Results 476 to 500 of 3644
-
07-09-2019, 08:28 AM #476
-
07-09-2019, 11:17 PM #477
I was thinking the same. Only a few days when it went over 90.
Anchorage hitting 90 is crazy. What happens to Alaska if they get a drought and 90 degree temps? Wildfires the size of Maine?
-
07-10-2019, 06:38 AM #478
-
07-10-2019, 09:26 AM #479
-
07-10-2019, 09:58 AM #480
-
07-10-2019, 07:26 PM #481
-
07-10-2019, 09:08 PM #482
"Here’s what happens when you try to replicate climate contrarian papers
A new paper finds common errors among the 3% of climate papers that reject the global warming consensus"
Those who reject the 97% expert consensus on human-caused global warming often invoke Galileo as an example of when the scientific minority overturned the majority view. In reality, climate contrarians have almost nothing in common with Galileo, whose conclusions were based on empirical scientific evidence, supported by many scientific contemporaries, and persecuted by the religious-political establishment. . .
You may have noticed another characteristic of contrarian climate research – there is no cohesive, consistent alternative theory to human-caused global warming. Some blame global warming on the sun, others on orbital cycles of other planets, others on ocean cycles, and so on. There is a 97% expert consensus on a cohesive theory that’s overwhelmingly supported by the scientific evidence, but the 2–3% of papers that reject that consensus are all over the map, even contradicting each other. The one thing they seem to have in common is methodological flaws like cherry picking, curve fitting, ignoring inconvenient data, and disregarding known physics.
If any of the contrarians were a modern-day Galileo, he would present a theory that’s supported by the scientific evidence and that’s not based on methodological errors. Such a sound theory would convince scientific experts, and a consensus would begin to form. Instead, as our paper shows, the contrarians have presented a variety of contradictory alternatives based on methodological flaws, which therefore have failed to convince scientific experts.
Human-caused global warming is the only exception. It’s based on overwhelming, consistent scientific evidence and has therefore convinced over 97% of scientific experts that it’s correct.
-
07-30-2019, 10:28 PM #483
https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/sci-te...ands-1.4530600
Hundreds of reindeer starve to death on Arctic islands
-
07-31-2019, 03:10 AM #484
. . . don't feed the trolls...
-
07-31-2019, 05:43 AM #485
European Heat Wave moving on to Greenland where large meltdown is possible
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-e...-idUSKCN1UL15C
-
07-31-2019, 12:22 PM #486
New high temperature records set in Alaska (again) as heat wave is set to relinquish grip
https://www.accuweather.com/en/weath...-grip/70008760
-
07-31-2019, 02:05 PM #487
-
08-01-2019, 02:43 PM #488
https://www.washingtonpost.com/weath...ic-july-alone/
1/2 a millimeter of sea level rise just from Greenland in July. Goes to show just how quickly we could see seas rise if there were just a few more warm days in future summers. Less sea ice means warmer water temps, warmer Greenland. Arctic is warming so much faster than everywhere else... what happens if Greenland’s average temp goes up another 2-3 celsius? The more water there is on the ice sheet the faster the ice flows and melts. Fucking house of cards.
-
08-02-2019, 09:27 AM #489
Greenland will finally live up to all the marketing hype.
I think that we are totally fucked.
-
08-02-2019, 12:33 PM #490
eh, maybe not....
-
08-02-2019, 02:24 PM #491
-
08-02-2019, 02:50 PM #492Scientists now have decisive molecular evidence that humans and chimpanzees once had a common momma and that this lineage had previously split from monkeys.
-
08-03-2019, 09:07 AM #493
Ice sheet is losing mass overall not gaining. Video is obviously from a moron and not a scientist. Yes most ice loss is from calving not “melt” so therefore melt doesn’t exceed new snowfall. https://nsidc.org/cryosphere/quickfacts/icesheets.html
The ice sheet is steadily retreating in the south. This is undeniable. Loss is about 57 cubic miles per year. Not currently significant but this is going to increase and probably exponentially.
-
08-03-2019, 12:26 PM #494Registered User
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
- Posts
- 824
Yeah, we're fucked.
-
08-03-2019, 04:43 PM #495Banned
- Join Date
- Aug 2019
- Posts
- 1,084
Do you have a link to the ice melt loss from calving vs melting? I searched around and couldn't find anything.
The video in question is pushing back on the climate hysteria we see from the media. It in no way questions the fact that the ice sheet has been losing size (although it did make small gains in 2017 and 2018).
-
08-04-2019, 03:02 PM #496Registered User
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
- Posts
- 824
https://link.springer.com/article/10...641-017-0070-1
Should be open-source.
Benn, D.I., Cowton, T., Todd, J. et al. Curr Clim Change Rep (2017) 3: 282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40641-017-0070-1
-
08-05-2019, 07:25 AM #497
Cross post from Carpathian in the Vail Imperialism thread. Seems more appropriate here....
https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/...38#post5727438
-
08-05-2019, 07:58 AM #498
Because the banks never make mistakes. 2008 never happened. What utter bullshit. Do you want to take your information on global warming from scientists or from banks who only care about short term profits and are going to pawn off risky loans on someone else anyway?
-
08-05-2019, 08:09 AM #499
Profit.....
-
08-05-2019, 08:55 AM #500
Bookmarks