Who is right? The climate alarmists? Or the Climate deniers?

True. But, that doesn't account for the tails of glaciers or glacial melt in the Antarctic and Arctic that are losing ice maintained by connection to land. Thus, the sea rise from those sources is as measured in the NASA articles I cited.

Of course, that's not the only source of sea rise. Even just warming the oceans raises sea level.

As I mentioned above, surface ice that is floating is a GOOD thing as it reflects solar radiation. When the extent of floating ice shrinks, solar warming is added to our seas.

 

So you do NOT seem to know the difference between the Arctic ice that is floating in the Arctic Ocean........

vs... the Greenland Ice Pack that is SITTING ON TOP OF LAND........

VS.... the West Antarctic Ice Sheet that is below sea level at the bottom... but..... the W.A. I. S. is colossal and is exceptionally vulnerable to rapidly cracking and sliding..... The W.A.I.S. DOES NOT HAVE TO MELT to dramatically increase world ocean levels............ . All that the W.A.I.S. has to do is crack and slide..... and voila...... we would have disastrously higher ocean levels that in Bangladesh ALONE could well create twenty to eighty million climate change refugees....most of whom would probably move to India...........

Perhaps that is what you meant by your sentence but I believe that you are taking the articles by climate change denies far too seriously. The climate change deniers are NOT covering this entire topic with objectivity..... that is why I was forced back in 2009 to join Canada's Liberal Party and avoid the Conservative Party at that time....... the narrative that most of Canada's Conservatives were preaching left me scratching my head at how so many people could be so unwilling to look at how serious all of this is.... which is sad... because deliberately turning deserts green HAS THE POTENTIAL TO MOVE THE NATION OF ISRAEL AND JORDAN AND EGYPT AND DUBAI AND QATAR AND ALGERIA AND SAUDI ARABIA AND ALL MIDDLE EASTERN NATIONS IN THE GENERAL DIRECTION OF INCREASED ECONOMIC COOPERATION AND THUS.......................... LESS CONFLICT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You don't by any chance have a grudge against Latter day Saints.... the Mormons do you????????? Although I am Messianic Gentile... not a Mormon.... I think that they are some of the nicest Christians that I have ever met... and they are also certainly some of the most well read, articulate and funny!!!!!!!


http://www.politicalforum.com/index...om-in-the-middle-east.614114/#post-1074469457

The Tate Plan for Shalom in the Middle East!

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...the-middle-east.614114/page-2#post-1074523969

The Tate Plan for Shalom in the Middle East!

 

Yes, we can work to make Israel more economically strong and we can continue supplying Israel with modern weapons to add to their own manufacturing.

How does that address Palestine?

The war right now is Israel slaughtering the people of Gaza, who have for decades been living in abject poverty and food insecurity, without rights to fish, export, travel, import building materials, or maintain hospitals. They have been living in an open air prison enforced by Israel.

In West Bank, Israel has refused all negotiation as they work to steal the homes and property of those who reside in Palestine - a country recognized by the UN and which has diplomatic relations with 139 countries (not the US). Israel rules much of Palestine with Israeli military (not civilian) law in which Palestinians have no representation or standing.

So far, the US has worked to block all action by the UN with regard to Palestine using its veto power and our economic weight and has cut humanitarian aid.



>>>How does your idea help Palestine.

 

Wait, did you miss what I said completely? I very clearly said the difference.

So I do in fact understand that, and actually directly addressed it.

Once again, is that area that is below sea level connected in any way to the ocean? As in, sitting in a straight that is frozen over?

If so, then once again it is sitting "in the water" for all purposes, and all of it melting will take up the exact same volume as if it all melts tomorrow then water replaces it. Plus any amount that is actually resting above sea level minus the amount that would be lost due to ice taking more volume than water even if it is the same mass.

Once again, this is all rather basic physics stuff here.

