"Benj" wrote in message
...
On Feb 9, 12:33 pm, "Cwatters"
wrote:
"Mike Jr" wrote in message

Glaciers have been melting since the end of the last ice age.

but not at current rates or they would have been gone long ago.

Here's a hint SeaWaters. Statistics means a variation. Average rate
is not when you take the biggest number you ever measured and use it
as if it existed for all time. Truth is glaciers used to be melting
MUCH faster and have slowed down a LOT!

Here's a hint Bent. The evidence currently suggests the rate of retreat has
_accelerated_ in recent decades.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...aciers-melting

"Those changes - the acceleration of the retreat of the glaciers and the
fact that it is a global response - is the concerning part of all this. It
is not any single glacier," he said

Cwatters wrote:
"Benj" wrote in message
...
On Feb 9, 12:33 pm, "Cwatters"
wrote:
"Mike Jr" wrote in message

Glaciers have been melting since the end of the last ice age.

but not at current rates or they would have been gone long ago.

Here's a hint SeaWaters. Statistics means a variation. Average rate
is not when you take the biggest number you ever measured and use it
as if it existed for all time. Truth is glaciers used to be melting
MUCH faster and have slowed down a LOT!

Here's a hint Bent. The evidence currently suggests the rate of
retreat has
_accelerated_ in recent decades.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...aciers-melting

"Those changes - the acceleration of the retreat of the glaciers and
the
fact that it is a global response - is the concerning part of all
this. It
is not any single glacier," he said

Assuming that that data too hasn't been cooked.

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
Cwatters wrote:
"Benj" wrote in message
...
On Feb 9, 12:33 pm, "Cwatters"
wrote:
"Mike Jr" wrote in message

Glaciers have been melting since the end of the last ice age.

but not at current rates or they would have been gone long ago.

Here's a hint SeaWaters. Statistics means a variation. Average rate
is not when you take the biggest number you ever measured and use it
as if it existed for all time. Truth is glaciers used to be melting
MUCH faster and have slowed down a LOT!

Here's a hint Bent. The evidence currently suggests the rate of
retreat has
_accelerated_ in recent decades.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...aciers-melting

"Those changes - the acceleration of the retreat of the glaciers and
the
fact that it is a global response - is the concerning part of all
this. It
is not any single glacier," he said

Assuming that that data too hasn't been cooked.


You're free to collect your own.

"Cwatters" wrote in message
o.uk...

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
Cwatters wrote:
"Benj" wrote in message
...
On Feb 9, 12:33 pm, "Cwatters"
wrote:
"Mike Jr" wrote in message

Glaciers have been melting since the end of the last ice age.

but not at current rates or they would have been gone long ago.

Here's a hint SeaWaters. Statistics means a variation. Average rate
is not when you take the biggest number you ever measured and use it
as if it existed for all time. Truth is glaciers used to be melting
MUCH faster and have slowed down a LOT!

Here's a hint Bent. The evidence currently suggests the rate of
retreat has
_accelerated_ in recent decades.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...aciers-melting

"Those changes - the acceleration of the retreat of the glaciers and
the
fact that it is a global response - is the concerning part of all
this. It
is not any single glacier," he said

Assuming that that data too hasn't been cooked.


You're free to collect your own.
I did, Washington DC is snowed under and it is cold here in Britain today.
GLOBAL cooling!

Cwatters wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
Cwatters wrote:
"Benj" wrote in message
...
On Feb 9, 12:33 pm, "Cwatters"
wrote:
"Mike Jr" wrote in message

Glaciers have been melting since the end of the last ice age.

but not at current rates or they would have been gone long ago.

Here's a hint SeaWaters. Statistics means a variation. Average
rate is not when you take the biggest number you ever measured and
use it as if it existed for all time. Truth is glaciers used to
be melting MUCH faster and have slowed down a LOT!

Here's a hint Bent. The evidence currently suggests the rate of
retreat has
_accelerated_ in recent decades.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...aciers-melting

"Those changes - the acceleration of the retreat of the glaciers and
the
fact that it is a global response - is the concerning part of all
this. It
is not any single glacier," he said

Assuming that that data too hasn't been cooked.


