Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • I never cease to be amazed at how quickly this forum swings between properties of cryogenically cooled proteins to women covered in cheese slices.

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - F X

1
Science / Re: NH winter cooling
The cold kills the bugs that eats the trees!  How can you have any pudding, if they don't eats the trees?
Thank God for the cold.  It should help fight some disease and bug problems from the warmer winters.  Nature is a bitch
2
Science / Re: NH winter cooling
The record old that has hit the US isn't unexpected, and actually fits the trend of winter cooling for the regions hardest hit.  What is a bit different is this cold is so widespread and extreme that it actually is leading to less snowfall for many areas.

So if those areas were warmer there would be more snowfall??
No

It's the widespread nature of the pattern that suppresses snowfall in this case.  Where there was open water the snowfall was actually record snow.   All time record snow.

Same for sea ice and ;lakes, rivers and stream ice.  Record amounts of ice.  But the wide area means no warm air can interact with the cold to produce snow.  That changed of course, and now the record cold is causing more snow records to be broken again.
3
Science / Re: NH winter cooling
It snowed again in the Sahara
4
Science / Re: NH winter cooling
The record old that has hit the US isn't unexpected, and actually fits the trend of winter cooling for the regions hardest hit.  What is a bit different is this cold is so widespread and extreme that it actually is leading to less snowfall for many areas. 
5
Science / Re: NH winter cooling
When you post climate science interpretations that are equivalent to "The sky is Violet" I can only point out that you are sadly misinformed. 
That's just not true.  In any way.  And an intelligent person can refute even the most absurd statements.
Quote
When you post climate science interpretations that are equivalent to "The sky is Violet"
That does not happen, you made it up.  (see how easy it is to refute nonsense?)

Quote
I can only point out that you are sadly misinformed.
No, an intelligent person can use logic, reason and evidence to refute nonsense.  In your case, you do an excellent job of self mockery and illustrating your ignorance, so not much effort is required at all.

 :smug:




6
It's just it's the only game in town against a tumor that has spread. 
No.that isn't true

7
Shut up Bart
8
It's not even that hard to act like a mature adult

Try it sometime
9
A Bart by by other name still can't help himself

Threatening other people with violence is what Bart would do

You want to stop being Bart?  Then stop acting like Bart
10
Nonsense
11
No, banning Bart is the logical approach
12
Fluoride is really good to brush your teeth with.  It's really bad to get to much of it in your water.

13
it still bothers me.  stupidity shouldn't be a death sentence.
And yet it so often is
14
Science / Re: NH winter cooling
Every glacier building phase of the ice age has happened when CO2 levels were high

15
Science / Re: NH winter cooling
When ice cores are analyzed for ocean content, the SMOW (Standard Mean Ocean Water) data tells the story of both seasonal and long term changes in the ocean temperature  that was the source of the snow.  If they tested these ice cores for this (and they really should), we might know something about the changes in the ocean water that was the source of the snow.  (or we might not)

If the SMOW data shows the snow came from warmer water then we might know something about the source of the snow.  If the data shows it is ocean effect snow, not tropical moisture, then we might actually know something about the cause of the snow increase.  The problem with so much research is simple enough.  If you are only looking for one thing (global; warming signals), you won't actually be doing science.

16
Science / Re: NH winter cooling
"According to the research, wintertime snowfall has increased 117 percent since the mid-19th century in southcentral Alaska in the United States. Summer snows also showed a significant increase of 49 percent in the short period ranging less than two hundred years."
This is, to me, one of the more important matters regarding climate. Unexpected feedbacks and other unknowns make the climate models unrealistic still.

The MIT idea that the most warming will actually occur from albedo changes at high latitudes, because the models show this, may not be true.
17
Science / Re: NH winter cooling
Greenland and Antarctica also show the same thing.  Even while near the ocean there is "ice loss", easy to observe, the source of the glaciers shows a drastic increase in snow, which turns to ice, which is the source of the glacier.  Warmer tropical oceans results in more snow and ice, not less.   While this is true for high altitudes and polar regions, it is not the case in the mid latitudes.  There more snow ( instead of rain) in winter is an indication of colder temps, not warmer.

Warmer tropics leads to more precipitation, but in a warming world in the mid latitudes,  it means more rain, or ice storms, not more snow.  Snow is an indicator of colder conditions, never warmer ones.  This shows up clearly in all valid data.  There is no question for anyone who studies this.

As Cohen keeps saying, it is possible a warmer world means more snow early on for Siberia, and that creates colder winters for the entire northern hemisphere, but especially for the eastern US and Eurasia.  With more snow.  That globally snow is increasing in fall and winter is also with out question. 



18
Science / Re: NH winter cooling
My immediate reaction to this alarming news was that the glaciers in Alaska must surely be advancing at a furious rate.  They would have to be.  Until I remembered that the rich and famous keep going to Alaska to weep great salty well documented tears over receding glaciers there and it is almost as much of a poster catastrophe as dead polar bears.
The large glaciers in Alaska of course have been "growing", which isn't as simple as it sounds.

