Polar ice advancing, global warming is dead

Then lets stick to facts . You didn't know anything about ancient sailors and there you were sprouting how the Polynesians were ahead of Europeans . You objected to me pointing out you were wrong .

Then you thought you had your chance for revenge when I posted an article about another method of confirming lineage, based on proteins that suggest DNA . For countless posts after that, you would hysterically yell WHO'S GOT DINOSAUR DNA ?

Then you followed Walt's lead in telling me I was wrong and that thermometers were accurate...but I never said they weren't .

Then you tell me I am wrong because my argument about temp affecting CO2 in the oceans is correct . That's right, my argument is wrong because it is correct .

Now you are trying to bury an important thread with bullshit and hide your mistakes . I wont let you do that . Is that enough fact for you ?

You need help . And rehab .

FIRST>__obviously you are unaware of the archaeological literature that suggested from evidence that polynesians visited and settled the western shores of the americas and how lithic sourced materials from the western Us and mexican volcanic deposits (rhyolite and green obsidian) ere strongly evidencing that polynesians were in the US and mexico and Hawaii . (They carried the obsidian lithics back with them to ther home islands of the PAcific).
Im not sure whether theres any DNA evidence that more than a suggestion but Ill be reading some stuff in a few weeks.
.
SECOND>__As far as the dinosaur DNA, you were the one who shouted the answer to my question about how you were certain that T rex was the ancestor of the chicken an you SCREAMED that it was "the DNA'. Thats when I yelled back about "Whose got any T rex DNA"?

Everyone here knows you are a unashamed liar who tries to escape by changing his stories to make it sound like you were the one who said what others actually told you.
I dont know how the hell you live with yourself. Have you absolutely no shame in your stupid positions??

Birds did NOT rise from the clade that included the T rex . Thats the fact of which I tried to inform you. The coeleosaurs ere already derived and the theropods that included T rex was already evolving along.
During the Jurassic the families that included Troodonts and Dromaeosaurs nd birds were developing as ssmall theropods WELL before T rex or his ancestors even existed. (You were arguing a point that was totally idiotic. and I was trying to set you strait whenevre you tried to lie your way (like suggesting that T rex DNA was available for study).
Your argument would have hd a prallel to you saying that you were the ancestor to your great great great "third level" grand cousins.
T rex was a highly derived gigantic theropod of the MID to LATE CRETACEOUS. Birds appeared in the LATE JURASSIC derived from a bunch of what we call " smally wastecan dinosaurs" specifically the generaMAGNOSAURUS nethercombensis which first appearedd in the MIDDLE JURASSIC.

Now stop being a dumb douche and try to stop reviving this silly point you made. (People will forget about it--I almost did until you keep bringing it back).


THIRD>___You clearly stated that a psychrometer did NOT have any themometry component hen, indeed, a sling pychrometer is merely TWO distinct thermometers, one a wet bulb and the other a dry bulb. SO you missed out on that too.

FOURTH>___I have nothing to recant on anything Ive told you or that others (WAlt, an Monterey Jack, and Parados) have said. They were right and youre just whining .

As far as getting "help and rehab" I dont need any, Im fine. I see things quite clearly and accurately whenever youre in the frey.

nuff said Bozo.

You are a liar, a drunk and are going senile . No doubt your fan club are just as ancient as you and think you are a wonderful boy as you are only in your 60's . That post is so full of crap it would block a toilet and you know it . No matter how many times we go over this, you sprout more lies each time . Get someone to hold your hand, you are full of self pity and arrogance .

Produce a post supporting those lies or admit to being just another drunken aging retard . You cant can you . It is your aim to derail a thread .

Actually I do have an annoying habit of not suffering idiots . You just happen to be there in all your idiotic whining presence.





.

You are too full of self pity for my liking . I hope you grow up soon, stop whining and enjoy life before it is too late .

Although I am not completely convinced that global climate change is being impacted by humans. I think this post is silly. It's similar to saying, "Hey since today wasn't as warm as yesterday, global warming is a myth." Just silly to expect only one way trends any time dealing with climate.

He's like all good politically motivated global warming deniers , they also deny the very fact that the climate IS warming.
Some of the more interesting proxy evidence is the extended ranges of animals and plants that ( in the Americas) were organisms that were considered more temperate and even tropical. Brown pelicans are moving north and are quite common in the beach areas of the Chesapeake and Delaware Bays and into New Jersey.

Examples of range extensions and exploiting entirely new niches that are available due to climate change is happening all over.

One of the most popular German spring songs is a folk song, which is about the birds coming back and starting to sing ...
Nearly none of those birds mentioned (blackbird, thrush, finch and starling) migrates since several years.

We can see now dolphins, even in springtime, ... in the Baltic Sea.

The Miami Dolphins . . . in the Baltic? That is warm!

One of the proxies that we use for our work in exploration-- is to look back on the geologic record where we have some good direct evidence of warming/cooling. Most of those species that colonized new niches opened up by warming or drifting continents, dont colonize and just sit there. They evolve into derived species and then show classical evolution/extinction and expansion of ranges. This makes certain organisms good "tools" to spot potential resource "pockets".
There wasa Thermal MAximum that occured in the early Cnozoic. It had all kinds of critters with short time spans of existence but really wide ranges. These fossils correspond to great pockets of oil and gas that were formed through the deposition of huge amounts of biological carbon. There were two major pockets in the world. One of these , based on fossil content alone, were poor O&G production zones and the other, where shell producing organisms(like oysters and non colonial corals) abound and we could see that their deposits appeared to be quickly "eroding" by chemical changes due to warming water. These were a good production zone.
We send our paleontologists out to seek out these "assemblages" and then send in geophyscisits to define the "basins " where we wouldfind these deposits.

It was all defined by the cyclic global warming that occured over time. We seem to be in such a time now(Its been too short to claim any knowledge though)

Everything goes around and comes around.

So what period of time do you think we should use ?

And if it gets colder again the trend will average out . How is that warming ? Who eliminated all the other reasons for animal behaviour and came up with GW ? That's right, the green enthusiasts and they have never been known to be hysterical have they .

Agreed . We have only very recently, ie the last 5 -10 yrs begun any really accurate measuring .

still trying to circle back to that BS are you??
Im like Krumple, Im not certain . However, Is measurable, its been measurable and our record of temp gos back into the 1700's with fair accurcy (please remember the max/min RECORDING thermometer was invented in the 1770's.).

Youre problem is that you have jumped to a conclusion without evidence, and its obiously a politically based decision. SO please , stop trying to discuss this as a "cience project"
youre not good at it and you really dont know half of what youre speaking.

About a decade ago, we had had a similar discussion. With quite the opposite view: then, it was said that only the data from from central England could be used ... because they had the only correct from 1659 onwards.
[You remember okie's argumentation, don't you, farmer?]

I remember Okie and his many assertions, but I cant say I recall that particular one.

http://www.livescience.com/7980-creatures-build-thicker-shells-ocean-chemistry.html





Surprise, Suprise, Surprise ! Nature doesnt collapse at the slightest change like the greenies have said it would now for years . The delicate nature of life...awwww ! Isnt that lovely ? And complete bullshit . Life is tough . It has survived many mass extinctions .

You cant get it through your thick skull that measuring where people are is not measuring anything of value . What about the hot and cold deserts, the oceans ...who was measuring there ? The mountains, the areas where people didn't live ?

You're assertions that I dont know what I am talking about would be better spent proving it but you cant can you ?

You say it is getting warmer as a trend then prove it taking into account all natural trends .