http://abcnews.go.com/US/ice-visible-lake-superior-weeks-ahead-schedule/story?id=26939239 Yet again, looks like the great lakes will set records for ice this year. I'm told this means nothing, it's just "weather". I wish I had the time or energy to post all the climate change guru's in the early part of the 21st century that said snow and ice would likely be gone from the northern hemisphere by now (and to prevent itwe have to tax everyone). Now that it is actually growing, they claim that was what was supposed to happen all along (and of course we still need those taxes).
Unsupported extrapolation, but, you're a denier, so that's expected. Why yes. If you haven't figured out the difference between weather and climate, or that the USA is 2% of the globe, you may be beyond help. Since nobody ever said such a thing, why did you fabricate such a crazy story? It doesn't do much for your credibility. Now, there is a way to restore your shattered credibility. Show us examples of people who said the northern hemisphere would soon be totally free of ice and snow. If you didn't just make up that crazy story, it should be easy for you. Please don't try to sleaze out of it by pointing to a guy who said the ice cap would melt in summer, or a guy who said it would stop snowing in England. You made a specific claim, so back up that specific claim. What's growing? The ice cap and the glaciers are still shrinking. Did some denier kook blog tell you otherwise? And then you fell for it? Tsk, tsk. By the way, all your talking about taxes makes it very clear that you don't care about the actual science, and that you're repeating the mantras of a political cult. Didn't you know you're supposed to hide your cult affiliation?
you don't have to go back to the 90's for those claims. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/08/o...w.html?emc=edit_tnt_20140207&tntemail0=y&_r=1 of course this has been heard before http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.html http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/16/g...-shows-arctic-sea-ice-coverage-up-50-percent/ http://www.robertfkennedyjr.com/articles/2008_sep_Los_angeles_times.html
Mamooth, I quit replying to you a long time back when I left the forum for a spell. Now that I am back I do not plan to change a good policy. No matter what "proof" is posted you say it is a "deniers" site, or some other such vague reference to your warmist religion, or simply hurl insults. Frankly I don't give a whit what you believe or do not believe, you live in your world. I have other things to do, including discussions with reasonable people here.
Hey Mamooth, you should invest in these guys. They have invented "Hydroatomic Nano Gas" that removes all carbon and other pollutants from industrial processes. They need investors. This looks like it is right on your level: http://www.hydroinfra.com/en/about/
So, you couldn't show us even a single person who claimed snow and ice would soon vanish completely from the northern hemisphere, even though you claimed vast numbers of such people existed. Why not admit you screwed up? It's not like you're fooling anyone. Doubling down on your error has moved it out of "wild exaggeration" territory and over the line into "deliberate lie" territory. You sure that's where you want to set up your fortress?
You're in for a long wait if you expect an answer from elmer. I'm still waiting for him to explain his claim warmer climates coming out of an ice age doesn't require higher temps or how he has claimed those melting ice sheets/glaciers don't result in rising sea levels Evidence means something different to elmer than it does to you or I, in denierworld evidence is whatever their imagination can invent...
Yeah, the same wait as me. I've been waiting for that experiment that shows adding 120 PPM of CO2 does anything to the climate. Still waiting.
Plz post where I claimed to have knowledge of such an experiment. - - - Updated - - - Plz [post where I claimed that the definition of "warmer" has nothing to do with "temperature"
I did not waste my time 1) because some other posters did it for me, and 2) you claimed your religion would require that you ignore them anyway: "Please don't try to sleaze out of it by pointing to a guy who said the ice cap would melt in summer, or a guy who said it would stop snowing in England". - mamooth arguing with you is a waste because you simply deny anything that you do not like
been waiting for years now for one of you warmists to show any correlation between the many climate changes the world has experienced in the last 10,000 years and CO2. But then any relationship between Co2 and the current warming trend is just a con job put over on low information libs so I am not holding my breath
I think you meant someone else or something. My post was to wyly not you, so I never said you had one.
just an opinion here but I fail to see how adding 1.2 molecules of CO2 per 10,000 would have much of an effect on anything. Been looking into using CO2 enrichment in my future green house and most recommendation say use 800ppm for flowers and 1000ppm for fruits and veggies for the best yields. So I guess we still have a few hundred ppm to go before we reach the sweet spot for agriculture
