The Environmentalist Thread Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Environmentalist Thread

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Brumar89 who wrote (16606)	10/2/2007 8:25:42 AM
From: Sam	Read Replies (2) of 36917

Typically, you're ignoring simple facts. Antarctica is a desert at extremely cold temperatures. Warming in that situation causes more precipitation than was historically the case. In Antarctica's case, the precipitation falls in the form of snow and ice. Other ice sheets in Antarctica that are closer to the equator and therefore already slightly warmer are in fact melting. Several gigantic ones are causing shipping problems for Chile and Argentina. It all depends on where you look. It has nothing to do with dismissing Antarctica. Or using the "same" fact to "prove" or "disprove" GW. You're looking for a simple verification or falsification of a complex theory, and there never will be one. That isn't how science works.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next