Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
hey satan's diarrhea you can see all the pics you want if you're smart enough to know how to use the internet. But that's not very likely, is it?hey chris's sock can we see the rest of the pics in between those years now?
No, you're confusing me with that uncle who molested you with a sock on his hand when you were a kid. Your delusions are getting more intense. Seek professional help.yeah ya posted the chain before and got embarrassed by it didn't ya douchebag.... What happened? Care to explain why you cut out the rest of the pics this time?
hey satan's diarrhea you can see all the pics you want if you're smart enough to know how to use the internet. But that's not very likely, is it?hey chris's sock can we see the rest of the pics in between those years now?
No, you're confusing me with that uncle who molested you with a sock on his hand when you were a kid. Your delusions are getting more intense. Seek professional help.yeah ya posted the chain before and got embarrassed by it didn't ya douchebag.... What happened? Care to explain why you cut out the rest of the pics this time?
hey satan's diarrhea you can see all the pics you want if you're smart enough to know how to use the internet. But that's not very likely, is it?hey chris's sock can we see the rest of the pics in between those years now?
No, you're confusing me with that uncle who molested you with a sock on his hand when you were a kid. Your delusions are getting more intense. Seek professional help.yeah ya posted the chain before and got embarrassed by it didn't ya douchebag.... What happened? Care to explain why you cut out the rest of the pics this time?
LINK?
LOL you get busted and your excuse is what? Oh i see now more postulating and nonsense...
hey satan's diarrhea you can see all the pics you want if you're smart enough to know how to use the internet. But that's not very likely, is it?
No, you're confusing me with that uncle who molested you with a sock on his hand when you were a kid. Your delusions are getting more intense. Seek professional help.
LINK?
LOL you get busted and your excuse is what? Oh i see now more postulating and nonsense...
"Busted"??? LOLOLOLOL. You have a strange little imaginary world you live in, gtard.
Blunder/old fraud has come unhinged it looks like to me. He insults like a 6 year old, he posts info from known fraudsters and expects sane people to believe it. He has definately gone off the plot. It's sad to see someone lose control this way. All the negative info about the collapse of his religion has obviously negatively affected him.
Blunder/old fraud has come unhinged it looks like to me. He insults like a 6 year old, he posts info from known fraudsters and expects sane people to believe it. He has definately gone off the plot. It's sad to see someone lose control this way. All the negative info about the collapse of his religion has obviously negatively affected him.
What is really funny is watching you denier cultists spew your worthless blather and pretend that you're smarter than the entire world scientific community when actually you're obviously ignorant, moronic rightwingnut yokels with your heads up Rush's ass.
Two very informative sites concerning Arctic Ice. Of course, anyone with a brain could have simply googled arctic ice, and came up with these sites.
Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis
Polar Sea Ice Cap and Snow - Cryosphere Today
The undeath spiral
Over the last three years, Arctic Ice has gained significantly in thickness. The graph above was generated by image processing and analysis of PIPS maps, and shows the thickness histogram for June 1 of each year since 2007.
The blue line represents 2008, and the most abundant ice that year was less than 1.5 metres thick. That thin ice was famously described by NSIDC as “rotten ice.” In 2009 (red) the most common ice had increased to more than 2.0 metres, and by 2010 (orange) the most common ice had increased to in excess of 2.75 metres thick.
We have seen a steady year over year thickening of the ice since the 2007 melt season. Thinner ice is more likely to melt during the summer, so the prognosis for a big melt looks much less likely than either of the previous two summers. More than 70% of the ice this year is thicker than 2.25 metres thick. By contrast, more than half of the ice was thinner than 2.0 metres in 2008.
Yes old fraud the NSIDC has some interesting information if you choose to read it. Of course they are still using the GISS data for Canada that is based on that single weather station based in that town so that it could maximise the Urban Island Effect, but other than that they say this
"The very late maximum ice extent, on March 31, means that the melt season started almost a month later later than normal.
As we noted in last month's post, the late growth in ice extent came largely from expansion in the southernmost Bering Sea, Barents Sea, and Sea of Okhotsk. These areas remained cool, with northeasterly and northwesterly winds, keeping the overall ice extent close to the average for the month of April."
So riddle me this batman...if the temps are so much warmer (very much in doubt based on the source of their temperature data) in the Arctic, why did the melting begin so much later than the previous year? Also if it so much warmer why is the ice near average for the month of April?
