Multiple NASA Studies Confirm Bedrock Heat Flow Behind Melting Polar Ice, Not...

[Stretch]

The north pole is an ocean basin that is completely filled with seawater and ice.

The ocean crust - aka, bedrock - of the arctic ocean is thousands of meters under water.

Neither you nor are have the training, qualifications, and expertise to credibly pontificate on climate science. Pretending to be an armchair expert on something one has no training in is not a good look.

The world's best climate scientists, and every single credible scientific organization with expertise in climate have studied this for decades and concluded unequivocally that the rapid warming we have seen since the mid 20th century is due to human emissions of heat-trapping greenhouse gases.

Even Exxon Corporation scientists in the 1970s concluded this is exactly what was going to happen as the world relentlessly continued burning more fossil fuels.

Read post #43 regarding the heat under the Arctic region.

[Stretch]

So what happened since then? Science was too hard and skeery and got liberal all over it?

Sometimes bedrock is exposed -- in Antarctica. It is not exposed under the Arctic polar ice cap because -- wait for this -- the bedrock is 17,000 feet below the surface where the ice is. You have absolutely NO scientific explanation for why the Arctic ice cap is shrinking, nor can you explain why permafrost is melting across the entire Arctic region other than "oh, that happened before and it's happening now."

I've seen your other nonsense about CO2 in the atmosphere. Anyone who rejects scientific reality doesn't deserve to have their opinion considered -- no matter how many claims they make about "studied ____ in college." BTW, I studied biology, chemistry, and microbiology in college. But I'm not a biologist, a chemist, nor a microbiologist. The difference between us is that I don't try to offer informed opinions on those topics while portraying myself as some sort of expert because I studied them in college.

</virtue signaling>

Read post #43 regarding the heat under the Arctic region.

[Stretch]

Interesting article, thanks for posting it.

This does not, of course, explain the massive melting taking place across both polar regions but particularly evident in the northern zone. Most likely the changes are better documented and recorded there because of human habitation spanning thousands of years; whereas in Antarctica there is little human historical information available as it is uninhabitable.

It doesn't matter how many pseudo-scientific articles you all present. The evidence is clear: the planet is warming at an accelerated rate. Most likely there is little at this point that we can do to shut down the greenhouse. We do need to stop pretending it isn't happening, and start talking about and making plans for the huge changes that will affect human life and populations. Fortunately, you deniers are in a tiny minority and have little to no say over the process the adults are involved in. World governments and major corporations across the planet are currently working on ways to deal with the disruptions and upheavals facing our species and our fellow passengers.

Massive thermal heat that's been under the earth for thousands (millions?) of years is more scientifically
correct than CO2 emitted anally from Al Gore and cows. Believe what you want.

[cancel2 2022]

So what happened since then? Science was too hard and skeery and got liberal all over it?

Sometimes bedrock is exposed -- in Antarctica. It is not exposed under the Arctic polar ice cap because -- wait for this -- the bedrock is 17,000 feet below the surface where the ice is. You have absolutely NO scientific explanation for why the Arctic ice cap is shrinking, nor can you explain why permafrost is melting across the entire Arctic region other than "oh, that happened before and it's happening now."

I've seen your other nonsense about CO2 in the atmosphere. Anyone who rejects scientific reality doesn't deserve to have their opinion considered -- no matter how many claims they make about "studied ____ in college." BTW, I studied biology, chemistry, and microbiology in college. But I'm not a biologist, a chemist, nor a microbiologist. The difference between us is that I don't try to offer informed opinions on those topics while portraying myself as some sort of expert because I studied them in college.

</virtue signaling>

The explanation is simple enough, Arctic ice melts in distinct cycles. The warming between 1910-40 was every bit as strong as that observed in recent times. As Judith Curry quite rightly points out if you cannot explain early 20th century warming, then you've no business trying to explain more recent warming.

https://judithcurry.com/2013/04/10/h...-ii-1920-1950/

[ThatOwlWoman]

Massive thermal heat that's been under the earth for thousands (millions?) of years is more scientifically
correct than CO2 emitted anally from Al Gore and cows. Believe what you want.

I just love when you derps try to play scientist then you destroy your entire argument with silliness like this. Nice job!

So... is the Earth 6,000 years old?

[ThatOwlWoman]

As Judith Curry quite rightly points out if you cannot explain early 20th century, then you've no business trying to explain recent warming.

Industrial Age. Still not interested in joining your cult or Stretch's either.

I AM interested in your opinions on how we should deal with climate change, rising sea levels, large displacements of human populations, droughts in former fertile areas, food shortages, famine, and other consequences of a warming planet. Or does your denial of such changes give you blinders to ignore them?

[signalmankenneth]

https://theweek.com/video/809857/7-b...-change-denial

[USFREEDOM911]

Amazing how the JPP liberals want to change the discussion AWAY from the OP; but then, the info probably created a great deal of despair in them.

[Stretch]

I just love when you derps try to play scientist then you destroy your entire argument with silliness like this. Nice job!

So... is the Earth 6,000 years old?

6,000?

[Stretch]

Amazing how the JPP liberals want to change the discussion AWAY from the OP; but then, the info probably created a great deal of despair in them.

They're clueless, blind and easily duped. All the geological facts have been around, but since there's no way to
blame man for naturally occurring thermal activity and make money off it or terrify people into robotic obedience
to a political party who vooooooooooows to save the planet from doom in return for a vote........they don't want
to hear the truth.

[ThatOwlWoman]

6,000?

That's what *some* believe. You did say in Post #48, and I quote: "Massive thermal heat that's been under the earth for thousands (millions?) of years...."

You don't do well at science. Maybe you should consider another cyber forum career.

Why do you have a need to believe that there is no climate change?

[ThatOwlWoman]

They're clueless, blind and easily duped. All the geological facts have been around, but since there's no way to
blame man for naturally occurring thermal activity and make money off it or terrify people into robotic obedience
to a political party who vooooooooooows to save the planet from doom in return for a vote........they don't want
to hear the truth.

Oh never mind. Please disregard my question to you about why you want to pretend there's no climate change.

Hey, is anyone missing a cuckoo from their clock? I found one here!

[Stretch]

Industrial Age. Still not interested in joining your cult or Stretch's either.

I AM interested in your opinions on how we should deal with climate change, rising sea levels, large displacements of human populations, droughts in former fertile areas, food shortages, famine, and other consequences of a warming planet. Or does your denial of such changes give you blinders to ignore them?

Climate change is a hoax made of opinions so there's nothing to opine about.

[ThatOwlWoman]

Climate change is a hoax made of opinions so there's nothing to opine about.

Okay then, dummy. I'm not surprised, given your other beliefs in mythology, that you've embraced this one as well. Hope you have flood insurance, living in FL. lol

[tinfoil]

Everyone knows climate scientists have spent 40 years studying the wrong causes. It wouldn't have occurred to them over 40 years to consult geologists, CONSIDER the earth's core, other causes. "Screw the scientific method, we have an agenda."

Sure why not?

You're sort of like the catholics who refused to believe their priests were kiddie didlers. The email dump back in 2009 ... you know what, it's not worth my time. You warmers are a cult. Can't wait to see the next 30 years as we head into the cold phase of the AMO. By 2050 they will be back to ice age doomsay