Global Warming---Oops!!

[MachZer0]

You are the one cherry picking. Just because you ignore the vast trove of evidence from hundreds of thousands of other areas doesn't mean it isn't there.

Scientists collect evidence. They pick more than just the one spot where they found an anomaly.

It wasn't me that decided to go on an expedition to prove global warming only to get trapped in unexpected ice

 

[1Sam15]

I sense that you haven't googled what scientists actually do ...

Lasers measure thinning ice sheets - Emerging Technology Corporation, Green Division

Using data culled from more than 50,000,000 laser measurements, scientists have assembled a picture of the rapidly thinning glaciers along the coastline of both the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets. The findings provide valuable information that will improve the accuracy of predictions for future sea level rise due to global warming.

​

Yet, some within the scientific community think they already know ... and are only making measurements to improve accuracy.

Not to nitpick your vast knowledge of science, but usually the "thinning ice" they are measuring is LAND-BASED ICE.

WHICH IS PRECISELY WHAT IS GOING ON IN ANTARCTICA!

DId you notice the "raising sea levels" bit in what you posted? SURELY you, in your vast knowledge of science know what happens when you fill a glass with water and ice cubes and let the ice cubes melt.

Do you?

It's the LAND ICE that will raise sea levels.

NOW, I'll complicate it a bit more for you: in the Arctic they ARE concerned with thinning of the sea ice insofar as the Arctic is seeing a marked loss of "Multiyear ice". It freezes in winter but the loss of multiyear ice is actually quite troubling and a big sign of global warming.

In the Antarctic they see ice driven out into the Southern Ocean due to changing wind and water mixing patterns.

Just a quick question for you: WHY do you think the land ice in parts of Antarctica is losing so MUCH mass recently?



This is happening in Antarctica

 

[jnxt]

I sense that you haven't googled what scientists actually do ...


Yet, some within the scientific community think they already know ... and are only making measurements to improve accuracy.

Please list all the climate scientist who assert that at a specific spot on the globe, they are certain the ice will continue to thin in the future, with no intervening periods of thickening.

You don't have a list of even one climate scientist.

Scientists don't use the Medieval logic of conservative Christians, who absurdly claim with certainty that a long dead Jewish cleric will return to earth. And they believe, as Erick Erickson does, that they are rational people who ought to be taken seriously.

The lack of introspection is alarming.

 

[NightHawkeye]

Please list all the climate scientist who assert that at a specific spot on the globe, they are certain the ice will continue to thin in the future, with no intervening periods of thickening.

LOL ... you made the claim.

I merely offered a counter-example showing your claim incorrect.

 

[jnxt]

LOL ... you made the claim.

I merely offered a counter-example showing your claim incorrect.

I made a claim that scientists deal in probabilities that are never 100 percent. And you went way off the rails and said they did, by quoting an informal article that had nothing to do with my claim.

Your inference is incorrect, and you know it is incorrect.

 

[jnxt]

It wasn't me that decided to go on an expedition to prove global warming only to get trapped in unexpected ice

Scientists don't go on expeditions to "prove" anything. You are making a fallacious conclusion that scientists are like you. But they are NOT presuppositionalists who claim to know how the world ends. They don't use medieval logic which is dependent on tortuous interpretations of ancient texts.

They are there to collect data. That is what scientists do.

 

[NightHawkeye]

I made a claim that scientists deal in probabilities that are never 100 percent. And you went way off the rails and said they did, by quoting an informal article that had nothing to do with my claim.

Your inference is incorrect, and you know it is incorrect.

Perhaps you would like to start over again ... rather than getting mad. What exactly was your earlier post about?

 

[jnxt]

Perhaps you would like to start over again ... rather than getting mad. What exactly was your earlier post about?

MachZero mistakenly said scientist went on an expedition specifically to measure "thinning" ice.

You replied with three happy emoticons.

Then I responded, “You should probably look up what scientists do. They aren't like conservative Christians who use medieval logic. Scientists don't have presuppositions like you do.

