info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: You Ought to Have a Look: Climate Change and Why Its Justified
19 views
Skip to first unread message
Kurt Lochner
Dec 4, 2016, 9:52:56 AM12/4/16
to
On 12/4/2016 7:22 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>
> A good read
You're citing the CATO Institute on 'climate'?
*>LOL!<*
Study Warns Methane from Melting Arctic Permafrost is ‘Certain to
Trigger Additional Warming’
A new study finds that melting Arctic permafrost from man-made global
warming is releasing large amounts of methane into the atmosphere – and
the resulting feedback loop is “certain to trigger additional warming.”
The study led by University of Guelph (Ontario, Canada) biology
Professor Merritt Turetsky examined 71 wetlands around the globe and
discovered that wetlands in northern latitudes are releasing much more
methane gas than previously thought.
http://inhabitat.com/methane-from-melting-arctic-permafrost-certain-to-trigger-additional-warming-new-study/
A synthesis of methane emissions from 71 northern, temperate, and
subtropical wetlands
Wetlands are the largest natural source of atmospheric methane. Here, we
assess controls on methane flux using a database of approximately 19 000
instantaneous measurements from 71 wetland sites located across
subtropical, temperate, and northern high latitude regions. Our analyses
confirm general controls on wetland methane emissions from soil
temperature, water table, and vegetation, but also show that these
relationships are modified depending on wetland type (bog, fen, or
swamp), region (subarctic to temperate), and disturbance. Fen methane
flux was more sensitive to vegetation and less sensitive to temperature
than bog or swamp fluxes. The optimal water table for methane flux was
consistently below the peat surface in bogs, close to the peat surface
in poor fens, and above the peat surface in rich fens. However, the
largest flux in bogs occurred when dry 30-day averaged antecedent
conditions were followed by wet conditions, while in fens and swamps,
the largest flux occurred when both 30-day averaged antecedent and
current conditions were wet. Drained wetlands exhibited distinct
characteristics, e.g. the absence of large flux following wet and warm
conditions, suggesting that the same functional relationships between
methane flux and environmental conditions cannot be used across pristine
and disturbed wetlands. Together, our results suggest that water table
and temperature are dominant controls on methane flux in pristine bogs
and swamps, while other processes, such as vascular transport in
pristine fens, have the potential to partially override the effect of
these controls in other wetland types. Because wetland types vary in
methane emissions and have distinct controls, these ecosystems need to
be considered separately to yield reliable estimates of global wetland
methane release.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcb.12580/abstract
--
Republicans often as not create the very problems they say
that they're trying to solve, while blaming the Democratic
Party for what they did..
>
> A good read
You're citing the CATO Institute on 'climate'?
*>LOL!<*
Study Warns Methane from Melting Arctic Permafrost is ‘Certain to
Trigger Additional Warming’
A new study finds that melting Arctic permafrost from man-made global
warming is releasing large amounts of methane into the atmosphere – and
the resulting feedback loop is “certain to trigger additional warming.”
The study led by University of Guelph (Ontario, Canada) biology
Professor Merritt Turetsky examined 71 wetlands around the globe and
discovered that wetlands in northern latitudes are releasing much more
methane gas than previously thought.
