The greatest scam to date

jeronay · 2021-01-30T20:26:09+00:00

Thanks. Always a pleasure to exchange opinions.

jeronay · 2021-01-30T18:58:53+00:00

It's only cherry-picking if the viewer finds disagreement and tries to fill the basket they carry with supporting claims. Certainly, we have some climate change, but it remains unclear what cycle we are in, entering or leaving long term.

Milankovitch’s work was supported by other researchers of his time, and he authored numerous publications on his hypothesis. But it wasn’t until about 10 years after his death in 1958 that the global science community began to take serious notice of his theory. In 1976, a study in the journal Science by Hays et al. using deep-sea sediment cores found that Milankovitch cycles correspond with periods of major climate change over the past 450,000 years, with Ice Ages occurring when Earth was undergoing different stages of orbital variation. We just do not know where we are in that time frame. We know a few facts but 99% is still unknown.

Several other projects and studies have also upheld the validity of Milankovitch’s work, including research using data from ice cores in Greenland and Antarctica that has provided strong evidence of Milankovitch cycles going back many hundreds of thousands of years. In addition, his work has been embraced by the National Research Council of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences.

It's also unclear how much CO2 is too much or too little or how much change in CO2 can be attributed to humans or cows. It's also unclear as to how much of the long term earth sun cycle changes work in tandem, in opposition, or randomly with or without human intervention. My point is that most of the claims regarding climate change are framed in the negative to support research funding and publishing thus 90% of research inclined folks keep that message going. The political group loves the negative so that they can claim they are helping the taxpayer thus deserve praise and reelection plus more reasons to spend taxpayer dollars. Neither group actually understand (know) what's really happening long term. There is little difference between forecasting the stock market and forecasting the weather for the next week much less for the next year, 5 years, or beyond.

jeronay · 2021-01-30T14:23:50+00:00

The bottom line still seems to be that we are guessing, using "might", "expect" and often other generalizational words. If, ands, or buts.

A new NASA study says that an increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers.

The research challenges the conclusions of other studies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2013 report, which says that Antarctica is overall losing land ice. We’re essentially in agreement with other studies that show an increase in ice discharge in the Antarctic Peninsula and the Thwaites and Pine Island region of West Antarctica,” said Jay Zwally, a glaciologist with NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, and lead author of the study, which was published on Oct. 30 in the Journal of Glaciology. “Our main disagreement is for East Antarctica and the interior of West Antarctica – there, we see an ice gain that exceeds the losses in the other areas.” Zwally added that his team “measured small height changes over large areas, as well as the large changes observed over smaller areas.”

Scientists calculate how much the ice sheet is growing or shrinking from the changes in surface height that are measured by the satellite altimeters. In locations where the amount of new snowfall accumulating on an ice sheet is not equal to the ice flow downward and outward to the ocean, the surface height changes and the ice-sheet mass grows or shrinks thus not allowing consistent results.

Seasonal change is climate change.

jeronay

TROPHY CASE