I thought the arctic was melting?

Discussion in 'Environment & Conservation' started by Josephwalker, Aug 3, 2020.

  1. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,398
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113
    When Gore is nominated to the Supreme Court he will have to prove his innocence, mkay?
     
  2. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,398
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, Josephwalker did.
     
  3. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,398
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113
  4. Montegriffo

    Montegriffo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2017
    Messages:
    10,673
    Likes Received:
    8,942
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The vineyards are not under glass.
    Year after year we are experiencing record temperatures in the UK.
    Vineyards all over the country are prospering.
    Greenlands icecaps are melting at record levels too.
     
  5. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No kay. The New Democrat standard is guilty until proven innocent.
     
  6. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,398
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113
    For Supreme Court nominees.
     
  7. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Guess you missed the last four years with the barrage of charges leveled at Trump and apparently you forgot Algore ran for pres and was VP. Live by the sword......
     
    Last edited: Sep 20, 2020
  8. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
  9. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,398
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You mean like the indisputable fact that he paid a porn star to shut up about his dalliance with her?
    Gore's indiscretions all seem to have occurred since he left office.
     
  10. Montegriffo

    Montegriffo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2017
    Messages:
    10,673
    Likes Received:
    8,942
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/50729990

    https://www.carbonbrief.org/is-climate-change-good-news-for-the-uk-wine-industry
     
  11. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,398
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113
    But they need modern technology to protect them from the cold:

    https://www.vinescapes.com/vineyard...vailable-to-fight-frost-risk-in-uk-vineyards/
    So what? There is always a record being set somewhere. The UK is no warmer now than it was 1000 years ago.
    Thanks to subsidies and modern technology.
    No they aren't. Such claims are often made, but seldom credible.
     
  12. Death

    Death Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2008
    Messages:
    5,114
    Likes Received:
    1,199
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    And what the phack does it have to do with climate change and pollution? You keep coming back to this crap because you have zero substance to offer in regards to the subject you claim to debate. You have done nothing but provide subjective unsubstantiated statements denying any change to the atmosphere or ecosphere with zero basis.
     
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2020
    Montegriffo likes this.
  13. Death

    Death Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2008
    Messages:
    5,114
    Likes Received:
    1,199
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    This is in regards to Bring's blanket denial of ice sheets receding in Greenland. You will note his tactic is to deny without any objective basis then state well yah ok but its natural cycles of warming and cooling. He has no clue as the amount of ice sheet/cap/flow recessions or the cycles of warmer and hotter periods.

    Here is but example of the Greenland issue brought to his attention that he summarily dismissed.

    http://nsidc.org/greenland-today/

    Here is an article summarizing an Ohio State University study on the issue Bring dismisses:

    https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/14/weather/greenland-ice-sheet/index.html

    Here is a site for more information:

    https://nsidc.org/cryosphere/quickfacts/icesheets.html
     
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2020
    Montegriffo likes this.
  14. Death

    Death Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2008
    Messages:
    5,114
    Likes Received:
    1,199
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I add this very simple to read article:

    https://e360.yale.edu/digest/theres...ease-in-polar-ice-cap-melting-since-the-1990s

    To try dismiss the above as mistaken as Bring does with zero reference for his conclusions is absurd. The key to such findings are that the scientists are well aware of the natural cycles of warm and cold trends and understand and can measure the amount of melting in the time period they studied does NOT even come close in comparison to what happened during natural warm and cold cycles prior to the emission of co2 into the air.

    Brinhg's attempt to dismiss all science he disagrees with as wrong is funny but sad.
     
    Montegriffo likes this.
  15. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,398
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I have provided evidence for my statements.
    Inevitably, that is just baldly false, as any attentive reader can confirm for him or herself.
     
  16. Death

    Death Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2008
    Messages:
    5,114
    Likes Received:
    1,199
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You have provided subjective unsubstantiated opinions which yes anyone can confirm for him or herself.
     
  17. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,398
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You made that up. Given the natural cyclical return to more normal Holocene temperatures following the coldest 500-year period in the last 10,000 years, it would be surprising if the Greenland ice were not receding: equilibrium is not achieved instantly in such massive systems. My objection was to the claim that the Greenland ice sheets were retreating at "record levels" -- unless the record is a meaningless short-term one, like "since the 1970s."
    False. I have cited objective bases for my statements.
    Whereas you deny that natural cycles of warming and cooling continue. Please present your evidence that the natural cyclical factors that caused all previous century-scale Holocene warming episodes are no longer operative.

