Driver to drive?

On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 18:01:59 -0600,
hal-usenet@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Hal Murray) wrote:

USGS says:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs2-00/
Click to expand...
Gees, there you guys go with an 80 meter sea level rise again. Who was
it who declared emphatically that I was wrong about the uncertainty
and wide range of estimates of sea level rise? Oh, yes, it was
"Ouroboros Rex" who said "No, they don't. lol"

LOL!

Burned by your own dogma.
 
Jim Thompson wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 23:37:31 +0100, "TheM" <DontNeedSpam@test.com
wrote:

"Jim Thompson" <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> wrote in message news:i3cog5t67qbc0ognbgo7ug3mmhs5aj9740@4ax.com...
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:07:36 -0600,
hal-usenet@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Hal Murray) wrote:

In article <4mnlg5d3uslb1j471rr9vohaaaolasvsbl@4ax.com>,
Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> writes:

I assume you'll agree that the Arctic is essentially neutral without
me having to pull out your finger nails ?:)

Is Greenland part of the Artic?

Anybody got the number handy? How much would sea level rise
if Greenland melted?

Greenland is a land mass with _some_ glacial coverage.

...Jim Thompson

Don't forget to mention it used to be green in the past, when Vikings
settled it. Surely that wasn't due to industrial CO2?

M

They used to herd CATTLE there.

Leftist weenies choose to ignore that.

Fox is the only network presently covering the climate change hoax
exposure. Wonder if Obama and the Forty Thugs will rush out and
arrest all us trouble-makers ?:)
Click to expand...

They are too busy partying with India and Bollywood.


--
The movie 'Deliverance' isn't a documentary!
 
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:07:36 -0600,
hal-usenet@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Hal Murray) wrote:

In article <4mnlg5d3uslb1j471rr9vohaaaolasvsbl@4ax.com>,
Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> writes:

I assume you'll agree that the Arctic is essentially neutral without
me having to pull out your finger nails ?:)

Is Greenland part of the Artic?

Anybody got the number handy? How much would sea level rise
if Greenland melted?
Click to expand...

Greenland is a land mass, so I do not think it will be melting any time
soon.

It is, however, covered with a large amount of ice.

The part of Greenland that is above the Arctic Circle is "part of the
Arctic".

There are no places on Earth that are "part of the artic", because no
such place exists on Earth.

Take the BLANK "Follow ups to:" line OUT of your retarded news reader
setup, jerk.
 
On Nov 24, 2:52 am, Geoff <ge...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 12:28:45 -0600, Tim Wescott <t...@seemywebsite.com
wrote:

* Ignore the fact that much of the ice in question is _on land_.

I did not ignore the fact. I accounted for it quite clearly. Come up
with precise volumes of ice and precise surface areas of the seas and
do the math. Show how X m^3 of ice are spread across Y m^2 of ocean
and tell us how many meters of rise to expect. Estimates range from 60
centimeters to 60 meters, that's a hell of a lot of margin of error.
Click to expand...
You are comparing apples and pears. The 60 metre estimate involves
melting the entire Antarctic ice sheet, which would take quite a
while.

It is sliding off the land mass rather faster than it used to

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/grace20091124.html

at about 194 gigatonne per year, equivalent to about 0.5mm per year of
sea level rise, at which rate it would take 120,000 years to contibute
its 60 metre to the sea level.

More global warming could well speed this up quite a bit.

The 60 centimetre estimate is of what might happen over the next 100
years, most of it coming from the thermal expansion of the oceans as
the earth warms up. Both Greenland and Antarctica are losing mass
quite a lot faster than they were a few years ago, and the 60cm figure
probably needs to be revised upwards.

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
 
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 12:14:30 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:07:36 -0600,
hal-usenet@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Hal Murray) wrote:

In article <4mnlg5d3uslb1j471rr9vohaaaolasvsbl@4ax.com>,
Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> writes:

I assume you'll agree that the Arctic is essentially neutral without
me having to pull out your finger nails ?:)

Is Greenland part of the Artic?

Anybody got the number handy? How much would sea level rise
if Greenland melted?

Greenland is a land mass with _some_ glacial coverage.

...Jim Thompson
Click to expand...

More like "_nearly complete_ glacial coverage".
 
