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

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 ]
2ju

Posts: 1
Registered: 6/2/14
Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Posted: Jun 2, 2014 5:44 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply



"cloud dreamer" <reduce.reuse@recycle.net> wrote in message
news:u-CdncopA-IWdxHOnZ2dnUVZ_qSdnZ2d@supernews.com...
> 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.


No it is not.



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.