I thought you guys were "winning"...?

abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00113.1
Cosimo 2012
ABSTRACT
The perennial ice area was drastically reduced to 38% of its climatological average in 2007 but recovered slightly in 2008, 2009, and 2010 with the areas being 10%, 24%, and 11% higher than in 2007, respectively. However, trends in extent and area remained strongly negative at −12.2% and −13.5% decade−1, respectively. The thick component of the perennial ice, called multiyear ice, as detected by satellite data during the winters of 1979–2011 was studied, and results reveal that the multiyear ice extent and area are declining at an even more rapid rate of −15.1% and −17.2% decade−1, respectively, with a record low value in 2008 followed by higher values in 2009, 2010, and 2011. Such a high rate in the decline of the thick component of the Arctic ice cover means a reduction in the average ice thickness and an even more vulnerable perennial ice cover. The decline of the multiyear ice area from 2007 to 2008 was not as strong as that of the perennial ice area from 2006 to 2007, suggesting a strong role of second-year ice melt in the latter. The sea ice cover is shown to be strongly correlated with surface temperature, which is increasing at about 3 times the global average in the Arctic but appears weakly correlated with the Arctic Oscillation (AO), which controls the atmospheric circulation in the region. An 8–9-yr cycle is apparent in the multiyear ice record, which could explain, in part, the slight recovery in the last 3 yr.
Click to expand...
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Red1966 said:
Which set of findings? They change every year. "If not, you believe in a conspiracy theory, which would make you a climate-truther" That is nonsense
Click to expand...
IPPC 1-5 is consistent, 1 took place in 1990, so of course new data is going to be added over the more than 2 decades since then and models would change accordingly, this however doesn't mean 1 varies vastly from 5. They all basically paint the same picture, 5 holds the strongest case.

That's how science works, mr. research scientist..


You don't believe IPCC 5, which means you do believe there is a global conspiracy by tens of thousands of scientists working together to subvert the truth.

Whether you believe that to be a conspiracy or not is irrelevant, that's what you actually believe and the definition of a conspiracy is 2 or more people working together to conspire, ergo, you are a conspiracy theorist, aka. a climate-truther
 
Harrekin

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
are you still trying to invert reality so that the ice caps start growing?

dream on, you deluded halfwit.
Click to expand...
Actually, I said sea ice is expanding.

Words just generally too hard for you?

And definitely ignore the satellite data Hecklers posted, cos it's obviously a "denier satellite" with a biased lens.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
Definitely ignore the peer reviewed study I posted on #623.
Click to expand...
they'll go shelter themselves in their alternate reality bubble.

they have a worldview already, and no need to modify it according to facts. instead, they modify the facts to their worldview.

peer reviewed studies show how conservatives do this while liberals do not.
 
sheskunk

sheskunk

Well-Known Member
The desire to prove oneself right only shows how lacking one really is. You all are pathetic little creatures.

None of you give 2 shits about global anything. The world could burst into flames and all you all would do is say "I told you so".

You've never helped anyone but yourselves. You don't work, you don't volunteer your time, you don't pay taxes, you are a burden on society. You'd be better off being black than being who you are today. Bunch of dope smoking losers.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
you're missing her desperate attempts at trolling. it's entertaining.

hell, sometimes it's even fun to nibble the bait, or just challenge yourself to find a unique way to call her fat.
Click to expand...
LOL I'm not missing shit

She/he/it, whatever it is.. (most likely Kynes' sock) remains desperate and it shows
 
sheskunk

sheskunk

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
you're missing her desperate attempts at trolling. it's entertaining.

hell, sometimes it's even fun to nibble the bait, or just challenge yourself to find a unique way to call her fat.
Click to expand...

Did you do nothing for nobody all day again? How's your desperate attempts to get people to answer your questions going? Fucking doper.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
sheskunk said:
Even when you have me on ignore I'm still in your head.
Click to expand...
The only way you'd be in my head is if I got drunk and blacked out and in the following weeks the Dr.'s office told me I had chlamydia

Of course I'd question it at first, knowing I could never stoop that low.. But reality would set in eventually, and knowing myself, I'd probably regret that last "why not.." of the night, which is you.. (if you're lucky)..

You're the worst of the worst out of the drunken goggles girls, an esteem nobody wants or wishes upon themselves. I take solace in knowing you take solace in knowing at least somebody, might want you, someday... for a night at least..


At least your pussy hole provides something of value..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top