Apparently we really need a "debate" over the term ICE AGE because y'all are all wrong...

EMH

Diamond Member
Apr 5, 2021
20,538
12,559
2,288
What is an ICE AGE?

Most apparently still believe it is a terrifying horror movie event where Earth all at once freezes up. The data has never supported such a scenario. Since 2010, there has been a massive effort to re-write Earth climate history into a series of rapid "glaciations" and ice retreats, as if "Day After Tomorrow" movie is accurate... LOL!!! What was North American Ice Age before 2010 is now spun into a series of rapid "ice ages" where it took a mere 75k years for the "ice age" to start in Northern Canada and put 2.5 mile thick glaicers on Chicago. This is "Milankovich" cycles, which I call McBullshit, and the data and debate on North American Ice Age vs. McBullshit is here...



and it isn't close. McBullshit is off by a factor of 10+ on every measure of ice age glacier available today.


The original definition of ICE AGE which is still used today was formed without any knowledge that land moves via the tectonic plates. It was thought that glaciation of South America's southern tip was the result of ice from Antarctica, in its current position, growing out over ocean and freezing up southern South America "during an ice age". Since 2010 that is now recorded, cough cough, as a rapid series of Dennis Quaid style ice ages coming and going. Neither of those are correct. As this map with sea level depth exposed shows, South America on the southern tip glaciated because 20 million or so years ago it was still attached to Antarctica, but isn't anymore and that's why it melted to just mountains today...


R.db19eb4ea7b7195ba0580ba3818ecaec


Antarctica itself has 70 million year old dinosaur fossils, because 70 million years ago it was not on the South Pole (and not covered with 2+ mile thick ice age glacier), but halfway to South Africa where it originated.




Rule 1 = Ice Age Glacier does not grow out over ocean, it breaks off - see Antarctica and Greenland, Titanic

Rule 2 = Ice Ages are Continent Specific Events because of Rule 1


The proof of this is the indisputable fact that Greenland froze while North America thawed. 20k years ago there was ice still in Chicago and Indiana. That is now gone. The Vikings were farming the southern tip of Greenland until the 1400s, when they were frozen off/out. For the past 20k years, Greenland froze while North America thawed. How far back that goes is in debate now, but it is a laughable debate. The data from Greenland is pretty well defined.

Greenland was unfrozen, completely unfrozen, 2 million years ago, as its northern tip was a flourishing forest....


Center of Greenland went from forest to ice age 400-800k years ago...



The continent specific ice age on Greenland is under 2 million years old.


North America had this for either 75k years or 30-50 million years (the latter is the sane answer)


R.227dcdb3e70664eda94c3ed3fc04c132



This map was done before the data from Greenland kept rolling in, as it was assumed Greenland and NA were attached and Greenland had been frozen for a long time = NOT THE CASE according to the data above. North America was covered with ice age glacier down to Indiana. That is the debate in the first link at the top of the post, how old that ice was and how long it took to grow and melt. Clearly, it melted, and Greenland is now frozen.

North America thawed while Greenland froze. Ice Ages are continent specific (with a planetary effect) but not planetary. THAT is the DATA...


So what causes an ICE AGE?


Land moving near the poles. When land gets to within - roughly- 600 miles of a pole, as Greenland just did, the annual snowfall ceases to fully melt in the summer, and then it starts to stack. Stack for a million or 2 years = Greenland. Stack for 40+ million years = Antarctica. Ice ages like North American Ice Age end when the land moves outside of the 600 miles to a pole barrier.

Greenland and Antarctica are ice ages. Earth Climate Change is 99% about where land is. If Earth had two polar oceans, it would have no ice (much warmer). If Earth had two polar continents, two "Antarcticas" it would have roughly twice the ice, oceans would be lower, there would be a thinner atmosphere with less humidity, and it would be colder...


Earth climate change is about ice. Ice controls sea level, temperature, atmospheric thickness, and humidity.

Ice is about where land is. 90% on Antarctica, 7% on Greenland today.

Land moves.

Not that hard.

Atmosphere, Co2 in atmosphere and Sun are not causes of climate CHANGE. Co2 does nothing. Sun is constant. What changes is where land is...

If you understand what an ice age is, it all makes sense. If you blur it and allow the Co2 fraud to define "ice age" as a Dennis Quaid movie, you are lost, and you are playing their game of debating their fudged fraud....
 
If only we could cover DC in 2.5 miles of ice overnight, and when Congress was in session.
 
If only we could cover DC in 2.5 miles of ice overnight, and when Congress was in session.


The GOP House could show a spine on this billions $$ loan to Ford for more electric vehicles in an already overcrowded and oversupplied market.

Will it?

The Republican Party has largely embraced Algore's fraud. Faux loves it.

The media, including the "alt right" media, won't even ask basic questions

Why does one Earth polar circle have 9+ times the ice of the other?

Why is there ice age glacier south of Arctic Circle on Greenland but trees and moose north of Arctic Circle on Alaska?

