|
Post by nonentropic on Sept 12, 2013 10:01:31 GMT
exactly one grew one reduced and there is no large or measureable temperature signature difference.
relax all
|
|
|
Post by numerouno on Sept 12, 2013 10:56:17 GMT
I take Nesje to mean that the accumulation of snow is currently in surplus over the ablation of the glacier but that since the snow has not yet converted to ice, Icefisher, yet again. See closely. The accumulation is taking place in the accumulation area which is from where the glacier begins it run. If there is no accumulation of snow, there will be no glacier either. The glacier is exposed to two main risks, one, a lack of snowfall in the accumulation area, two, melting that is taking place druing its flowing downwards. For an increase in the size of the glacier to take place, both of these conditions respectively need to happen, and not to happen, and this fact will only be seen after the pipeline has run its predetermined course. However, a melting can take place during each and any melting season, and we do not have to wait, the glacier can happily melt into water well before the pipeline would have completed.
|
|
|
Post by numerouno on Sept 12, 2013 14:21:29 GMT
|
|
|
Post by stanb999 on Sept 12, 2013 15:36:27 GMT
This year has also been surplus of snow on the glacier, but Nesje says it will take three to four years before they see the glacier will grow again. Google Translate, yes. The original is: "I år har det også vore overskot av snø på breen, men Nesje seier det vil ta tre-fire år før dei ser om brefronten igjen vil vekse." Which I translate as: This year there has also been a surplus of snow on the glacier, but Nesje says it will take three to four years before it can be seen if the glacier front might grow again. I see you still fail to realize that Google translate works for the whole page. What of the growth in the 90's? Just before that convenient picture was taken... Your non-sequitur, placed on a straw-man was taken to the wood shed and beaten like the spoiled child it was. Or differently... Find better proof so your assertions don't go Poof.
|
|
|
Post by flearider on Sept 12, 2013 18:12:00 GMT
got one of them for the southern side of our planet ..because that's where the cold is coming from ..
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Sept 12, 2013 19:07:50 GMT
You mean one scientist after considering the effects of anthropogenic additions of CO2 does not expect any more glaciation. However, the same article expects glaciation to begin in the near future without consideration of human effects. So what do we really have here? Another opinion based upon collapsed climate models?
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Sept 12, 2013 22:54:14 GMT
how would an ice age start ?? from which pole ..?? would it happen in 10-20 or 1000 yrs do we really know ? if over the last 30 yrs we have had a grand max .. could it take that long for an ice age ? i'm sure it's a question of balance but what would tip the scales ?? a grand min while entering new galactic arm ? thoughts on a post card plz .. We are on the verge of a new neo-boreal event, a mini ice age, according to my climate forecast. It will begin officially in mid-December 2017 and last 36 years. Global cooling is wholly detrimental to the earth. As global warming is always good for the earth, global cooling is not good for the Earth. The stability of all nations is based upon a dependable source of food. However, this is not possible in a climate regime of global cooling. In this new climatic era, my climate forecast calls for colder-than-normal temperatures, a wet, cold climate for some regions and a cold and dry climate for other regions. The droughts and resulting famines are also a recipe for political unrest in the world. The activity and condition of the Sun is most important, and this is something the 'man-made global warming' idiots don't even consider, which accounts for their cluelessness when it comes to the climate facts of the matter. You can see here how when solar activity is low, it affects the Earth's jet streams: A cold Arctic summer also has left nearly a million more square miles of ocean covered with ice than at the same time last year – an increase of 60 percent. This rebound from 2012’s record low arrives six years after man-made global warming ideologists said that global warming would leave the Arctic ice-free in summer by 2013. But, days before the annual fall re-freeze was set to begin, an unbroken ice sheet more than half the size of Europe already stretches from the Canadian islands to Russia’s northern shores. For instance, the Northwest Passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific has remained blocked by pack-ice all year. More than 20 yachts that planned to sail through it have been left ice-bound and a cruise ship that