DescentBB

Scientist are now pondering a possible ice age. Have fun vision.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561- ... oxnews.com

It’ll just be a really hot ice age.

That is not remotely what the article says, nor does it say anything about the proven fact that is anthropogenic climate change. Quit trying to talk about subjects on which you are completely ignorant.

TG, when you actually read the paper let me know.

I did. That's how I know you're absolutely wrong.

Literally, right in the abstract, the paper states that variations in ocean movement around glacial periods may explain historical DECREASES in atmospheric carbon dioxide. We are currently experiencing a rapid, unprecedented INCREASE in atmospheric carbon dioxide due to burning fossil fuels for the past 150 years. I know you didn't read the paper, and that you couldn't understand its conclusions if you did, so what right-wing shitrag spoon-fed you this wilfully incorrect interpretation?

woodchip wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2019 7:57 amScientist are now pondering a possible ice age. Have fun vision.

I did have fun, now let me have fun explaining the paper to you. But first...

Here is the article from Fox News (It's where you got this information as noted in your link). Nowhere in the article does it insinuate "scientist are now pondering a possible ice age". I would be skeptical of the source who told you this.

The cited article, had you read it, simply says they can model a feedback loop for ocean CO2 sequestration. The model shows that when the air temperature is cold enough, sea ice expands. The expanding sea ice captures and forces the air trapped underneath to sink deeper into the ocean and increases "conveyor belt" action. This in turn increases the amount of air driven under the ice and pushed to the sea floor, thus trapping more carbon and reducing atmospheric heating (the feedback loop).

As TopGun noted, this only happens when the atmosphere is cool, not when it's warming as it is now.

You are not a skeptic. You used this information, wrongly, to confirm your belief that scientists don't know anything. But you didn't understand the Fox News article and you didn't read the paper, and this is more evidence you are not a skeptic. A true skeptic takes a stoic approach to information. I was excited to see some evidence that an ice age is coming! I don't want global warming. I don't want climate change. I want proof it's not happening so I can sleep better at night. You should want the same thing.

Wow, even the Fox article doesn't make these absurdly-wrong statements. Color me shocked. If Woody gets his information from sub-Fox sources that pretty much explains everything about him.

Sorry skeptics. An Ice Age occurring again is not out of the realm of possibility, all because of the profound effect of climate change on the Earth's ocean currents and salinity. Climate deniers can laugh all they want, but neither scenario is a pleasant prospect for human survival. And Woody, living in Michigan, will most likely get the brunt of a resurrected Ice Age and some frozen balls, along with most of our own East Coast and Europe.

https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/s ... ar_arctic/

https://www.commondreams.org/views04/0130-11.htm

Tunnelcat wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2019 9:16 pmSorry skeptics. An Ice Age occurring again is not out of the realm of possibility...

Ah, looks like you need a little refresher too. I can't blame you, the articles you linked too have some bad language. The disruption of the Great Ocean Conveyor would NOT create an "ice age". The term "ice age" has a specific meaning and is used incorrectly in a lot of science reporting (because people can't be bothered to learn science). The conveyor disruption would cause a regional climate event similar to the Younger Dryas. Even if Europe was under ice we would still have out of control global warming, just like Antarctica is still under ice.

vision wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:13 am

Tunnelcat wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2019 9:16 pmSorry skeptics. An Ice Age occurring again is not out of the realm of possibility...

Ah, looks like you need a little refresher too. I can't blame you, the articles you linked too have some bad language. The disruption of the Great Ocean Conveyor would NOT create an "ice age". The term "ice age" has a specific meaning and is used incorrectly in a lot of science reporting (because people can't be bothered to learn science). The conveyor disruption would cause a regional climate event similar to the Younger Dryas. Even if Europe was under ice we would still have out of control global warming, just like Antarctica is still under ice.

Yeah, I was looking at the maps and the effect does look more regional, not global. But what I find silly is that even if this regional ice scenario were to occur to our planet, it's still a no-win situation for the human race. We would have millions of people migrating from severe weather areas to more temperate areas and those livable areas would end up being a very small region of our planet. It couldn't handle the influx or support the population because food production and water availability would be severely impacted as well. So all those deniers who are saying an "ice age" would happen instead of a hotter planetary climate are still a bunch of head-in-the-sand idiots. Even regional ice areas would still spell disaster for humanity in the end. It's just an excuse to not act on curtailing all the CO2 we keep dumping into the atmosphere, or controlling our population.