So they don't measure "thinning" ice. If they knew with certainty (or thought they knew, because an imaginary god told them so) the ice was thinning, then there would be no need to measure its thickness.”


Let me translate for you. Scientist collect data. They don't decide in advance what that data will show. So to say they went to measure "thinning" ice (or responding with approval of the same) shows are disturbing, Medieval view of science, as evildoers with an evil agenda.

The scientists went to collect data, regardless of what it was, not to build a specific case like a prosecutor might do.

If they do the latter, they aren't scientists, but they might be conservative Christians anti science advocates or employees of big oil.

 

[NightHawkeye]

Then I responded, “You should probably look up what scientists do. They aren't like conservative Christians who use medieval logic.

Yes. You put down Christians. I understood that part clearly.

Scientists don't have presuppositions like you do.

But they do ... and I provided an example.

Statements were also provided earlier which clearly indicated that the research expedition was agenda driven.

So they don't measure "thinning" ice.

In the abstract I agree that it would be nice if scientists weren't agenda driven ... but many are. It is the agenda which provides the funding after all. Without the agenda ... not much funding. It may not be a pleasant thought but it is true nonetheless.

Now, to their credit "good scientists" will strive for accuracy and completeness in what they work on, but that doesn't change the fact that some "agenda" has provided a framework for their efforts.

If they knew with certainty (or thought they knew, because an imaginary god told them so) the ice was thinning, then there would be no need to measure its thickness.”

True. But it is still interesting and ironic that their initial suppositions and predilections were so off the mark as to result in disastrous and costly consequences both for the expedition and its rescuers.

Let me translate for you. Scientist collect data. They don't decide in advance what that data will show.

Scientists should be so objective. It's certainly a great ideal to shoot for.

So to say they went to measure "thinning" ice (or responding with approval of the same) shows are disturbing, Medieval view of science, as evildoers with an evil agenda.

That would seem to be an unwarranted conclusion.

The scientists went to collect data, regardless of what it was, not to build a specific case like a prosecutor might do.

I agree that nearly all aspire to that goal ... though some are much better at distancing themselves from prejudices than others.

If they do the latter, they aren't scientists, but they might be conservative Christians anti science advocates or employees of big oil.

ROTFL ... now who's separating people into two classes.

What's with the view of Christians as being perpetually evil and unscientific, anyway?

 

[1Sam15]

True. But it is still interesting and ironic that their initial suppositions and predilections were so off the mark as to result in disastrous and costly consequences both for the expedition and its rescuers.

Turney's expedition's goal was, among other things to investigate the East Antarctic Ice Sheet.

THIS IS LAND-BASED ICE....NOT SEA ICE.

Please get this part straight before you mischaracterize what happened here!

PLEASE LEARN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LAND AND SEA. It is CRUCIAL.

In addition they were going to look at Southern Ocean currents. Guess what?

Yeah, they did that!

But the key here is you and the rest of the non-scientists think all ice is the same! In this case it makes a HUGE difference because of what happened!

The Akademik got stuck because of DRIFTING SEA ICE due to polar circulation! It fits with various aspects of what we know is happening in the Southern Ocean. AND the fact that they got stuck in ICE doesn't change the fact that OTHER LAND-ICE is disappearing.

This key difference is the MOST IMPORTANT ASPECT OF THIS STORY and the fact that you guys can't keep this straight only makes your "critiques" look sillier and sillier and sillier with each passing post!

Do you realize that when you conflate SEA and LAND ice you you make your position scientifically WEAKER?

 

[iluvatar5150]

Turney's expedition's goal was, among other things to investigate the East Antarctic Ice Sheet.

THIS IS LAND-BASED ICE....NOT SEA ICE.

Please get this part straight before you mischaracterize what happened here!

PLEASE LEARN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LAND AND SEA. It is CRUCIAL.

In addition they were going to look at Southern Ocean currents. Guess what?

Yeah, they did that!

But the key here is you and the rest of the non-scientists think all ice is the same! In this case it makes a HUGE difference because of what happened!

The Akademik got stuck because of DRIFTING SEA ICE due to polar circulation! It fits with various aspects of what we know is happening in the Southern Ocean. AND the fact that they got stuck in ICE doesn't change the fact that OTHER LAND-ICE is disappearing.

