Jump to content

NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses


AURaptor

Recommended Posts

The childish ad hominems don't follow the arguments being made here. I state, correctly, there's more ice in the Antarctic, as observed by NASA . NASA is commonly referred to as a leading , unbiased source for data on the issue of climate change. Contrary to the claims that we're losing ice at the poles, NASA clearly states that this is NOT the case. MORE ice is forming.

Why are some of you attacking me for just passing on the message ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites





The childish ad hominems don't follow the arguments being made here. I state, correctly, there's more ice in the Antarctic, as observed by NASA . NASA is commonly referred to as a leading , unbiased source for data on the issue of climate change. Contrary to the claims that we're losing ice at the poles, NASA clearly states that this is NOT the case. MORE ice is forming.

Why are some of you attacking me for just passing on the message ?

Does this mean you are willing to accept NASA as a definitive source when it comes to global warming?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And you're the one name calling huh ?

Crassic

Yeah, your were called a "doofus" for making idiotic posts. Oh the horror! :-\

So, not denying the charge is your best defense here ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does this mean you are willing to accept NASA as a definitive source when it comes to global warming?

There is no ONE source, but I brought up NASA because it has so often been used by the AGW crowd as THE last word.

Even though I fully believe that NASA has been politically corrupted on the issue of AGW, they still have to be listened to and their data added to the discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And you're the one name calling huh ?

Crassic

Yeah, your were called a "doofus" for making idiotic posts. Oh the horror! :-\

So, not denying the charge is your best defense here ?

First, it wasn't me who called you "doofus". And considering your record on here, I don't think Ben really needs a defense.

But you are free to assume the role of victim as you please. We all know better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no assumption on my part, Homer. I'm just stating what has taken place in this thread, as happens through out this board.

I post something which goes counter to the BELIEFS of others, and despite the facts, I'm cast as some sort of village idiot.

Folks in the middle ages were burned at the stake for claiming the Earth went around the Sun. I suppse you'd grant them permission to assume the role of victim as well, huh ?

That's comforting. :laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no assumption on my part, Homer. I'm just stating what has taken place in this thread, as happens through out this board.

I post something which goes counter to the BELIEFS of others, and despite the facts, I'm cast as some sort of village idiot.

Folks in the middle ages were burned at the stake for claiming the Earth went around the Sun. I suppse you'd grant them permission to assume the role of victim as well, huh ?

That's comforting. :laugh:

Your posts speak for themselves. You are either demonstrating an evasive ignorance of the subject or you are trolling.

The sad thing is that it's so hard to tell which.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just had a thought... and it makes me sad.

I had been using logic and knowledge and saying that makes me root against raptor.

But by rooting against raptor in this thread, am I rooting against the earth?

....Is Raptor actually captain planet? setting to right what once went wrong?

No. He's Ma-ti (what the hell kind of power is "heart" anyway?) You're Wheeler.

The Power is Yours!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does this mean you are willing to accept NASA as a definitive source when it comes to global warming?

There is no ONE source, but I brought up NASA because it has so often been used by the AGW crowd as THE last word.

Even though I fully believe that NASA has been politically corrupted on the issue of AGW, they still have to be listened to and their data added to the discussion.

Yeah, except for their reports which (you think) support your paradigm. :-\

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no assumption on my part, Homer. I'm just stating what has taken place in this thread, as happens through out this board.

I post something which goes counter to the BELIEFS of others, and despite the facts, I'm cast as some sort of village idiot.

Folks in the middle ages were burned at the stake for claiming the Earth went around the Sun. I suppse you'd grant them permission to assume the role of victim as well, huh ?

That's comforting. :laugh:

You prove my point.

But you got something wrong: It's not your opinion that is getting ridiculed, it's the case you make for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ben and homer.....Raptor reported a factual article about ice increasing. Why do you two have to do the very thing you complain about all the time...........someone not offering facts or the source is not credible.You just don't like the facts in this case so you try to spin them. Get a grip on reality and stop insulting people just because you don't agree with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ben and homer.....Raptor reported a factual article about ice increasing. Why do you two have to do the very thing you complain about all the time...........someone not offering facts or the source is not credible.You just don't like the facts in this case so you try to spin them. Get a grip on reality and stop insulting people just because you don't agree with them.

