Timothy Birdnow

Here is more on my arguement over geothermal glacial melt: /tge furst oart us avaukavke here. Apologies for not inserting the hyperlinks; time is limited and I just don't have the time or energy to do it.

Bryce says:

Well, that's a formidable wall of text.

I have to point out a couple of things that have a lot of bearing on your "the volcanoes melted the glaciers" theory.

The Earth receives about 174,000 terrawatts of energy from the Sun, day in, day out. The amount of heat coming from the Earth's interior (globally) is about 47 terrawatts (0.03% of the amount coming from the Sun). So the theory doesn't really pass the initial back-of-the-napkin test, even in a high-vulcanism, low-sun area like Iceland.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_internal_heat_budget

Further, when a volcano erupts, most of its heat goes stratospheric. Hot air rises, and the hotter it is the faster it rises.

BTW, your links are borderline gibberish. You've been feeding your brain junk food.

For example, the "90% of glaciers" one. Glacier retreat is a global phenomenon, but the article supposedly showing glacier growth is 100% about the Antarctic continental ice shelf (which is gaining ice for well understood reasons that are perfectly compatible with climate change). It also links heavily to iceagenow.info, which is basically the InfoWars of the climate denial movement

From the article: "If the Antarctic Ice Sheet is growing, wouldn’t that mean that more than 90 percent of the world’s glaciers are growing?"

Dude doesn't even know what a glacier is lol

PS: If vulcanism was the primary cause of these glaciers shrinking, wouldn't the losses be concentrated around areas of highest activity? And wouldn't the scientists who, I dunno, devote their entire lives to studying this sort of thing, maybe pick up on that?

Did you think you, a layman, could just Dunning-Kreuger your way into the conversation and tell them something they missed? Or do you think they're deliberately hiding the truth?

Mr. Birdnow rebuts:
,One of the things that's really annoying about arguing with you hysterics is that you won't bother to do your own homework. I am not the one who is saying volcanoes melt glaciers. I did a quick Google search for "volcanoes melt glaciers" and came up with a number of articles - something you could have bothered doing yourself. Here is a Livescience article entitled "Hidden Volcanoes melt Antarctic Glaciers from Below". https://www.livescience.com/46194-volcanoes-melt-antarctic-glaciers.html, as one example. Here is another link to a popular articles on the subject. Or do you think they're deliberately hiding the truth? http://www.antarcticglaciers.org/question/volcanic-activity-contributing-melting-west-antarctic-ice-sheet/ since you are too lazy to do your own research. Also, https://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2014/0610/Subglacial-volcanoes-melting-West-Antarctic-Ice-sheet-say-scientists

From the Livescience article:

"Now, a new study finds that these subglacial volcanoes and other geothermal "hotspots" are contributing to the melting of Thwaites Glacier, a major river of ice that flows into Antarctica's Pine Island Bay. Areas of the glacier that sit near geologic features thought to be volcanic are melting faster than regions farther away from hotspots, said Dustin Schroeder, the study's lead author and a geophysicist at the University of Texas at Austin."

End excerpt.

YOU accuse me of essentially making this up. You said:
"Did you think you, a layman, could just Dunning-Kreuger your way into the conversation and tell them something they missed?"

Which is, first off, classic for you people, turning this into a pissing contest when I have been nothing but courteous to you -more so than you deserve, apparently. I could point out the same for you. But be that as it may, You make some other rididculous statements. For example, you claim:

"The amount of heat coming from the Earth's interior (globally) is about 47 terrawatts (0.03% of the amount coming from the Sun). So the theory doesn't really pass the initial back-of-the-napkin test," after speaking about the energy from the sun. Well, part of global warming IS the solar activity -

something YOU people completely deny. But then you seem to think that the volcanic activity is applied evenly over the entire surface of the Earth. You are either quite myopic or purposely disingenuous. Uh, and the ground in volcanic areas DOES INDEED get warmer before a volcanic eruption. Why do you think Iceland heats houses with geothermal energy? Furthermore, it's not just when a volcano erupts, but when it becomes active and warms the ground and pops open geothermal vents. I suspect you know that, but are more interested in winning the argument than in actually discussing the truth.

YOU comment on my links but use wikipedia, a site edited by any Tom, Dick, or Harry. Brilliant.

You still haven't answered my question about how atmospheric heating is causing glacial melt in Antarctica, which is well below freezing almost the entire year.

Changes in wind and water patterns explain most of the rest of the glacial ice melt.

You say:

"Or do you think they're deliberately hiding the truth?"

Well, some of them are. We KNOW NOAA and the Goddard Institute have been systematically altering data. We know that some of the big names in the field have played all manner of dirty tricks with the data - take Michael Mann, who spliced different data sets together to create his hockey stick graph. We have the Climategate e-mails where Phil Jones, Kevin Turnbreth, and the rest plot to manipulate peer review and marginalize those scientists who disagree with them. So yes, I do take anything I hear, most especially in the mainstream media, with a huge grain of salt.

There is plenty of alternate research out there. YOU just don't want to be bothered to learn about it.

What you and the other warmists refuse to do is apply common sense to this issue. You ignore the fact that a one degree rise in temperature in the twentieth century is well within natural parameters. You refuse to actually think about what is happening.

About that solar influence business; you people denied the theory of Heinrick Svensmark that cosmic rays were driving part of it for years, yet now even the most rabid warmist must admit this theory is pretty well settled. Jere are two liniks that discuss how solar variability can effect climate. https://www.space.com/19280-solar-activity-earth-climate.html and https://phys.org/news/2017-03-sun-impact-climate-quantified.html Naturally, since these are pop articles, they tip the hat to anthropogenic climate change. But how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? The fact is, the alarmists have insisted it is nothing but carbon dioxide that is at fault, when we keep finding other influences. And here http://www.helsinkitimes.fi/finland/finland-news/domestic/16562-finnish-scientists-effect-of-human-activity-on-climate-change-insignificant.html?fbclid=IwAR0k_pzndj_xD2yhwvR0sUVOLNdpKM8J28wBsSVkUeenGBFQ-oeOKcq774k is an article about new research showing how human activity has little to no effect on the Earth's warming.

BTW, explain why Mars is so cold. It has an atmosphere composed of ninety five percent carbon dioxide.

There are many other things; land use changes, for example, effect planetary temperature readings. In fact, most warming is measured by surface stations, many of which have been decommissioned over the years and substituted with, well, an average of two other stations. Many are situated in what are now mushrooming cites, next to air conditioning compressors or on blacktop. see www.surfacestations.lorg.

Satellite data, which covers a wider territory, show little warming.

So how is slightly warmer air responsible? Does that make a lick of sense to you?

Oh, and before I forget, Ice Age Now is primarily a composite site for links. AND, as Google is now censoring the better information opposing AGW theory (you used to be able to find a lot more stuff easily) I take what I can get - especially as I really don't see any reason to waste a lot of time arguing with someone whose mind is clearly already made up.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:42 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1287 words, total size 9 kb.