Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math.independent

Topic: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Replies: 111   Last Post: Jun 18, 2014 1:15 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
cloud dreamer

Posts: 4
Registered: 5/30/14
Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Posted: Jun 2, 2014 5:20 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On 02/06/2014 6:39 PM, kefischer wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Jun 2014 13:16:29 -0500, "Jim G."
> <jimgysin@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>

>> cloud dreamer sent the following on 5/31/2014 6:26 AM:
>>> On 31/05/2014 2:13 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>> Am 30.05.2014 02:36, schrieb R Kym Horsell:
>>>>> Oh, sure. 1-2 mm/yr c1900, 2-3 mm/yr c2000 -- It's starting to compare
>>>>> favourably to the last time the ice sheets melted.
>>>>>
>>>>> www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/12/101201120605.htm
>>>>> 4 Dec 2010 ... Southampton researchers have estimated that sea-level
>>>>> rose by an average of
>>>>> about 1 metre per century at the end of the last Ice Age, ...

>>>>
>>>>
>>>> E.g. this article:
>>>> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/05/140528133151.htm
>>>>
>>>> Quote:
>>>> "A new study has found that the Antarctic Ice Sheet began melting about
>>>> 5,000 years earlier than previously thought coming out of the last ice
>>>> age -- and that shrinkage of the vast ice sheet accelerated during eight
>>>> distinct episodes, causing rapid sea level rise."
>>>>
>>>> How can they call this 'science'?
>>>>
>>>> The Antarctic is NOT melting AT ALL!
>>>>
>>>> The average temperatures are well below melting point of water, so there
>>>> is little chance for ice to melt.
>>>>
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_of_Antarctica
>>>>
>>>> Icebergs are already floating, hence have no influence on the sea-levels.
>>>>

>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So your rebuttal is Wikipedia's list of AVERAGE temperatures in Antarctica?
>>>
>>> Are you on drugs?
>>>
>>> http://www.grida.no/publications/et/pt/page/2559.aspx
>>>
>>> Though, I doubt you'll read it. You'd rather live in ignorance then
>>> educate yourself.

>>
>> Am I the only one getting a kick out of these increasingly obscure
>> sources? This one, once again, gives no indication of any official link
>> to anything or anyone credible on its "About" page even as it tosses
>> about lots of feel-good generalities. I like this bit, in particular:
>>
>> QUOTE
>> Our staff consists of a diverse team of international professionals.
>> Through a dynamic portfolio of projects, we partner with various
>> organizations to facilitate free access to and exchange of information
>> in support of decision making and to promote a sustainable future.
>> END QUOTE
>>
>> Odd how it doesn't provide specific names and doctoral degrees in
>> science fields, or any such thing. Or maybe not.



Odd how you can whine about who runs a site but have yet to provide a
single piece of data to disprove what they're saying.


>
> Yeah, a lot of Global Warming supporters
> have degrees in literature, or economics,
> but you won't find many geologists that
> support it, they see too much evidence
> that it has been a lot warmer before, way
> before any IC engines or coal mines existed.




Ummm....no. Climatologists are climatologists not lawyers or historians.

"Supporters" can have any education. The difference is that those of us
with an education are more open to learning.

Oh, and this "oh it was a lot warmer before" argument is pretty lame. I
mean, seriously, are you that limited that you think only burning coal
or oil can raise temperatures???? Seriously????

If you truly understood how the climate of this planet works, you'd know
that is irrelevant.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/medieval-warm-period.htm

And here's a hint...you can't compare the climate of the planet over the
last 3 million years to any epoch before that. The rise of the Panama
land bridge completely altered the climate of this planet. Altered it to
one that saw the rise of homo sapiens.

What is happening now is going to be completely outside the climate that
has existed over those three million years. The level of CO2 alone is
already 100 ppm above the natural high and continues to increase at a
rate of 2 ppm per year minimum....a rate that takes nature almost 1000
years to replicate. Atmospheric temperatures are following.

But you won't believe us until the supermarket shelves are empty.

And that is already in the cards.

..




Date Subject Author
5/27/14
Read nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
5/27/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Peter Percival
5/27/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Thomas Heger
5/27/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
5/28/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
5/28/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Thomas Heger
5/28/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Mike
5/28/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
William December Starr
5/28/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Michael J. Strickland
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
5/28/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Greg Goss
5/28/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Don Kuenz
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Michael J. Strickland
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Greg Goss
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Michael J. Strickland
5/28/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Kirby Grant
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
J. Clarke
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Cryptoengineer
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
5/31/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
William December Starr
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Michael J. Strickland
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
antani
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
R Kym Horsell
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Thomas Heger
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
J. Clarke
5/31/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Thomas Heger
5/31/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
J. Clarke
6/1/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Thomas Heger
5/31/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
cloud dreamer
6/2/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Jim G.
6/2/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
6/2/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
cloud dreamer
6/2/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
2ju
6/2/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
6/2/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Greg Goss
6/2/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Greg Goss
6/2/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Lynn McGuire
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Greg Goss
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Greg Goss
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Jim G.
6/2/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
William December Starr
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
5/31/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
R Kym Horsell
5/31/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
J. Clarke
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Bill Steele
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
R Kym Horsell
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
J. Clarke
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Virgil
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Peter Trei
6/4/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Virgil
6/4/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
6/4/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
J. Clarke
6/4/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
6/4/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Lynn McGuire
6/4/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
R Kym Horsell
6/4/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
J. Clarke
6/4/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
J. Clarke
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Lynn McGuire
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
David Hartley
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Greg Goss
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
J. Clarke
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Cryptoengineer
6/7/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
6/8/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Thomas Heger
6/8/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
6/8/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Thomas Heger
6/9/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Peter Trei
6/10/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
6/13/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
6/17/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
6/18/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
6/7/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
6/7/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
John F. Eldredge
6/4/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Thomas Heger
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
6/6/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Thomas Heger
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Bill Steele
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Thomas Heger
6/4/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
J. Clarke
6/4/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
cloud dreamer
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
cloud dreamer
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
5/28/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Michael J. Strickland
5/28/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
J. Clarke
5/28/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
William December Starr
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Peter Trei
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Michael J. Strickland
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
J. Clarke

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.