Karl`s PC Help Forums Last active: Never
Not logged in [Login ]
Go To Bottom

In memory of Karl Davis, founder of this board, who made his final journey 12th June 2007

Post Reply
Who Can Post? All users can post new topics and all users can reply.
Username   Need to register?
Password:   Forgot password?
Subject: (optional)
Icon: [*]
Formatting Mode:

Insert Bold text Insert Italicised text Insert Underlined text Insert Centered text Insert a Hyperlink Insert E-mail Hyperlink Insert an Image Insert Code Formatted text Insert Quoted text Insert List
HTML is Off
Smilies are On
BB Code is On
[img] Code is On
:) :( :D ;)
:cool: :o shocked_yellow :P
confused2 smokin: waveysmiley waggyfinger
brshteeth nananana lips_sealed kewl_glasses
Show All Smilies

Disable Smilies?
Use signature?
Turn BBCode off?
Receive email on reply?
The file size of the attachment must be under 200K.
Do not preview if you have attached an image.

Topic Review

[*] posted on 21-11-2017 at 11:21
There is the thought that we're approaching a "Polar shift" event. The evidence seems to point, more and more, to this being the case.

[*] posted on 21-11-2017 at 02:55
JL, are you disputing just the first assertion in the quote box?

As I pointed out, you can't very well say a man's assertion in January 2016 is wrong as a statement up to the time it was written, when there is a change after the post has been made.

I do recall that those who believe in man-made climate change were decrying reduction in ice in one hemisphere, while ice was noticeably increasing in the other.

I notice that JL's link talks about the extent of the ice masses, but that is not the same as a measurement of the total ice. If snow and ice are less spread out, there will be a greater volume of frozen mass within a smaller area. And, neither is the same as a warming or cooling global climate. One would have to have measurements of every depth in the sea, every depth and height of the earth, and the whole volume of air to know the total thermal condition of the globe. When the surface area seemed to be getting warmer, ocean measurements indicated the depths of water were getting slightly cooler, tending toward balancing each other out.

[*] posted on 20-11-2017 at 20:45
Awww, John, Never let the facts get in the way of a good story!

[*] posted on 20-11-2017 at 18:41
Now, we know that the South Pole is gaining more ice than it’s losing. Also a great amount of the losing is due to underground heat. As for Greenland, its melting cycle doesn’t seem to have changed much. In fact, it seems to be quite regular. And sea level has been increasing… at a steady level since we started recording them.

Not according to this site:-


[*] posted on 20-11-2017 at 18:36
Some of the "facts", cited on that site, are just a tad dubious.

"Indeed satellite data show no increase in temperature for nearly 19 years despite a constant increase in CO2." is, for one, contentious.

'course, the climate IS changing. Always has. Always will.

The debate is how much humanity is affecting it.

Those who say "Not much", "Barely" and the like are deluded.

People (I use the term losely) like The Trumper.

[*] posted on 20-11-2017 at 17:32
Gore was far off in much of what he said, and he has made a point of refusing to speak in any kind of debate, at which the other side might refute what he says with actual empirical facts. He refers to his opponents as "global warming deniers' with the kind of contempt that historians use for "holocaust deniers."

However, the author who posted this web piece did so in late January of 2016. Since then, the U.S. has had some harsh hurricanes which undermine point number 3.

I am amused at Gore's hypocrisy in buying a beach front mansion, which proves he does not really believe his own predictions or the junk science behind them.

[*] posted on 20-11-2017 at 05:15
Al Gore predicted that we would all be up to our necks in melt ice by now? The Global warming myth?