http://inhabitat.com/methane-from-melting-arctic-permafrost-certain-to-trigger-additional-warming-new-study/
A synthesis of methane emissions from 71 northern, temperate, and
subtropical wetlands
Wetlands are the largest natural source of atmospheric methane. Here, we
assess controls on methane flux using a database of approximately 19 000
instantaneous measurements from 71 wetland sites located across
subtropical, temperate, and northern high latitude regions. Our analyses
confirm general controls on wetland methane emissions from soil
temperature, water table, and vegetation, but also show that these
relationships are modified depending on wetland type (bog, fen, or
swamp), region (subarctic to temperate), and disturbance. Fen methane
flux was more sensitive to vegetation and less sensitive to temperature
than bog or swamp fluxes. The optimal water table for methane flux was
consistently below the peat surface in bogs, close to the peat surface
in poor fens, and above the peat surface in rich fens. However, the
largest flux in bogs occurred when dry 30-day averaged antecedent
conditions were followed by wet conditions, while in fens and swamps,
the largest flux occurred when both 30-day averaged antecedent and
current conditions were wet. Drained wetlands exhibited distinct
characteristics, e.g. the absence of large flux following wet and warm
conditions, suggesting that the same functional relationships between
methane flux and environmental conditions cannot be used across pristine
and disturbed wetlands. Together, our results suggest that water table
and temperature are dominant controls on methane flux in pristine bogs
and swamps, while other processes, such as vascular transport in
pristine fens, have the potential to partially override the effect of
these controls in other wetland types. Because wetland types vary in
methane emissions and have distinct controls, these ecosystems need to
be considered separately to yield reliable estimates of global wetland
methane release.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcb.12580/abstract
--
Republicans often as not create the very problems they say
that they're trying to solve, while blaming the Democratic
Party for what they did..
Beam Me Up Scotty
Dec 4, 2016, 10:28:56 AM12/4/16
to
On 12/04/2016 10:13 AM, Ted wrote:
--
That's Karma
> Kurt Lochner <kurt_l...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On 12/4/2016 7:22 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>
>>> A good read
>>
>> You're citing the CATO Institute on 'climate'?
>>
>> *>LOL!<*
Liberals quoted Al Gore....
>> On 12/4/2016 7:22 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>
>>> A good read
>>
>> You're citing the CATO Institute on 'climate'?
>>
>> *>LOL!<*
--
That's Karma
Kurt Lochner
Dec 4, 2016, 11:54:34 AM12/4/16
to
On 12/4/2016 9:28 AM, Stream Me Up-skirts Potty wrote:
>
> Liberals quoted Al Gore....
Al Gore cited verifiable scientific publications, Potty.
Let's examine the contrast in these reports..
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3974846/Stunning-new-data-indicates-El-Nino-drove-record-highs-global-temperatures-suggesting-rise-not-man-emissions.html
Last year, Dr Schmidt said 2015 would have been a record hot year even
without El Nino.
‘The reason why this is such a warm record year is because of the
long-term underlying trend, the cumulative effect of the long-term
warming trend of our Earth,’ he said. This was ‘mainly caused’ by the
emission of greenhouse gases by humans.
Dr Schmidt also denied that there was any ‘pause’ or ‘hiatus’ in global
warming between the 1998 and 2015 El Ninos.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-we-dont-know-if-it-will-be-sunny-next-month-but-we-know-itll-be-hot-all-year/
The most notable ocean pattern of variability is the El Niño/Southern
Oscillation (ENSO). In the tropical Pacific, the distance from Indonesia
to South America and the way tropical winds push warm water west combine
to allow special waves to travel along the equator and are amplified by
the atmospheric wind response to produce large fluctuations in
temperatures (up to 3 degrees Celsius) in the Eastern Pacific that last
for months. Since the 1980s, we’ve had sufficient understanding of ENSO
to be able to predict the occurrence and speed of these waves and,
consequently, the variability of ocean temperatures in the Eastern
Pacific about six months in advance.
These fluctuations in temperature can be so large that their influence
can be felt globally. Warm El Niño phases cause excess rain in Peru and
Ecuador; drought in Brazil’s Nordeste region, Indonesia and Northern
Australia, and weather responses in North America and Antarctica. There
is a clear impact on global temperature, too, though the mechanisms are
complex: heat released from the oceans; increases in water vapor, which
enhance the greenhouse effect, and redistributions of clouds.
Statistically, the impact on global temperature peaks two or three
months after changes in the tropical Pacific. Because these events are
large, take months to play out and can be predicted months ahead of
time, we can use ENSO to predict the next year’s global temperatures.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2016/11/record-heat-despite-a-cold-sun/
Global temperature goes from heat record to heat record, yet the sun is
at its dimmest for half a century.