How did Co2 melt North America and freeze Greenland at the same time?


When Greg Gutfeld was on Huffington Post, he was exposed to all of that, and continues at Faux to 100% censor all of it...
 
Some general information for reference;

What Are the 3 Milankovitch Cycles?​

More detailed with good illustrations;
...
A Milankovich cycle is any slow but regular change in the Earth's orbit around the Sun, and the tilt of the Earth's axis.[1]

The dynamics are complex. The changes affect the 'insolation' (sunlight falling on parts of the Earth). This leads to cycles of climate on Earth, at about 21,000, 41,000 years, 100,000 and 400,000 years. This whole field is still under active research.

Using applied mathematics, Milutin Milanković predicted that variations in eccentricity, axial tilt, and precession of the Earth's orbit caused climate patterns on Earth.
...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Milankovich cycles Cyclical changes in the rotation and orbit of the Earth that Milankovich correlated to climatic effects. There are three cycles: changes in the eccentricity of the Earth's orbit, altering the distance between Earth and the Sun at aphelion and perihelion, with a period of about 100 000 years; variations in the tilt of the Earth's rotational axis (obliquity of the ecliptic), with a period of about 40 000 years; and a movement (wobble) in the angle by which the axis of the Earth's rotation is tilted in respect of the orbital plane, altering the seasons at which aphelion and perihelion occur (precession of the equinoxes), with a period of about 21 000 years. Climatic changes associated with Milankovich cycles may be recorded in cyclic sedimentation.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Interesting charts and graphics to visualize with;
 
Last edited:
While plate tectonics can explain continental movement over long periods of time, on scale of millions of years, and thus some of the past climate anomalies in some areas of the planet, there is another idea that has been suggested, but is controversial.
Mass Crustal Displacement
......
..........
......
Snapshot/Lay Summary—In 1958 Charles Hapgood proposed that mass imbalances created by a buildup of polar ice could displace the earth’s crust over the mantle and that resulting pole shifts were the cause of catastrophic climate changes and ice ages. We contrast the first part of his theory with plate tectonics and true polar wander and propose a new mechanism that is triggered by short-term reversals of the geomagnetic field that “unlock” the crust from the mantle, driven by earth–moon–sun tidal forces, the same forces that move earth’s oceans. It is shown that by combining a modified version of the second part of Hapgood’s theory with elements of existing climate theories it may be possible to account for periodic sea-level changes associated with the buildup and melting of polar ice over past glacial cycles with a combination of Milanković cycles and Hapgood pole shifts.

Hapgood's Earth Crust Displacement Theory - YouTube

 
Returning to current "normal" science and data, we have the case of Glacier Girl, a World War Two USAAF P-38 fighter, crash-landed on a Greenland glacier in 1942, recoverd from under 268 feet of snow and ice, and now in restored, flying condition.
...
On 15 July 1942, due to poor weather and limited visibility, six P-38 fighters of 94th Fighter Squadron/1st FG and two B-17 bombers of a bombardment squadron were forced to return to Greenland en route to the British Isles during Operation Bolero and made emergency landings on the ice field. All the crew members were subsequently rescued, but Glacier Girl, along with the unit's five other fighters and the two B-17s, were eventually buried under 268 feet (82 m) of snow and ice that built up over the ensuing decades.
ontheglacier.jpg

after-crash.jpg

...
Fifty years later, in 1992, the plane was brought to the surface by members of the Greenland Expedition Society after years of searching and excavation. The aircraft was eventually transported to Middlesboro, Kentucky, where it was restored to flying condition.[2] The excavation of Glacier Girl was documented in an episode of The History Channel's Mega Movers series, titled "Extreme Aircraft Recovery".
P-38-600x391.jpg


The Lightning returned to the air in October 2002.[3]
450px-Lockheed_P-38E_Lightning_%22Glacier_Girl%22%2C_Chino%2C_California.jpg

...
...

............
IIRC, it takes about 10 inches of snow to make one inch of ice. Either way, buried under 268 feet in span of fifty years when the planet isn't going through extreme conditions moving toward (or away from?) and Ice Age would suggest how quick weather~climate can change. Especially if all the variables align the 'right' way.
That depth, 268 feet, is about 27 stories in length (height).

Glacier Girl survives its own ice age

 
Last edited:
Either way, buried under 268 feet in span of fifty years when the planet isn't going through extreme conditions moving toward (or away from?) and Ice Age would suggest how quick weather~climate can change. Especially if all the variables align the 'right' way.
That depth, 268 feet, is about 27 stories in length (height).


Or maybe Greenland IS AN ICE AGE NOW and HAS BEEN SINCE IT STARTED STACKING 1-2 million years ago....
 
