Global Warming is Stuck in the Ice

[Kyriakos]

Hey, it was meant as a joke and not an attack on you or anyone!

As to what the allegory would have been about...well...Florida was in the news for something in 2013, and my twisted sense of humor enabled a projection of that in the terms used in the harmless phrase you posted without any such intention

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

There's something about your precious bodily fluids could be a great opening to a romantic love song.

oO(As opposed to non-romantic love songs Ziggy? Think these things through!)

 

[Farm Boy]

There's something about your precious bodily fluids could be a great opening to a romantic love song.

oO(As opposed to non-romantic love songs Ziggy? Think these things through!)

"I'm not in love, but I'm gonna **** you 'Til somebody better comes along"

Kinda comes close.

 

[bhsup]

"I'm not in love, but I'm gonna **** you 'Til somebody better comes along"

Kinda comes close.

Sounds like Love, Starship Troopers style!

"I need a lover. You're it, until you're dead or I find someone better."

 

[Azale]

Bit of a bummer the interviewer was more interested in a sensationalist line of questioning than actually acquiring insight. I was also tempted to abandon the video at his first question due to the phrasing.

If you lived in this country and had to cope with climate deniers having a large platform to voice their views and the power to enforce them, you would get a little snarky too. You can't let the other side play politics and pretend "just the facts ma'm" is gonna be enough.

 

[CavLancer]

People who willfully mislead people on such an important issue are disgusting.

Could not have said it better myself. :b:

 

[Yeekim]

Well there you have it, Australia's heatwave caused the ice trapping those scientists.

Within 1-2 minutes he told us in a condescending tone they got stuck because its really cold and when Chris Hayes later mentioned its summer down there he said warmer seas and air can do that. Now if that makes sense to you, feel free to explain it to me. What he said is funny but I didn't call him anything, so please dont speak for me. Thx

If global temperatures rise (e.g. in Australia), more water vaporizes from extra heat.
If this water vapor ends up in cold places (e.g. around Antarctic), it becomes snow and ice - as long as temps there are still sub-zero. And I am pretty sure temps around Antarctic coast are still sub-zero even in warm part of the year.
Why wouldn't this make sense?
EDIT: Nah, apparently Ziggy already explained this. And apparently it was explained in the videos as well?

 

[Kyriakos]

If global temperatures rise (e.g. in Australia), more water vaporizes from extra heat.
If this water vapor ends up in cold places (e.g. around Antarctic), it becomes snow and ice - as long as temps there are still sub-zero. And I am pretty sure temps around Antarctic coast are still sub-zero even in warm part of the year.
Why wouldn't this make sense?
EDIT: Nah, apparently Ziggy already explained this. And apparently it was explained in the videos as well?

I think the joke is more along the lines of: If they could not even predict a normal formation of ice trapping their expedition, can they really predict a pattern of global heat change through the millenia?

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I think the joke is more along the lines of: If they could not even predict a normal formation of ice trapping their expedition, can they really predict a pattern of global heat change through the millenia?

Aren't jokes supposed to be funny?

This is more along the line of: if they can't predict the weather next week ...

It's bs criticism hidden behind the shield of a 'joke'.

EDIT: Nah, apparently Ziggy already explained this. And apparently it was explained in the videos as well?

Yes.

I only paraphrased what was in the video.

 

[Kyriakos]

Jokes don't have to be funny when they are about serious matters

In those cases they often are meant as some shielded put-down of the other person, as you so much mentioned. I recall a nice philosophical one-liner: "That is a philosophy of the dollar", used by someone to attack an american philosopher. Is that actually an argument? No, but it was not meant as an argument (hopefully), since it clearly aimed to allude to a tenuous link marginally shielding hostility and arrogance from the image of a downright trolling which would cancel the attacker's own supposed worth as a thinker. (ultimately it does, but at least it carries this nice tail of condenced antipathy with it and you can rather observe that while forgetting the whole thing)

 

[Algeroth]

Except he doesn't. Dendrochronology is not accepted as an accurate proxy for weather, since all the world knows, tree rings are determined by many factors, not just temperature.

Oh, please, tell me more!

 

[Tee Kay]

Why wouldn't this make sense?

Because it's evil.

 

[CavLancer]

Oh, please, tell me more!

Only when the glaciers grind them under will there be even a small chance that some folks will finally get it. The rest will look at the massive ice sheets as a sure sign of global warming and by so doing belly up to the bar for their final daily dose of guilt.

The rest of us look on in wonder.

 

[Dale]

I think the joke is more along the lines of: If they could not even predict a normal formation of ice trapping their expedition, can they really predict a pattern of global heat change through the millenia?

The joke as I understand it is that this expedition was to repeat Mawson's voyage in 1912. The funny part is that in 1912 Mawson sailed into Commonwealth Bay with no ice, and this expedition was out to prove there was less sea ice than Mawson saw yet get completely iced in by a 10 mile ice sheet.

Honestly though, I think it's more irony than joke. It's not really a "hahaha" joke.

 

[Tee Kay]

Only when the glaciers grind them under will there be even a small chance that some folks will finally get it. The rest will look at the massive ice sheets as a sure sign of global warming and by so doing belly up to the bar for their final daily dose of guilt.

You wouldn't accept that global warming is real even if all the ice in Antarctica melts.

 

[Dale]

Oh, please, tell me more!

You could start your learning process here: http://www.priweb.org/globalchange/climatechange/studyingcc/scc_01.html

Excerpt:
Dendrochronology is currently still in its scientific infancy – there are many problems in the use of tree rings, particularly because the growth of tree rings can be impacted by many issues - not just rainfall amount, temperature, and cloud cover – but also by wind, soil properties, disease, or even pollution. These issues can certainly impact tree ring growth and cloud the scientific record.

Bottom line: Dendrochronology is not an accurate measure of temperature, no matter what Michael "Hokey Schtick" Mann says.

 

[CavLancer]

You wouldn't accept that global warming is real even if all the ice in Antarctica melts.

Yes I would.

Global warming causes ice melt whether its man made global warming or natural warming. I doubt that all the ice will melt as temps are either momentarily flat or finally in decline. That's why we have increasing ice.

Right back at you... If the ice undeniably increases will you accept global cooling?

 

[Tee Kay]

If we observe ice increasing globally (Arctic as well as Antarctic, and glaciers) and a general trend towards colder weather for 4-5 decades, then yes, of course I would accept global cooling.

But that's not happening is it. The trend is towards warmer weather and retreating glaciers, land ice and sea ice decade after decade and the only place we get a (relatively small by comparison) trend of increasing ice is certain areas of the Southern Ocean.

So don't pretend the "two sides" have equal weight here.

 

[gay_Aleks]

You know what else is stuck in the ice? MSNBC ratings.

Probably.

 

[Algeroth]

You could start your learning process here: http://www.priweb.org/globalchange/climatechange/studyingcc/scc_01.html

Excerpt:
Dendrochronology is currently still in its scientific infancy – there are many problems in the use of tree rings, particularly because the growth of tree rings can be impacted by many issues - not just rainfall amount, temperature, and cloud cover – but also by wind, soil properties, disease, or even pollution. These issues can certainly impact tree ring growth and cloud the scientific record.

Bottom line: Dendrochronology is not an accurate measure of temperature, no matter what Michael "Hokey Schtick" Mann says.

You could continue with some relevant paper, websites are not relevant at all.