The North Pole is an insane 36 degrees warmer than normal as winter descends

a reply to: alphabetaone

Indeed. Very different wind and weather patterns, due to the different land/ocean distributions.

Don't mind jrod, he is only pissed that I have been right all along. Not to mention his wild statements such as claiming he believes AGW is a hoax and then on the same sentence agreeing with AGW... That kind of tells you who is spouting the BS...

Not to mention that we have the EPA chief admitting that Climate regulations is about reinventing the economy...

These extreme "regulations" are supposedly going to lower temperatures 1/100 of a degree, meanwhile taking down tens of thousands of jobs, adding large fees to trucker to bypass these regulations, and in general making rich the left in power meanwhile the people pay for these stupid regulations that won't stop climate change...

]



EPA Chief concedes climate rule; it's about 'reinventing a global economy'

originally posted by: Phage
Primarily it has to do with the fact that Antarctica is a continental land mass and the Arctic is an ocean. Beyond that, it has to do with the fact that the Arctic Ocean is surrounded by very large land masses and Antarctica is surrounded by a lot of water. They are two very different situations which show different reactions to the overall warming of the atmosphere and oceans.

Except that Phage won't tell you, or even admit that other changes are happening to the Earth which have nothing to do with CO2, and these changes are affecting places like Antarctica and our climate...

Underwater volcanoes, not climate change, reason behind melting of West Antarctic Ice Sheet

a reply to: Unity_99

See, now if you said perpetual mid april-early may like temperatures, I would have been all for it.

The problem is that we really have to look at the sources of the temperature readings to see if they are real or have been "tweaked" by NASA or are a normal variation. We've had questionable readings of hurricane intensities when compared to local readings. A hurricane out to sea is a category 4 and then when it approaches land it suddenly gets downgraded to a weak category 2. I also read that the polar vortex is weakening which may indicate more severe cold weather for North America and Europe. More global warming means more frigid temperatures. ???

There was no 2012 prediction about the end of the world,

That would be false. 2012 was a classic example of apocalyptic millennialism. Terence McKenna's mid-1970 singularity prediction said we would reach a maximum point of novelty in 2012, bringing us face to face with "the transcendental object at the end of time and space." The Law of One first predicted in 1981 that 2012 would "bring the 4th" and end the 3rd density earth. Other people latched on to Drunvalo Melchizedek's claims of working with the National Mayan Council of Elders in Guatemala advocating a near-term change in consciousness in and around the 2012-time frame. Then there were the predictions by St. Malachy, which lands roughly right about now, predicting the end of the world and which has since been correlated with the 1917 third secret of fatima. Add on top of that the more crazy claims by John Major Jenkins, and so-called channelers and contactees like Howard Menger (in 1950), David Wilcock, and Darryl Anka's "Bashar"; and, well, 2012 was sort of the granddaddy of all apocalyptic doomsday scenarios.

originally posted by: ThingsThatDontMakeSense

There was no 2012 prediction about the end of the world,

That would be false. 2012 was a classic example of apocalyptic millennialism. Terence McKenna's mid-1970 singularity prediction said we would reach a maximum point of novelty in 2012, bringing us face to face with "the transcendental object at the end of time and space." The Law of One first predicted in 1981 that 2012 would "bring the 4th" and end the 3rd density earth. Other people latched on to Drunvalo Melchizedek's claims of working with the National Mayan Council of Elders in Guatemala advocating a near-term change in consciousness in and around the 2012-time frame. Then there were the predictions by St. Malachy, which lands roughly right about now, predicting the end of the world and which has since been correlated with the 1917 third secret of fatima. Add on top of that the more crazy claims by John Major Jenkins, and so-called channelers and contactees like Howard Menger (in 1950), David Wilcock, and Darryl Anka's "Bashar"; and, well, 2012 was sort of the granddaddy of all apocalyptic doomsday scenarios.

Nope. It would not be false.

There was PLENTY of 2012 doomsday hysteria surrounding an inaccurately transcribed text. But there WAS no prediction of an apocalypse because of what I just mentioned.

originally posted by: alphabetaone
Nope. It would not be false.

There was PLENTY of 2012 doomsday hysteria surrounding an inaccurately transcribed text. But there WAS no prediction of an apocalypse because of what I just mentioned.

Please share with us where I mentioned anything about the "Mayans" here?



All of the quotes above are from other sources.

You're creating a strawman. Good job buddy.

originally posted by: ThingsThatDontMakeSense

originally posted by: alphabetaone
Nope. It would not be false.