Maybe this will help explain how it works. Imagine the San Francisco Bay is entirely frozen. Yes, almost all of that volume will be resting below sea level. However, as it is directly connected to the sea (as opposed to say Death Valley which is below sea level and has no connection to the ocean), when it melts the same volume that melted will be replaced with just water. Hence, the added amount of water will be exactly zero.

And BTW, yes indeed the WAIS is connected directly to the ocean. The bed is below sea level, and it is in an arm that if there was no ice would be more or less a giant fjord. So if it melts, other than the amount over sea level the net addition is negligible.

Who said I read articles by anybody? That is you making either an assumption, or projecting onto me something I never said.

However, I do study a great deal of geology. And also knowing some things like basic physics and how displacement work. However, also mostly simply applying logic to something. And the added effect of the WAIS is negligible by logic because the mass of it under sea level is already effectively displacing water in the ocean. So if it melts, the majority of the "added volume" is already in the ocean to begin with.

What in the hell does this non-sequitur have to do with absolutely anything? And no need to explain to me who the LDS are, I grew up in Idaho. But this is the Science thread, not the Religion thread. And in case you did not notice, I almost never go into threads here that do not deal with the military, history, or science. The political and religious threads almost never have any interest for me.

 

Look at the Sahara Desert each afternoon...... it is over one hundred degrees Fahrenheit....... but the following morning the desert is cool.... where did the heat go...... into the atmosphere....... Greening the deserts will stabilize the climate.... but those who support Depopulation do not want this fact known.

Carbon dioxide is necessary for life..... certain people exaggerate because of their longer term plans. The lecture "Innovating to zero" by Bill Gates back in 2010 depends on a Carbon Tax to work...... and the Carbon Tax is used to give the governments total control over the movement of people.

New Mexico biologist Carl Cantrell.

... Israel now has the technology to do this......
....

[/quote]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland_ice_sheet

And then there is this

https://www.earth.com/news/shrinking-glaciers-volcano-eruptions/#
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/abs/10.1098/rsta.2010.0063
https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news...ce-age-caused-by-melting-ice-caps-and-glacial

 

Thank you for the clarification......

Yes... the W.A.I.S. is sitting on ice but.....
if an earthquake were to send a tsunami to hit the W.A.I. S. the fact that it is below sea level could cause it to break up and slide into the Antarxtic Ocean with amazing rapidity.

If the W.A.I. S. were to crack and slide for some reason it could raise ocean levels by three meters.

The fact that the people who talk about climate change virtually ignore this means that they are promoting the Carbon Tax
that they should know perfectly well will do essentially nothing to prevent ocean levels from rising......
eventually......
I believe that deliberate investment in turning deserts green... which produces more food.....
is the only solution but......

Bill Gates does not like this idea as you can easily see from his lecture "Innovating to zero" that he did back in 2010.....
where he explained that he believed that the world population that was then six point eight billion people needed to be reduced down to two or three billion people.

Actually... I suspect that Bill Bates probably really meant five hundred million people as advocated by the Georgia Guide Stones but... he is too intelligent to come out and say that directly.

 

Why are you bringing up Greenland and then Iceland, when the very thing I was discussing was about Antarctica?

Stay on topic, I did not mention Iceland or Greenland, this was about Iceland. Once again, you are completely ignoring actual facts that you do not like by trying to spin off onto something completely different.

 

And if it is already at or below sea level, how in the hell is it going to cause the oceans to rise three meters?

Here, let me show you how incredibly stupid that very concept actually is. Maybe this will give you an idea as to why what you are saying is completely stupid.

The oceans cover just under 140 million cubic miles. And because they are all interconnected, you have to change the level of the oceans globally to have any increase or decrease in their water levels.

Now suppose you want to increase the ocean level by a single meter. OK, fine. Then you have better have around 3.1 million cubic meters kilometers of ice to melt that is all sequestered on the surface of the planet. And remember, that is for only a single meter of sea level rise. You are actually talking about a three meter rise in sea levels.