The mountains in the study never melt at high altitudes, which is why they chose them to do ice cores.   While the idiotic deniers of evidence like to imagine all the glaciers are melting away, they are certainly not.  What is happening is down near sea level the foot of the glaciers (not the large ones, the smaller ones) are melting due to a climate shift to warmer summer temps, while the ice fields that feed the glaciers, up high, are showing a drastic increase in ice (from increasing snow).  If you just look at small glaciers down low you might think they are "shrinking", even when the source of the glacier is showing a massive increase in ice.

This study and the ice cores it is based on show the bigger picture, which is an increase in the glacier mass.  This won't show up at the foot of the glacier for a long time.  The same thing was found in other regions.  The increased calving for tidewater glaciers is assumed to mean the glacier is in trouble, when in reality the glacier is growing.  The problem for the simple minded is the assumption that more ice calving means trouble, when it just might mean there has been more snow, and it takes a long time to show up down where it is easy to observe a glacier.

In fact, that is exactly what this study shows.
19
Science / Re: NH winter cooling
My immediate reaction to this alarming news was that the glaciers in Alaska must surely be advancing at a furious rate.
From the link
https://www.dartmouth.edu/press-releases/warming_seas_double_snowfall-north_around_north_americas_tallest_peaks.html
Quote
The research, appearing in Scientific Reports, is based on analysis of two ice cores collected at 13,000 feet from Mount Hunter in Denali National Park. According to the authors, accumulation records in the separate samples taken from just below the summit of the mountain known as "Denali's Child" are in nearly complete agreement.

Quote
"It is now glaringly clear from our ice core record that modern snowfall rates in Alaska are much higher than natural rates before the Industrial Revolution," said Dominic Winski, a research assistant at Dartmouth and the lead author of the report. "This increase in precipitation is also apparent in weather station data from the past 50 years, but ice cores show the scale of the change well above natural conditions."
How is it possible to misunderstand that?

The paper
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-18022-5



21
Science / Re: NH winter cooling
Callendar  tried to explain how a warming world with increasing temperatures could result in a glacier building phase of the ice age, something almost nobody deals with in the modern war over CO2 (which often resembles a terrorist attack on anything the even suggests a problem with the theory)

Plass also knew that the theory would have to explain why the short warm periods resulting after C)2 levels reached a maximum.   By focusing on the insane war over fossil fuels, the never ending shitfest over climate just ignores the scientific data and increasing knowledge of climate history.

So much that the Holocene climactic optimum (Altithermal) gets fucked over by alarmists, who would rather change data and scientific findings than explain why shit actually happened.

It's a clown parade of fuckheads.
22
Science / Re: NH winter cooling
Difficult to know what to make of these diametrically conflicting phenomena in a world of settled science.
What you are running into is the theory of climate change.  Or the even broader term "scientific theory of climate change", which includes a dozen other names for the same theory.  The CO2 theory is the same thing as the greenhouse theory, AGW, global warming theory, or the theory of global warming.  (AGW is the simple way to type it out)

Unlike most of the other big theories, global warming theory isn't rock solid, like the theory of evolution, or the theory of plate tectonics.  While even a little modern scientific learning allows us to define, explain and appreciate a theory, AGW is nebulous, often misunderstood, poorly defined and certainly contentious.

For example
Quote
Plate tectonics is the theory that the outer rigid layer of the earth (the lithosphere) is divided into a couple of dozen "plates" that move around across the earth's surface relative to each other, like slabs of ice on a lake.
Then you can follow with
Quote
The theory of plate tectonics explains most of the features of Earth's surface. It explains why earthquakes, volcanoes and mountain ranges are where they are. It explains where to find some mineral resources.

Quote
Plate tectonics theory explains why:

Earth's geography has changed over time and continues to change today.
Some places are prone to earthquakes while others are not.
Certain regions may have deadly, mild, or no volcanic eruptions.
Mountain ranges are located where they are.
Many ore deposits are located where they are.
Living and fossil species of plants and animals are found where they are.
Some continental margins have a lot of geological activity, and some have none.
Plate tectonic motions affect Earth's rock cycle, climate, and the evolution of life.

If some alarmist moron can't define and explain the theory of AGW in such a way, they are an idiot.

Debating or even discussing the theory with them is like trying to talk to a flat earther, or a religious idiot about plate tectonics.  The theory came about to explain the ice ages when it was realized that the solar changes were not enough to explain climate change.  A mechanism was needed to explain why small changes in the sun and our relation to it could cause such massive changes in global climate.

A stumbling block for every incarnation of the CO2 theory was the saturation of CO2.  Then after that was somewhat resolved, the other issues that killed the theory had to be somehow explained.  Because a theory doesn't just predict, it explains.

But of the loud and idiotic don't know about this, they hand wave things away, and then go on the attack, like a religious idiot when confronted with evidence, or even worse, a zealot when confronted with scientific uncertainty on matters.
23
Science / Re: NH winter cooling
Erie gets record snowfall during Christmas blizzard

http://www.post-gazette.com/news/nation/2017/12/26/Christmas-brings-Northeast-blizzard/stories/201712260041

Quote
And another 19 inches fell before dawn Tuesday, bringing the total to 53 inches -- the greatest two-day total in commonwealth history. The previous record was the 44 inches that fell in Morgantown in March 1958.

And it's not over for Erie - the snow is expected to continue falling through Wednesday.



24
If it runs counter to what you want to believe, there is always a way to reject information.
This is the human condition