I Am Bored

Loads of viral videos, games, memes, lists and social networking for when you're bored. Updated every day, so visit often.
LatestPopularMost BookmarkedMost EmailedTop RatedMy FavoritesRandomChat
AllGamesFunnyEntertainmentQuizzesWeirdTechLifestyle, Arts & Lit.News & PoliticsScienceSportsMisc
Submit Content  





rss

friendsmore friends | add your site
123 Games

Extreme Humor

Funny Stuff

Viva La Games

Free Samples

Pugorama

Gorilla Mask

Asylum

Oddee

Urlesque

FreeGame Heaven

Funny Videos

Friday Fun

Shi**y Stories

Angelsfire.nl

Crazy Games

Insane Pictures

I hate retail

Chaostrophic



Back to Listing

Lake At The North Pole? Not Really. 300 Miles Away

Hits: 6233 | Rating: (2.1) | Category: Science | Added by: 5Cats
Page: 1 24 5 6 Next >   Jump to: Bottom    Last Post
mesovortex
Male, 30-39, Southern US
 451 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 11:26:14 AM
richanddead:
I'm not a member of the website so I can't look at the data you are attempting to source. My guess is it's not saying what you're thinking it's saying.

When multiple sources show that the chart you posted is not accurate and is misleading, then I'm going to go with those sources.

The link you provided doesn't show anything to back up your claim at least as far as I can tell.

mesovortex
Male, 30-39, Southern US
 451 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 11:23:02 AM
richanddead:
We aren't emitting more water vapor, plus it condenses.

CO2 stays in the atmosphere for a very long time before it is reabsorbed.

It also seems like you're agreeing with me about Venus. So, I'm not sure why you're attempting to argue.

CO2 is the most important greenhouse gas because we are emitting more CO2 than anything else.

If you want to know more about the science behind climate change, watch all of the videos from this guy:
https://www.youtube.com/user/potholer54/videos

He's a science consultant and knows a thing or two about what is and isn't science.

richanddead
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 2054 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 11:21:43 AM
(cont)
link

link

link

link

...not a denialist websites among them and all peer reviewed. You know just looking at the citation on the graph or the sources I provided you would have revealed this. Maybe you should refine you reverse google search or maybe you should look at the validity of data rather than simply who wants to show it and if it supports your case.

richanddead
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 2054 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 11:21:30 AM
(cont)
And here is the 9 article it was cited in, in 2013 alone. (keep in mind over the 12 years it was cited in dozens and dozens of studies, but if you need those cited as well just ask.)
link

link

link

link

link

richanddead
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 2054 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 11:21:03 AM
(cont)
"richard: "

My name is not ricard, everyone seems to think my name is Richard on this for some reason, if you must know it is Diedrich.

"No. It wasn't. You can't lie when reverse google image search is so easy to do. It's only used on denialist websites. It isn't used at all in any peer reviewed literature. Ever. "

Oh really, even when the link I sent you was from the American Journal of Science a peer reviewed journal.

Here is where the data for that graph is from again as it is also cited in the graph itself.

link

richanddead
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 2054 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 11:20:34 AM
(cont)
"CO2 from volcanoes is less than 1% of human activity."

Yea I agree with that, but C02 is far less a greenhouse gas than the majority of gasses a volcano produces or what some of the non greenhouse gases do. Explosive volcanic eruptions inject gasses like water vapor, carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, hydrogen chloride,chlorine monoxide, hydrogen fluoride suddenly. And yes they cool Earth's lower atmosphere or troposphere; however, they also absorb heat radiated up from the Earth, thereby warming the stratosphere. The sulfate aerosols also accelerated chemical reactions that, together with increased stratospheric chlorine levels destroyed ozone. When I said " the lasting effects of the Mount Pinatubo" I was talking about how it led to the lowest ozone levels ever recorded to date in the stratosphere, not high CO2.

richanddead
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 2054 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 11:20:16 AM
mesovortex: "Not to the level of CO2. Besides, those aren't greenhouse gases."

You don't seem to know what your saying. Each of those are the top greenhouse gasses on planet earth currently. The only one that I didn't mention that also accounts for 70% of greenhouse warming is water vapor.

"Look at Venus. It's hotter than Mercury, is at a nearly stable temperature at night and during the day, and consists of a very thick atmosphere of mostly CO2. That's proof of the greenhouse effect."