OK, where in the hell are over 9 million cubic kilometers of ice? The entire freaking continent of Antarctica only contains around 30 million cubic kilometers.

SO you are honestly trying to claim that would cause almost a third of Antarctica to suddenly break off and fall into the ocean?

Sorry, this is exactly what is meant by "science deniers". Anybody that claims that the breaking up of the WAIS is going to cause ocean levels to rise by three meters is either lying, or one of the most unscientific fear mongers there is on the planet. And it's not like anybody really needs to have a Doctorate to understand these things, this is just knowing a little math and actually understanding what would happen.

And once again for the final time, the majority of the WAIS is already below sea level! So it would add absolutely nothing to the sea level at all. In fact, it would slightly lower it if it was all to melt tomorrow as ice is fractionally less dense than water, in addition to being fresh water that is less dense than sea water.

Stop playing games and actually address these points I am clearly bringing up. You keep making these claims, I keep busting them rather easily with logic, and all you do is spin around and ignore it and make the same claim yet again.

 

Wrong thread

 

Only the base... only the foundation of the W.A.I.S. is below sea level......
ninety percent of the actual ice of the W.A.I. S. towers well above sea level... which is what makes it the ice shelf that theorists are so worried about.

Billions of tons of ice sitting on top of ice is a recipe for disaster!

 

The total volume of ice there both above and below sea level is 2.2m k3.

If the entire thing was to melt tomorrow instantly, that is somewhere around .5m ocean rise. Not the 3+ meters you are claiming.

You see, this is what people on each side of the argument do. And we are seeing a perfect example of that.

One side goes screaming with outlandish scenarios that could never happen. And they tell it with predictions of complete destruction.

Meanwhile, another looks at it rather coldly, with actual facts and measurements and logic is able to dispute most of the claims of ultimate destruction. But as always, it does not matter because the paranoids and fear mongers want people to believe "The End Is Near" unless they change their ways. It really is a belief more based on religion and belief than it is one based on actual science.



OK, how many times are we going to have to go over this? If a tsunami was to hit the WAIS with enough force to cause that much damage, it could not even come from a conventional earthquake. It would have to be something in the order of an asteroid hitting the ocean, and that is by itself going to be an Extinction Level Event, so even worrying about the WAIS is like whistling in the dark.

Might as well worry that you left the iron on as you flee your house from a blazing inferno closing in.

That is the problem with "theorists". I can "theorize" about a massive volcano going active under Antarctica and melting all of the ice there. But is that likely? Is that going to happen? Nope, not likely. What you need to realize is that most "theorists" only do that, they think things up. And it does not always have to actually make sense, or be believable or workable.

Now we all should know what an actual tsunami looks like, there have been enough of them recorded in the last couple of decades. But to get a tsunami like you are describing is going to take such a cataclysmic event that even if it does not wipe out most life on the planet all by itself, nobody is going to be caring about sea levels rising because we will be back in a stone age.

 

I would like to think that whoever wrote this article is reasonably well informed on this topic???????

https://www.nbcnews.com/science/env...llapse-may-unavoidable-study-finds-rcna120993

 

Well, let's take a look, shall we?

Who exactly is Evan Bush? Well, let's take a look, shall we?

Well, here is what he says about himself on his own LinkedIn Page: I'm a news reporter covering the environment, climate change, science and breaking news.

OK, so right away he comes across as a zealot. Oh, and his degree is actually in journalism. He is in no way an actual "scientist".

What is the history of the articles he has posted for NBC?

https://www.nbcnews.com/author/evan-bush-ncpn1281465

Wow, it's really kind of all over the place there. A hell of a lot of similar fear mongering climate stories. Then, the border wall? How a government shutdown would affect craft beer? Smoke in the US from fires in Canada. A train derailment? The Chinese balloons from the start of the year?

The guy and his reporting is literally all over the freaking place. But it seems that 80% of his stories are the exact same kind of fear mongering article that you just pointed out.

