Researchers find major West Antarctic glacier melting from geothermal sourcesScience | 206784 hits | Jun 10 12:13 am | Posted by: N_Fiddledog Commentsview comments in forum Page 1 2 You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news. |
|
But wait, weren't we being told not just a couple of weeks ago that humans are the cause? Once again, the science was drowned out by wailing and gnashing of teeth from the AGW zealots who want nothing more than to impose their ideology on everyone.
Speaking of wailing and gnashing of teeth, did you bother to read the article at PhysOrg? No, I didn't think so. Here's the first sentence:
Sheesh.
But wait, weren't we being told not just a couple of weeks ago that humans are the cause? Once again, the science was drowned out by wailing and gnashing of teeth from the AGW zealots who want nothing more than to impose their ideology on everyone.
No, a couple weeks ago we were told that humans were the ONLY cause.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morn ... tional_pop
But wait, weren't we being told not just a couple of weeks ago that humans are the cause? Once again, the science was drowned out by wailing and gnashing of teeth from the AGW zealots who want nothing more than to impose their ideology on everyone.
Speaking of wailing and gnashing of teeth, did you bother to read the article at PhysOrg? No, I didn't think so. Here's the first sentence:
Sheesh.
Sheesh is right. I guess your short term memory sucks monkey butt. Remember the last two very recent articles about the glacier? It was all OUR fault that it was melting. The science simply said the glacier was melting. It was then run with by the alarmists, saying that we are doomed and it's all our fault.
It's the same crap with the Arctic sea ice. Ever since 2005, both Wood's Hole and NOAA have known about a rather large, fairly active volcano on the Arctic sea floor. Both were shocked that it was as large as it was considering the depth. The lava field of about 10km2 indicated that the eruptions go up quite high in the ocean. Yet every time the subject of diminishing Artic sea ice comes up there's zero mention of this volcanic activity and we humans take 100% of the blame for it.
The University of Texas at Austin
Man these science types do not know how to fact check. To add on at Austin is considered an insult The University of Texas is in Austin any associated school not in Austin would have the city's name added an example being The University of Texas at Arlington. The at Austin is not needed and many graduates for UT consider it a direct insult.
Considering I'm not a huge fan of the UT athletics I'm all for the insult.
Well AndyT if they can not get the name of the University that did the research correct what else did they get wrong?
The scientists got the name of their own university wrong?
Sheesh is right. I guess your short term memory sucks monkey butt. Remember the last two very recent articles about the glacier?
Last two articles? I probably read twenty articles on the recent studies on the Thwaites Glacier.
Again, I can only speak to the evidence presented in the original papers, but neither paper indciated that "it was all our fault." Or that we are doomed. If you found a media artilce or blog that said that--well, I'm not surprised.
It's certainly significant.
Again, I haven't seen the papers that attribute 100% of ice loss to AGW. Most scietnists I know readily admit that we are in warming period from the last ice age. However they also say that increasing the CO2 has increased the heat trapped in the troposphere, leading to global warming.
What is causing the volcanic activity? Is it recent? Is it related to global warming somehow (e.g. less mass on the glacier leads to rise in crust leads to change in magma flows?) The magnetic pole of the earth is very active right now--the poles do switch now and then (every 10^5 to 10^6 years or so). Could the change in geomagnetism from the active poles be influencing magma flows?
All good questions.
Bart. The article you linked to makes no such statement.
The article attributes all of the loss to global warming and global warming, as we've been informed by the IPCC, is 100% man-made.
2+2=4
"The Glacier's retreat is being driven by climate change"
Does the term "Climate Change" no longer refer to global warming then?
Very well, what does it refer to? Magic.
Again, I haven't seen the papers that attribute 100% of ice loss to AGW.
Well...what do you mean by papers? None of the studies said that. However the press releases as written up for the newspapers pretty much suggested, or outright claimed it. Somebody tried to tell me that was the same thing once. That was good for a chuckle.
Careful Zip. You're starting to talk like a skeptic, or what the evil Heartland institute once called a "climate realist". You're OK though, until you start finishing that thought with "We don't know how much", then I have to give you your official Skeptic's pin, welcome hug, and two cheek kiss.
Bart. The article you linked to makes no such statement.
The article attributes all of the loss to global warming and global warming, as we've been informed by the IPCC, is 100% man-made.
2+2=4
The IPCC does not say that. The IPCC says that we are in a warming trend (interglacial) since the last glacial period some 12,000 years ago. It says that the humans have contributed to this warming.