Whoa, hold on there...dont get so defensive!

ARRELL — 3/20/2008 6:39:20 PM (archived)

All I said was that the link offered no data that conflicted with the idea of AGW. The reason the 2007 low was so noteworthy is that it was, even you have to admit, such a HUGE EXCURSION on that graph. The graph shows a clear trend to less ice.

I simply asked you why you thought the link was somehow an argument against AGW.

The whole thread (59 posts)

Part 1: Global Warming and Sea Level Change READ TO THE END before responding - ARRELL - 3/19/2008 2:30:11 AM
- Temperature rise - Eri - 3/22/2008 5:59:03 PM
  - re: Temperature rise - gbaikie - 3/22/2008 8:44:16 PM
    - retry graph - gbaikie - 3/22/2008 8:48:45 PM
- How much new arable land becomes available due to a global warming cycle? - Sawyer - 3/19/2008 9:47:43 PM
  - For temperature rise on the low side of the range... - ARRELL - 3/20/2008 7:06:49 PM
    - "reliant on status quo"....Malthusian - Sawyer - 3/21/2008 7:34:06 AM
      - No, its not Malthusian... It is common sense - ARRELL - 3/22/2008 4:25:10 AM
        
        re: No, its not Malthusian... It is common sense - gbaikie - 3/22/2008 6:21:01 AM
        
        did you READ beyond the sentence that you cut and pasted? - ARRELL - 3/22/2008 6:45:24 AM
      - If Malthus were alive today he'd be spinning in his grave. - ER - 3/22/2008 12:13:36 AM
        
        You people are grotesque. (n/t) - ER - 3/22/2008 2:23:16 AM
        
        Money making proposition. - Lee - 3/22/2008 1:26:50 AM
        
        re: If Malthus were alive today he'd be spinning in his grave. - gbaikie - 3/22/2008 1:06:44 AM
        
        Thanks for dumbing it down, yet again - ARRELL - 3/22/2008 5:28:49 AM
        
        re: Thanks for dumbing it down, yet again - gbaikie - 3/22/2008 7:18:19 AM
      - Two points concerning poverty. - Lee - 3/21/2008 4:05:11 PM
    - re: For temperature rise on the low side of the range... - gbaikie - 3/21/2008 2:20:08 AM
      - I have a hard time deciding if you are actually this obteuse... - ARRELL - 3/21/2008 3:10:30 AM
        
        re: I have a hard time deciding if you are actually this obteuse... - gbaikie - 3/21/2008 6:30:17 AM
        
        I don't mean it as a flame, but you SERIOUSLY seem to WORK at missing to obvious points... - ARRELL - 3/21/2008 3:14:16 AM
  - The world will definitely be worse, much worse. - ER - 3/20/2008 1:32:20 AM
    - I disagree. - TAFKASE - 3/20/2008 5:17:34 PM
      - re: I disagree. - ER - 3/20/2008 6:44:40 PM
- re: Part 1: Global Warming and Sea Level Change READ TO THE END before responding - gbaikie - 3/19/2008 8:17:19 PM
- Thermocline and temperature structure of the ocean - nick hoffman - 3/19/2008 6:01:03 AM
  - "Mathematically, the thermal expansion will be almost exactly half what you calculate"- actually, no.... - ARRELL - 3/19/2008 7:12:24 AM
    - The factor's you cite of COURSE would have to go in any calculation claiming to be rigorous - ARRELL - 3/19/2008 3:24:31 PM
      - re: beta - nick hoffman - 3/19/2008 10:48:15 PM
        
        Reminds me of Drake's Equation. - Lee - 3/19/2008 11:28:53 PM
        
        That is true of any equation. (n/t) - Hank - 3/20/2008 12:36:03 AM
    - And that is really isn't the dominant factor.... (n/t) - ARRELLL - 3/19/2008 7:14:52 AM
      - Arrell has a point. That's kind of a nitpick. (n/t) - TB - 3/19/2008 1:30:15 PM
        
        re: Arrell has a point. That's kind of a nitpick. - gbaikie - 3/19/2008 6:20:17 PM
        
        re: Arrell has a point. That's kind of a nitpick. - gbaikie - 3/19/2008 7:01:15 PM
        
        re: Arrell has a point. That's kind of a nitpick. - gbaikie - 3/20/2008 10:43:58 AM
- Thermal expansion of ocean water. - podrock - 3/19/2008 3:44:43 AM
  - A FAR more detailed calculation - ARRELL - 3/19/2008 3:57:48 AM
    - ooops... more - ARRELL - 3/19/2008 4:06:42 AM
- re: Global Warming and Sea Level Change - TB - 3/19/2008 3:42:09 AM
  - re the antarctica data... - ARRELL - 3/20/2008 6:07:43 AM
  - Okay, are you sure you put the right link? - ARRELL - 3/20/2008 5:43:37 AM
    - Yes. - TB - 3/20/2008 3:43:55 PM
      - Whoa, hold on there...dont get so defensive! - ARRELL - 3/20/2008 6:39:20 PM
        
        re: Whoa, hold on there - TB - 3/20/2008 8:39:36 PM
  - I will go over the points in detail later today, but let me just say this now - ARRELL - 3/19/2008 4:00:21 PM
    - The other side of that coin - TB - 3/19/2008 4:53:56 PM
      - I don't think you will find a post by me ever claiming that there arent some alarmist statements out there... - ARRELL - 3/19/2008 8:47:21 PM
        
        Where the politics belongs... - ARRELL - 3/19/2008 9:32:36 PM
        
        Good post - TB - 3/19/2008 9:21:11 PM
        
        As I said: "I believe we can all agree that to make these decisions in ignorance, to ignore the science because we do not like what it says or who is saying it, is 'objectively' immoral no matter wha… - ARRELL - 3/19/2008 9:37:49 PM
  - sea ice extent currently is BELOW the recent mean - pwokenyaw - 3/19/2008 2:33:02 PM
    - P.S, - TB - 3/19/2008 3:02:08 PM
    - There's a global graph on the same site - TB - 3/19/2008 2:58:24 PM
      - my P.S. - pwokenyaw - 3/19/2008 4:03:56 PM
      - Is multi-year averaging sensible or not? - pwokenyaw - 3/19/2008 4:02:07 PM
        
        Trends - TB - 3/19/2008 4:47:50 PM
  - Ocean temperature update - TB - 3/19/2008 1:42:22 PM
- Arrrrgh, not sure how it became IIPC it should read IPCC (n/t) - arrell - 3/19/2008 2:32:51 AM

Recent posts

On this day in Space/Science

The whole thread (59 posts)