Some general information for reference;

What Are the 3 Milankovitch Cycles?​

More detailed with good illustrations;
...
A Milankovich cycle is any slow but regular change in the Earth's orbit around the Sun, and the tilt of the Earth's axis.[1]

The dynamics are complex. The changes affect the 'insolation' (sunlight falling on parts of the Earth). This leads to cycles of climate on Earth, at about 21,000, 41,000 years, 100,000 and 400,000 years. This whole field is still under active research.

Using applied mathematics, Milutin Milanković predicted that variations in eccentricity, axial tilt, and precession of the Earth's orbit caused climate patterns on Earth.
...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Milankovich cycles Cyclical changes in the rotation and orbit of the Earth that Milankovich correlated to climatic effects. There are three cycles: changes in the eccentricity of the Earth's orbit, altering the distance between Earth and the Sun at aphelion and perihelion, with a period of about 100 000 years; variations in the tilt of the Earth's rotational axis (obliquity of the ecliptic), with a period of about 40 000 years; and a movement (wobble) in the angle by which the axis of the Earth's rotation is tilted in respect of the orbital plane, altering the seasons at which aphelion and perihelion occur (precession of the equinoxes), with a period of about 21 000 years. Climatic changes associated with Milankovich cycles may be recorded in cyclic sedimentation.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Interesting charts and graphics to visualize with;



Milankovitch is a lame attempt to re-write climate history without exposing Co2 as fraud, and it failed miserably.

"This whole field is still under active research."

by people WHO CANNOT EXPLAIN A MAP OF THE ARCTIC TODAY....


Do you believe an ice age that started in northern Canada put 2.5 mile thick glacier on Chicago in just 75k years?
 
Climatic changes associated with Milankovich cycles may be recorded in cyclic sedimentation.


Priceless = the McBullshit fraud "study" cited by Toddster here




"dated" "wood" outside in nature unfrozen for 20k years....

problem = wood decomposes in nature in 100 years, another moment where McBullshit is off by multiple decimal points, and clearly the fudgebaking liars who did this "study" billed the taxpayer for "dating" that never happened... since what they claim they dated does not exist...
 
And there you have it.

NOBODY has even attempted to refute any of this, because THEY CANNOT, because IT IS CORRECT.
 
Then let's see the data ... which satellite bands gives temperature ... [giggle] ...


HERE is the DATA.


ALL LAND ON PLANET EARTH WITHIN 600 MILES OF A POLE TODAY IS IN ICE AGE.

ALL LAND ON PLANET EARTH OUTSIDE OF 600 MILES OF A POLE IS NOT IN ICE AGE.

EM bands required to comprehend that truth - the visible spectrum...

Have a look...



R.2a3294ffeab2b7aaf47c6f7a80ae4810


Antarctic vs Arctic Infographic | Antarctica activities, Geography ...
 
You're showing me Middle School posters ... temperature data should be in degrees Celsius ... and balloon data will include pressure, humidity, wind speed and direction ... averaged over 100 years ...

That is your claim ... "balloon data shows no temperature increase" ... let's see the balloon data that shows this ...
 
"balloon data shows no temperature increase"




"satellite and weather balloon data have actually suggested the opposite, that the atmosphere was cooling.

Scientists were left with two choices: either the atmosphere wasn't warming up, or something was wrong with the data."




Love that. Your outside thermometer says it is 70F. You have two choices =

A) you can accept that it is 70F outside

B) you can fudge the "data" and claim it is 80F outside
 


"satellite and weather balloon data have actually suggested the opposite, that the atmosphere was cooling.

Scientists were left with two choices: either the atmosphere wasn't warming up, or something was wrong with the data."




Love that. Your outside thermometer says it is 70F. You have two choices =

A) you can accept that it is 70F outside

B) you can fudge the "data" and claim it is 80F outside

Which satellite band gives us temperature data? ... where is the balloon data that shows cooling? ...

If the NOAA-approved thermometer shows 70ºF ... then I will assume it's between 69ºF and 71ºF ... as we use ±1ºF as our instrument error ...

Show us where NOAA fudged a full 10ºF ... ha ha ... your proof as it were ...
 
Which satellite band gives us temperature data? ... where is the balloon data that shows cooling? ...

If the NOAA-approved thermometer shows 70ºF ... then I will assume it's between 69ºF and 71ºF ... as we use ±1ºF as our instrument error ...

Show us where NOAA fudged a full 10ºF ... ha ha ... your proof as it were ...


Ask NBC...

And your side fudged with laughable excuses.

Orbit wobble

Shade issues that were constant the whole time


Outside of Urban Heat Sink Effect your side has NO WARMING ANYWHERE
 
Ask NBC...

And your side fudged with laughable excuses.

Orbit wobble

Shade issues that were constant the whole time


Outside of Urban Heat Sink Effect your side has NO WARMING ANYWHERE

NBC? ... why do you think NBC has 6,000 thermometers stationed across the Earth's surface? ... or launching weather balloons? ... or flying satellites ...

HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW ...

NBC? ... that's fucking funny ... I wouldn't trust NBC to give me the current DJIA ...
 

Forum List

Back
Top