Jump to content
Problems logging in? ×
Snow?
Local
Radar
Cold?

songster

Members
  • Posts

    327
  • Joined

  • Last visited

songster's Achievements

Rookie

Rookie (2/14)

  • First Post
  • Collaborator
  • Posting Machine
  • Reacting Well

Recent Badges

90

Reputation

  1. Because there are only so many ways you can say "probably, but nobody knows how" without resorting to interpretative dance.
  2. Hasn't this already been done?Fawcett, 2007 (page 140 onwards) http://www.amos.org.au/documents/item/82 Foster and Rahmsdorf, 2011 http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/6/4/044022 Discussion at SkS and Tamino http://www.skepticalscience.com/print.php?r=38 http://www.skepticalscience.com/foster-and-rahmstorf-measure-global-warming-signal.html http://tamino.wordpress.com/2011/12/06/the-real-global-warming-signal/
  3. Sea ice linking up to South America would have no effect at all on the ocean currents, since sea ice is (in context) a wafer thin skim on the surface. Similarly, you can't keep a cat still by balancing a Pringle on its back. Edit: If you meant a land link, then that would likely have the effect of melting the Antarctic ice cap. Isolation of the continent by the Circumpolar current after the Drake Passage opened up is believed to be one of the major drivers behind Antarctica becoming glaciated. If you block the circumpolar current, the continent's no longer isolated, you get much more heat influx, and the ice will melt down.
  4. It's an inevitable consequence of the fact that last year was a record low for summer ice. Given that winter extent is much less variable, a higher proportion of it must therefore be newly formed first-year ice.
  5. Where "intense" = "below average"? http://nsidc.org/greenland-today/images/greenland_melt_area_plot_tmb.png
  6. Not for long... http://nsidc.org/greenland-today/images/greenland_melt_area_plot_tmb.png
  7. While the floating ice sheet itself doesn't add to sea level when it breaks off, while it's attached, its sheer mass acts as a kind of "plug" slowing down the flow of the land-based glaciers feeding the sheet. Now that the PIG has calved, look for the flow rate of the PIG to increase. This is where the feedback increase in sea level rise comes from (bearing in mind the fact that any individual glacier's contribution is very small).
  8. When you consider the mass of ice involved in an ice sheet that thick, I doubt the weather has any influence at all - certainly the presence of sea ice will be irrelevant. Tides might possibly affect the timing of the fracture, anything else just has too little energy.
  9. Well that's kind of my point. Someone posted a graph showing (modelled) temperatures which were below normal but above zero and claimed that the graph proved the Arctic was not melting. It doesn't. Above zero is above zero! Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not to their own melting point of water.It looks to me as though the mods have set up a situation where no mistake can ever be set straight within the threads in question. I'm all for discussing ideas which may be a bit off the wall - but creating an environment where the only allowed response is "Yes, I agree totally" is not a discussion.
  10. What happens if someone posts in one of the special three threads, saying "The Arctic ice is disappearing because little green men are eating it to sharpen their teeth" ? I hope we can all agree this is inaccurate! a) Nobody is allowed to contradict them. Only the mods are allowed to correct/remove the post. c) Sceptics are allowed to contradict them in the sceptic thread, AGW-ists in the AGW thread, but not vice versa. d) Anybody is allowed to contradict them. If (a), I tremble for humanity. If ( you've made an awful lot of work for yourselves, and the discussions will depend on which mod is on duty, their beliefs, and how much they know. If ©, where is the list of who's in which category? If (d), then how do the mods decide which posts are inaccurate enough to allow members to contradict them?
  11. I have done so, indeed I did before posting, and I'm none the wiser. I was not arguing with anyone - I wasn't expressing any opinion one way or another as to whether AGW exists or not, and whether it's man-made or not. What I did was point out that one of the data sources referred to didn't show what was being claimed. I've done the same in various Arctic ice threads whenever pro-AGW people make mistakes or misunderstand their sources. Will I end up banned from both threads if I correct people on both sides? I understand the need to keep opinions separate, but this was not a matter of opinion. Indeed, if the same post had been made by someone else like Jethro, doubtless it would have stayed.What happens when a new person joins these boards? Do the mods have to watch them for a while and then (secretly) decide which posts they're allowed to contribute to? Where is the list of who's a sceptic and who's a warmist? A half-assed measure like this is ridiculous. If the intent really is that people can only post in one thread or the other, no matter what, then they should be implemented as members-only forums. As it stands you're just making more trouble for yourselves.
  12. OK, here's a perfect example. http://forum.netweather.tv/topic/76448-scepticism-of-man-made-climate-change/page-11#entry2732662 Keithlucky posted the DMI temperature graph in the "sceptic" thread and said there was no melting north of 80 degrees. I followed up, politely pointing out that that this was wrong for three reasons: firstly that DMI temperatures are a model rather than data, secondly that even though temperatures are below average, they are still above melting point, and thirdly that the mass balance buoys in the area do indeed show both top and bottom melt in the area above 80 degrees. Everything I posted was factually accurate and presented politely. My post has vanished. What is going on? Is nobody allowed to post even verifiable, neutral facts in these threads unless they are somehow (by whom?) registered as official sceptics? How can people be allowed to post mistakes (note, I do not say lies, I say MISTAKES) without these being set right? What are we trying to create here, simply a set of parallel echo chambers and mutual suspicion? Edit: At the very least I would appreciate a private mail from whichever mod deleted my post, saying why they did so and what rules I've infringed.
×
×
  • Create New...