"raylopez99" wrote in message
ups.com...
Oh, that makes sense. Green cheese that makes up the moon. Money is
more logical though.

Idiot, quit replying to my trolling. You're wasting "valuable
bandwidth". Remember that lie, back when the Internet was controlled
by academia? I've been trolling since 1992, and one thing I've learned
is that there are ALWAYS two sides to every story. Always.

I'll take the other side of that one.

--
Coby Beck
(remove #\Space "coby 101 @ bigpond . com")

"raylopez99" wrote in message
ups.com...

The problem with you AGW polemicists is that you fail to even give the
appearance of neutrality.

"stupid facts and their liberal agenda."

--
Coby Beck
(remove #\Space "coby 101 @ bigpond . com")

To Ian

While the variation in orbital geometry in influencing glaciations or
climate imbalances from what we presently experience is well known,the
relationship between axial and orbital motion during ice ages is
totally ignored for the same reason the correct attribution for present
seasonal cyclical changes is ignored.

If you are serious and can surmount the initial difficulties which
arise from the artificial conception of axial and orbital motion
currently in place,a productive avenue will open up.

18th century cataloguers reworked the early heliocentric adaption of
the equable 24 hour day (at 15 degrees per hour and 24 hours/360
degrees in total) towards an artificial conception of axial and orbital
motion based on rotation through 360 degrees in 23 hours 56 min 04 sec.

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/1999/JennyChen.shtml

http://www.pfm.howard.edu/astronomy/...S/AACHCIR0.JPG

It is impossible to fit the sidereal justification into Keplerian
orbital geometry and motion and especially the second law -

http://kepler.nasa.gov/johannes/

The changing relationship between axial and orbital motions during ice
ages due to the variations in daylight/darkness asymmetry from a global
perspective reflecting a more elliptical orbital geometry begs a
reasonable audience to appreciate it .This cannot happen because the
vast majority of physicists rely on Newton's use of the sidereal format
in his catastrophic attempt to explain planetary motion using
terrestial ballistics.

You cannot even discuss seasonal cyclical changes correctly in which
case genuine investigation in these matters never reach the level much
above frowns and concerns with little understanding behind the factors
at work.

wrote:
To Ian

While the variation in orbital geometry in influencing glaciations or

Gerald,

My point was not that there was some orbital forcing that continue the
retreat of ice sheets during the interglacial ( which you seem to assume)
but that the forcing is there regardless and merely slows as the retreat
follows into area that are marginal. As in that initial retreat is relative
rapid as the forcing over the ice sheet and especially at the southern
extent is much larger and thus forces a rapid retreat. But as the ice sheets
move back into colder and colder territory, the rate of retreat slows
(inverse exponential ) under the same forcings and thus we end up seeing the
ice sheets retreat as 'finished' while in reality it was just slowing to a
crawl.

However, for GW forcing, this is no longer the case for Greenland and we can
expect it to accelerate ( as we have in terms of melting and glacial advance
( from lubrication of the underside). Greenland is vulnerable to GW and the
current retreat is rapid, but I was trying to point out that we have the
wrong 'picture' of the ice sheets suddenly becoming static during the
interglacial. They are still in retreat, just slowly. And this is evidenced
by the fact that the Greenland ice sheet ( and the arctic archipelago ice
sheets ) pretty much disappeared during the last two interglacials ( as I
read it ). Even the WAIS ( West Antarctic Ice Sheet ) diminished further
than we have now during these times.

global warming for idiots

www.globalboiling.com makes it pretty easy to see daily ocean temps and
the huge effect they have on a storm that crosses into a high
temperature area.
Additionally it shows the daily ice measurements by satellite at the poles.

This is pretty cool


geo wrote:


global warming for idiots

www.globalboiling.com makes it pretty easy to see daily ocean temps and
the huge effect they have on a storm that crosses into a high
temperature area.
Additionally it shows the daily ice measurements by satellite at the poles.

If you find that web site easy to understand then are you identifying
yourself as the idiot?

"Sometime it's wiser to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak
and prove it so!"

end

"geo" wrote in message
ink.net...


global warming for idiots

www.globalboiling.com makes it pretty easy to see daily ocean temps and
the huge effect they have on a storm that crosses into a high
temperature area.
Additionally it shows the daily ice measurements by satellite at the
poles.