Firstly, Venus is highly volcanic, has a different composition, closer to the sun, and has multiple different greenhouse gasses not simply CO2. And no one is arguing that a greenhouse effect is not a real thing, no one is claiming otherwise, it keeps us from returning to a "snowball Earth" climate. I am arguing that its is well within normal limits and perfectly natural for the earth.

mesovortex
Male, 30-39, Southern US
 451 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 11:19:02 AM
@lauriloo
Thanks for posting those. They are very informative.

Somehow I think it'll fall on deaf ears, though. Some of these people here aren't interested in reality. I mean, if people like 5cats cannot figure out the difference between volume and area, or think that Earth was once a moon of Saturn, then I don't know what to tell you.

richanddead
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 2054 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 11:18:21 AM
mesovortex: "Not to the level of CO2. Besides, those aren't greenhouse gases."

You don't seem to know what your saying. Each of those are the top greenhouse gasses on planet earth currently. The only one that I didn't mention that also accounts for 70% of greenhouse warming is water vapor.

"Look at Venus. It's hotter than Mercury, is at a nearly stable temperature at night and during the day, and consists of a very thick atmosphere of mostly CO2. That's proof of the greenhouse effect."

Firstly, Venus is highly volcanic, has a different composition, closer to the sun, and has multiple different greenhouse gasses not simply CO2. And no one is arguing that a greenhouse effect is not a real thing, no one is claiming otherwise, it keeps us from returning to a "snowball Earth" climate. I am arguing that its is well within normal limits and perfectly natural for the earth.

mesovortex
Male, 30-39, Southern US
 451 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 10:33:27 AM
CrakrJak:
I found the source of your graph. Google reverse image search is interesting. It's from Roy Spencer, which is not exactly a reputable source. It's also sourced on other right wing climate denial websites, too.

I went to NASA instead, and honestly I wasn't sure what the anomaly would be. I found this:

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2011/

Which shows a .4 to .6C anomaly. Interesting.

HADCRUT is above .4, too.

Other sources of UAH data show it has eclipsed .4C as well. Even your chart shows this, but you're only pulling out one month instead of an overall trend. Roy Spencer, and yourself, are cherry picking data.

Don't post something that's so easy to debunk next time. It'll show you as being intellectually lazy.

CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 17292 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 10:22:32 AM
mesovortex: As the chart I posted shows, we haven't even got to +.8 C over normal in the past 30+ years. So +.17 C is nothing to be concerned about.

And as I've said before, eventually the climatology crowd that's making bank on AGW is going to slowly step away from it and declare a new scare. Perhaps the ice age scare again, under a new name.

mesovortex
Male, 30-39, Southern US
 451 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 10:10:13 AM
@lauriloo
Thanks for posting those. They are very informative.

Somehow I think it'll fall on deaf ears, though. Some of these people here aren't interested in reality. I mean, if people like 5cats cannot figure out the difference between volume and area, or think that Earth was once a moon of Saturn, then I don't know what to tell you.

mesovortex
Male, 30-39, Southern US
 451 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 10:08:59 AM
5cats:
"Immanuel Velikovsky HE is the one who predicted Venus was hotter than current theories... and was VILIFIED by the "vast majority" of scientists... but he was 100% right! "

WHAT????

Did you even read his predictions? So you actually think Earth was once a moon of Saturn, Mercury was involved in the Tower of Babel, and that Noah's Flood was real. No wonder your understanding of science is so bad.

The only thing he was right about was that catastrophes have happened in earth's past, but we were going to find that out anyway, and even a blind squirrel finds a nut.

What we found out about Venus, we found out by observing it and even sending probes there. It's 100% greenhouse effect. That's why Venus is so much hotter than Mercury.

mesovortex
Male, 30-39, Southern US
 451 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 10:05:03 AM
OldOllie:
You post a link that is from 'iceagenow.info' - that's SUCH a reliable source.

What's with you guys posting blog links that link to other sites, that link to other sites, and the real sources that they EVENTUALLY link to don't even remotely say what they are trying to spin?

I see it all the time. Why not just link to the actual science or peer-reviewed source?

Oh wait, if you did that, you guys wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

mesovortex
Male, 30-39, Southern US
 451 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 10:02:57 AM
Gauddith:
"I have an idea, who actually CARES about debunking this "liberal hoo haw" and how about we JUST take care of our planet. "

What makes me really upset is that people like 5cats and Crakr think that science is somehow liberal or conservative based on whether or not it tells them what they want to hear. Science is neither. It just is. It's reality.