So no, this is not somebody that is "reasonably well informed", it comes across as a journalist who is also an activist, and is using the platform to push things that he believes. And it is almost all highly sensationalized.

So "reasonably well informed"? Nope, not at all. Because if somebody was "reasonable" and posting news stories, they would not be predominantly pushing a single agenda, with every single article pushing doom and gloom. It would be much more balanced. But his reporting is not, he is only reporting as much negative as he can seem to be able to dig up.

Come on now, we were warned about this kind of nonsense four decades ago.

 

For the record.....
you have my apologies for misunderstanding your first reply to my post in this topic.......

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...limate-deniers.595892/page-92#post-1074523949

Frankly... you used a level of English that I am not used to reading......

I actually work at a blue collar job in a building supply store......

Thank you for really livening up this discussion with exceptional posts like this.........

I plead guilty.... I myself am genuinely worried about the threat of rising ocean levels........

and I would truly love it if you could prove to me that my fears are misguided and exaggerated???!!


www.BankingSystemsFlaws.blogspot.ca/


Sunday, April 25, 2010
We can STOP GLOBAL WARMING and we can keep our school![/paste:font]

September 15, 2008

Dear residents of Indian Harbour Lake, Sonora and Wine Harbour: I am campaigning for the office of Municipal Councilor for St. Mary's District 4.

There are three primary threats to the quality of life for all of us who live here. High unemployment will probably force most of our young people to move far away to find jobs. Because of government cut backs St. Mary's Educational Centre may be closed as early as 2011. In the near future record high tides may devastate our roads and homes that are only a few feet above sea level. We are being told that there is little that you and I can do about any of these problems but this is simply not true.

Satellite pictures show rapid melting of Arctic ice but only about ten percent is above water level. Ice occupies more space than liquid water so until now we have experienced rather little ocean level rise. Our situation will be entirely different if and when melting occurs in the massive ice pack on Greenland and Antarctica that sit on land.

I am in agreement with environmentalist and economist Bjorn Lomborg that a carbon shift policy will probably be ineffective over the short term in combating global temperature increases or in preventing a destructive rise in world ocean levels.

Two effective methods to combat global warming and simultaneously fight rising ocean levels have been proposed by New Mexico biologist Carl Cantrell.

Another promising method to green the deserts is to use hydrogen fuel cell technology to power vehicles in the hottest and driest regions of the earth. Imagine millions of vehicles across the Sahara, the Middle East, near the US Mojave desert and in the outback of Australia all spewing harmless water vapor as exhaust! Rest assured humidity and rainfall will increase in those areas and vegetation will grow.

Last week I wrote a lengthy e-mail to Green Party Leader Elizabeth May. "Ms. May, if you owned a large apartment building and your tenants complained that the rooms were too warm would you listen to the advice of the contractor who was telling you to rip all the insulation out of the walls of this structure?"

"I don't think that you would because your article indicates that you have a phenomenal intellect and listening to this probably self-interested contractor would be incredibly unwise!"

"Combating global warming by first getting rid of CO2 is comparable to tearing the insulation out of this hypothetical building. CO2 is not a pollutant. Plants love this compound and some people even seem to feel that the recent greening in some parts of the Sahara Desert is partly attributable to increased levels of CO2. I tend to strongly agree with them in this assertion."

"Several days ago Mr. Charles Moore informed me that Canada produces roughly only 2.5 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. Our nation could invest billions of dollars into reducing our carbon footprint and yet all this would have essentially zero effect on the global environment if China and India did not take similar measures.... besides....CO2 IS NOT A POLLUTANT... PLANTS LIVE ON IT AND RISING WORLD OCEAN LEVELS ARE ALMOST CERTAINLY THE GREATEST MOST IMMEDIATE THREAT POSED BY GLOBAL WARMING TO EVERY COASTAL COMMUNITY!!!!!!!!! (E-mail, September 11, 200

Ms. May deserves credit for encouraging Canadian political leaders to take environmental issues more seriously but at this time I feel that she has far too much confidence in the proposals put forward at Kyoto. The skepticism that Prime Minister Harper had for this accord seems to have been based on sound reasoning. Liberal Leader Stephane Dion was wise to hope for more time to further study this complex subject before an election.

