rabbitoh07 wrote on Jul 25^th, 2013 at 10:29pm:



Says whom?

The arctic ice has been decreasing and increasing way before man ever came on the scene.

Today arctic sea ice is back to 1989 levels.

Glaciers are melting because the forrests and jungles at the foothill of the mountains have been turned into A4 paper.

How did Greenland get its name, didn't all the ice melt of during the medieval warm period and the Norse settlers farmed the land.

The ice came back and now there is no farming.

Problem with that is there was no manmade CO2 when it melted and then came back.

Natural cycle of the Earth's weather pattern...maybe???

And natural disasters like cyclones, tsunamis and tornados have nothing to do with AGW.

muso wrote on Jul 30^th, 2013 at 9:13pm:


Well maybe not all the ice, but it would've been a fair chunk.

Still attributing glacier melts to only antropogenic global warming just shows how unsophisticated the computer simulated models really are.

The antarctic ice sheet is also increasing but we never hear about that right??!!! WHY?

When water freezes it expands by about 9% this is unique to water as far as i know.

When an iceberg is in the water about 90% of its mass is below the surface.

Therefore any ice in the sea that is melting should technically reduce sea levels.

Only the melting of land ice should significanlty contribute to sea level rises.

Now you have to ask yourself if greenland and the arctic are melting so fast why haven't we seen sea level rises???

Where is the evidence sea levels are rising????

Like i said atrributing the melt in the north pole to AGW without taking all the other factors into consideration is a fairy tale at best.