• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Antarctica is losing ice 6 times faster today than in 1980s

flogger said:
Longer growing seasons more food more greening less starvation greater human life expectancy more loss of life due to cold temperatures then due to warm the list just goes on and these are observed effects not computer modelled baloney based on subjective politically engineered guesswork :wink:
Click to expand...

Not what the experts say. I would suggest you provide a reference from one of the mentioned scientific organizations, and prove them wrong, with peer-reviewed links.
 
Media_Truth said:
Not what the experts say. I would suggest you provide a reference from one of the mentioned scientific organizations, and prove them wrong, with peer-reviewed links.
Click to expand...

Don’t be silly.

It’s flogger.

All he does is spit out unsupported suppositions.
 
Media_Truth said:
The National Academy of Science, the Royal Academy, NASA, and the IPCC have all discussed the long-term effects of AGW. Therefore the onus is on you, to prove them wrong. You "pick the place", and you "pick your good aspect of warming". Better yet - cite an article by one of the above Scientific leaders of the world, and show that they are wrong.
Click to expand...

No.

You claim that there are going to be bad things happening. You are the one making the claim. You show somewhere where it is going to be bad.

That you all have so obviously failed to do so means that there is no such place.
 
Media_Truth said:
Not what the experts say. I would suggest you provide a reference from one of the mentioned scientific organizations, and prove them wrong, with peer-reviewed links.
Click to expand...

Reference the previous post :wink:
 
Media_Truth said:
Not what the experts say. I would suggest you provide a reference from one of the mentioned scientific organizations, and prove them wrong, with peer-reviewed links.
Click to expand...

Better still show me a death certificate from anywhere in the world that cites cause of death 'global warming' ? :lol:
 
calamity said:
Nothing to see here, Folks. Global warning is a hoax. Look, it's snowing! The earth is cooling.

cough cough

Antarctica is losing ice 6 times faster today than in 1980s



Must be all that liberal hot air. Yeah, that's it.
Click to expand...

Run for your lives, the sky is falling! Aliens are coming to eat us for not spending enough money on voodoo weather doctors. We will all die in 12 years if we do not bankrupt ourselves by giving trillions of dollars to the weather witch doctors to cure the weather.
 
marke said:
It's like: 'Record lows were recorded in the Midwest this week and scientists attribute the unusual weather to global warming.'
Click to expand...

You haven't got a clue about how climate works, or why weather behaves the way it does: that much is painfully obvious. Best stick to your bible and its unicorns for your daily dose of reality and science.
 
Last edited:
snakestretcher said:
Yes, that's about your level :roll:
Click to expand...


I should have mentioned that NASA and Penn State disavowed knowledge of the published peer-reviewed article (stating we may end up being eaten by aliens for harming the planet) in a reputable scientific journal once public outcry exposed its utter foolishness.
 
Threegoofs said:
So IPCC editors are not scientists?

Where did you get this gem? LoP?
Click to expand...
The editors may have been scientist of some sort, we do not know, what we do know is that
the findings of the actual climate scientist who were the lead authors, did not survive the final edit, whoever did it!
 
Tim the plumber said:
No.

You claim that there are going to be bad things happening. You are the one making the claim. You show somewhere where it is going to be bad.

That you all have so obviously failed to do so means that there is no such place.
Click to expand...

Follow the HEAT!

World_Temp_Map.webp
 
longview said:
The editors may have been scientist of some sort, we do not know, what we do know is that
the findings of the actual climate scientist who were the lead authors, did not survive the final edit, whoever did it!
Click to expand...


Here are the Co-Chairs of Working Group I.

Valérie Masson-Delmotte
Co-Chair, Working Group I
FRANCE
Panmao Zhai
Co-Chair, Working Group I

Here are the Vice-Chairs of Working Group I.