    Thought not.
    Please present your evidence that the recession of Greenland ice sheets in recent decades exceeds that of the Medieval Warm Period.

    Thought not.

    Because you have cited it as support for your wild scare-mongering, but in fact it does not support your wild scare-mongering.

    Because it, too, does not support your wild scare-mongering.
    Which also does not support your wild scare-mongering.
     
  18. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,398
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113

    As usual for the Guardian's coverage of climate, lots of scare-mongering based on very little actual empirical science.
    The reference is the self-evident and indisputable absence of the claimed climate "crisis."
    That is just baldly false. There is no attempt anywhere in that article to compare 20th century warming with the Medieval Warm Period. None.
    Disgraceful.
     
  19. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,398
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That is false.
    That is true.
     
  20. mamooth

    mamooth Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    6,422
    Likes Received:
    2,186
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    And a lot more wine grapes are grown there now. Did your cult really not tell you that?

    http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/07/medieval-warmth-and-english-wine/

    Come one, use some sense. In the MWP, there were a _two_ short-lived sucky vinyards in the north, which produced really awful wine. If you are claiming there were big successful vinyards in the north, you are pushing misinformation again. Some winemakers just don't give up, so there are always vinyards everywhere. But that doesn't mean the weather was good for grapes, or that it was warmer than it is now.

    Nobody farmed in Greenland beyond a bit of barley in sheltered valleys.

    Sure they are. They're not good grapes, and they're not growing much, but it was the same way in the MWP. There is a lot more grape-growing in England now, both north and south, because the temperature is higher.

    Again, totally wrong. Short season veggies are commonly grown in Greenland now. That wasn't possible before. It's warmer in Greenland now than it was during the MWP.

    And so crashes your "it was warmer in the MWP" theory, taking down your "it's natural" theory with it.

    You need to understand that your feelings do not override the actual data, no matter how strong your feelings are. Current temps are way above anything ever seen before in the Holocene.

    [​IMG]

    You bizarre claim there would require that CO2 and H2O cover the same parts of the absorption spectrum. They don't, so your claim is nonsense. You are demonstrably ignorant of atmospheric physics.
     
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2020
    Montegriffo likes this.
  21. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,398
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Because they are now SUBSIDIZED so that vineyard operators can afford MODERN FROST PROTECTION MACHINERY:

    https://www.vinescapes.com/operational-management/frost-protection-equipment/

    Come on, use some common sense.
    Again, your claims are just reliably false:

    “In Domesday Book (1085) 38 vineyards were recorded in England besides those of the king. The wine was considered almost equal with the French wine both in quantity and quality as far north as Gloucestershire and the Ledbury area of Herefordshire where the soil is said to resemble that of the Rhine and Moselle wine districts. "

    https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/j.1477-8696.1959.tb00533.x
    Which is presumably why you made that up. See above.
    The fact that it was warmer in the MWP than it is now is proved not only by thriving UK vineyards in the MWP WITHOUT frost protection machinery but by the retreat of glaciers on the continent revealing villages, artifacts, etc. that were left there in medieval times, before the LIA covered them with ice.
    Which people can't do now because it is too cold.
    No, because it is subsidized, and growers use modern frost-protection machinery.
    Again, your claims are just factually incorrect. Short-season veggies require less warmth than the vikings' barley - the vikings just didn't grow them -- and are most definitely not "commonly grown in Greenland now," even with government subsidies, genetically engineered short-season cultivars, and modern frost-protection machinery:

    "Expanded production is subsidized by the government through purchase guarantees by the state-owned Neqi A/S grocery store chain."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Greenland#Agriculture_and_forestry
    Nope. Flat wrong. It was warmer in Greenland during the MWP:

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/02/07/study-shows-that-vikings-enjoyed-a-warmer-greenland/
    False, as proved above. Your consistently false claims only crash your own credibility.