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:20:49 -0700, don <don> wrote:

Erik's
time during the Medieval Warm Period.
Click to expand...

Yes. Like today's warming being claimed as being due to the industrial
revolution, the idiots should understand that it is just a natural cycle.
 
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 12:14:30 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:07:36 -0600,
hal-usenet@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Hal Murray) wrote:

In article <4mnlg5d3uslb1j471rr9vohaaaolasvsbl@4ax.com>,
Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> writes:

I assume you'll agree that the Arctic is essentially neutral without
me having to pull out your finger nails ?:)

Is Greenland part of the Artic?
Click to expand...
http://www.mnh.si.edu/arctic/html/resources_glossary.html

Arctic: The area lying above 66 ˝ degrees North latitude that includes
the Northern Lands and Arctic Ocean.
 
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 20:56:42 -0800, Archimedes' Lever
<OneBigLever@InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote:

On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:20:49 -0700, don <don> wrote:

Erik's
time during the Medieval Warm Period.


Yes. Like today's warming being claimed as being due to the industrial
revolution, the idiots should understand that it is just a natural cycle.
Click to expand...
Like observing a sine wave pattern in global sea level and
extrapolating a linear or an exponential departure from the historic
pattern when predicting the future. Clearly, good science.

http://planetearth.nerc.ac.uk/news/story.aspx?id=293

"The researchers found that during the Middle Ages warm period, around
12th century, sea level was approximately 20cm higher than today.
During the 'Little Ice Age' in the 18th century, when it was possible
to skate on the Thames in winter, sea level was approximately 25cm
lower than it is today.

The team, who published thier[sic] findings in the journal Climate
dynamics, say that present sea level is within 20cm of the highest sea
level for 110,000 years."

....

"The authors believe there is a precedent for such a bold statement.
Studies from the last ice age show that ice sheets can melt quickly.
When the ice age ended 11,700 years ago, the ice sheets melted so
quickly that sea level rose 11mm a year, or one metre in a century."

All without human cause or intervention.
 
On Nov 25, 2:27 am, Geoff <ge...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 18:01:59 -0600,

hal-use...@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Hal Murray) wrote:
USGS says:
 http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs2-00/

Gees, there you guys go with an 80 meter sea level rise again. Who was
it who declared emphatically that I was wrong about the uncertainty
and wide range of estimates of sea level rise? Oh, yes, it was
"Ouroboros Rex" who said "No, they don't. lol"

LOL!

Burned by your own dogma.
Click to expand...
Pity about that. You should learn to read more carefully. The 60 to 80
metre sea level rise depends on melting the whole of the Antartic ice
sheet, which would take quite a while - about 120,000 years if it
continued at it is current rate (which is likely to speed up, but not
all that much, at least not for the next few thousand years).

The IPCC's current prediction is for some 0.48 metres over the next
century, though that predates the recent acceleration in the glacier
flow off Greenland and Antarctica which would be good for an
additional tenth a of a metre or so if it doesn't continue to
accelerate.

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
 
On Nov 25, 5:56 am, Archimedes' Lever <OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org>
wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:20:49 -0700, don <don> wrote:
Erik's
time during the Medieval Warm Period.

  Yes.  Like today's warming being claimed as being due to the industrial
revolution, the idiots should understand that it is just a natural cycle.
Click to expand...
The "natural cycle" that has raised the CO2 level in the atmosphere to
387ppm, the highest it has been for about 20 million years?

You need to do a little reading on greenhouse gases (of which CO2 is
one) before making the kind of claim that labels you as a gullible
ignoramus who has been suckered by the denialist propaganda paid for
by Exxon-Mobil and others who want to be able to keep on digging up
and selling fossil carbon for fuel, despite the damage it has already
done and the rather worse damage that more of the same would do.

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
 
"Jim Thompson" <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> wrote in
message news:64sog5te2vcqoha5r8lu1bkfto1dt3bc2q@4ax.com...
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 23:37:31 +0100, "TheM" <DontNeedSpam@test.com
wrote:

"Jim Thompson" <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> wrote in
message news:i3cog5t67qbc0ognbgo7ug3mmhs5aj9740@4ax.com...
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:07:36 -0600,
hal-usenet@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Hal Murray) wrote:

In article <4mnlg5d3uslb1j471rr9vohaaaolasvsbl@4ax.com>,
Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> writes:

I assume you'll agree that the Arctic is essentially neutral without
me having to pull out your finger nails ?:)

Is Greenland part of the Artic?

