Climate Change is here and man made
- Thread starter SWP's back
- Start date
Skashion
Well-Known Member
Latest IPCC report I'm afraid. Take it up with the IPCC.Damocles said:
I've no doubt the LoSUs will improve, because science is supposed to go forward, not backwards. If it shows us how best to counteract or mitigate the effects of climate change, that's what I want to see. How can we hope to approach geoengineering without sufficient knowledge to do so?
EAST ANTARCTIC Damo, EAST ANTARCTIC. I said it very clearly. The evidence currently shows they are gaining mass. Greenland contains water enough only for 6 or 7m of sea level rises, not the 200ft (60m) you were foaming at the mouth about.
As I haven't received a response I will mention this;
In 1974 scientist warned that polution was getting into our food chain and causing us grave problems. As an example they quoted Tuna fish had an alarmingly high level of Mercury in them. If anyone remembers Marvin Gaye's classic about mans effect on the envoiroment, 'Mercy Mercy Me' they will remember he sang 'fish full of mercury'. That's how alarmed we all were about the pollution............ and then a year later it was reported that in fact Mercury levels in fish swing wildly from year to year and cannot be used as evidence of global pollution.
Scientist eh, don't you just love 'em.
Oh and on a seperate note but again in the 1970's, Sweeden and other Nordic countries complained about British power stations producing acid rain that was destroying their trees. Succesive Governments had scientists prove that this was all a lie and the UK were not responsible for acid rain.I think we all now agree that power stations do in fact casue acid rain.
Governments eh, don't you just trust 'em.
In 1974 scientist warned that polution was getting into our food chain and causing us grave problems. As an example they quoted Tuna fish had an alarmingly high level of Mercury in them. If anyone remembers Marvin Gaye's classic about mans effect on the envoiroment, 'Mercy Mercy Me' they will remember he sang 'fish full of mercury'. That's how alarmed we all were about the pollution............ and then a year later it was reported that in fact Mercury levels in fish swing wildly from year to year and cannot be used as evidence of global pollution.
Scientist eh, don't you just love 'em.
Oh and on a seperate note but again in the 1970's, Sweeden and other Nordic countries complained about British power stations producing acid rain that was destroying their trees. Succesive Governments had scientists prove that this was all a lie and the UK were not responsible for acid rain.I think we all now agree that power stations do in fact casue acid rain.
Governments eh, don't you just trust 'em.
Skashion said:
These are the only people who issue reports?
You've ignored my point about the difference between the low and high LoSU values still meaning a 5 degree warmig.
Again, we don't know everything. This doesn't mean we don't know anything.
Foaming at the mouth? You sound like Dave. If you want to talk science then let's do that but if you're going to go down this path then I'd rather sit on an ice spike.
You said Eastern Antarctic when I said "Greenland and parts of the Arctic". I meant parts of the Antarctic which you pretty much picked up on and I thought we were still talking about the same thing.
Also "they are gaining mass"? Talk about cherry picking. Yes, East Antartica is gaining mass because its sea ice is rapidly increasing as its land ice is growing. Sea ice is the thing that people are arsed about as like an ice cube in a glass it contributes more to sea level changes. Also, the overall mass of Antartica is shrinking, not growing.
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 89,068
You sure about sea ice contributing more than land ice Damocles?
Go get a glass, fill it nearly to the top and put some ice cubes in.
Report Ba k what happens to the level when it melts.
Go get a glass, fill it nearly to the top and put some ice cubes in.
Report Ba k what happens to the level when it melts.
Skashion
Well-Known Member
Sea ice does not contribute to sea level rises. The East Antarctic ice sheet is the issue because that's on land, and hence does contribute to sea level rises when it melts. The East Antarctic ice sheet, which contains 60+% of the world's fresh water, is gaining mass.Damocles said:Skashion said:
These are the only people who issue reports?
You've ignored my point about the difference between the low and high LoSU values still meaning a 5 degree warmig.
Again, we don't know everything. This doesn't mean we don't know anything.
Foaming at the mouth? You sound like Dave. If you want to talk science then let's do that but if you're going to go down this path then I'd rather sit on an ice spike.
You said Eastern Antarctic when I said "Greenland and parts of the Arctic". I meant parts of the Antarctic which you pretty much picked up on and I thought we were still talking about the same thing.
Also "they are gaining mass"? Talk about cherry picking. Yes, East Antartica is gaining mass because its sea ice is rapidly increasing as its land ice is growing. Sea ice is the thing that people are arsed about as like an ice cube in a glass it contributes more to sea level changes. Also, the overall mass of Antartica is shrinking, not growing.
paphos-mcfc
Well-Known Member
Would the changing of the Earth's orbit over several hundred years effect the the current climate change? Hotter summers, colder wetter winter????
<a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_orbit" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_orbit</a>
Just a thought.
<a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_orbit" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_orbit</a>
Just a thought.
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 89,068
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/7645112/Melting-sea-ice-would-cause-sea-levels-to-rise-by-hairs-breadth.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthn ... eadth.html</a>
If all the floating ice in the world melted it would cause sea levels to rise by just 4cm. In comparison if all the ice on land melted it would cause a rise of 70m.
If all the floating ice in the world melted it would cause sea levels to rise by just 4cm. In comparison if all the ice on land melted it would cause a rise of 70m.
corky1970 said:
You'll get none. You seemingly don't understand either science as a method for explanation nor the science involved here. I won't be debating you on this because I think you're trolling. I'll debate Skash as he seems to be clever enough to not post a single scientific paper which talks of a single effect as some sort of marker. Try as you might, you'll get no further contribution from me because I think you're an idiot and it's a waste of my time. If you somehow come up with some science, then we can talk again
B
B
blueinsa
Guest
paphos-mcfc said:
Not as much as me driving at 90mph in 4th apparently ;-)