    You need to understand that your feelings do not override the actual data, no matter how strong your feelings are.
    Again, your claim is just factually false and absurd:

    "In summary, the mid-Holocene, roughly 6,000 years ago, was generally warmer than today during summer in the Northern Hemisphere. In some locations, this could be true for winter as well."

    https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/global-warming/mid-holocene-warm-period
    Wrong again. The most comprehensive set of recent proxies actually shows no such thing:

    http://joannenova.com.au/2012/07/me...xies-roman-era-similar-to-early-20th-century/

    And neither does the instrumental record:

    http://notrickszone.com/2018/05/03/...rd-that-closely-aligns-with-paleo-proxy-data/
    Nope. That's just another false claim from you. They overlap to a large degree, and H2O is so much more abundant in the atmosphere that the edge of its absorption spectrum broadens into most of CO2's spectrum. As a result, CO2 is effectively irrelevant to radiative heat transfer except where the temperature is well below 0C and the H2O has all condensed out: i.e., in the highest-latitude polar regions and the stratosphere, as Angstrom demonstrated empirically more than 100 years ago.

    You have again proved you are demonstrably ignorant of atmospheric physics.
     
    Lil Mike likes this.
  22. Death

    Death Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2008
    Messages:
    5,114
    Likes Received:
    1,199
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
  23. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,398
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I have cited relevant evidence.
    You are makin' $#!+ up again. I have never denied that in the last 200 years, natural cyclical factors have returned the earth to more normal Holocene temperatures following the coldest 500-year period in the last 10,000 years. Please indicate which of the following sources you claim refute that fact and demonstrate that the warming is due primarily to increased CO2, and not natural cyclical factors, with relevant quotes to that effect:
    If you cannot provide such quotes, then your post is nothing but worthless personal diatribe lacking any basis in science.
    Please specify exactly what you claim I am "denying."
    False. The causal link between cancer and smoking has been amply confirmed by empirical testing. The causal link between atmospheric CO2 and temperature has not. OTC, the link appears to go in the other direction, and the mechanism involved is far more robustly supported by the relevant physics.
    You are just makin' $#!+ up again. Nothing in that article describes either my position or the factual and logical basis for it.
    Such absurd psychological speculations are nothing but ad hominem filth such as one might expect from deconstructionism or intersectional identity politics.
     
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2020
    Sunsettommy likes this.
  24. mamooth

    mamooth Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    6,422
    Likes Received:
    2,186
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I think everyone has noticed your habit of making crazy stories up and demanding that everyone believe them. You peddled a load of demonstrablly untrue nonsense about vinyards, you got caught, so you responded by raving about "subsidies and frost protection equipment".

    How does that refute the fact that there are a lot more vinyards in England today, due to the warmer temperatures?

    We don't have to rely on vinyards, of course. We have the actual tmperatures, and the proxies. We know it's warmer today.

    You're exhibiting one of the classic traits of the pseudoscience cultist. You throw away the best data -- the actual temperature record -- and substitute fuzzy data, secondhand stories of vinyards. And those don't even support you. If the actual hard data supported you, you wouldn't have to rave about vinyards. But all the hard data contradicts you, so you do.

    Again, you're not making any sense. Nobody is disputing the LIA existed. The normal people just point out it was totally over by 1850. Hence, claiming that the current fast warming is a "recovery from the LIA" is delusional, being how that claim is flatly contradicted by the data.

    This isn't in debate, at leat not by non-cult fanatics. It's warmer now than it was during the MWP. And the MWP was local. Anyone claiming the MWP is global would be taking the delusion to a whole new level. The MWP is barely noticable on the global temperature record.

    Old data. It's gotten warmer since that piece. Go with something more recent.

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/06/200630072044.htm
    ---
    The findings show that the millennial-scale global cooling began approximately 6,500 years ago when the long-term average global temperature topped out at around 0.7°C warmer than the mid-19th century. Since then, accelerating greenhouse gas emissions have contributed to global average temperatures that are now surpassing 1°C above the mid-19th century.
    ---

    An outlier, as discussed in the link below. The rest of the science says otherwise. So, cherrypicking fallacy on your part. Probably not intentional, though, since you're so blissfully unaware of any science that hasn't been selectively spoon fed to you by your cult.

    https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016RG000521

    That was just a conspiracy blog screaming. No wonder you get it so wrong.

    But not all. That makes you totally wrong. Common sense would indicate that. If you open two windows in the house then close one, that makes a huge difference in termperature.

    Your repetition of "BECAUSE I SAY SO!" one more time is noted. Flat earthers use the same technique. Nobody pays attention to them either.
     