You're free to collect your own.

Got a grant for me?

"Benj" wrote in message
...

--Mike Jr.

On Feb 7, 11:38 pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
Seems unlikely that they are all wrong and you are right, Mike!

Ben Jacoby wrote:
Right. Hey listen to the Worm, Mike. He'll set you straight that proof
in science has to do with majority vote. And right now I believe the
democrats are ahead in the polls. Sam the Sham is obviously a
democrat.

Hint: go look at sea level data to measure glacier melting. No
serious indications, just chicken little predictions.

hanson wrote:
Better Hint:
environmentalism = the politics of hysteria, misanthropy and true lies.
Both the left and the right is involved when and if it make them money






--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

"Sam Wormley" wrote in message
...
On 2/7/10 10:30 PM, Mike Jr wrote:
On Feb 7, 8:25 pm, Sam wrote:
On 2/7/10 6:10 PM, Just A Guy wrote:

The Science is Scuttled NASA climate...

NOAA Climate Monitoring
http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/climate-monitoring/index.php
Lies

NASA - Global Climate Change
http://climate.nasa.gov/
Damn lies

U.S. Global Change Research Program
http://www.globalchange.gov/
Waste of money

--Mike Jr.

Sam Wormely said:
Seems unlikely that they are all wrong and you are right, Mike!

hanson said:
Yes, it's unlikely, Sam, ...because from its inceptionm to this very day
environmentalism = the politics of hysteria, misanthropy and true lies


--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On Feb 7, 4:10*pm, Just A Guy wrote:
“The Science is Scuttled” – NASA climate page, suckered by IPCC,
deletes their own ‘moved up’ glacier melting date reference:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/2...-suckered-by-i...

We have one collapse but it is not from climate change.

Mitch Raemsch

On Tue, 09 Feb 2010 21:26:37 -0600, Sam Wormley wrote:

On 2/9/10 7:01 PM, Marvin the Martian wrote: took a vote and agreed to
fake lots of photos of


Ice age ended 25,000 years ago. It is stupid to presume that the first
24,900 years was due to natural causes, but the last 100 years is now
"man made".


It is the rapid and increasing rate of warming in the last decades
that is troublesome.

Your favorite fraud, Jones, admitted yesterday that there has been no
significant warming since 1995, and that other periods in the 20th
century and before have been similar to the last warming period. Seems
Jones himself debunked this lie you are telling.

Mind you, once again you gibber a lie which, even if true, would be a
post hoc fallacy.

snip mindless cut and paste that I've debunked a dozen times before
without any comment from this shill.

On Tue, 09 Feb 2010 21:00:31 -0800, Puppet_Sock wrote:

On Feb 7, 5:25Â*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 2/7/10 6:10 PM, Just A Guy wrote:

The Science is Scuttled NASA climate...

[snip]
NASA - Global Climate Change
Â* Â*http://climate.nasa.gov/

That would be the web site that was being criticized in the link you
snipped. It seems you are sinking into a deeply pathological mental
state when you offer as denfense against criticism of a web site the
very same web site. With the faked up **** intact.

Have you become totally mentally chomped Sam? Do they let you run around
or do they tie you up?

You are not a scientist Sam. You are not even a nice human being. Buy a
clue.
Socks

I know a lot of wackos with totally irrational beliefs that cannot and
will not look at the facts who are otherwise "nice human beings".

My issue with wormley is that he either refuses to think or cannot think.
He uses every logical fallacy in the book: appeal to authority,
bandwagon, post hoc, appeal to cause, emotional appeals... his list of
gibberish is endless.

Not once has he admitted that the data he is using is fraudulent. Not
once has he admitted that the e-mails prove conspiracy. Not once has he
replied to the simple chemistry that debunks AGW. Not once has he replied
to the fact that Svensmark has predicted the recent cooling trend and AGW
failed. He just has some cut and paste replies and keeps posting them,
mindlessly, over and over even when they are debunked as being from a
discredited source or explained to him why his "facts" are irrelevant or
he's using an illogical argument.