The Global warming blow-hards...

[Ava Estelle]

I have had two different answers to my question. Both cannot be correct, both could be wrong though.

Really? They look the same to me. You asked where the sea level rise would come from if all the ice melted, "If all of the Antarctic ice melted, sea levels around the world would rise about 61 meters (200 feet)."

[j2k4]

We know you're an advocate of doing nothing, as your lords and masters the oil companies suggest...

How fucking dopey is that?

Not as 'fucking dopey' as putting your trust in oil companies...

Please indicate for me where I ever said anything about oil companies, one way or another?

Or do you consider my "trust in oil companies" to be implicit, somehow?

That's just wrong; the only thing I take on faith where you are concerned is your dishonesty, intellectual and otherwise.

The point is, he once posted here railing against people who cut and paste.

Yet another example.

"It's okay for others, just not for j2"

I did "rail" against "people who cut-and-paste"; yes, I did, in response to idiots like you, who would prefer exclusivity on that point.

You fail to mention this, however.

You have this in common with Busyman, BTW.

Among other things.

Well, hell...what can I expect from an anti-free-speech Communist, right?

[bigboab]

I have had two different answers to my question. Both cannot be correct, both could be wrong though.

Really? They look the same to me. You asked where the sea level rise would come from if all the ice melted, "If all of the Antarctic ice melted, sea levels around the world would rise about 61 meters (200 feet)."

Barbarossa

There are 3 100 000 km3 of ice on Arctic lands around the world, containing enough water to raise the global sea level by 8m. Most Arctic glaciers and ice caps have been in decline since the early 1960s, with this trend speeding up in the 1990s. In some areas, the increase in precipitation has outpaced the melting so that a small number of glaciers, especially in Scandinavia, have gained mass during some recent years.

Take a look at the answer above. It says it would rise by 8 metres and that is for the total ice mass of the world. That is only about 13% of the levels you quote that would just come from Antarctica.

[Ava Estelle]

... is your dishonesty, intellectual and otherwise

Well, hell...what can I expect from an anti-free-speech Communist, right?

Priceless! The sillier you're made to look, the more insulting you get.

A poor substitute for substance, but what can you expect from an ass licking, party line toeing, Barbie doll?

Have you thought of a spot of maintenance, maybe a new string and a few original platitudes?

[Ava Estelle]

Take a look at the answer above. It says it would rise by 8 metres and that is for the total ice mass of the world. That is only about 13% of the levels you quote that would just come from Antarctica.

BB, check that quote, it says ARCTIC lands, that's up North, I quoted ANTARCTIC lands, that's down South.

[j2k4]

Really? They look the same to me. You asked where the sea level rise would come from if all the ice melted, "If all of the Antarctic ice melted, sea levels around the world would rise about 61 meters (200 feet)."

Barbarossa

There are 3 100 000 km3 of ice on Arctic lands around the world, containing enough water to raise the global sea level by 8m. Most Arctic glaciers and ice caps have been in decline since the early 1960s, with this trend speeding up in the 1990s. In some areas, the increase in precipitation has outpaced the melting so that a small number of glaciers, especially in Scandinavia, have gained mass during some recent years.

Take a look at the answer above. It says it would rise by 8 metres and that is for the total ice mass of the world. That is only about 13% of the levels you quote that would just come from Antarctica.

Yes, Boab, but the 61 meter, 200-foot thingie was what Ava's google yielded, so you're stuck with that.

Deal with it.

[Ava Estelle]

Deal with it.

Haha! Wrong time of month Barbie?

[bigboab]

Barbarossa

There are 3 100 000 km3 of ice on Arctic lands around the world, containing enough water to raise the global sea level by 8m. Most Arctic glaciers and ice caps have been in decline since the early 1960s, with this trend speeding up in the 1990s. In some areas, the increase in precipitation has outpaced the melting so that a small number of glaciers, especially in Scandinavia, have gained mass during some recent years.

Take a look at the answer above. It says it would rise by 8 metres and that is for the total ice mass of the world. That is only about 13% of the levels you quote that would just come from Antarctica.

Yes, Boab, but the 61 meter, 200-foot thingie was what Ava's google yielded, so you're stuck with that.

Deal with it.

I have Googled a bit more. It seems that Ava has underestimated the rise that would occur. I have found quotes(3) that say over 70 metres. Barbie does say the Arctic which would not affect the levels much because most of it is 'ice cube'.

So I have found out where the water is going to come from. Thanks Ava.

P.S. I still find the figures incredulous but will have to accept them or go to the Antarctic and measure for myself.

Thanks to all who replied.

[Busyman™]

"It's okay for others, just not for j2"

I did "rail" against "people who cut-and-paste"; yes, I did, in response to idiots like you, who would prefer exclusivity on that point.

You fail to mention this, however.

You have this in common with Busyman, BTW.

Among other things.

Please explain. I am not the first or only one to talk about about your CNP and what "other things"?

This "exclusivity" must be the entire board. You used to CNP very opinionated articles with nary point made by yourself. You've just got slightly better by adding a preface or epilogue. Usually it says, "Thie article sums up my views nicely."

Some people use facts and such articles to form their own opinion. Others post someone else's opinion and adopt it.

[j2k4]

"It's okay for others, just not for j2"

I did "rail" against "people who cut-and-paste"; yes, I did, in response to idiots like you, who would prefer exclusivity on that point.

You fail to mention this, however.

You have this in common with Busyman, BTW.

Among other things.

Please explain. I am not the first or only one to talk about about your CNP and what "other things"?

This "exclusivity" must be the entire board. You used to CNP very opinionated articles with nary point made by yourself. You've just got slightly better by adding a preface or epilogue. Usually it says, "Thie article sums up my views nicely."

Some people use facts and such articles to form their own opinion. Others post someone else's opinion and adopt it.

And still others find an article of opinion that "sums up my views nicely".

What of that, and what should be required apart from a statement signifying agreement with it's content?

If I do a total C & P, and adorn it with such an introduction, I mean to say that I find it's content agreeable, and that it is as well- or better-constructed than any effort of my own, not to mention the savings of effort and time.

Others do this sort of thing all the time, much more often than I do, and most often with even less accompanying commentary.

In my case, though, you seem to feel this signifies some sort of shortcoming.

BTW-

I have taken your advice and found an audience willing to entertain any felt need on my part to use the "N"-word.

If you stumble through the door by mistake, would I have to stop?