U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Celebrating Memorial Day!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-25-2017, 03:38 PM
 
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
5,602 posts, read 3,584,148 times
Reputation: 7820

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Texyn View Post
Just quit before you embarrass yourself.
You first.
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard...er-than-losses
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-25-2017, 10:27 PM
 
Location: South Padre Island, TX
2,459 posts, read 1,100,972 times
Reputation: 1386
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG CATS View Post
You've had your chance, and now you've blown it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-26-2017, 11:00 AM
 
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
5,602 posts, read 3,584,148 times
Reputation: 7820
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texyn View Post
You've had your chance, and now you've blown it.
I stated ice is growing and proved it. You've offered nothing but your typical, useless posts. Take a hike, lady.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-26-2017, 01:39 PM
 
Location: Seattle WA, USA
3,717 posts, read 1,922,420 times
Reputation: 2339
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG CATS View Post
That's a joke. You cant possibly believe those predictions. Hell, the NWS cant even properly predict a hurricane's path over 2 days, let alone what the temps are going to be in 30 years. And last I checked, NASA reported massive, record ice growth at the Poles. Check it yourself.
Just the fact that ice is growing could be an indicator of warmer temperatures. Antarctica is still going to be freezing cold even if the temperatures rise by a couple degrees, however if temps rise, more water can be held in the air and so more snow falls and thus ice grows. Also a place doesn't have to be super cold to have glaciers, it just needs to have a steady/large snow supply. Just take a look at crater glacier on mt st helens. It's the youngest glacier in the US and possibly the world, formed after the 1980 eruption, and already it is 656 ft deep (about as deep as the largest glacier on Mt. Rainier) and at only an elevation of 6,794*ft which isn't very high, especially for a glacier of it's size. And yet by 2001 it contained about half the volume of all glacier on the mountain prior to 1980. This is because of the crater walls, they cast huge shadows and large avalanches fill the crater with snow, which means the snow doesn't have the time to melt by the time winter comes back. Does that mean there is an ice age on Mt. St. Helens? no it just means that there is more snow being collected in one spot due to avalanches. Like wise the growth of glacier in Antarctica means that that there is more snow fall and that can only be explained by warmer temperatures that hold more moister, even if the temps are still below freezing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-26-2017, 03:29 PM
 
Location: South Padre Island, TX
2,459 posts, read 1,100,972 times
Reputation: 1386
^^Yep. Adding to that:

Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG CATS View Post
I stated ice is growing and proved it.
And your attempt at proof doesn't capture the full story.

For one, the growth in sea ice in Antarctica simply is a minor offset of the land ice that has been decreasing there. Also, what is the thickness of this expanded sea-ice? If the new ice is merely an increase in coverage, but not volume, then it can still translate to an overall loss in amount of ice present.
https://forbes.com/sites/quora/2016/.../#7f26c3dc8e7b

In the end, global ice coverage is decreasing anyway, which you'll see once you add in the factor of the Arctic, where its losses offset Antarctica's gains:
Quote:
Adding the Antarctic and Arctic sea ice extents month by month through the satellite record shows that globally the Earth has been losing sea ice since the late 1970s in each portion of the annual cycle of ice growth and decay. “In fact, this year, every single month from January through August experienced a new monthly record low in global sea ice extents,” Parkinson said.
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard...west-on-record

Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG CATS View Post
You've offered nothing but your typical, useless posts. Take a hike, lady.
Because there's no use in dealing with hair-triggered posters like yourself who get their knickers in a twist over headlines relating to science they have no understanding of.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2017, 11:13 AM
 
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
5,602 posts, read 3,584,148 times
Reputation: 7820
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texyn View Post


Because there's no use in dealing with hair-triggered posters like yourself who get their knickers in a twist over headlines relating to science they have no understanding of.
I'll keep this plain and simple because I don't want to go too off-topic. Just a few years ago Al Gore said the ice would be melted by now and cities like NYC would be under water. You bought it. He said temps would be so high that places like Phoenix would be unlivable. You bought it. He said Mt. Kilimanjaro would never see snow again. You bought it.


Temps started cooling rapidly in areas, and his radical, fear-mongering predictions were proven false, so how did you guys respond? You responded by changing terms from "global warming" to "global climate change". Places like Tehran saw their first snow in 100+ years. We all said "Al said the Earth was going to get so hot that we'd all perish!" Quite the opposite, actually. He said there would be mass hurricanes... yet we had a several year hurricane drought followed by a lot of head-scratching. Then when Irma hit we got the typical "we told you so" response from Global Climate Change yahoos.


Yes, temps are changing, some for the worse. Is it mankind's fault? I don't think so. The Earth has gone through cycles like these repeatedly. I don't think this is any different. Modern society is just too full of mass hysteria.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2017, 04:36 PM
 
Location: South Padre Island, TX
2,459 posts, read 1,100,972 times
Reputation: 1386
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG CATS View Post
I'll keep this plain and simple because I don't want to go too off-topic. Just a few years ago Al Gore said the ice would be melted by now and cities like NYC would be under water. You bought it. He said temps would be so high that places like Phoenix would be unlivable. You bought it. He said Mt. Kilimanjaro would never see snow again. You bought it.


Temps started cooling rapidly in areas, and his radical, fear-mongering predictions were proven false, so how did you guys respond? You responded by changing terms from "global warming" to "global climate change". Places like Tehran saw their first snow in 100+ years. We all said "Al said the Earth was going to get so hot that we'd all perish!" Quite the opposite, actually. He said there would be mass hurricanes... yet we had a several year hurricane drought followed by a lot of head-scratching. Then when Irma hit we got the typical "we told you so" response from Global Climate Change yahoos.


Yes, temps are changing, some for the worse. Is it mankind's fault? I don't think so. The Earth has gone through cycles like these repeatedly. I don't think this is any different. Modern society is just too full of mass hysteria.
If you say so.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2017, 08:43 AM
 
Location: St Simons Island, GA
21,554 posts, read 33,477,663 times
Reputation: 13274
Sounds like this will become a non-topic before long.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...lm-trees-dying
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2017, 09:15 AM
 
Location: Downtown Phoenix, AZ
15,831 posts, read 5,651,525 times
Reputation: 4649
Quote:
Originally Posted by LovinDecatur View Post
Sounds like this will become a non-topic before long.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...lm-trees-dying
I'd heard that, but that is unique to the city of Los Angeles.

Here in Phoenix, as well as our suburbs, palms are still the go to trees
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2017, 10:04 AM
 
49 posts, read 22,839 times
Reputation: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by LovinDecatur View Post
Sounds like this will become a non-topic before long.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...lm-trees-dying
Read again. It will take decades, and who know what will happen int that time span. Even in a worst case scenario, the article says certain desginated areas will still have palms.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top