You can't just dismiss science because you don't like the politics around it. It's like dismissing gravity because you don't like the fact that some people use it to kill themselves.

Further, it's like every single argument against AGW here is easily traceable on google to a right wing think tank - and it gets spread around on the internet so easly because people like 5cats will STOP doing any research the second it tells them what they want to hear, and will post it ad infinitum.

mesovortex
Male, 30-39, Southern US
 451 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 9:59:58 AM
5cats:
"@Gauddith & @Madduck: The cost of "false AGW" is:
- trillions wasted on nothing
- electric bills tripled
- millions lose their jobs
- hundreds of millions starve to death "

Not true at all. I thought you were claiming that WE were scaremongering? That's scaremongering. You're spreading complete lies about AGW that aren't even remotely true.

If we switched to renewable energy, had better efficiency, greener energy, and were aware of coastal flooding decades before it became the norm so we could adapt and survive, we would SAVE trillions of dollars and SAVE millions of lives.

Also, if the climate does get out of control, then it would be a mass extinction. That's far worse than trying to make the earth more efficient or greener. We're at the top of the food chain. We should be greatly concerned what happens to the global climate and how we are changing it.

mesovortex
Male, 30-39, Southern US
 451 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 9:52:14 AM
5cats:

You posted a graph of GLOBAL temperatures (the hockey stick) and compared them to EUROPE. Europe is about 2-3% of the surface of the Earth.

Why are you being that dishonest?

mesovortex
Male, 30-39, Southern US
 451 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 9:50:54 AM
".17 C is a rather tame global temperature for July of any year. But as you can clearly see the 1998 temporary spike has had no ill long term effects."

That is a decent warming globally. 3-4C is the difference between normal climate and an ice age. 5C would be mass extinction levels.

1998 was an EL NINO. That's why it's anomalous.

mesovortex
Male, 30-39, Southern US
 451 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 9:49:22 AM
5cats:
"The ice pack in the South has indeed gotten bigger AND thicker. It's a fact."

You are confusing the sea ice with the ice over the south pole. The sea ice is not 3 miles thick. The ice over the south pole is. Sea ice is not land ice.

""Most of the ice in the northern hemisphere is not in the arctic ocean. It's Greenland."
This is 100% FALSE!
NOT EVEN CLOSE!
Greenland Ice Sheet: 1.7 million miles ^2
North Pole Ice Pack: 6.0 Million Miles ^2"

You don't know what volume is do you? You used AREA. The ice over greenland is up to 2 miles thick. The ice over the north pole is not.

How can you make such a basic blunder?

lauriloo
Female, 40-49, Midwest US
 1805 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 8:23:00 AM

Video explaining data showing natural influences don't account for overall warming trend

lauriloo
Female, 40-49, Midwest US
 1805 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 8:08:59 AM
More information links

lauriloo
Female, 40-49, Midwest US
 1805 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 8:05:21 AM
Gosh, my university is also spending so much time on this:

Understanding Climate Change: A Data-Driven Approach

papajon0s1
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 579 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 7:56:08 AM
Amen, 5Cats, I am so tired of the AlGores of this world making millions off questionable and arguable science. Stop making policy based ont his crap, lefties! You are getting people needlessly hurt or worse.

lauriloo
Female, 40-49, Midwest US
 1805 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 7:39:23 AM
Stanford research in ways to reduce atmospheric CO2

CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 17292 Posts
Monday, August 05, 2013 6:51:14 AM
ferdyfred: Back to the old population bomb myth again. I can recall the scaremongers screaming for population control when I was a child, when there were a mere 4 billion people on earth. They were saying at the time we wouldn't be able to survive past 6 billion people. Well we've blown past that and near 7 billion now and climbing.

So why have we thrived despite the warnings?

Innovation, better ways to clean water, better crop yields and farming techniques, better healthcare and better efficiencies in nearly everything else we do.

Page: 1 24 5 6 Next > 

You Must be Signed in to Add a Comment

If you've already got an I-Am-Bored.com account,
click here to sign in.

If you don't have an account yet,
Click Here to Create a Free Account
 

Back to Listing ^top


Bored | Suggest a Link | Advertise | Contact I Am Bored | About I Am Bored | Link to I Am Bored | Live Submission | Privacy | TOS | Ad Choices | Copyright Policy |
© 2014 Demand Media, Inc. All rights reserved.