attempted to cross the route was forced to turn back. This is what we are looking at, and it is a precursor to the global cooling I have forecasted to officially arrive by mid-December 2017: Now, some boneheads who pretend to know what they are talking about will most likely say that that, "This is not a cycle; it's just a fluctuation. In the end, it will all just melt away quite suddenly." I counter that it IS a cycle, since all climate and weather on Earth is, in fact, cyclical, according to the condition of the Sun and the rate at which the Earth's spins on its axis around that Sun, which drives our highly variable climate. Of course, humanity is not the cause of global warming, which is solar-forced and good for the Earth, but we are on the downward end of this cycle and heading toward the new climate regime: Global Cooling. It will be here by December 2017 and will dominate the 2020s, 2030s and 2040s. That's my forecast and it means preparing, for global cooling is no joke and will affect everyone. Those who want to argue about something that is taking place before their very eyes do not have both oars in the water. They are wasting valuable years of what's left of positive global warming to prepare for something that is far, far worse and that's global cooling. In fact, it is already too late, seeing that there are only about four years left to the official start of global cooling. And much more time has been wasted with the 'man-made global warming' yo-yos, who I hold directly accountable for wasting everyone's time with their bullshit. However, we do have everything they have said on the record, so we know who they all are. Let's see them eat plenty of crow and it won't be long either...
|
|
|
Post by numerouno on Sept 12, 2013 23:18:50 GMT
got one of them for the southern side of our planet ..because that's where the cold is coming from .. No the Milankovitch cycles are symmetrical, as it the planet itself, and work the same for both of the hemispheres at the same time. The SH has got a lot less large glaciers, owing to its geography. There is nothing in the way of an immediate global glaciation to be expected.
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Sept 13, 2013 0:24:10 GMT
that's great we can all relax now that you know everything.
the clearest sign of a CAGWer is the clarity with which they purport to understand the forward picture for the planet.
most skeptics are skeptical. that status allows all outcomes its a probabilistic model of the future. every outcome lives with a quantifiable positive chance of occurring, none of that in your language, if I judge you harshly due to this forum being a second language I suggest you indicate.
|
|
|
Post by numerouno on Sept 13, 2013 0:34:42 GMT
that's great we can all relax now that you know everything. the clearest sign of a CAGWer is the clarity with which they purport to understand the forward picture for the planet. most skeptics are skeptical. that status allows all outcomes its a probabilistic model of the future. every outcome lives with a quantifiable positive chance of occurring, none of that in your language, if I judge you harshly due to this forum being a second language I suggest you indicate. Nonentropic, speaking of language, may I suggest you start your sentences with a capital letter. That way you will appear more educated. Some of your sentence constructions are not proper English either. The "quantifiable positive chance of occurring" for a global glaciation is nil in the near future. The global glaciation cycle is governed by the Milankovitch cycles, and they are not predicting a glaciation for a long time.
|
|
|
Post by numerouno on Sept 13, 2013 0:48:40 GMT
You mean one scientist after considering the effects of anthropogenic additions of CO2 does not expect any more glaciation. Your reading and/or understanding skills do need some improvement: The following glaciation scenario models therefore choose to consider climatic trends as being unaffected by human activities.
(Page one into the study, yes, it is a bit complicated sentence) www.posiva.fi/files/2712/POSIVA-99-30_web.pdf
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Sept 13, 2013 1:10:52 GMT
Milankovitch cycles have problems and should not be used for any type of forecast tool.
|
|
|
Post by numerouno on Sept 13, 2013 1:21:29 GMT
Milankovitch cycles have problems and should not be used for any type of forecast tool. I see, what kind of problems would you have had with them? That they don't show any immediate glaciation is the problem, I suppose?
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Sept 13, 2013 2:23:40 GMT
|
|
|
Post by numerouno on Sept 13, 2013 2:33:18 GMT
That "Musings from the Chiefio" is a study? With that much understanding of science, I can see why you should stick to making references up ...
|
|