There was PLENTY of 2012 doomsday hysteria surrounding an inaccurately transcribed text. But there WAS no prediction of an apocalypse because of what I just mentioned.

Please share with us where I mentioned anything about the "Mayans" here?

All of the quotes above are from other sources.

You're creating a strawman. Good job buddy.

That's exactly the point. You didn't and you should have as the Tzolkin was precisely the fuel around which the fire that WAS the hysteria was conceived.

But this is about the Arctic and warming, not about 2012, you should feel free to post any further thoughts about 2012 in one of those threads.

originally posted by: alphabetaone
But this is about the Arctic and warming, not about 2012, you should feel free to post any further thoughts about 2012 in one of those threads.

The mods can decide what isn't and is appropriate. I'll respond to your counterclaims and then we can get back to the subject at hand, thanks very much. You claimed, "There was no 2012 prediction about the end of the world." This is outright false.

Also I'm pretty sure National Geographic as represented by Princeton University and Ohio State University has more of a leg to stand on when it comes to talking about possible connections between Mayan civilization and the relationship to climate change.

That's exactly the point. You didn't and you should have as the Tzolkin was precisely the fuel around which the fire that WAS the hysteria was conceived.

So let me see if I got this straight. I should have referred to the 2012 Mayan calendar date which has nothing to do with the end of the world predictions mentioned, to talk about 2012 end of the world predictions?

Huh? Say what?

2012 hysteria was a combination of contactees (Howard Menger in 1950 - way before 2012 was a thing), new age believers (largely based off the 1970 movement from the Law of One), fears about solar cataclysm, anxiety over transhumanism and the possibility of a technological singularity, and Christians who believe in other prophecies that are roughly being timed to this period (St. Malachi's prediction from 12th century Ireland and the 3rd secret of fatima).

The only reason the Mayan's even came in to the picture was because it was used as a side-mention by the likes of John Major Jenkins and groups like the National Mayan Council of Elders, spearheaded by Don Alejandro Cirilo Perez Oxlaj, looking to insert themselves into the narrative by targeting a more specific date.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Riffrafter

Can't keep saying that Climate Change is a hoax. Reality is starting to catch up with the deniers.

actually, this is a temperature anomaly, not any validation of climate change. Just as you can't say, it snowed in an area it didn't used to snow, therefore, global warming doesn't exist.

originally posted by: cuckooold


And yes, the science of APG is a lot more settled than any other nonsensical theory I've seen you or other users come up with.

what percentage EXACTLY is man's role in the current warming? (please cite your work)

originally posted by: Riffrafter
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

So you believe the sun and solar flares, CME's, etc affect our weather?

Absolutely!
...

If you read the articles and excerpts I gave you would see that we are receiving more x-rays than the solar wind or the Local Hot Bubble is sending our way, and these x-rays cause warming. This source, which I believe is the new region of the local bubble we are entering, is sending more x-rays in our direction which is causing changes throughout the entire solar system.

For years i have been showing the signs that we were approaching this new region of the local bubble. For years i stipulated that since we were receiving more interstellar dust from outside the solar system, and the amount of dust would continue to increase as the research stated, then it is only logical we would also receive more energy from this region of the local bubble. Something within this new region of the bubble is sending this energy our way. Here we are today, and my assertion has been correct. We are receiving more energy that is warming not only Earth, but every planet in the Solar system. But the naysayers don't want to see the truth and instead want to keep on blaming mankind for what we cannot control.

a reply to: network dude

According to the EPA chief these "extreme regulations" will "supposedly" lower temperatures 0.01 degrees. Meanwhile the elites get richer at our expense and control our lives more than they already do.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: alphabetaone

Indeed. Very different wind and weather patterns, due to the different land/ocean distributions.

This topic really piqued my interest so I have been doing further research. I've found a number of articles related to it, but I thought you might be interested in this one as it speaks specifically to the Antarctic sea ice issue.

Scott and Shackleton logbooks prove Antarctic sea ice not shrinking 100 years after expeditions

originally posted by: Riffrafter

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: alphabetaone

Indeed. Very different wind and weather patterns, due to the different land/ocean distributions.

This topic really piqued my interest so I have been doing further research. I've found a number of articles related to it, but I thought you might be interested in this one as it speaks specifically to the Antarctic sea ice issue.

Scott and Shackleton logbooks prove Antarctic sea ice not shrinking 100 years after expeditions

It's a fun read for sure. What do you find most interesting about it?