Originally Posted by Bill14564 (Post 2179764)

...

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580 (Post 2179702)

Don't know if it would be called a field trip, but they are definitely "trippin'".

Originally Posted by sounding (Post 2179707)

Wow ... love the word unprecedented. Kind of like the unprecedented growth of legalized hunting of hundreds of polar bears each year, unprecedented global human longevity, unprecedented global crop yields, and the unprecedented lack of reporting of the current 7-year cooling trend.

Originally Posted by sounding (Post 2179707)

Wow ... love the word unprecedented. Kind of like the unprecedented growth of legalized hunting of hundreds of polar bears each year, unprecedented global human longevity, unprecedented global crop yields, and the unprecedented lack of reporting of the current 7-year cooling trend.

Originally Posted by golfing eagles (Post 2179710)

You no longer can take a "field" trip, since the word field was banned by the USC social work college as "racist". You may however call it a "practicum trip":1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

Originally Posted by Bill14564 (Post 2179720)

???

From your numbers, the temperature rose approximately 0.07 degrees fahrenheit per century. The data I can find shows the temperature rising at about 1.4 degrees fahrenheit per century since 1880 (about 2 degrees total).

I searched on "temperature rise over last 120 years" to find the data I used, what did you use to find data that showed much less than a 0.07 degree increase?


Discussing sea level rise will take more time than I am willing to spend. Some data points I found:
- The 432ft rise was from 21,000 years ago to about 3,000 years ago
- At the end of the 432 ft rise the seas were at their current level which means there was a great deal more ice to melt in those 18,000 years than there is now
- While 8" over 120 years seems correct it is important to know that half of that was over the last 30 years indicating the rate of sea level rise is increasing
- The seas will not rise another 432 ft (not enough ice) but at a rate of more than one foot per century and increasing, sea level rise could be a big problem not too long from now

Originally Posted by Two Bills (Post 2179732)

As you base your whole cooling argument on this thread on 7 years of 'DATA, 200+ years of records showing the opposite, would seem to me, to make your claim somewhat shaky.

Originally Posted by Byte1 (Post 2179782)

Just curious, how does one attribute the ocean's warming due to underwater volcanoes, to mankind? Are we also responsible for erupting volcanoes? Years ago, I accidentally wandered onto a military website that kept readings on equipment located at the poles that measured polar ice thickness. According to the information provided by the instruments, the ice was melting from the bottom, not the top. Experts suggested that the ocean was warming due to under water volcanoes. Not sure if anyone(military) was making large sums of money for their "research" so the information from the military may have been less accurate....;)

Originally Posted by jimjamuser (Post 2179813)

The Weather Club meets right before the Flat Earth Club so people can get a double dose of ...................? I think that Roland the Headless Thompson Gunner is a member in good standing at each club.

Originally Posted by jimjamuser (Post 2179812)

I read about that concern about the world's sea level rising relatively RAPIDLY in recent years. We can just look to MIAMI where on high tide and certain lunar phases the base of Miami skyscrapers have seawater and also the nearby roads. And seawater is NOT VERY helpful to concrete.

Originally Posted by golfing eagles (Post 2179822)

I guess you didn't read the comparison of the recent century's rise of 6.7 inches vs the average century rise of 4.32 FEET from 21,000 to 11,000 BC. So, easy question: Which is more rapid and which is more recent. A cigar if you get the answer right:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

Originally Posted by jimjamuser (Post 2179812)

I read about that concern about the world's sea level rising relatively RAPIDLY in recent years. We can just look to MIAMI where on high tide and certain lunar phases the base of Miami skyscrapers have seawater and also the nearby roads. And seawater is NOT VERY helpful to concrete.

Originally Posted by golfing eagles (Post 2179822)

I guess you didn't read the comparison of the recent century's rise of 6.7 inches vs the average century rise of 4.32 FEET from 21,000 to 11,000 BC. So, easy question: Which is more rapid and which is more recent. A cigar if you get the answer right:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

Originally Posted by golfing eagles (Post 2179822)

I guess you didn't read the comparison of the recent century's rise of 6.7 inches vs the average century rise of 4.32 FEET from 21,000 to 11,000 BC. So, easy question: Which is more rapid and which is more recent. A cigar if you get the answer right:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl: