Renewable Revolution

Quote from: monsta666 on July 10, 2016, 05:56:21 pm

This is what I mean about contradictory information:

Quote from: Maria-José Viñas from NASA's Earth Science News Team

According to the new analysis of satellite data, the Antarctic ice sheet showed a net gain of 112 billion tons of ice a year from 1992 to 2001. That net gain slowed to 82 billion tons of ice per year between 2003 and 2008.

"We're essentially in agreement with other studies that show an increase in ice discharge in the Antarctic Peninsula and the Thwaites and Pine Island region of West Antarctica," said Jay Zwally, a glaciologist with NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, and lead author of the study, which was published on Oct. 30 in the Journal of Glaciology. "Our main disagreement is for East Antarctica and the interior of West Antarctica – there, we see an ice gain that exceeds the losses in the other areas."  Zwally added that his team "measured small height changes over large areas, as well as the large changes observed over smaller areas."[/quote]

Check the link in question for quote: http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses

What you DELIBERATELY do not wish to understand, is that this NOT about a "DEBATE" on whether global warming is a "hypothesis" or not. Of course the DENIERS wish to make it appear that their IS a "debate". YOU are, by the last three posts, doing EXACTLY THAT.  

Since you are an Admin here, I cannot delete your propaganda disguised as "objective" debate.

So, I will, as RE never fails to remind me, have to LIVE WITH IT.

Okay, let us begin, Mr. Monsta.

You stated that you merely wish to clarify the Antarctic growth "FACT". You did not, as you DID when mentioning global warming, call that a "hypothesis". SO, anyone reading WHAT YOU WROTE would immediately, while ignoring an entire post covering MANY global warming issues and fact I had just laboriously published, AS-U-ME that global warming is a "hypothesis" and Antarctic Ice increase is a "fact". DON'T PRETEND YOU WERE NOT AWARE OF THAT BIASED PHRASEOLOGY ON YOUR PART.

Let's pretend, just for the hell of it, that we aren't talking about global warming. Let's pretend that the only issue here is Antarctic Ice. And mind you, we HAVE TO DO THAT in order to discus objectively what you claim is a "fact".  The REASON for that is that the TOTAL amount of ice mass on the LAND MASS of this forking planet is  declining.

But, as I said, let's stick with Antarctica and not mention Greenland and umpteen land glaciers with ice melt decline (that YOU failed to bring up when you mentioned Antarctic ice "growth" as a "valid" argument by the deniers).

Here are the facts on that NASA study you linked:
[/size]

Quote

What's Going on in Antartica?

According to this study, the gains in ice from increased precipitation in the continent's interior, particularly across the East Antarctic Ice Sheet, is enough to offset the melting occurring in the West Antarctic and Antarctic Peninsula.

However, the study does not contradict the troubling trends seen in Western Antarctica where there has been widespread loss of ice along the Bellingshausen and Amundsen Seas.

And what this study really illustrates is how difficult it is for scientists to measure small changes in ice. Fortunately, NASA is developing new tools—due to launch in 2018—that will help scientists more accurately measure long-term ice changes in Antarctica.

The research on this continues, but is hardly a reason for not taking action on climate today.

http://www.ecowatch.com/whats-going-on-in-antarctica-is-the-ice-melting-or-growing-1882118412.html

Now the above analysis will be USED by the DENIERS, to NOT justify radical action (i.e. PHASE OUT the burning of your beloved Fossil fuels) to ameliorate catastrophic climate change.

IOW, they will TRY to claim there is a "debate", as you are doing here.   

This is unethical cherry picking  of the most dastardly sort that favors foot dragging on behalf of the dirty energy producers.   

SO, if you truly are OBJECTIVE on the issue of Global Warming in general and total planetary ice mass, both on land and in the ocean, in particular, you will stop taking a study about Antarctic ice (that is itself inconclusive and subject to review) out of PLANETWIDE context.

That is precisely what you did. Stop doing that. You NEVER post here agreeing that radical action must be engaged in to stop global warming. You only show up to question a post that underlines the danger of global warming. That is evidence of your bias FOR the fossil fuel industry and AGAINST radical action to phase out fossil fuels in order to give the next generation a chance to survive, REGARDLESS of your claims to the contrary.

All that said, I am quite willing to go into excruciating detail about glaciers, Antarctica, Greenland and floating ice everywhere. But I will NOT accept ANY a priori allegation that global warming is a "hypothesis".

Global Warming is an existential threat to most macroscopic species of land and sea vertebrates in general and humans in particular.

Global Warming is NOT a "hypothesis". The existential threat it presents may be a hypothesis, but it is NOT a "debatable" one, according to the scientific community.  Anyone that claims that is not the scientific consensus is a suicidal fool or a tool of the fossil fuel industry :iamwithstupid:  (which is the same thing).

Have a nice day.