NASA Data Reveals No Global Warming Polar Ice Retreat

a reply to: Danbones

Nothing like anecdotal 'evidence'.

Anecdotal Evidence

a reply to: Danbones

So if it's raining in Seattle it must be raining everywhere... Got it.

a reply to: jrod

Too true...

I'm all in for a mini-ice-age being on it's way, in my opinion, but I still try my best to view all information subjectively.
Obviously, per the OP, I was excited, but had to depress the brakes while ascertaining the validity of the information.

You believe that?
Clutching at straws
a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: Danbones

Nothing like anecdotal 'evidence'.

Anecdotal Evidence

it ain't anecdotal evidence to me

Great Lakes ice cover 13 percent higher than last year

iceagenow.info...
its got picktures too
just for you

Another benefit of climate change and increased CO2 – trees continue to grow at a faster rate

wattsupwiththat.com...

@domo
what are you talking about?
make sense please

if you recall, last winter’s ice cover on the Great Lakes climbed to the second highest on record at 92.2 percent on March 6, 2014. That was due to the below-average temperatures that persisted from mid-January onward in the winter of 2014. ”

from the iceagenow link above
like i said
there's picktures

The label climate change is true,but misleading.OP the cause of all the Earth changes is solely due to the magnetic influence of Planet X.

The globe is 'wobbling' due to this magnetic interaction,this has been noted by many people and the proof is mounting up.What has occurred for many years,is the North Pole of Earth gets pushed further back in its axis causing a freeze in the Arctic-meanwhile the South Pole in the Antarctic melts and has record temperatures,this scenario can also be reversed,as this wobble is back and forth and will get more violent as time passes leading up to the Poleshift.

There is no such thing as climate change being man made! Volcanoes can dwarf Human Co2 yearly output in a day.

Read this site thoroughly and its many blog posts I recommend it highly.






poleshift.ning.com...

a reply to: LogicalGraphitti


You know, the article refers to this diagram: Satellite data

From that, I recon, the OP is more than correct - the darn thing has not changed.

And from other sources (which my demented mind does not recall now, and my lazy butt could not care less to start finding) - world is not getting warmer either.

But CLIMATE - that is of course changing. It has always been changing since the beginning of the world. But for a changing climate, why would I need to throw a dime for a TAX ??? That is just plain stupid.

originally posted by: Elementalist
Where's Al Gore, I want my money back.

Seriously where is he?!

Earth is stable, sun is stable, nature is stable, the universe will always be like clockwork, undisturbed.

Humanity however, very unstable.

He is flying around the world on his private jet to visit all his big mansions or his friends big mansions. And don't forget he wants YOU to reduce your carbon footprint!!!


We could reduce GW and resource depletion just by STOP printing all the GW ads, books and pamphlets.

Ummm I wonder just how much stuff we burn up in the name of GW?

Maybe I can get a grant to research that?




Could I include GREENPEACE and all the other "save the Earth" groups expenditures and carbon footprint in that study, or would that be too much?

a reply to: johnwick

Your tears obviously blurred your ability to see the sarcasm in my words. Depraved? Some might think my action are out of the norm.

originally posted by: swanne
a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

Is there any neutral source to confirm the statements of the article?

LOL..."neutral source"

originally posted by: jrod

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: Ultralight

The billions of tax dollars that were dumped into the "green" companies was wasted as all have either went bankrupt or are very close. Thanks Obama.

So you are telling us that you were being sarcastic with that post?

I am confused by your postings.

Notice I said "green companies" not "green technology" .The green companies that were invested in for the most part were already on the way to bankruptcy. They hadn't come out with something new in awhile. The money almost seemed like a vain attempt to raise these companies from the dead

originally posted by: Greven
Oh look an article quoting writer from Forbes - a notoriously anti-climate change even happening source. Good job.

From the "Forbes" article:

The Earth has warmed modestly since the Little Ice Age ended a little over 100 years ago, and the Earth will likely continue to warm modestly as a result of natural and human factors. As a result, at some point in time, NASA satellite instruments should begin to report a modest retreat of polar ice caps. The modest retreat – like that which happened briefly from 2005 through 2012 – would not be proof or evidence of a global warming crisis. Such a retreat would merely illustrate that global temperatures are continuing their gradual recovery from the Little Ice Age. Such a recovery – despite alarmist claims to the contrary – would not be uniformly or even on balance detrimental to human health and welfare. Instead, an avalanche of scientific evidence indicates recently warming temperatures have significantly improved human health and welfare, just as warming temperatures have always done.

Did you even read the entire article? Any of it?

Ignorance passed off as an intelligent comment on the "Forbes" story - pathetic.

What I find amusing is that you are trying to disprove a story reporting on bad data about polar ice caps by posting graphs that most likely derived its information from the aforementioned bad data. Which logical fallacy to I choose, here?

Of course, that's assuming this story is correct. I'm not prepared to make that assumption, but I'm also not prepared to ideologically discard it, either.