For a while, 2010 was the hottest year on record globally. But then it
got overtopped by 2014. And 2014 was beaten again by 2015. And now 2016
is so warm that it is certain to be once again a record year. Three
record years in a row – that is unprecedented even in all those decades
of global warming.
Strangely, one aspect of this gets barely mentioned: all those heat
records occur despite a cold sun (Figs. 1 and 2). The last solar minimum
(2008-2010) was the lowest since at least 1950, while the last solar
maximum (2013-2015) can hardly be described as such. This is shown,
among others, by the sunspot data (Fig. 1) as well as measurements of
the solar luminosity from satellites (Fig. 2). Other indicators of solar
activity indicate cooling as well (Lockwood and Fröhlich, Proc. Royal
Society 2007).
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2016/09/predicting-annual-temperatures-a-year-ahead/#more-19578
The key results are summarized in the figures that show how residual
variations in the global temperatures (after detrending) related to the
ENSO phase at the beginning of the year (defined using the MEI), and the
predictions for 2016 (two methods) and 2017.
Graphs:
http://i1.wp.com/espnfivethirtyeight.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/schmidt-climate-11.png?quality=90&strip=all&w=1150&ssl=1
http://i0.wp.com/espnfivethirtyeight.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/schmidt-climate-2.png?quality=90&strip=all&w=1150&ssl=1
>
> Liberals quoted Al Gore....
Al Gore cited verifiable scientific publications, Potty.
Let's examine the contrast in these reports..
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3974846/Stunning-new-data-indicates-El-Nino-drove-record-highs-global-temperatures-suggesting-rise-not-man-emissions.html
Last year, Dr Schmidt said 2015 would have been a record hot year even
without El Nino.
‘The reason why this is such a warm record year is because of the
long-term underlying trend, the cumulative effect of the long-term
warming trend of our Earth,’ he said. This was ‘mainly caused’ by the
emission of greenhouse gases by humans.
Dr Schmidt also denied that there was any ‘pause’ or ‘hiatus’ in global
warming between the 1998 and 2015 El Ninos.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-we-dont-know-if-it-will-be-sunny-next-month-but-we-know-itll-be-hot-all-year/
The most notable ocean pattern of variability is the El Niño/Southern
Oscillation (ENSO). In the tropical Pacific, the distance from Indonesia
to South America and the way tropical winds push warm water west combine
to allow special waves to travel along the equator and are amplified by
the atmospheric wind response to produce large fluctuations in
temperatures (up to 3 degrees Celsius) in the Eastern Pacific that last
for months. Since the 1980s, we’ve had sufficient understanding of ENSO
to be able to predict the occurrence and speed of these waves and,
consequently, the variability of ocean temperatures in the Eastern
Pacific about six months in advance.
These fluctuations in temperature can be so large that their influence
can be felt globally. Warm El Niño phases cause excess rain in Peru and
Ecuador; drought in Brazil’s Nordeste region, Indonesia and Northern
Australia, and weather responses in North America and Antarctica. There
is a clear impact on global temperature, too, though the mechanisms are
complex: heat released from the oceans; increases in water vapor, which
enhance the greenhouse effect, and redistributions of clouds.
Statistically, the impact on global temperature peaks two or three
months after changes in the tropical Pacific. Because these events are
large, take months to play out and can be predicted months ahead of
time, we can use ENSO to predict the next year’s global temperatures.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2016/11/record-heat-despite-a-cold-sun/
Global temperature goes from heat record to heat record, yet the sun is
at its dimmest for half a century.
For a while, 2010 was the hottest year on record globally. But then it
got overtopped by 2014. And 2014 was beaten again by 2015. And now 2016
is so warm that it is certain to be once again a record year. Three
record years in a row – that is unprecedented even in all those decades
of global warming.
Strangely, one aspect of this gets barely mentioned: all those heat
records occur despite a cold sun (Figs. 1 and 2). The last solar minimum
(2008-2010) was the lowest since at least 1950, while the last solar
maximum (2013-2015) can hardly be described as such. This is shown,
among others, by the sunspot data (Fig. 1) as well as measurements of
the solar luminosity from satellites (Fig. 2). Other indicators of solar
activity indicate cooling as well (Lockwood and Fröhlich, Proc. Royal
Society 2007).
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2016/09/predicting-annual-temperatures-a-year-ahead/#more-19578
The key results are summarized in the figures that show how residual
variations in the global temperatures (after detrending) related to the
ENSO phase at the beginning of the year (defined using the MEI), and the
predictions for 2016 (two methods) and 2017.
Graphs:
http://i1.wp.com/espnfivethirtyeight.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/schmidt-climate-11.png?quality=90&strip=all&w=1150&ssl=1
http://i0.wp.com/espnfivethirtyeight.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/schmidt-climate-2.png?quality=90&strip=all&w=1150&ssl=1
Beam Me Up Scotty
Dec 4, 2016, 12:17:40 PM12/4/16
to
by ice melting.
--
That's Karma
Kym Horsell
Dec 4, 2016, 12:35:38 PM12/4/16
to
Highlarious.
Liars are perty easy to spot because they have the habit of putting things in the negative and giving no details. E.g. they don't say what *is* happenin but what is allegedly not happening. "I am not a crook" versus "I am honest".
--
http://www.globalideasbank.org/site/bank/idea.php?ideaId=1907
'Liars say "I am not a crook" rather than "I am honest" '
Liars use short sentences, the past tense and negative statements
Bella DePaula, professor of psychology at the University of Virginia,
has found, in a study of 3,000 people, that the following clues are
the most useful indicators of whether somebody is lying:
# Lack of specific detail - not volunteering names of people and places
# Short answers
# Using the past tense
# Using negative statements ("not a crook" rather than "honest")
# Increased eye contact
# Higher pitched voice
Liars are perty easy to spot because they have the habit of putting things in the negative and giving no details. E.g. they don't say what *is* happenin but what is allegedly not happening. "I am not a crook" versus "I am honest".
--
http://www.globalideasbank.org/site/bank/idea.php?ideaId=1907
'Liars say "I am not a crook" rather than "I am honest" '
Liars use short sentences, the past tense and negative statements
Bella DePaula, professor of psychology at the University of Virginia,
has found, in a study of 3,000 people, that the following clues are
the most useful indicators of whether somebody is lying:
# Lack of specific detail - not volunteering names of people and places
# Short answers
# Using the past tense
# Using negative statements ("not a crook" rather than "honest")
# Increased eye contact
# Higher pitched voice
Kurt Lochner
Dec 4, 2016, 12:35:48 PM12/4/16
to
On 12/4/2016 11:17 AM, Stream Me Up-skirts Potty whined:
> On 12/04/2016 11:54 AM, Kurt Lochner started laughing at:
>> On 12/4/2016 9:28 AM, Stream Me Up-skirts Potty writhed in denials:
You're completely wrong, of course..
http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/
Sea level rise is caused primarily by two factors related to global
warming: the added water from melting land ice and the expansion of sea
water as it warms. The first chart tracks the change in sea level since
1993 as observed by satellites.
Graph:
http://climate.nasa.gov/system/charts/12_15_seaLevel_left.gif
Again..
> On 12/04/2016 11:54 AM, Kurt Lochner started laughing at:
>> On 12/4/2016 9:28 AM, Stream Me Up-skirts Potty writhed in denials:
http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/
Sea level rise is caused primarily by two factors related to global
warming: the added water from melting land ice and the expansion of sea
water as it warms. The first chart tracks the change in sea level since
1993 as observed by satellites.
Graph:
http://climate.nasa.gov/system/charts/12_15_seaLevel_left.gif
Again..
abu.ku...@gmail.com
Dec 4, 2016, 1:07:20 PM12/4/16
to
see axeL Moerner;
he quite effectively show how the data was diced,
to amplify the tiny sealevel rise,
that is probably caused by a)
erosion, and b)
subsidence ... but,
most of that is probably due to construction etc.
he quite effectively show how the data was diced,
to amplify the tiny sealevel rise,
that is probably caused by a)
erosion, and b)
subsidence ... but,
most of that is probably due to construction etc.