Oh, ffs. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ben and homer.....Raptor reported a factual article about ice increasing. Why do you two have to do the very thing you complain about all the time...........someone not offering facts or the source is not credible.You just don't like the facts in this case so you try to spin them. Get a grip on reality and stop insulting people just because you don't agree with them.

Its not the "reporting" of the facts that's a problem, it's the interpretation of what those facts mean and his refusal to discuss it seriously. Note that he hasn't bothered to respond to post #20 which asked directly:

There's more ice in Antarctica. So what?

Do you have a point or conclusion you would like to share?

This is really no different from using a harsh winter as an argument against global warming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no assumption on my part, Homer. I'm just stating what has taken place in this thread, as happens through out this board.

I post something which goes counter to the BELIEFS of others, and despite the facts, I'm cast as some sort of village idiot.

Folks in the middle ages were burned at the stake for claiming the Earth went around the Sun. I suppse you'd grant them permission to assume the role of victim as well, huh ?

That's comforting. :laugh:

You prove my point.

But you got something wrong: It's not your opinion that is getting ridiculed, it's the case you make for it.

I'm using the very source which the AGW cling to as THEIR " source ".

Face it, you're attempting to mock me for making a valid point

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no assumption on my part, Homer. I'm just stating what has taken place in this thread, as happens through out this board.

I post something which goes counter to the BELIEFS of others, and despite the facts, I'm cast as some sort of village idiot.

Folks in the middle ages were burned at the stake for claiming the Earth went around the Sun. I suppse you'd grant them permission to assume the role of victim as well, huh ?

That's comforting. :laugh:

You prove my point.

But you got something wrong: It's not your opinion that is getting ridiculed, it's the case you make for it.

I'm using the very source which the AGW cling to as THEIR " source ".

Face it, you're attempting to mock me for making a valid point

What is your point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no assumption on my part, Homer. I'm just stating what has taken place in this thread, as happens through out this board.

I post something which goes counter to the BELIEFS of others, and despite the facts, I'm cast as some sort of village idiot.

Folks in the middle ages were burned at the stake for claiming the Earth went around the Sun. I suppse you'd grant them permission to assume the role of victim as well, huh ?

That's comforting. :laugh:

You prove my point.

But you got something wrong: It's not your opinion that is getting ridiculed, it's the case you make for it.

I'm using the very source which the AGW cling to as THEIR " source ".

Face it, you're attempting to mock me for making a valid point

What is your point?

Why do you always make so many posts in a thread if you don't know what the point is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've already posted and re-posted the " point " . Homer is just lonely, and needs someone to reply to him, That, and /or he's just a pathetic troll.

Homer, revisit the OP, and then follow through the thread, if you feel the need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no assumption on my part, Homer. I'm just stating what has taken place in this thread, as happens through out this board.

I post something which goes counter to the BELIEFS of others, and despite the facts, I'm cast as some sort of village idiot.

Folks in the middle ages were burned at the stake for claiming the Earth went around the Sun. I suppse you'd grant them permission to assume the role of victim as well, huh ?

That's comforting. :laugh:

You prove my point.

But you got something wrong: It's not your opinion that is getting ridiculed, it's the case you make for it.

I'm using the very source which the AGW cling to as THEIR " source ".

Face it, you're attempting to mock me for making a valid point

What is your point?

Why do you always make so many posts in a thread if you don't know what the point is?

Name the post where you expressed it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've already posted and re-posted the " point " . Homer is just lonely, and needs someone to reply to him, That, and /or he's just a pathetic troll.

Homer, revisit the OP, and then follow through the thread, if you feel the need.

The OP has no comment. Name the post where you expressed your point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've already posted and re-posted the " point " . Homer is just lonely, and needs someone to reply to him, That, and /or he's just a pathetic troll.

Homer, revisit the OP, and then follow through the thread, if you feel the need.

The OP has no comment. Name the post where you expressed your point.

No, read the damn mother****ing thread. Stop being a damn troll

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've already posted and re-posted the " point " . Homer is just lonely, and needs someone to reply to him, That, and /or he's just a pathetic troll.

Homer, revisit the OP, and then follow through the thread, if you feel the need.

The OP has no comment. Name the post where you expressed your point.

No, read the damn mother****ing thread. Stop being a damn troll

All you have to do is name a post #. I'll look it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...