These are basic questions that should give anyone pause. The figures don't add up if you believe the GISS data. On the other hand if you ignore the GISS data (which I now firmly do based on all of their protocol violations) then the NSIDC information makes perfect sense.
EVERYONE knows how much hotter it feels to wear a black T-shirt, rather than a white one, on a warm day.
In the same way, the melting of sea ice in the Arctic, revealing the dark water below, has been shown by Australian scientists to be the main cause of unusually rapid warming at the top of the world.
Confirmation of this "feedback loop" means the region is likely to continue to warm strongly, with greater loss of sea ice and possible melting of the ice sheets.
James Screen and Ian Simmonds, of the University of Melbourne, said the rise in surface temperatures in the Arctic in the past 20 years had been more than double the global average.
Melting ice makes the Arctic a vicious circle
Yes old fraud the NSIDC has some interesting information if you choose to read it. Of course they are still using the GISS data for Canada that is based on that single weather station based in that town so that it could maximise the Urban Island Effect, but other than that they say this
"The very late maximum ice extent, on March 31, means that the melt season started almost a month later later than normal.
As we noted in last month's post, the late growth in ice extent came largely from expansion in the southernmost Bering Sea, Barents Sea, and Sea of Okhotsk. These areas remained cool, with northeasterly and northwesterly winds, keeping the overall ice extent close to the average for the month of April."
So riddle me this batman...if the temps are so much warmer (very much in doubt based on the source of their temperature data) in the Arctic, why did the melting begin so much later than the previous year? Also if it so much warmer why is the ice near average for the month of April?
These are basic questions that should give anyone pause. The figures don't add up if you believe the GISS data. On the other hand if you ignore the GISS data (which I now firmly do based on all of their protocol violations) then the NSIDC information makes perfect sense.
It seems to me that "warmer than normal" does not necessarily translate into 'more melting'. Sub freezing is still sub freezing even if the temperature is warmer.
And though I am no scientist, it seems quite logical to me that if some of the ice doesn't melt now and then at both poles, the ice caps would continue to expand until the Earth is just one giant ice ball. And given the millions and millions of years of ebb and flow in climate change swinging back and forth between mostly tropical climates to ice ages, trying to establish a 'norm' using data from a half century of record keeping borders on the absurd.
Yes old fraud the NSIDC has some interesting information if you choose to read it. Of course they are still using the GISS data for Canada that is based on that single weather station based in that town so that it could maximise the Urban Island Effect, but other than that they say this
"The very late maximum ice extent, on March 31, means that the melt season started almost a month later later than normal.
As we noted in last month's post, the late growth in ice extent came largely from expansion in the southernmost Bering Sea, Barents Sea, and Sea of Okhotsk. These areas remained cool, with northeasterly and northwesterly winds, keeping the overall ice extent close to the average for the month of April."
So riddle me this batman...if the temps are so much warmer (very much in doubt based on the source of their temperature data) in the Arctic, why did the melting begin so much later than the previous year? Also if it so much warmer why is the ice near average for the month of April?
These are basic questions that should give anyone pause. The figures don't add up if you believe the GISS data. On the other hand if you ignore the GISS data (which I now firmly do based on all of their protocol violations) then the NSIDC information makes perfect sense.
It seems to me that "warmer than normal" does not necessarily translate into 'more melting'. Sub freezing is still sub freezing even if the temperature is warmer.
And though I am no scientist, it seems quite logical to me that if some of the ice doesn't melt now and then at both poles, the ice caps would continue to expand until the Earth is just one giant ice ball. And given the millions and millions of years of ebb and flow in climate change swinging back and forth between mostly tropical climates to ice ages, trying to establish a 'norm' using data from a half century of record keeping borders on the absurd.
Yes old fraud the NSIDC has some interesting information if you choose to read it. Of course they are still using the GISS data for Canada that is based on that single weather station based in that town so that it could maximise the Urban Island Effect, but other than that they say this
"The very late maximum ice extent, on March 31, means that the melt season started almost a month later later than normal.
As we noted in last month's post, the late growth in ice extent came largely from expansion in the southernmost Bering Sea, Barents Sea, and Sea of Okhotsk. These areas remained cool, with northeasterly and northwesterly winds, keeping the overall ice extent close to the average for the month of April."