Beam Me Up Scotty
Dec 4, 2016, 1:46:25 PM12/4/16
to
> pretending I thought astronomy was the same as astrology. The thread
> subject is "Re: Are there any astronomers here?" and I posted it over a
> week ago.
>
> Now you can dishonestly ridicule me over it. Consider that an early
> Christmas present. :)
>
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/planet-x-nibiru-headed-earth-doomsayers-article-1.2504846
There was a 9th planet.... it just wasn't Pluto.
--
That's Karma
Wally W.
Dec 4, 2016, 1:53:40 PM12/4/16
to
On Sun, 4 Dec 2016 09:35:36 -0800 (PST), Kym Horsell wrote:
>Highlarious.
Not so much.
The hypothesis, we would be "swallowed by a rising sea level caused by
ice melting" by now, has been falisified.
What more do you need?
>Liars are perty easy to spot because they have the habit of putting things in the negative and giving no details. E.g. they don't say what *is* happenin but what is allegedly not happening. "I am not a crook" versus "I am honest".
Pretty obvious to one who doesn't need to see things to 15 decimal
places: The locales that were to be flooded remain above sea level.
Those who value simplicity in communication might find it convenient
to state it equivalently (for the purpose at hand) in terms of the
negative: "The areas are not flooded."
Why was your complaint in the form of a negative: "they ___don't___
say what *is* happenin"?
Even if the gist of the complaint was reasonable, would your phrasing
it in the negative invalidate the complaint because it was blown away
by a spinning irony meter?
>Highlarious.
Not so much.
The hypothesis, we would be "swallowed by a rising sea level caused by
ice melting" by now, has been falisified.
What more do you need?
>Liars are perty easy to spot because they have the habit of putting things in the negative and giving no details. E.g. they don't say what *is* happenin but what is allegedly not happening. "I am not a crook" versus "I am honest".
places: The locales that were to be flooded remain above sea level.
Those who value simplicity in communication might find it convenient
to state it equivalently (for the purpose at hand) in terms of the
negative: "The areas are not flooded."
Why was your complaint in the form of a negative: "they ___don't___
say what *is* happenin"?
Even if the gist of the complaint was reasonable, would your phrasing
it in the negative invalidate the complaint because it was blown away
by a spinning irony meter?
Unum
Dec 4, 2016, 3:10:52 PM12/4/16
to
Lol, teddy keeepps onnn runnninggg!
Eric©
Dec 4, 2016, 3:59:16 PM12/4/16
to
Kurt Lochner wrote...
> Trigger Additional Warming?
> the resulting feedback loop is ?certain to trigger additional warming.?
THE INHABITAT TEAM
Jill Fehrenbacher, Publisher of Inhabitat.com, Founder of Inhabitat, Editor-in-chief of
Inhabitat, Inhabitat founder, Inhabitat editor, green designer, JILL FEHRENBACHER ?
Founder, Editor-in-Chief
Jill is the founder of Inhabitat, as well as a LEED-AP green designer and green design
consultant based in New York City. She created Inhabitat in the Spring of 2005 as a way
to catalog her search for new ways to improve the world through forward-thinking, high-
tech, and environmentally conscious design. Educated at Brown University, where she
received a B.A. in Art Semiotics, [...]
LOL!
>
> On 12/4/2016 7:22 AM, David Hartung wrote:
> >
> > A good read
>
> You're citing the CATO Institute on 'climate'?
>
> *>LOL!<*
>
> Study Warns Methane from Melting Arctic Permafrost is ?Certain to
> On 12/4/2016 7:22 AM, David Hartung wrote:
> >
> > A good read
>
> You're citing the CATO Institute on 'climate'?
>
> *>LOL!<*
>
> Trigger Additional Warming?
