Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

You're just showing your ignorance now. You realize the Antarctic is a CONTINENT don't you? Covered by up to a mile thick ice sheets? Lava is hot enough to melt steel? Never been to Yellowstone have you? Imagine Yellowstone under a mile of ice then explain how aerosols from Yellowstone cool the atmosphere. Oops, I'm talking to a dolt, better stop wasting my time. At least everyone Else reading this understands how ignorant you are. Carry on

Neither geezers involved in Brexit nor geysers at Yellowstone make your claims true

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

12 hours ago, remake it said:

Read the third and fourth posts

Ah, @Tom Kirkman , this is your fault, ''Mr Doomed''.

In fairness the 3rd post is about Snickers bars.

14 minutes ago, remake it said:

Neither geezers involved in Brexit nor geysers at Yellowstone

Haha I'll give you that one   😎🤣

 

Edited by DayTrader
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, DayTrader said:

Ah, @Tom Kirkman , this is your fault, ''Mr Doomed''.

Given that Junker's words were "Un Brexit sans accord entraînerait un affaissement du Royaume-Uni et un net affaiblissement des ressorts de croissance sur le continent," and that the French translate "un affaissement" as "sagging" rather than collapse, your linked article appears to be a victim of a translation error.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a quote from him that was kinda translated as ''I have no erotic attachment to the backstop''. Think it was the backstop, that's not the key bit anyway haha. 

I dunno if he uses odd phrases, or translators bit dodgy (or can't be directly translated), or all 3. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

image.png.1f44824965103bca83c9fee1bda12026.png

 

Edited by DayTrader
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have way too much time on my hands. Agreed. 

I'll say it before Doug does... 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSOUsfl_CVA 

''Farage - you patronising stuck up snob!''

Absolute gold... watch this ... all of it is good. If you don't have 15 mins to watch then just watch this bit...

Farage: 12.20 - END

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are getting closer clowns ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/11/2019 at 12:23 PM, remake it said:

Neither geezers involved in Brexit nor geysers at Yellowstone make your claims true

Neither do the frauds who start the graph in 1979.... the largest measured ice extent in the Arctic when we have the exact SAME satellite used for the 1979 data, with prior data along with previous numbers for Arctic sea ice of a mere 6Million square km in the 1940's which would have been 50% lower than any number seen on satellite since 1979.  True, you wish to talk about Antarctica, but same issues apply.  Then the obvious, floating ice in water makes no difference in sea level rise or mass balance..... even though the numbers and paper you quote uses both except a TINY portion of the Antarctic peninsula. 

As for sea level rise per year.  It has been entirely constant and is not accelerating as the lying frauds claim.  Graphs lie when one adds in more recent new data stations.  If one uses the old stations or EVERY single station by itself, they all show a constant, uh hem, CONSTANT sea level rise, no rise, or falling sea levels all at a CONSTANT rate. To see the fraud in action: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cK8wHwm7oWU

Hrmm, where are the continents rising?  Oh All of northern Canada and most of Scandinavia @ ++10mm/year most of which is water which is creating sea level rise around the world...  3000 more years and Hudson bay and most of the islands channels up north in Nunuvut will be 90% dry land.  In 5k-10k years it will be 100% dry land turning the whole region into the same thing as Greenland.  What happens with glacial ice on dry land... It accumulates so it probably sends the earth back into an ice age as the ocean cannot warm up the bottom of the glaciers and is one area glacialogists are looking for how/why cycle for massive glaciation happens. 

Where else are the ocean basins falling/rising?  We do not know. Seems the smoking gun if you asked me. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Neither do the frauds who start the graph in 1979.... the largest measured ice extent in the Arctic when we have the exact SAME satellite used for the 1979 data, ...

That's an interesting take on honesty given that ESA's ERS 1 was the first to use SAR technology and was not launched until 1991.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

geezer / geyser   🙄

Meh, carry on 

Edited by DayTrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/10/2019 at 7:06 AM, DayTrader said:

WE ARE CLEARLY ALL GOING TO DIE BY LEAVING THIS CRUMBLING MESS.

WE WILL LITERALLY 'COLLAPSE'.

WELL OBVIOUSLY... 

Starting at the beginning, it was not a "literal" translation although could put Britain's economy underwater as as the Siberian snows melt if those US defense experts are right...DOOMED, WELL OBVIOUSLY... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We will be fine, just a little sagging apparently. Germany is more doomed. We will be free of Clownville. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, remake it said:

That's an interesting take on honesty given that ESA's ERS 1 was the first to use SAR technology and was not launched until 1991.

