I seem to remember reading an article in the not-too-distant past that dealt with ocean depth and global warming (the study was carried out by REAL scientists, not the frauds involved in climatology). Basically, it was found that ocean depth hadn't increased at all, and that it may have instead gone down very slightly. So much for the global warming kook theories that the media loves to bandy about.
I'll try to find the article, although I'm pretty sure I found it at the Junk Science web site.
Make a bet with an envoironmental agitator.Wait till the ice melts and water level falls. Collect bet.
As Winston Churchill said "Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing has happened."
Nothing like making your arguement with an unsubstanciated piece of propaganda like this. This is theory and most likely a drug induced bit of enviro-crapola at that.
Global warming, on the other hand, is still an unsubstantiated theory
With a line like this, how can I take the rest of Alexandra's writing seriously? Duh, warm water is always on the surface, it doesn't rise from below. Anybody who pays attention to real weather news knows that an El Nino condition is caused by strong easterly winds blowing warm water across the equatorial Pacific towards the Americas.
I wonder what a partial El Nino is like?
Antarctica Cooling Despite Supposed Global Warming
Antartica is storing more water!
To find all articles tagged or indexed using Global Warming Hoax
Click here: Global Warming Hoax
Ah, but what did they say Sunday? These predictions have a way of changing.
I hate to dispute, but this "fact" is the subject of fierce debate. To flippently say it is not in dispute is a distortion (ie: my cat and I never argue about this), or an outright lie.
Further, what about the reports a few weeks ago that the western Antartic ice sheet was getting thicker (adding ice, therefore taking up existing liquid water), and that Antarctica is getting colder.
Whatever the real truth may be, it is an obvious conclusion that changing public policy (laws, regulations, Kyoto, etc) based on such contradictory and contentious theories is assinine at best and criminally negligent at worst.
No facts but the conclusion fits the theory. Ok. Whatever.
Editor
Dallas Morning News
Dallas, TX
Dear Editor,
In today's Alexandra Witze article entitled "Experts: Glacier melting, sea rise underestimated", it would seem that Ms. Witze did a poor job of expert selection. Her statement "That melting could combine with other factors to bring total sea level rise to between 1 and 2 feet" is unsupported by facts.
In a recent study by a University of Illinois (Chicago) team, as reported in Nature, data was collected and analyzed from all weather stations in Antarctica. They concluded that, rather than warming, the average temperature in Antarctica had fallen by 0.7 C per decade. These results shoot holes in theories about claiming global warming, since the impact is supposedly magnified at the poles. The study further concluded that estimates of future rises in sea level may not be accurate.
Probably the very best evidence that the seas aren't rising (in spite of hysterical claims to the contrary) is contained in the work of Thomas Lempriere, who on July 1st, 1841, after much research, carved several notches on a cliff face partially covered by the sea, at a place in southern Australia called Isle of the Dead. Lempriere's permanent mark proves that the tides haven't risen in over 160 years.
----------------------------------
For FReepers interested in Lempriere's work, please see:
This link told me everything I will ever need to know about global warming.
i live about 6 miles inland from the pacific at 300 feet.
we'd like an ocean view, too.
Earth happens... get over it.