This key difference is the MOST IMPORTANT ASPECT OF THIS STORY and the fact that you guys can't keep this straight only makes your "critiques" look sillier and sillier and sillier with each passing post!

Do you realize that when you conflate SEA and LAND ice you you make your position scientifically WEAKER?

I think it's pretty clear at this point that certain posters are more interested in poking fun at liberals than they are about learning the science.

 

[jnxt]

ROTFL ... now who's separating people into two classes.

Professional football players make a living playing football, not playing piano.

Research scientists make a living doing scientific research, not some other kind of thing.

It is not "class" it is the definition of what it means to be a research scientist.

What's with the view of Christians as being perpetually evil and unscientific, anyway?

Erick Erickson's remarks are the epitome of anti science, religious paranoid rhetoric. And all that in less than 140 characters.

 

[NightHawkeye]

Erick Erickson's remarks are the epitome of anti science, religious paranoid rhetoric. And all that in less than 140 characters.

Why bring Eric Erickson's remarks into this thread?

Poisoning the well ... or is there a legitimate reason?

 

[1Sam15]

I think it's pretty clear at this point that certain posters are more interested in poking fun at liberals than they are about learning the science.

That's pretty much a given at this point with this crowd. The fact that many of them post the exact same type of trash time and again EVEN AFTER their error of logic has been pointed out shows that it isn't really about "facts" or even TRUTH for that matter.

Someone like Nighthawkeye is focused on fighting people. It appears to be his way. He CONSISTENTLY misrepresents others' posts with "I'm glad we agree...." and then proceeds to make it sound the like the person said just the OPPOSITE of what they said.

 

[NightHawkeye]

I think it's pretty clear at this point that certain posters are more interested in poking fun at liberals than they are about learning the science.

ROTFL ... the poking of fun at conservatives is also noted.

Each faction does things which merit such jocularity.

 

[NightHawkeye]

Someone like Nighthawkeye is focused on fighting people. It appears to be his way. He CONSISTENTLY misrepresents others' posts with "I'm glad we agree...." and then proceeds to make it sound the like the person said just the OPPOSITE of what they said.

You know better than that, Sam. You just object to me pointing out when such agreement occurs.

It's as if you're constantly fighting against me.

 

[iluvatar5150]

That's pretty much a given at this point with this crowd. The fact that many of them post the exact same type of trash time and again EVEN AFTER their error of logic has been pointed out shows that it isn't really about "facts" or even TRUTH for that matter.

Someone like Nighthawkeye is focused on fighting people. It appears to be his way. He CONSISTENTLY misrepresents others' posts with "I'm glad we agree...." and then proceeds to make it sound the like the person said just the OPPOSITE of what they said.

It's become something of a sport among some conservative members (I'm not going to say which ones) on this board to <verb-which-must-not-be-name-but-it-starts-with-'t'-and-rhymes-with-"hole"> threads and then report people on the other side once they've been goaded into over-reacting. We're now at the point where some libs will report conservatives for any minor infraction out of frustration at the perceived lack of moderator action on this issue.

 

[NightHawkeye]

It's become something of a sport among some conservative members (I'm not going to say which ones) on this board to <verb-which-must-not-be-name-but-it-starts-with-'t'-and-rhymes-with-"hole"> threads and then report people on the other side once they've been goaded into over-reacting. We're now at the point where some libs will report conservatives for any minor infraction out of frustration at the perceived lack of moderator action on this issue.

Hmm ... who exactly is being goaded in these past few posts?

 

[1Sam15]

.....

From Shakespeare Henry IV, Act 3 Scene 3:

FALSTAFF:
There&#8217;s no more faith in thee than in a stewed prune, nor no more truth in thee than in a drawn fox,

 

[iluvatar5150]

Hmm ... who exactly is being goaded in these past few posts?

Depends on how you define "goading." I consider disingenuously re-posting debunked claims (or just blatantly ignoring contradictory information) to be a form of goading. Not everyone agrees.