OH this is interesting.... according to you ice extent was only measured starting in 1991....  Give you a big hint: It started in early 1970's via weekly measurements.  ESMR Nimbus 5 1972.  Enjoy.  A different type was launched in 1978. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

OH this is interesting.... according to you ice extent was only measured starting in 1991....  Give you a big hint: It started in early 1970's via weekly measurements.  ESMR Nimbus 5 1972.  Enjoy.  A different type was launched in 1978. 

Please take the time to read what you post, as it was dishonest, and so is this post as no such claims were made, especially as the topic was about ice mass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, remake it said:

Please take the time to read what you post, as it was dishonest, and so is this post as no such claims were made, especially as the topic was about ice mass.

Exactly, and why your statement is really stupid. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Exactly, and why your statement is really stupid. 

Others introduced non-Brexit topics, and  you and those others have since made statements which are simply not true unless you re-invent empirical evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, remake it said:

Others introduced non-Brexit topics, and  you and those others have since made statements which are simply not true unless you re-invent empirical evidence.

Give you a big logical hint since you cannot connect the dots: You have to show ACCELERATION of sea level rise due to CO2 accelerating % change.  Sorry temps have gone nowhere other than steady delta/decade and so has sea level rise. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Give you a big logical hint since you cannot connect the dots: You have to show ACCELERATION of sea level rise due to CO2 accelerating % change.  Sorry temps have gone nowhere other than steady delta/decade and so has sea level rise. 

There is no empirical data showing your points can be true, so if you are going to make those claims can you please add your references/sources, and please open another thread if these matters concern you.

CSIRO_GMSL_figure.png

 

BarChartsForSurfaceTempTrends.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, remake it said:

There is no empirical data showing your points can be true, so if you are going to make those claims can you please add your references/sources, and please open another thread if these matters concern you.

CSIRO_GMSL_figure.png

BarChartsForSurfaceTempTrends.gif

You brought it up: and I already demonstrated how the above graph is fraud in text and in a youtbue vid of a guy who deconstructed the fraud.  You refused to read.  The satellite data shown is another smoking gun it  is fraud.  It is constant.

Hudson bay/Northern Canada/Scandinavia are rising at a constant rate due to Isostatic rebound.  Where else are the ocean basins rising/falling?  No one has any idea. 

As for your temps: when you and your ilk throw out all city data, then we can talk.  Until then, the fraud is built in, due to heat retention and heat generation within cities.  PS: there are data sets without this fraud in it, but you refuse to use them.  I'll bet you even know which ones they are but refuse to use them as it shows the obvious fraud happening. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

You brought it up: and I already demonstrated how the above graph is fraud in text and in a youtbue vid of a guy who deconstructed the fraud.  You refused to read.  The satellite data shown is another smoking gun it  is fraud.  It is constant.

Hudson bay/Northern Canada/Scandinavia are rising at a constant rate due to Isostatic rebound.  Where else are the ocean basins rising/falling?  No one has any idea. 

As for your temps: when you and your ilk throw out all city data, then we can talk.  Until then, the fraud is built in, due to heat retention and heat generation within cities.  PS: there are data sets without this fraud in it, but you refuse to use them.  I'll bet you even know which ones they are but refuse to use them as it shows the obvious fraud happening. 

Did you contribute to the "conspiracy theory" thread, as if you were aware of how eustatic and isostatic influences affect sea levels then you would realize your views are not sound, while your points about temperature are completely at odds with satellite data.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, remake it said:

Did you contribute to the "conspiracy theory" thread, as if you were aware of how eustatic and isostatic influences affect sea levels then you would realize your views are not sound, while your points about temperature are completely at odds with satellite data.

Isostatic rebound isn't "views" it is fact.  We only measure that which we can measure.  And as I stated previously.  "where else are ocean basins rising/falling?"  The fact you can't debate and instead default to "conspiracy theory" slander just proves my point.  Fraud.  Epic homogenizing fraud. 

As for satellite data... Here is some more obvious fraud for the temperatures regarding satellite data.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOHrYY3yAGE

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#leavemeansleave

#brexit

#doomedshmoomed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

We only measure that which we can measure.  

And when the people who are trained to work why these measurements change over time, and you disagree, their measurements become fraudulent ... part of a big scam, a conspiracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#brexit

#diversion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.