So riddle me this batman...if the temps are so much warmer (very much in doubt based on the source of their temperature data) in the Arctic, why did the melting begin so much later than the previous year? Also if it so much warmer why is the ice near average for the month of April?
These are basic questions that should give anyone pause. The figures don't add up if you believe the GISS data. On the other hand if you ignore the GISS data (which I now firmly do based on all of their protocol violations) then the NSIDC information makes perfect sense.
It seems to me that "warmer than normal" does not necessarily translate into 'more melting'. Sub freezing is still sub freezing even if the temperature is warmer.
And though I am no scientist, it seems quite logical to me that if some of the ice doesn't melt now and then at both poles, the ice caps would continue to expand until the Earth is just one giant ice ball. And given the millions and millions of years of ebb and flow in climate change swinging back and forth between mostly tropical climates to ice ages, trying to establish a 'norm' using data from a half century of record keeping borders on the absurd.
Yes old fraud the NSIDC has some interesting information if you choose to read it. Of course they are still using the GISS data for Canada that is based on that single weather station based in that town so that it could maximise the Urban Island Effect, but other than that they say this
"The very late maximum ice extent, on March 31, means that the melt season started almost a month later later than normal.
As we noted in last month's post, the late growth in ice extent came largely from expansion in the southernmost Bering Sea, Barents Sea, and Sea of Okhotsk. These areas remained cool, with northeasterly and northwesterly winds, keeping the overall ice extent close to the average for the month of April."
So riddle me this batman...if the temps are so much warmer (very much in doubt based on the source of their temperature data) in the Arctic, why did the melting begin so much later than the previous year? Also if it so much warmer why is the ice near average for the month of April?
These are basic questions that should give anyone pause. The figures don't add up if you believe the GISS data. On the other hand if you ignore the GISS data (which I now firmly do based on all of their protocol violations) then the NSIDC information makes perfect sense.
It seems to me that "warmer than normal" does not necessarily translate into 'more melting'. Sub freezing is still sub freezing even if the temperature is warmer.
And though I am no scientist, it seems quite logical to me that if some of the ice doesn't melt now and then at both poles, the ice caps would continue to expand until the Earth is just one giant ice ball. And given the millions and millions of years of ebb and flow in climate change swinging back and forth between mostly tropical climates to ice ages, trying to establish a 'norm' using data from a half century of record keeping borders on the absurd.
Exactly. You never hear these doom and gloom libs talk about past ice ages. You'll never hear them mention the fact that our world has been much warmer, and much colder at many points in its history. They claim to embrace scientific fact, but the truth is they ignore scientific facts that don't suit their political agenda.
It seems to me that "warmer than normal" does not necessarily translate into 'more melting'. Sub freezing is still sub freezing even if the temperature is warmer.
And though I am no scientist, it seems quite logical to me that if some of the ice doesn't melt now and then at both poles, the ice caps would continue to expand until the Earth is just one giant ice ball. And given the millions and millions of years of ebb and flow in climate change swinging back and forth between mostly tropical climates to ice ages, trying to establish a 'norm' using data from a half century of record keeping borders on the absurd.
Exactly. You never hear these doom and gloom libs talk about past ice ages. You'll never hear them mention the fact that our world has been much warmer, and much colder at many points in its history. They claim to embrace scientific fact, but the truth is they ignore scientific facts that don't suit their political agenda.
The only one with a political agenda is you.
The fact that we have almost doubled atmospheric CO2 in the last 200 years, and that this increase in greenhouse gases is warming the earth is irrefutable.
Unless you work for Tom Colburn the Senator from Big Oil....
Arctic Sea Ice at Lowest Point in Thousands of Years
Date: 04-Jun-2010
The shrinking amount of sea ice that covers the Arctic Ocean today is the smallest it has been in the last few thousand years, a new study suggests.
The sea ice that normally covers huge swaths of the Arctic Ocean has been retreating and thinning over the last few decades, due to the amplified warming at the North Pole, which is a consequence of the buildup of greenhouse gases in Earth's atmosphere.
The most dramatic sea-ice melt in recent years came in 2007, when sea-ice extent (or the area of ocean covered by the ice) dropped to its lowest level since 1979, when satellite measurements began. This event also opened up the fabled Northwest Passage.
Arctic Sea Ice at Lowest Point in Thousands of Years | Science & Environment | Peacefmonline.com
