Please show us NASA's data re Antarctica's ice mass.
Even the Pope sides with Futurecurrents
- Thread starter nitro
- Start date
NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddar...ns-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses
Ok, but is NASA a good authority on it?
There was a consensus that there was a big bang/singularity. Now a new quantum model is predicting that there was no big bang and the universe has existed forever. Hell they even taught us about the big bang in school.Yes I continue to maintain that the consensus is at least 97% and the debate over the basics is over and has been for quite some time. I maintain that because it's the truth and any reasonable look at the issue shows I'm correct.
One has to really try hard to lie about. Why do you try so hard?
Speaking of meteorologists....
American Meteorological Society
"It is clear from extensive scientific evidence that the dominant cause of the rapid change in climate of the past half century is human-induced increases in the amount of atmospheric greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide (CO2), chlorofluorocarbons, methane, and nitrous oxide." (2012)7
Global Warming: The Weather Channel Position Statement
More than a century's worth of detailed climate observations shows a sharp increase in both carbon dioxide and temperature. These observations, together with computer model simulations and historical climate reconstructions from ice cores, ocean sediments and tree rings all provide strong evidence that the majority of the warming over the past century is a result of human activities. This is also the conclusion drawn, nearly unanimously, by climate scientists.
http://phys.org/news/2015-02-big-quantum-equation-universe.html
Do you think NASA is a good authority?
You brought them up, are they trustworthy?
You need to differentiate reliable information put out by NASA and its employees at nasa.gov which is totally different than the nonsense put out by the California Institute of Technology at the climate.nasa.gov website.
Last edited:
I kind of thought you'd go this route, since we've been there before. Sorry, you got my pawn but I take your bishop. You have no authority greater than NASA to say that one division of NASA is publishing nonsense but another division is not.
Once again, climate.nasa.gov is not part of NASA and involves no NASA employees. In fact, a good number of NASA employees have demanded that NASA shut down the California Institute of Technology website because it detracts from the good work that NASA does.
Yes, Ricter, don't you know? NASA is not reliable. Bunch of space cadets.
For the real science of "globull warming" you need to go with the petroleum geologists.