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.
Not sure your point, what do you think it represents?
What’s your point? The land is there?There are three pieces of land within 600 miles of a pole today.
Antarctica = 90% of Earth ice
Greenland = 7% of Earth ice
Ellesmere Island = 0.3% of Earth ice
So how much ice would Earth have if there was no land within 600 miles of an Earth pole??
Again, your question, if a question, has no point to address!Again you are asked a question that you lack the intellectual capacity to answer...
Again, your question, if a question, has no point to address!
I never ever made any such comment! You okay?According to you, the amount of ice on planet Earth is "not a point to address" regarding Earth climate...
You really are brilliant. You aren't perhaps a "pro Israel Christian," are you??
LOL!!
Perhaps explain why ice exists at the poles?
www.usmessageboard.com
Why can’t you answer?Apparently we really need a "debate" over the term ICE AGE because y'all are all wrong...
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...
Nope, didn’t read anything about why there’s ice at the polesAlready did in the OP of that topic linked.
Nope, didn’t read anything about why there’s ice at the poles
That’s not my question, why is there ice at the polesFrom the link...
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....
Since Co2 does nothing, what does cause Earth climate change?
What does the science say?
What does the science say? Does it say Co2 does nothing? If it does say the Co2 does nothing, then you are sticking with what the science says?
www.nbcnews.com
Why ice on land with no precipitation?You mean, like, it is actually colder at the poles than the equator??
LOL!!!
Stuck in 3rd grade still, apparently...
Dryist continent on earthAntarctic ice expands from frost, has for many years. But frost still counts as an "ice core layer."
Antarctic ice expands from frost, has for many years. But frost still counts as an "ice core layer."
See? You're at it again. I have no theories.Science actually starts with DATA from INSTRUMENTS....
Your theory is that increasing atmospheric Co2 would warm the atmosphere.
We have two and only two measures of atmospheric temps = satellites and balloons.
What did they say before being FUDGED in 2005?
Key claim against global warming evaporates
Satellite and weather balloon data used to argue that climate models were wrong and that global warming isn't really happening turns out to be based on faulty analyses, according to three new studies.
satellite and weather balloon data have actually suggested the opposite, that the atmosphere was cooling
and while "the science" says FUDGE THAT to show "warming" that DOES NOT EXIST,
ACTUAL SCIENCE SAYS THEORY REJECTED
