Ask A Question
 
soonenough1111
Fresh Boarder
Blog Posts: 0
Forum Posts: 18
Rating: 0ApplaudCriticize
Posted 9 Months, 2 Weeks ago permalink
'...Satellite radar altimetry measurements indicate that the East Antarctic ice-sheet interior north of 81.6°S increased in mass by 45 ± 7 billion metric tons per year from 1992 to 2003. Comparisons with contemporaneous meteorological model snowfall estimates suggest that the gain in mass was associated with increased precipitation. A gain of this magnitude is enough to slow sea-level rise by 0.12 ± 0.02 millimeters per year. ...'

translation: there is a lot more ice in the East Antarctic now than there was 11 years ago. 45 billions tons per year worth!
Answer
hoti0101
Fresh Boarder
Blog Posts: 0
Forum Posts: 8
Rating: 0ApplaudCriticize
Posted 9 Months, 2 Weeks ago permalink
Especially your posts, eh?
Answer
Thumper
Fresh Boarder
Blog Posts: 0
Forum Posts: 13
Rating: 0ApplaudCriticize
Posted 9 Months, 2 Weeks ago permalink
speculation compared to the results of a scientific study.

The first study says the ice in the larger East Antarctic is increasing by 45 billions tons per year. If the 2nd study is accurate, doesnt it follow that the first study is wrong? After all if the larger East gets icier by a large amount and the total ice on the continent lessens 'significantly', then the smaller west must be losing a visible amount of ice. Where are the year to year measurements of West Antarctica?

from the study:

'...The spatially averaged increase is 5.4 ± 0.2 cm/year, or ~60 cm over 11 years, or ~54 cm when corrected for isostatic uplift. ...'

the cover page of the study clearly states there has been an average increase ice thickness of 5.4 cm per year. Why the double talk?
Answer
Mintaoism
Fresh Boarder
Blog Posts: 0
Forum Posts: 16
Rating: 0ApplaudCriticize
Posted 9 Months, 2 Weeks ago permalink
'...Satellite radar altimetry measurements indicate that the East Antarctic ice-sheet interior north of 81.6°S increased in mass by 45 ± 7 billion metric tons per year from 1992 to 2003. Comparisons with contemporaneous meteorological model snowfall estimates suggest that the gain in mass was associated with increased precipitation. A gain of this magnitude is enough to slow sea-level rise by 0.12 ± 0.02 millimeters per year. ...'

translation: there is a lot more ice in the East Antarctic now than there was 11 years ago. 45 billions tons per year worth!
Answer
DavidJanis
Fresh Boarder
Blog Posts: 0
Forum Posts: 14
Rating: 0ApplaudCriticize
Posted 9 Months, 1 Week ago permalink
Nomex adequately answered all the bullshit here already:
http://www.factcheck.org/article395.html#

What's your problem?
Answer
lainey
Fresh Boarder
Blog Posts: 0
Forum Posts: 9
Rating: 0ApplaudCriticize
Posted 9 Months, 1 Week ago permalink
You didn't read the scientist's statement about what his research means, did you?
Answer
GSii
Fresh Boarder
Blog Posts: 0
Forum Posts: 11
Rating: 1ApplaudCriticize
Posted 9 Months, 1 Week ago permalink
What double talk? These results are equivalent. I don't get what you are objecting to.
Answer
blueice
Junior Boarder
Blog Posts: 0
Forum Posts: 25
Rating: 0ApplaudCriticize
Posted 9 Months, 1 Week ago permalink
If that is so then how can we believe what you posted sir?
Answer
Hecuba
Fresh Boarder
Blog Posts: 0
Forum Posts: 14
Rating: 0ApplaudCriticize
Posted 9 Months, 1 Week ago permalink
To those of us who try to stay informed on such issues, the increased snowfall in Antarctica has been documented and known for sometime. Inasmuch as Antarctica is essentially a desert and little moisture has fallen there over the centuries, the current increase says that the air is getting warmer and is holding more moisture. Hence, further evidence for GW. It always amazes me how ill informed and uneducated the people are who post such drivel. Of course, that is what CEI is banking on and the average yokel in the trailer park isn't going to understand that he's being hoodwinked.
Answer
MercuryRapids
Fresh Boarder
Blog Posts: 0
Forum Posts: 10
Rating: 0ApplaudCriticize
Posted 9 Months, 1 Week ago permalink
A THICKER ice sheet at the poles is A. a sign of global warming. B. a sign of an ice age. A. causes B.
Answer
Questar
Fresh Boarder
Blog Posts: 0
Forum Posts: 12
Rating: 0ApplaudCriticize
Posted 9 Months, 1 Week ago permalink
I've met one too many idiots, and personally I say it's time to give in. Half of America seems hellbound to destroy the world, and when people complain they're called liberals or hippies or treehuggers. You can't keep a boat afloat if half its passengers want it to sink, and unfortunately it's the same with the earth.

As far as global warming, then, I say bring it on. The sad fact is, though, that in twenty years, when Manhattan is underwater, none of these idiots will have the guts to stand up and say they caused it, like they're too chickenshit to say they're responsible for this meaningless war that's destroying our country.
Answer

Spread the Word!

Four out of five users would recommend us to a friend. Shouldn't you?
Link to Us    Tell a Friend

Related Posts:

The Content on this site is provided for general information purposes only. Your use of the Content, or any part thereof, is made solely at Your own risk and responsibility. By entering this site you declare you read and agreed to its Terms, Rules & Privacy.
Copyright © 2006 - 2010 My Democrats Friends