You are right the scientists were only off by 46 billion tons of ice per year, no reason to argue over tiny little figures like that, and let's also leave out the ocean currents which have changed to bring warmer waters from the Pacific into the Artic and the effects of wind blowing in from the Bearing sea, and the Polar Bear populations higher than they were 30 years ago....all of that is insignificant.
Sure, they were off by an order of magnitude. Not a small error, but they used the best data the had at the time. Now they have better data and can make better predictions. That's how science works.
And I'm not sure what ocean currents have to do with the ice mass of Himalayan glaciers... you do understand that's a mountain range in the middle of Asia, right? :fawkdancesmiley:
Last time I checked, polar bear population isn't a major factor in determining the mass of ice in Himalayan glaciers, either.
The earth has been warming for 12,000 years, and with it, the ice melts, as I recall, and correct me if I'm wrong, SUVs weren't around 12,000 years ago to start the warming process....but maybe I'm wrong again.
Care to share your source for "the earth has been warming for 12,000 years?"
From
http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/File:Holocene_Temperature_Variations_Rev_png
See the link for descriptions of the various data sets used to construct the graph.
All the multi-source reconstructions of Holocene temperatures I have seen point to the same conclusions. The first couple thousand years warmed significantly, the the last eight thousand years have been fairly stable (with some small fluctuations) until the last century and a half.
Unless you can back up your assertions with data (and your track record is not good, by the way...), I would say, yes. Yes, you are wrong. About many things... for instance, your implication that anybody actually believes that SUVs are the only cause of global warming. Perhaps you should go back and read all my posts in this thread again. There you will find information about climate forcings. You will learn (if only...) that atmospheric CO2 is but one piece of the climate puzzle.
But then again... you haven't figured it out, yet, so I doubt you will.
It doesn't matter if science is wrong or has a political slant. Science will correct itself, you just have to wait and believe.:eeek::haha:
No belief necessary. I know you're just being a troll, but (belief aside) what you posted is exactly what happened. Let me walk you through it...
1. Scientists collect data from low-elevation glaciers.
2. Scientists use this data (the best data available at the time) to make a model and predictions about high-elevation glaciers.
3. Scientists collect data from high-elevation glaciers.
4. Scientists discover that their predictions from the low-level data do not extrapolate well to high-elevation glaciers.
5. Scientists revise their model to include the data from high-elevation glaciers.
Science corrected itself, we just had to wait for better data.
I totally agree, I am not against science (except when its conclusions are inconvenient in some way), I am against all the EPA and government regulations that are forced upon us because of an over-hyped theory that so far has about a 3% chance of being correct, you are correct though, in 25yrs we would probably all laugh if it weren't for the $5 dollar gas, the diesel trucks that should be getting 21mpg, but due to smog crap are getting 14mpg, LEED Credits, building requirements and the list goes on forever.
Fixed it for you, Jay.