Anybody got the number handy? How much would sea level rise
if Greenland melted?

Greenland is a land mass with _some_ glacial coverage.

...Jim Thompson

Don't forget to mention it used to be green in the past, when Vikings
settled it. Surely that wasn't due to industrial CO2?

M

They used to herd CATTLE there.

Leftist weenies choose to ignore that.
Click to expand...
The biggest single cause of global warming is the post steam age clean up.
The irrational obsession with eliminating particulates has removed the one
thing that was offsetting any temperature rise due to CO2.

Normally the droplets of water that form clouds are seeded by pollen in the
upper atmosphere, these droplets are large which results in clouds that
aren't very reflective.

Particulates seed smaller droplets, which form more reflective clouds that
reflect more of the sun's rays back out into space.

The so called scientists are baying for the one thing that *WAS* protecting
us from global warming!
 
"MeowSayTongue" <MeowSayTongue@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in
message news:gq4pg5dgd29l8lt0bquiepfstn07tijnq8@4ax.com...
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:07:36 -0600,
hal-usenet@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Hal Murray) wrote:

In article <4mnlg5d3uslb1j471rr9vohaaaolasvsbl@4ax.com>,
Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> writes:

I assume you'll agree that the Arctic is essentially neutral without
me having to pull out your finger nails ?:)

Is Greenland part of the Artic?

Anybody got the number handy? How much would sea level rise
if Greenland melted?


Greenland is a land mass, so I do not think it will be melting any time
soon.
Click to expand...
How do you know..............it might be a cleverly disguised volcano.
 
MeowSayTongue wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:07:36 -0600,
hal-usenet@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Hal Murray) wrote:

In article <4mnlg5d3uslb1j471rr9vohaaaolasvsbl@4ax.com>,
Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> writes:

I assume you'll agree that the Arctic is essentially neutral without
me having to pull out your finger nails ?:)
Is Greenland part of the Artic?

Anybody got the number handy? How much would sea level rise
if Greenland melted?
Click to expand...
26 FEET

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland_ice_sheet
Greenland is a land mass, so I do not think it will be melting any time
soon.

It is, however, covered with a large amount of ice.
Click to expand...
The bedrock in the center of Greenland has been pressed below sea level
by the weight of the ice sheet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland


The part of Greenland that is above the Arctic Circle is "part of the
Arctic".

There are no places on Earth that are "part of the artic", because no
such place exists on Earth.

Take the BLANK "Follow ups to:" line OUT of your retarded news reader
setup, jerk.
Click to expand...
 
<don> wrote in message news:d8KdnVlbRst5w5DWnZ2dnUVZ_hadnZ2d@forethought.net...
MeowSayTongue wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:07:36 -0600,
hal-usenet@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Hal Murray) wrote:

In article <4mnlg5d3uslb1j471rr9vohaaaolasvsbl@4ax.com>,
Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> writes:

I assume you'll agree that the Arctic is essentially neutral without
me having to pull out your finger nails ?:)
Is Greenland part of the Artic?

Anybody got the number handy? How much would sea level rise
if Greenland melted?

26 FEET

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland_ice_sheet
Click to expand...

I think you miss-quoted, although it is still quite a bit.

"If the entire 2.85 million kmł of ice were to melt, it
would lead to a global sea level rise of 7.2 m (23.6 ft)."

Bill Garber
 
On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 16:56:46 -0500, "Bill Garber"
<Ask_for_my_email@address.com> wrote:

don> wrote in message news:d8KdnVlbRst5w5DWnZ2dnUVZ_hadnZ2d@forethought.net...
MeowSayTongue wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:07:36 -0600,
hal-usenet@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Hal Murray) wrote:

In article <4mnlg5d3uslb1j471rr9vohaaaolasvsbl@4ax.com>,
Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> writes:

I assume you'll agree that the Arctic is essentially neutral without
me having to pull out your finger nails ?:)
Is Greenland part of the Artic?

Anybody got the number handy? How much would sea level rise
if Greenland melted?

26 FEET

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland_ice_sheet


I think you miss-quoted, although it is still quite a bit.