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2020
    Cosmo likes this.
  25. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,398
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Everyone knows that hasn't happened. So you are just makin' $#!+ up again.
    Nope. You are just makin' $#!+ up again.
    Nope. You are just makin' $#!+ up again.
    Nope. You are just makin' $#!+ up again. It is a FACT that without subsidies and modern frost protection machinery -- and genetically engineered short-season grape vines -- there would be no commercial vineyards in northern England, while there WERE commercial vineyards in northern England during the MWP because it was WARMER then.
    The modern commercial vineyards have appeared because of subsidies, modern frost protection technology, and genetic engineering, not because it is warm enough to grow wine grapes without them (it isn't), though it was during the MWP.
    No we don't. You are just makin' $#!+ up again. There are no actual temperature readings from the MWP because the thermometer was not even invented until hundreds of years later.
    Nope. You are just makin' $#!+ up again. The proxies show no such thing, as I already proved to you with peer-reviewed references in my previous post:

    http://joannenova.com.au/2012/07/me...xies-roman-era-similar-to-early-20th-century/
    No, you are just makin' $#!+ up again. Where are these actual temperature record data from the MWP? Cite them, or admit you are simply making wild false claims again, as is your wont.
    You are just makin' $#!+ up again. I provided sourced references proving the data support me:

    http://joannenova.com.au/2012/07/me...xies-roman-era-similar-to-early-20th-century/
    Except hysterical anti-fossil-fuel screamers like Lyin' Michael Mann, who made the LIA disappear from his infamously fabricated hockey stick graph...
    Nope. You are just makin' $#!+ up again. Temperatures did not return to Holocene normal levels until the mid-20th century, and have not increased since then:

    http://notrickszone.com/2018/05/03/...rd-that-closely-aligns-with-paleo-proxy-data/
    You are just makin' $#!+ up again. There is no current fast warming except in fabricated data, as PROVED by the fact that arctic sea ice is still above the 2012 level:

    https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2020/09/

    That would be impossible if there had been any "fast warming" over the last eight years. So there hasn't been. It's simply made up, a bald fabrication.
    It is supported by the data, which I already provided. Here:

    http://notrickszone.com/2018/05/03/...rd-that-closely-aligns-with-paleo-proxy-data/
    It is anti-fossil-fuel hysteria that is led by suicide cult fanatics, as your "contributions" to this forum amply confirm.
    Already proved false:

    http://notrickszone.com/2018/05/03/...rd-that-closely-aligns-with-paleo-proxy-data/
    It is known to have been global, as confirmed by 1200 sources:

    https://notrickszone.com/2019/09/03...med-by-over-1200-publications-at-google-maps/
    False, as proved above. You just reject all facts that prove your anti-fossil-fuel suicide cult hate propaganda is nothing but hysterical anti-scientific shrieking.
    Already proved false, as shown in Schneider et al., 2015:

    https://research-repository.st-andr...andle/10023/7883/Wilson_2015_GRL_Revising.pdf

    The MWP is merely most noticeable outside the tropics because ice-albedo feedback makes higher latitudes more sensitive to natural cyclical factors, and more noticeable in the northern hemisphere because the southern hemisphere is 90% ocean, which has far higher thermal inertia than the continental land masses that make up half the northern hemisphere.
    False, as already proved.
    More hysterical anti-fossil-fuel hate propaganda.
    Problem is, the warming all happened before 1940, and thus could not have been due to CO2, as shown by Xing et al., 2016:

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4709040/
    Only because unlike the mainstream, its data are not fabricated.
    You're just makin' $#!+ up again, as already proved.
    :LOL:
    As usual, your source does not support your claims.
    No, it was perfectly calm and rational, unlike anti-fossil-fuel suicide cult hate propaganda shrieking, and provided multiple peer-reviewed sources. You are just makin' $#!+ up again. No wonder you get it so wrong.
    But enough.
    Self-evidently false.
    Common sense indicates there is no climate "crisis" or "emergency," proving that those who claim there is are lying.
    Not analogous. A better analogy would be closing the curtains over a window that is already closed.
    I've never said or implied that, and ALWAYS give factual reasons for my statements. So you are just makin' $#!+ up again. As usual.
    <yawn>
     
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2020

Share This Page