>
> A new study finds that melting Arctic permafrost from man-made global
> warming is releasing large amounts of methane into the atmosphere ? and
> A new study finds that melting Arctic permafrost from man-made global
> the resulting feedback loop is ?certain to trigger additional warming.?
> The study led by University of Guelph (Ontario, Canada) biology
> Professor Merritt Turetsky examined 71 wetlands around the globe and
> discovered that wetlands in northern latitudes are releasing much more
> methane gas than previously thought.
>
> http://inhabitat.com/methane-from-melting-arctic-permafrost-certain-to-trigger-additional-warming-new-study/
*>LOL!<*
> Professor Merritt Turetsky examined 71 wetlands around the globe and
> discovered that wetlands in northern latitudes are releasing much more
> methane gas than previously thought.
>
> http://inhabitat.com/methane-from-melting-arctic-permafrost-certain-to-trigger-additional-warming-new-study/
THE INHABITAT TEAM
Jill Fehrenbacher, Publisher of Inhabitat.com, Founder of Inhabitat, Editor-in-chief of
Inhabitat, Inhabitat founder, Inhabitat editor, green designer, JILL FEHRENBACHER ?
Founder, Editor-in-Chief
Jill is the founder of Inhabitat, as well as a LEED-AP green designer and green design
consultant based in New York City. She created Inhabitat in the Spring of 2005 as a way
to catalog her search for new ways to improve the world through forward-thinking, high-
tech, and environmentally conscious design. Educated at Brown University, where she
received a B.A. in Art Semiotics, [...]
LOL!
David Hartung
Dec 4, 2016, 5:31:09 PM12/4/16
to
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/10/11/shock-news-satellite-sea-level-error-is-100-of-the-trend/
[...]
The global satellite sea level graphs claiming 3 mm/year are complete
bullshit, and would be thrown out of any engineering project. But this
is government science and the government needs some basis to claim that
sea level rise rates have increased.
[...]
And:
http://sealevel.colorado.edu/content/map-sea-level-trends
[...]
Local trends are calculated with a least-squares fit of 10-day, 0.25
degree resolution grids of sea level. A trend, bias, annual, and
semi-annual terms are fit simultaneously. Please note that these trends
have been determined for a finite period (1993 - present), and reflect
the impact of decadal scale climate variability on the regional
distribution of sea level rise. Additionally, local sea surface height
trends and variations are a result of many factors, including (but not
limited to) local crustal displacement, glacial isostatic adjustment,
steric effects, and even local wind patterns. Therefore you should
consider these effects in interpreting local sea surface height time
series derived from our gridded data sets.
[...]
In other words, there is much more involved in sea level change than
warming and ice melt.
Catoni
Dec 4, 2016, 5:51:29 PM12/4/16
to
On Sunday, December 4, 2016 at 12:35:48 PM UTC-5, Kurt Lochner wrote:
> > Al gore lied... we aren't being swallowed by a rising sea level
>
> You're completely wrong, of course..
>
> http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/
>
> Sea level rise is caused primarily by two factors related to global
> warming: the added water from melting land ice and the expansion of sea
> water as it warms. The first chart tracks the change in sea level since
> 1993 as observed by satellites.
>
> Graph:
>
> http://climate.nasa.gov/system/charts/12_15_seaLevel_left.gif
>
> Again..
> --
> Republicans often as not create the very problems they say
> that they're trying to solve, while blaming the Democratic
> Party for what they did..
I travel a bit in the world.. Fishermen down east in Nova Scotia and new Brunswick tell me they have been tying up their boats in the same place for more than twenty years...
> > Al gore lied... we aren't being swallowed by a rising sea level
>
> You're completely wrong, of course..
>
> http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/
>
> Sea level rise is caused primarily by two factors related to global
> warming: the added water from melting land ice and the expansion of sea
> water as it warms. The first chart tracks the change in sea level since
> 1993 as observed by satellites.
>
> Graph:
>
> http://climate.nasa.gov/system/charts/12_15_seaLevel_left.gif
>
> Again..