"If the entire 2.85 million kmł of ice were to melt, it
would lead to a global sea level rise of 7.2 m (23.6 ft)."

Bill Garber
Click to expand...
And what effect is _sucking_ all those calories going to do to world
climate ?:)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
 
On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 15:21:58 -0000, "ian field"
<gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:

"MeowSayTongue" <MeowSayTongue@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in
message news:gq4pg5dgd29l8lt0bquiepfstn07tijnq8@4ax.com...
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:07:36 -0600,
hal-usenet@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Hal Murray) wrote:

In article <4mnlg5d3uslb1j471rr9vohaaaolasvsbl@4ax.com>,
Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> writes:

I assume you'll agree that the Arctic is essentially neutral without
me having to pull out your finger nails ?:)

Is Greenland part of the Artic?

Anybody got the number handy? How much would sea level rise
if Greenland melted?


Greenland is a land mass, so I do not think it will be melting any time
soon.

How do you know..............it might be a cleverly disguised volcano.
Click to expand...

Yes... Just like the ones on Europa.

If only we could dig a 1500 ft deep reservoir the size of lake
superior. Cover it, and then cover that with solar cells.

I would fill it ONLY with glacial waters from the North.

Then... I would dig another right next to that one.

Hell, just dam off the grand canyon and fill it up, like they did the
Flaming Gorge.

THAT is our best bet against rising seas. Also, it forces new
glaciation to begin, which draws its water from sea evaporations.
 
On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 12:24:11 -0800, Rich Grise <richgrise@example.net>
wrote:

On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 09:45:23 -0700, don wrote:
MeowSayTongue wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:07:36 -0600,
hal-usenet@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Hal Murray) wrote:

In article <4mnlg5d3uslb1j471rr9vohaaaolasvsbl@4ax.com>, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> writes:

I assume you'll agree that the Arctic is essentially neutral without
me having to pull out your finger nails ?:)
Is Greenland part of the Artic?

Anybody got the number handy? How much would sea level rise if
Greenland melted?

26 FEET

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland_ice_sheet


Greenland is a land mass, so I do not think it will be melting any
time
soon.

It is, however, covered with a large amount of ice.

The bedrock in the center of Greenland has been pressed below sea level by
the weight of the ice sheet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland


So, when the ice melts, the bedrock floats on the magma, which is pressed
down by the additional weight of the ocean, Greenland pops up, and sea
level stays the same. ;-)

Cheers!
Rich
Click to expand...
Pop up video?
 
And what effect is _sucking_ all those calories going to do to world
climate ?:)
Click to expand...
It would probably make clouds in AZ. :)

--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
 
On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 09:45:23 -0700, don wrote:
MeowSayTongue wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:07:36 -0600,
hal-usenet@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Hal Murray) wrote:

In article <4mnlg5d3uslb1j471rr9vohaaaolasvsbl@4ax.com>, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> writes:

I assume you'll agree that the Arctic is essentially neutral without
me having to pull out your finger nails ?:)
Is Greenland part of the Artic?

Anybody got the number handy? How much would sea level rise if
Greenland melted?

26 FEET

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland_ice_sheet


Greenland is a land mass, so I do not think it will be melting any
time
soon.

It is, however, covered with a large amount of ice.

The bedrock in the center of Greenland has been pressed below sea level by
the weight of the ice sheet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland
Click to expand...
So, when the ice melts, the bedrock floats on the magma, which is pressed
down by the additional weight of the ocean, Greenland pops up, and sea
level stays the same. ;-)

Cheers!
Rich
 
Geoff wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 18:01:59 -0600,
hal-usenet@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Hal Murray) wrote:

USGS says:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs2-00/

Gees, there you guys go with an 80 meter sea level rise again. Who was
it who declared emphatically that I was wrong about the uncertainty
and wide range of estimates of sea level rise? Oh, yes, it was
"Ouroboros Rex" who said "No, they don't. lol"
Click to expand...
Sorry, no moving the goalposts - you referred specifically to
expectations.

"Show how X m^3 of ice are spread across Y m^2 of ocean
and tell us how many meters of rise to expect. Estimates range from 60
centimeters to 60 meters, that's a hell of a lot of margin of error."
Click to expand...
No one expects such a rise.

Feel free to prove me wrong instead of lying about your original post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top