http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/loo...-20071113.html



"Our study confirms many changes seen in upper Arctic Ocean circulation in
the 1990s were mostly decadal in nature, rather than trends caused by global
warming"

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:25:58 GMT, BillP penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/loo...-20071113.html
|
|
|
|"Our study confirms many changes seen in upper Arctic Ocean circulation in
|the 1990s were mostly decadal in nature, rather than trends caused by global
|warming"
|

And this *proves* what?

--

Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.

Homepage
http://pamandgene.idleplay.net/

Rec.boats at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide
http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats
-----------------
www.Newsgroup-Binaries.com - *Completion*Retention*Speed*
Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road
-----------------

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:25:58 GMT, BillP penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/loo...-20071113.html
|
|
|
|"Our study confirms many changes seen in upper Arctic Ocean circulation
in
|the 1990s were mostly decadal in nature, rather than trends caused by
global
|warming"
|

And this *proves* what?


It proves at least one part of human induced GW theory is incorrect.

On Nov 14, 11:52 am, "BillP" wrote:
"Gene Kearns" wrote in message

...





On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:25:58 GMT, BillP penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/loo...-20071113.html
|
|
|
|"Our study confirms many changes seen in upper Arctic Ocean circulation
in
|the 1990s were mostly decadal in nature, rather than trends caused by
global
|warming"
|

And this *proves* what?

It proves at least one part of human induced GW theory is incorrect.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

What part is that?

wrote in message
ups.com...
On Nov 14, 11:52 am, "BillP" wrote:
"Gene Kearns" wrote in message

...





On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:25:58 GMT, BillP penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/loo...-20071113.html
|
|
|
|"Our study confirms many changes seen in upper Arctic Ocean
circulation
in
|the 1990s were mostly decadal in nature, rather than trends caused by
global
|warming"
|

And this *proves* what?

It proves at least one part of human induced GW theory is incorrect.-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

What part is that?


The part that says man made CO2 is causing the ice caps to melt.

On Nov 14, 6:02 pm, "BillP" wrote:
wrote in message

ups.com...





On Nov 14, 11:52 am, "BillP" wrote:
"Gene Kearns" wrote in message

. ..

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:25:58 GMT, BillP penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/loo...-20071113.html
|
|
|
|"Our study confirms many changes seen in upper Arctic Ocean
circulation
in
|the 1990s were mostly decadal in nature, rather than trends caused by
global
|warming"
|

And this *proves* what?

It proves at least one part of human induced GW theory is incorrect.-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

What part is that?

The part that says man made CO2 is causing the ice caps to melt.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I think you'd be well advised to learn to comprehend what you've read.
Where is it in that article that says that without a doubt man made
CO2 isn't causing the ice caps to melt? What proof do they provide to
back that claim?

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:18:51 -0500, Gene Kearns
wrote:

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:25:58 GMT, BillP penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/loo...-20071113.html
|
|
|
|"Our study confirms many changes seen in upper Arctic Ocean circulation in
|the 1990s were mostly decadal in nature, rather than trends caused by global
|warming"
|

And this *proves* what?

That whales fart, ducks swim and I will soon take over the universe in
my true form - Universal Galactic Overlord.

Prepare for my ordination. :)

On Nov 14, 7:25?am, "BillP" wrote:
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/loo...-20071113.html

"Our study confirms many changes seen in upper Arctic Ocean circulation in
the 1990s were mostly decadal in nature, rather than trends caused by global
warming"

People should, indeed, read the article in its entirety and not assume
that the two lines pulled out of context by BillP represent the
general theme. The study in question is primarily limited to the
circulation patterns and salinity of sea water.

Other lines pulled out of context from the same article:

"The results suggest that not all the large changes seen in Arctic
climate in recent years are a result of long term trends associated
with global warming" (Obvious inference, some of the changes are).

"While some 1990's climate trends, such as declines in Arctic ice sea
extent have continued, the results suggest at lest for the "wet" [art
of the Arctic- the Arctic Ocean- circulation reverted toconditions
live those prevalent before the 1990's." (some of the climate trends,
including the reduction of Arctic ice, continue).

"The winter of 2006-2007 was a high Arctic Oscillation year and summer
sea ice extent reached a new minimum. It is too early to say, but it
looks as though the Arctic Ocean is ready to start swinging back to
the counterclockwise circulation pattern of the 1990's again."
(So, as of last winter, the phenomenon was at a "high" state, arctic
ice has reached a new minimum, and even though this winter isn't
really even started yet the individual quoted ways it 'looks as
though' conditions will reverse. Some scientist.)

"The events of the 1990's may well offer a preview of how the Arctic
will respond over longer periods of time in a warming world". (looks
like the theme, "Global warming is a bs conspiracy dreamed up by
liberals" won't reallybe found anywhere in this article)

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
ups.com...

snip
"The events of the 1990's may well offer a preview of how the Arctic
will respond over longer periods of time in a warming world". (looks
like the theme, "Global warming is a bs conspiracy dreamed up by
liberals" won't reallybe found anywhere in this article)


Of course not. Whether or not the authors believed global warming is
true or is not true, saying so in an article would be a "career limiting
move" at the least. It is dangerous to flout orthodoxy openly.

del

"Del Cecchi" wrote in message
...

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
ups.com...

snip
"The events of the 1990's may well offer a preview of how the Arctic
will respond over longer periods of time in a warming world". (looks
like the theme, "Global warming is a bs conspiracy dreamed up by
liberals" won't reallybe found anywhere in this article)


Of course not. Whether or not the authors believed global warming is true
or is not true, saying so in an article would be a "career limiting move"
at the least. It is dangerous to flout orthodoxy openly.

del


This guy is not only qualified to speak on the subject but is entertaining
as well ....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOLkze-9GcI

Eisboch