Then tell me how ice mass can increase at record levels while CO2 levels increase? You know just as much about climate change as your chicken little predictions about the economy.Hakik wrote: ↑Fri Jul 06, 2018 12:02 pmJohnnyP wrote: ↑Fri Jul 06, 2018 11:39 am"Last year, Greenland had their fifth largest surface ice mass gain on record, gaining nearly 600 billion tons of ice."
Btw, Greenland has the most glaciers in the northern hemisphere.
Would someone think of the polar bears???
Added in 1 minute 12 seconds:
Most of you dolts need to stick to your day jobs.
LOL @ having no ability to interpret data. You realize that graph only shows a brief period of time when Greenland gained more mass between 2016-2017, while all the previous years it's been going down. Way to dig for a brief moment where there was a small increase in ice, when the rest of the time it's been melting away.
If you zoom out and take more than just a year into context this is what's been happening to the ice on Greenland over a longer period of time:
And this is where that sudden little peak in ice stands (marked with a star) compared to previous years:
But forget graphs, and just one year comparison. Here's the satellite mapping of what's actually been happening on the ground in the span of just 10 years:
You realize your graph comes from wattsupwiththat a site that denies anthropogenic climate change exists, right?
Btw, your last map only deals with one year (2002). Practice what you preach...
Added in 12 minutes 25 seconds:
97% of peer reviewed papers my ass. It should have been 100% then. After all, what's going to happen to the grant money if someone says climate change isnt happening?Kumacho wrote: ↑Fri Jul 06, 2018 12:06 pm97% of peer reviewed papers agree... Can't argue facts? Let's split hairs on grammar and get demeaning calling people leftists and sheep. Pretty fucking cheesy (and let me say it again, intellectually dishonest).JohnnyP wrote: ↑Fri Jul 06, 2018 12:05 pmNo, 97% of the scientific community doesn't agree about anthropogenic climate change. That's another lie.Kumacho wrote: ↑Fri Jul 06, 2018 11:55 am
No, no you can't. How could you even make such a retarded statement? No, I mean seriously, what the fuck were you thinking?
97% of the scientific community (NOT FUCKING POLITICAL COMMUNITY) agree and accept climate change. How in the holy fuck can you come up with just as much scientific data when only fucking 3% disagree?
Wow! Those 3% must be putting out a lot of papers.
Do you realize just how crazy your statement was? I'd say no, since you seem to make broad sweeping stupid fucking statements. You know, like I'm a fucking lefty. Moron.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexepstei ... 100-wrong/
"97% of people who's livelihoods depend on AGW grants say global warming exists"