Dannie Boy wrote: ↑Thu Jun 14, 2018 9:24 am
Global warming or not? The following article highlights the massive melting of ice in the Antarctic over the past 25 years - difficult to visualize how much 3 trillion tonne is, other than an awful lot!!
Any thing reported by the BBC these days has to be taken with a pinch of salt, such is their left wing bias and selective reporting.
Just remember, Greenland was once actually a 'green' land, farmed by it's early inhabitants.
Discoveries of lush tropical grasses and trees have been found under the melted ice in areas of Antarctica.
Climate change has been around since the year dot, it's only nowadays that people are trying to profiteer from it.
Remember, no one can make you feel inferior without your consent.
Dannie Boy wrote: ↑Thu Jun 14, 2018 9:24 am
Global warming or not? The following article highlights the massive melting of ice in the Antarctic over the past 25 years - difficult to visualize how much 3 trillion tonne is, other than an awful lot!!
Any thing reported by the BBC these days has to be taken with a pinch of salt, such is their left wing bias and selective reporting.
Just remember, Greenland was once actually a 'green' land, farmed by it's early inhabitants.
Discoveries of lush tropical grasses and trees have been found under the melted ice in areas of Antarctica.
Climate change has been around since the year dot, it's only nowadays that people are trying to profiteer from it.
Although I agree that the BBC are not as trustworthy in what and how they report these days, the article quotes many prominent scientists who have been studying the changing conditions over many years, so I believe the article has some credence, but I guess with numbers, you can make things look better or worse by the slant you put on them.
STEVE G wrote: ↑Thu Jun 14, 2018 6:25 pm
From fifty odd million years ago when C02 levels were more than double what they are now and sea levels were 200 feet higher!
You were there were you?
Don't tell me, based on some scientific model, accurately of course, just like the Climategate graphs and data they got away with falsifying to suit their needs.
You actually believe all that crap you're fed.
Remember, no one can make you feel inferior without your consent.
Dannie Boy wrote: ↑Thu Jun 14, 2018 3:14 pm
Although I agree that the BBC are not as trustworthy in what and how they report these days, the article quotes many prominent scientists who have been studying the changing conditions over many years, so I believe the article has some credence, but I guess with numbers, you can make things look better or worse by the slant you put on them.
So did the 'Climategate' global warming scandal.
Remember, no one can make you feel inferior without your consent.
MY in BS full of BS.
“When people learn no tools of judgment and merely follow their hopes, the seeds of political manipulation are sown.” Stephen Jay Gould
MY in BS full of BS.
“When people learn no tools of judgment and merely follow their hopes, the seeds of political manipulation are sown.” Stephen Jay Gould
Jim Bridenstine’s sudden agreement with the scientific consensus on climate change hints that the GOP isn’t as skeptical about the science when it suits them
"Of course, this would mean that the Republican stance on climate change is deeply cynical and many don’t really believe their own talking points on the subject. They’re just using it as another wedge culture war issue to get themselves elected and protecting donors’ profits to fund their campaigns by keeping the scientists off their backs long enough for said donors to make a profitable, slow, transition to green energy if and when they choose to do so."
MY in BS full of BS.
“When people learn no tools of judgment and merely follow their hopes, the seeds of political manipulation are sown.” Stephen Jay Gould