> --
> Republicans often as not create the very problems they say
> that they're trying to solve, while blaming the Democratic
> Party for what they did..
In southeast Asia in 2013... (Thailand and Cambodia)... fishermen down at the docks laughed at me and pointed at me saying "Al Gore" ... "Al Gore" They've been tying their boats up at the same place for many, many years...
I guess Gore's propaganda flick has travelled far also... I was surprised... But perhaps I shouldn't be. Gore apparently travelled to that part of the world promoting his crap movie.
The in-laws in Floriday live a quarter mile from their dock. They haven't felt the need to hurry and try to sell their place because of sea level rise... My faher-in-law thinks the Warming Alarmists are hilarious..
Businessmen in Manhatten aren't making plans to use boats to get to their office on the second floor any time soon. ..
LOL 555555
Beam Me Up Scotty
Dec 4, 2016, 6:24:12 PM12/4/16
to
the equator and the water is drawn to the equator bulge so the effects
of minimal sea level change would be most dramatic at the equator. That
means "were it to rise 10mm" then a disproportionate amount of that
would be seen at the equator meaning that the equator sea level may rise
15mm and the norther and southern pole regions only see a 5mm rise. So
telling us the water level is rising 3mm is NOT going to be the same as
the sea level rise in the polar regions. If you use the Equator sea
rise it might be more than the more northern sea rise and the whole
amount actually be only half what they are telling us that they measured
in Tahiti/Tonga.
--
That's Karma
Unum
Dec 4, 2016, 6:30:25 PM12/4/16
to
On 12/4/2016 4:08 PM, Ted wrote:
> LOL, Unum keeps on lying! :)
You're always welcome to try to point out an actual lie, Jonathan. Until
then you are merely doing some pathetic blustering, right?
You're always welcome to try to point out an actual lie, Jonathan. Until
then you are merely doing some pathetic blustering, right?
Unum
Dec 4, 2016, 7:25:35 PM12/4/16
to
> learned from it. You used the wrong word and that's because you're stupid.
Lol, he didn't like my choice of words!
> But so what? If you'd had the balls, you would have just faced it and moved
> on. Instead, you denied the obvious fact that you even made an error.
> That's a pussy lie, Unum, and you're a lying pussy. And in case you don't
> realize it, anybody else here, friend or foe, is now able to witness your
> humiliation, which you needlessly compounded with your cowardice.
Got all excited, this is hilarious! So you can't point out a lie, Jonathan?
Until then you are just doing some pathetic blustering, right?
Ted
Dec 4, 2016, 7:46:16 PM12/4/16
to
words". Thank you, Unum. I love morons like you. :)
>
>> But so what? If you'd had the balls, you would have just faced it and moved
>> on. Instead, you denied the obvious fact that you even made an error.
>> That's a pussy lie, Unum, and you're a lying pussy. And in case you don't
>> realize it, anybody else here, friend or foe, is now able to witness your
>> humiliation, which you needlessly compounded with your cowardice.
>
> Got all excited, this is hilarious!
> So you can't point out a lie, Jonathan?
"Jonathan" is to my real name.)
>
> Until then you are just doing some pathetic blustering, right?
knowing its definition. :)
--
http://kingofwallpapers.com/ted/ted-005.jpg "This troll is one of the
dumbest, most opinionated, most blinkered and also the most arrogant septic
idiots one can come across."
Unum
Dec 4, 2016, 11:58:02 PM12/4/16
to
Wally W.
Dec 5, 2016, 12:50:32 AM12/5/16
to
with automatically a lie?
Do you think a statement from ignorance is necessarily a lie?
How many categories do you have for ideas you don't like if you can't
pigeonhole them as "lies" or "hate?"
abu.ku...@gmail.com
Dec 5, 2016, 3:35:32 PM12/5/16
to
he inhabit that, like this
Chom Noamsky
Dec 6, 2016, 11:56:27 PM12/6/16
to
0 new messages