems?

oh i see ,mis-quoted would you care to correct the quote for us?

seems that everywhere i have looked the quote is correct

 

[palerider]

i posted an article about what NASA said it was pertinent to the conversation. Its theyre words I only conveyed them to you all. I really dont know what they are talking about?
seemed global warming related to me. and it was from NASA?

So you are just parroting what you were told? I see.

you seem to have some anger problems?

oh i see ,mis-quoted would you care to correct the quote for us?

seems that everywhere i have looked the quote is correct

No anger here. It is you who seems to have the problems roker. To the extent that you find it necessary to invent new personalities in an attempt to recover some form of credibility.

ALso, I retract my statement that you misquoted Jefferson. Upon review of the letter from Jefferson to William Smith, I see that he did indeed say that it was a natural manure. What do you know roker, you get to be right.

 

[Abraxis Axis]

No its not called parroting friend its called contributing to the conversation of global warming. That is what you all WERE talking about, until you went on a tangent about my supposedly incorrect quote?

 

[Abraxis Axis]

No anger here. It is you who seems to have the problems roker. To the extent that you find it necessary to invent new personalities in an attempt to recover some form of credibility.

you mean this Guy?

Rokerijdude11
Banned

 

[9sublime]

or this guy

Rokerijdude12
Banned

 

[palerider]

No its not called parroting friend its called contributing to the conversation of global warming. That is what you all WERE talking about, until you went on a tangent about my supposedly incorrect quote?

No. It is called parrotting. Parrots simply repeat sounds they hear with no understanding of what those words mean.

 

[Abraxis Axis]

ok sure