Perhaps if it had any relevance to today, it might be worth the long explanations needed. But it doesn't.
Yeah, like why the Arctic sea ice melted in just one area 2005 and 2007... Search for Undersea Arctic volcanoes.... Understanding how the warmers got an 83F temperature in the Arctic Ocean explains what they do. They monitor seismic activity. When they get some, they race out to measure "warming" they then blame on co2.... because they know co2 is a fraud and there is no ongoing planetary warming...
As I've posted before, there is near perfect agreement that you are WRONG coming from scientists working on climate related issues throughout the world - not just in the US. I don't see you presenting ANY evidence that would cause any rational human to believe YOU instead of the entire world of science.
North American Plate interacting with the Eurasian Plate is powerful stuff.It runs under the Arctic then down the Atlantic creating Iceland. Iceland has a geothermal power plant. Volcanoes. Geysers. A Eurasian side and a North American side. I was sayin' earlier my attempt at searching the activity along these plates tectonic border have been fruitless for me. The Arctic is melting, geothermal changes seem a reasonable avenue of study. Si? Moi SUPPORT STATIC EARTH Stop Continental Drift
One active area of study involves vulcanism. That gets attention in the Antarctic, where there is activity that is under glaciers. It also includes particulates spewed into the air, for instance with volcanoes along the Pacific rim. I don't believe you have hit on some area that is being ignored.
And when the seismic readings from Antarctica act up, your heroes dash out, measure the oceans temps right over it, and get all spazzy when another piece of ice breaks off, as if ice breaking off Antarctica is something new....
Gakkel ridge? Yeah, that is why they never showed you photos of the 2005 and 2007 Arctic sea ice melt events, because ALL the melt was over Gakkel ridge....
Thank You! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gakkel_Ridge I didn't realize it was the "spreading sort"? So where are the comparisons of nearby ocean temperatures then, before then and now? eh @Tigger2 How about other such comparisons of geothermal pollution? Just, please try relate it to "Man Made" to keep it relevant. Moi BEWARE Azores Hegemony Lite The Match Igniting The Gakkel Ridge
??? Of COURSE scientists measure the heck out of events such as these. What would be the excuse for NOT doing that? But, that doesn't mean that those measurements are given representation in climate change analyses. You're just making gigantic false assumption after gigantic false assumption. And, you have NO CITES to any legitimate source of information related to your nutty claims.
They all know, including the media, that co2 based climate change is a complete fraud. Fox News knows. Who knew in 2010? Who shut up for two years pondering the FBI fraud case "he" ended up hiding in his closet? Search for Obama climate silence 2010 2012 It was the greatest threat to mankind, then for 2 years it did not matter, and then it was back as the greatest threat.... but not enough of a "threat" to not buy beachfront property on MV....
Lol Seismic event happens. Magma released into Arctic Ocean. Co2 "scientists" looking for "evidence of warming" jet out, pop out the thermometers..... Look look look 83F in the Arctic Ocean (directly over recently released magma). Rest of Arctic sea ice does not melt at all.... What caused 83F water temp over seismically active undersea Arctic volcanos?? Co2 I tell you, it is co2, now get my taxpayer funded private jet ready, we are going to the taxpayer funded climate conference to share this "evidence"
You have NO basis for this nonsense of yours. Fox is NOT a source of science - it is a source of right wing American politics.
Once again, you have NOTHING. The fact that someone measured a temperature somewhere does NOT INDICATE how that number is being used. I get your second grade education comment. You really need to consult some reliable source that has a CLUE about science. I'd suggest NASA, NOAA, or any of the other climate sites that has a significant outreach capability.
I'm not interested until you actually cite you crap. Until then, you're totally out of gas, stalled by the side of the road.
Two things are happening to the Arctic Ocean. One, it is growing. Two, it's growth leads to magma release under the ocean. As the Arctic Ocean grows, it pushes land (NA, Russia) out of the polar circle. Whether it is now pushing Greenland away from the pole is unclear. Greenland did move closer to the pole via the Atlantic fault, but the growth of the Arctic Ocean could push Greenland away from the pole if it exceed the growth of the North Atlantic (and Iceland). When water replaces land in a polar circle, that warms the polar circle. Land pushed out of a polar circle has, oh my goodness, ice melt.... Lol... As long as Greenland is in ice age, the Arctic will not warm given what is left of the rest of the ice...
The low IQ awards go to the total juveniles who think they're too smart to bother consulting science.
No, I want your source that indicates this is a source of heat that is changing Earth's average surface temperature. That's your claim. I want to see your source.
