Climate change the coming Ice Age .

a reply to: Greathouse

Either it misrepresented or you believe 100% everything that comes from every media source .

False dichotomy.

Is the media 100% accurate with all their past and current predictions ?

Oh, hell no. I already said I pay little attention to the media when it comes to matters of science.

a reply to: Phage

What you are saying I am misrepresenting is word for word from that NASA page titled, "Consensus: 97% of climate scientists agree".

So is NASA misrepresenting the information then?

a reply to: c0gN1t1v3D1ss0nanC3
You rely on headlines a lot?
I don't. You should try to do something about that. Like read the article and the references.

climate.nasa.gov...
nice graph showing the C02 is what I said

Since the end of 2012, moreover, total polar ice extent has largely remained above the post-1979 average. The updated data contradict one of the most frequently asserted global warming claims – that global warming is causing the polar ice caps to recede.

www.forbes.com...
here is the RECENT Nasa report it was about Ice not shrinking lately...except for the last couple years
oops my bad
means the same thing though
no actual global warming in reality

Thick, puffy stratocumulus clouds (left) reflect sunlight and cool the Earth’s surface. However, thin cirrus clouds (right) allow most visible light to pass right through them, while blocking thermal radiation, so they warm the Earth. Because of this, how clouds respond to changes in solar energy output is a crucial aspect of the Sun’s influence on climate. (Photographs courtesy Dr. Robert Houze, University of Washington Cloud Atlas)

earthobservatory.nasa.gov...
yeah I had somethings dyslexic, but not the point i was trying to make

sea levels rose alot more BEFORE civilization then since
more Ice lately
the recent nasa report on the recent years

Version 6 of the UAH MSU/AMSU global satellite temperature dataset is by far the most extensive revision of the procedures and computer code we have ever produced in over 25 years of global temperature monitoring. The two most significant changes from an end-user perspective are (1) a decrease in the global-average lower tropospheric (LT) temperature trend from +0.140 C/decade to +0.114 C/decade (Dec. ’78 through Mar. ’15)

www.drroyspencer.com...
thats what I thought
I had reports mixed up

yes and I did have to cloud thing mixed up too

no Problem with the corrections Phage
thanx actually

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Greathouse

Either it misrepresented or you believe 100% everything that comes from every media source .

False dichotomy.

Is the media 100% accurate with all their past and current predictions ?

Oh, hell no. I already said I pay little attention to the media when it comes to matters of science.

In that case I have no earthly idea why you are debating me? That has been my position since the beginning of this thread .

But you are slippery son of a gun .

a reply to: c0gN1t1v3D1ss0nanC3

I didn't. That quote is even directly from one of your replies to me.

Answer the question and stop attacking my character.

a reply to: Danbones

here is the RECENT Nasa report it was about Ice not shrinking lately
oops my bad
means the same thing though

No. It doesn't. And that's not what the report said.

sea levels rose alot more BEFORE civilization then since

Yes. Because before civilization glacial ice was melting. However, in the 10,000 years since civilization, it has not been.


Your source:

The two most significant changes from an end-user perspective are (1) a decrease in the global-average lower tropospheric (LT) temperature trend from +0.140 C/decade to +0.114 C/decade (Dec. ’78 through Mar. ’15)

See those "+" signs? That doesn't mean cooler.

a reply to: Greathouse

In that case I have no earthly idea why you are debating me? That has been my position since the beginning of this thread .

Really?

You equated a few scientists claiming a cooling trend (supported by media coverage) in the 70s with the current situation? Is that a misrepresentation of your position?

But you are slippery son of a gun .

I understand that critical thinking annoys some people.

a reply to: Phage

I will give you the link again since you must have lost it.

NASA 97% Consensus

I will quote directly from that page again for you Phage.

"Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities."

I quoted that word for word, and you came back at me stating I was "misrepresenting" the information.

So again Phage, is NASA misrepresenting information?

a reply to: c0gN1t1v3D1ss0nanC3

So again Phage, is NASA misrepresenting information?

Yup.

a reply to: Phage

Was that so hard?

a reply to: c0gN1t1v3D1ss0nanC3

Nope.

Global warming will end in a new ice age.
As the clouds thicken due to huge amounts of water vapour being held in the atmosphere through a great increase in latent heat, the ground begins to cool. Ice crystal begin to form in the blanket of clouds enshrouding the earth. Then a snowflake falls, and then another, and then many, and then more, ever increasing. It begins to snow all over the world, and snows for year after year, not ending for a 100 years. When the sky clears the earth is a glistening white snowball. The white reflects the heat back out into space and the temperature continues to fall and the oceans freeze.
At that point only a few small organisms thrive under the mile thick sheet of ice. It's not called global warming any more, It's called climate change, there is a reason for that; please try to keep up.
a reply to: Greathouse

a reply to: Phage

Well obviously it was, because it took multiple replies, many of them attacking my character and intelligence to get you to answer that question.

a reply to: Phage

Seriously ????

One of your first replies even said it was the media and not the scientist ?


Apparently you missed the mechanism of the fear I described in my 0P . Books, magazines and television you were the one that brought scientist into the discussion .

a reply to: starswift

As the clouds thicken due to huge amounts of water vapour being held in the atmosphere through a great increase in latent heat, the ground begins to cool. Ice crystal begin to form in the blanket of clouds enshrouding the earth.

You are confusing relative humidity with absolute humidity. It is true that warmer air can hold more water vapor (absolute humidity) but that water vapor does not condense into clouds unless the relative humidity is high enough. Higher temperatures do not mean higher relative humidity.

It's not called global warming any more, It's called climate change, there is a reason for that; please try to keep up.

Actually, it is called global warming. Climate change is the result.

a reply to: Greathouse

One of your first replies even said it was the media and not the scientist ?

Your OP:

Here's a newspaper clipping from that era does anyone notice anything similar to today's scenarios ?

I was taken in by flawed science and a movie .

a reply to: c0gN1t1v3D1ss0nanC3

Well obviously it was, because it took multiple replies, many of them attacking my character and intelligence to get you to answer that question.

Many? Can you point out one where I attacked either your character or intelligence?

a reply to: Phage

Now we can get into what I actually wanted to debate with you.

Since we are on the topic of NASA misrepresenting information, I want to add a couple things.

It is one thing to manipulate data. I will break down that 97% study later as a PERFECT example of that. However it is MUCH worse to lie about something so obviously false as they have with the narrative of this 97% consensus.

If NASA is using that study as their main argument of a scientific consensus, they have NO consensus at all and I am sure you can agree with me on that.

So before I get into breaking down that study, I hope you will answer another question for me.

Everyone keeps talking about this consensus, that the debate is over. Where is the proof of this consensus? Can you please provide me any legitimate source that actual has the raw data I can look over that shows any type of consensus?

a reply to: Phage

You stated multiple times that I was misrepresenting information to which you later admitted I wasn't. I would call that an attack of my character.

You also said

You rely on headlines a lot?
I don't. You should try to do something about that. Like read the article and the references.

A bit passive aggressive and straw man like, but still an attack on my intelligence.