The planet is doing fine, the people are #ed up:
www.youtube.com...
I rest my case, cant tell it better than him.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey

originally posted by: Greven
Oh look an article quoting writer from Forbes - a notoriously anti-climate change even happening source. Good job.

From the "Forbes" article:

The Earth has warmed modestly since the Little Ice Age ended a little over 100 years ago, and the Earth will likely continue to warm modestly as a result of natural and human factors. As a result, at some point in time, NASA satellite instruments should begin to report a modest retreat of polar ice caps. The modest retreat – like that which happened briefly from 2005 through 2012 – would not be proof or evidence of a global warming crisis. Such a retreat would merely illustrate that global temperatures are continuing their gradual recovery from the Little Ice Age. Such a recovery – despite alarmist claims to the contrary – would not be uniformly or even on balance detrimental to human health and welfare. Instead, an avalanche of scientific evidence indicates recently warming temperatures have significantly improved human health and welfare, just as warming temperatures have always done.

Did you even read the entire article? Any of it?

Ignorance passed off as an intelligent comment on the "Forbes" story - pathetic.

What I find amusing is that you are trying to disprove a story reporting on bad data about polar ice caps by posting graphs that most likely derived its information from the aforementioned bad data. Which logical fallacy to I choose, here?

Of course, that's assuming this story is correct. I'm not prepared to make that assumption, but I'm also not prepared to ideologically discard it, either.

In AGW discussions the very first tactic is to discredit the source. It happens on both sides almost like clockwork. You can look back on any discussion and see it. It becomes humorous quickly.

I'd prefer to use critical thinking and questions to further the knowledge for all. When we had the dustbowl, did "we" cause that, or was it possibly a phase of odd weather? The current CA drought. Is that "US" or possibly another version of the same anomaly?

Is the climate supposed to be static or dynamic? If the answer is dynamic, then how much does our input affect it-if any?
(my uninformed conclusion is that at this point, we don't have enough data to form a logical question, let alone a logical answer)

But, never fear, I was told "The Science is settled".

Please explain why Florida is getting ready to spend untold millions of dollars to reinforce its coastline to protect cities from rising sea level, and how this situation is the number one concern for the people and local governments?

originally posted by: fooledmetwice
I participate in the ice patrols monitoring ice flow off Canada every year, went to Greenland last year too. There has been very little ice loss.

There are changes and ice loss in the world as a whole.

My sister in Alaska sent me pictures of the glaciers near them, they have been the same since she moved there 30 some years ago and now one is GONE and others are nearly gone.

Arctic sea ice extent for April 2015 averaged 14.0 million square kilometers (5.4 million square miles), the second lowest April ice extent in the satellite record.

nsidc.org...

Anyone can look at the photos and see this...

Glaciers in Tibet retreating at alarming rate

timesofindia.indiatimes.com...

a reply to: Gothmog

Some people get so caught up in proclaiming humans as evil and destroying Mother Earth Gaia they do not look at al the facts.

Well this in itself is a fact. Humans are as a whole evil, we elect or allow evil to rule over us and we destroy nature in every possible way anyone who does not know this by now is dead or so stupid they can't understand anything!

If anyone is interested in an observer with all of the info gathered already I recommend.
www.suspicious0bservers.org...
www.suspicious0bservers.org...
Why "Global Warming" Failed & Why Climate Change is Real
www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: LDragonFire
Please explain why Florida is getting ready to spend untold millions of dollars to reinforce its coastline to protect cities from rising sea level, and how this situation is the number one concern for the people and local governments?

This is the type of response that is akin to being labeled a "denier". It's baffling. I don't see anyone at all claiming the Earth isn't warming overall. Even this article makes mention of it. A simple look at Glacier National park explains this, but as has been said many many times, localized warming or cooling is not indicative of GLOBAL warming or cooling. (unless it's warming, then it all rainbows)

So, while the northern hemisphere appears to be warming and ice is melting at some locations, the southern hemisphere, while reporting some warming, doesn't appear to be having the same problems with ice. (conundrum)

So while it seems prudent to do exactly as coastal areas are doing, we don't have anything other than guesses on the final outcome. All this could theoretically stop and reverse direction within a few months. Or it could spiral out of control and be much worse than anyone imagined. Point being, we just don't know nearly as much as some would like us to believe. And the lies to the contrary have undermined public trust as a whole. (an inconvenient truth)

originally posted by: Char-Lee
a reply to: Gothmog

Some people get so caught up in proclaiming humans as evil and destroying Mother Earth Gaia they do not look at al the facts.

Well this in itself is a fact. Humans are as a whole evil, we elect or allow evil to rule over us and we destroy nature in every possible way anyone who does not know this by now is dead or so stupid they can't understand anything!

Please elucidate on how mankind is destroying nature in every possible way . The ball is in your court now. Please reply with the information in a clear and precise way.