Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 12-15-2009, 11:05 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
37,963 posts, read 22,143,591 times
Reputation: 13799

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by rkb0305 View Post
hello? the warming trend takes into account MANY years. even if the last 2 were colder than the years previous, allowing some ice to form, they still appear to be warmer than the previous decades. Look at post #8 with the graph of sea ice extent. Honestly, it doesn't take a brain surgeon...
Could you define "MANY years"?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-15-2009, 11:06 AM
 
160 posts, read 161,628 times
Reputation: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomander View Post
His attempt is to claim that this is just temporary, that it will melt all away and recede further the next year. The problem is, the observational data isn't supporting them so well (they had claimed it would be much worse that it is now and were dumbfounded when it wasn't what they predicted).

So, what will happen is that if it does gain more growth even next year, they will come up with new terms and claims stating that it changes nothing and it will be gone next year, just you wait.

They aren't being objective, they are rooting for an outcome and coming up with excuses that still attempts to support their position when it doesn't do what they want. It is a perfect example of how the field is political, not scientific.
I completely agree. Excuses fly until observations meet their expectations.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2009, 11:07 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,479 posts, read 59,771,962 times
Reputation: 24863
Ever is a long, long time. So are the time scales of climate change. 1,000 years is climatology. 100 years is weather. 2 years is nothing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2009, 11:10 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
37,963 posts, read 22,143,591 times
Reputation: 13799
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
Because it gets cold in the winter and warm in the summer. Duh
I was curious as to what you might have to add, so I took you off my /ignore list. What a waste of mouse clicks on my part.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2009, 11:10 AM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,922 posts, read 8,064,636 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by dumdum View Post
They are not getting warmer. Have you looked at the news lately? It is as cold as it has ever been in northern Canada and the Arctic.
There's a 30 year trend in warming. 2009 has been slighly cooler than 2007-2008, but still warmer than 2006-2007 and the 1979-2000 average. There is no cooling trend. We are experiencing a slightly cooler year than last.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2009, 11:11 AM
 
Location: here
24,873 posts, read 36,164,079 times
Reputation: 32726
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post
So what time period would mean "squat" to you? Can you provide an answer without the snarky, condescension?
the big picture. decades worth of data. The more years taken into account, the clearer the picture. I'm not the only snarky condescending one on here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2009, 11:12 AM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,922 posts, read 8,064,636 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post
Could you define "MANY years"?
30

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2009, 11:12 AM
 
Location: here
24,873 posts, read 36,164,079 times
Reputation: 32726
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post
Could you define "MANY years"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
There's a 30 year trend in warming. 2009 has been slighly cooler than 2007-2008, but still warmer than 2006-2007 and the 1979-2000 average. There is no cooling trend. We are experiencing a slightly cooler year than last.
.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2009, 11:12 AM
 
160 posts, read 161,628 times
Reputation: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
There's a 30 year trend in warming. 2009 has been slighly cooler than 2007-2008, but still warmer than 2006-2007 and the 1979-2000 average. There is no cooling trend. We are experiencing a slightly cooler year than last.
Do you have an excuse for this?

"Feb. 20 (Bloomberg) -- A glitch in satellite sensors caused scientists to underestimate the extent of Arctic sea ice by 500,000 square kilometers (193,000 square miles), a California- size area, the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center said."

Arctic Sea Ice Underestimated for Weeks Due to Faulty Sensor - Bloomberg.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2009, 11:13 AM
 
13,053 posts, read 12,948,893 times
Reputation: 2618
Quote:
Originally Posted by dumdum View Post
I completely agree. Excuses fly until observations meet their expectations.
Take a look at the extent over the years. You can compare year and month to see the results.

http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/...&sd=09&sy=2009

2009 was an improvement throughout, and 2008 was an improvement over 2007.

What does it mean? /shrug

We will see if a trend develops for recovery. If it does, I am sure we will hear more excuses.

If it gets worse, they will walk around arrogantly with their noses turned up thinking they are vindicated. Either way, its just more BS.
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
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

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 > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:39 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top