You would be astonished how many of our political leaders do not understand the tremendous benefits of historical Canadian monetary policy.

.......
.......

I personally plead guilty to flip flopping on the topic of climate change.... I myself get led all over the place on this topic as I encounter evidence.... and theories.... that seem to have very different probable implications for the future?????????

Here is a theory that I sure do hope is correct.....
if what was shown to near death experiencer and former Atheist Mellen Benedict is true..... then this would mean that we make serious improvements from 2024 to 2034!!!!

https://near-death.com/mellen-thomas-benedict/

 

What, you think I am not blue collar? I am freaking career military, that for most of the last decade on the civilian side was catching shoplifters, or working in a warehouse. Hell, I was in the bottom of my class when I graduated high school. But that has not stopped me from continuing to learn and improve myself afterwards.

Oh, and the clearing of the rain forest will not slow down, it will accelerate. Because the people doing it are at subsistence levels of farming, their populations are growing also, and it takes centuries or longer for the areas they leave behind to recover. The problem is not going to slow, it will grow increasingly worse.

And most of what you put in the end literally sounds like an absolute nightmare to me. You seem to have this belief we can, will, and should "tame" nature and the environment. We can't, and we never will. What you literally tried to describe is the end of the planet and most life on it, and you seem to be fine with that?

*shudders in revulsion*

 

Well.....
you are obviously a truly intelligent person who is free to conclude whatever you wish from the quotations that I post that obviously I take very differently than you do.

Yes... I thought from the way that you write that you used high level English continually...... and actually you do.......

I predict that you are in line for rapid promotions once President Donald J. Trump is back in power........

[or Gabbard and RFK....... whoever leads the next USA administration].........!!!

I am extremely hopeful for the up coming decade.... and even for the next two centuries...... but I admit that we will go through some rough stuff as well.....



https://near-death.com/howard-storm-nde/

 

Political BS. But to give an idea how wrong you are, when he was in office in 2016 until 2020, he made no changes in the military. No increase in numbers, the same levels established during the Obama Administration continued during the entire Trump Administration, and remain during the Biden Administration. This is the longest I am aware of with no changes in troop numbers, funding, or anything else Going on 16 years now. So that shows how little you understand this either.

In fact, Donald Trump is not even a Conservative nor is he a Republican. He has always been a Populist and nothing else. But that does not matter, I already retired. Not that it even matters, I would have been forced out in another year no matter what as the maximum age you can serve is 60.

But it gives yet another indication that you really do not understand. And you would likely be surprised at how well educated most in the military are. The vast majority of us are not some knuckle dragging cavemen. Hang around us, and you might run across discussions on almost everything from medieval English literature to current things about discoveries in cosmology. I remember getting into one hours long conversation about the deeper meanings of Tom Stoppard's "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead".

And once again, you essentially ended it with what appears to be an extract from a religious tract. Let me remind you, this is supposed to be the science area, not the religious one. You are once again injecting philosophy and not actual science that is relevant to the topic.

And please, RFK? One of the ultimate anti-science nuts and rabid anti-vaxxer? He is about the only politician that scares me more than the idea of Donald Trump repeating the feat of Grover Cleveland.

 

In my opinion.......
President Trump may have been doing something behind the scenes that will soon become public knowledge.......

some of it anyway....... What he did according to the sources that I take serious....... was to deal with corruption at the highest levels in the G-8... and the G-20....... as well of course in Washington, D. C. and New York and... and... and... and... and...and ... and......


http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/are-military-tribunals-coming.547119/