Noureddine Yassaa
Vice-Chair
ALGERIA
Carolina Vera
Vice-Chair
ARGENTINA
Muhammad Tariq
Vice-Chair, Working Group I
PAKISTAN
Jan Fuglestvedt
Vice-Chair, Working Group I
NORWAY
Gregory Flato
Vice-Chair, Working Group I
CANADA
Fatima Driouech
Vice-Chair, Working Group I
MOROCCO
Edvin Aldrian

Here is the TSU Staff of Working Group I

Anna Pirani
Head of TSU
FRANCE
Wilfran Moufouma-Okia
Head of Science
FRANCE
Clotilde Péan
Head of Operations
FRANCE
Yang Chen
Senior Science Officer
CHINA
Robin Matthews
Senior Science Officer
FRANCE
Sarah Connors
Senior Science Officer
FRANCE
Xiao Zhou
Science Assistant
CHINA
Elisabeth Lonnoy
Project Assistant
FRANCE
Tim Waterfield
IT Officer
FRANCE
Melissa Gomis
Graphics and Communication Officer
FRANCE
Rong Yu
Science Officer
CHINA
Baiquan Zhou
Science Officer
CHINA
Rodrigo García Manzanas

Of course these people didn't all assemble the final edit of the Working Group's papers. Don't you think the final version was reviewed by the researchers? To make such a preposterous, inflammatory statement, you should provide a quote from one of these scientists which states that their work was misrepresented. BTW, this is just one of many Working Groups.
 
longview said:
The editors may have been scientist of some sort, we do not know, what we do know is that
the findings of the actual climate scientist who were the lead authors, did not survive the final edit, whoever did it!
Click to expand...

You realize the process for publishing and writing the IPCC is detailed quite clearly, right?

And your claims that the lead authors had their writing changed is bonkers.

But bonkers is your style, I guess.
 
Media_Truth said:
Here are the Co-Chairs of Working Group I.

Valérie Masson-Delmotte
Co-Chair, Working Group I
FRANCE
Panmao Zhai
Co-Chair, Working Group I

Here are the Vice-Chairs of Working Group I.

Noureddine Yassaa
Vice-Chair
ALGERIA
Carolina Vera
Vice-Chair
ARGENTINA
Muhammad Tariq
Vice-Chair, Working Group I
PAKISTAN
Jan Fuglestvedt
Vice-Chair, Working Group I
NORWAY
Gregory Flato
Vice-Chair, Working Group I
CANADA
Fatima Driouech
Vice-Chair, Working Group I
MOROCCO
Edvin Aldrian

Here is the TSU Staff of Working Group I

Anna Pirani
Head of TSU
FRANCE
Wilfran Moufouma-Okia
Head of Science
FRANCE
Clotilde Péan
Head of Operations
FRANCE
Yang Chen
Senior Science Officer
CHINA
Robin Matthews
Senior Science Officer
FRANCE
Sarah Connors
Senior Science Officer
FRANCE
Xiao Zhou
Science Assistant
CHINA
Elisabeth Lonnoy
Project Assistant
FRANCE
Tim Waterfield
IT Officer
FRANCE
Melissa Gomis
Graphics and Communication Officer
FRANCE
Rong Yu
Science Officer
CHINA
Baiquan Zhou
Science Officer
CHINA
Rodrigo García Manzanas

Of course these people didn't all assemble the final edit of the Working Group's papers. Don't you think the final version was reviewed by the researchers? To make such a preposterous, inflammatory statement, you should provide a quote from one of these scientists which states that their work was misrepresented. BTW, this is just one of many Working Groups.
Click to expand...

So who decided to remove the findings of the lead authors?
 
Threegoofs said:
You realize the process for publishing and writing the IPCC is detailed quite clearly, right?

And your claims that the lead authors had their writing changed is bonkers.

But bonkers is your style, I guess.
Click to expand...
Another substance free post!
 
Tim the plumber said:
Yet another fail.
Click to expand...

He keeps using PISS, the worst temperature data set of all. It is based on a model that have large areas of little to no data in it.

It is why skeptics dropped it years ago.
 
Sunsettommy said:
He keeps using PISS, the worst temperature data set of all. It is based on a model that have large areas of little to no data in it.

It is why skeptics dropped it years ago.
Click to expand...

It is also nothing like any attempt to address the challenge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom