LithiaWx
-
Posts
9,945 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Blogs
Forums
American Weather
Media Demo
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by LithiaWx
-
You're
-
I see so now a small percentage equals "a large portion"
-
It's been stated in the monstrosity of a thread that we are talking about a timescale of thousands of years not a 100 years for a "large portion" to be released. The accepted numbers are 50Gt of the 1,400Gt is subject to sudden release. The amount of warming that would be necessary for "a large portion" to be released would take many centuries to millenniums. Wake me up when the world is ending when a catastrophic climatic calamity commences. http://www.cosis.net...008-A-01526.pdf
-
^ The asinine statement that started the debate. Why talk about "a large portion" being released in the next 100 years if it's not a possibility? Answer = alarmism. You guys can enjoy your circle jerk of doom and gloom about the end of the world. This is a joke thread. If you wanted to have a serious debate about methane you shouldn't have started the way you did.
-
"Large Portion" isn't any different.... You were the first to use the verbiage. again, nothing suggests that a "large portion" (did I get it right this time?) is in danger of being released in the next 100 years. You shouldn't have suggested such a thing if you weren't willing to take the heat for such a ridiculous statement. Why would you talk about a "large portion" being released in the next 100 years if it's accepted that it won't happen?
-
You haven't showed me what I asked for. You don't read very well. I'll ask again.
-
I hear you Rusty... I just keep going back to the thread title that not many seem to object to. catastrophic climatic calamity? really?
-
Peer reviewed papers please. Some of you (not you in particular) scream about the peer review process. You won't find serious scientists who believe the ESAS is on the verge of a catastrophic methane release. We are thousands of years away from such an event if it ever does happen.
-
What's funny is your little followers won't disown you for this egregious error. That just goes to show you how terrible even the sheep that follow you are.
-
shameful.... Terrorism and the methane in the ESAS are not comparable. You should be called out and shunned for this terrible judgement.
-
I wasn't talking about a minority amount and neither was the guy's post I was originally responding to. So the answer appears to be there is not peer reviewed papers that suggest a majority of the methane in the ESAS is in danger of being released in the next 100 years.
-
You should be ashamed to compare methane release to one of the biggest tragedy's in American history, 9/11.
-
You are 100% correct wrt to the bold text I highlighted.
-
idk... A large portion typically means most of it... From what I hear there are massive amounts down there. I was looking for peer reviewed papers that suggest most of that methane is unstable enough to be released in the next 100 years. Honestly, you are one of the only people in this thread who I feel is even worth responding to in a good faith manner. So there you have it.
-
You may have misread my OP. I was objecting to the idea that a large portion of the methane trapped in the ESAS has reasonable potential to be released in the next hundred years.
-
I read through it and didn't read that. If you have time could could show me this information? I would love to read it. I've heard the opposite that it is highly improbable that the vast amounts of methane stored there could have a large portion released in less than 100 years. I've heard a timescale more on the order of thousands of years.
-
I missed the part that suggests a large portion of the methane trapped in the ESAS will be released in the next century.
-
It's not going to be. There are no peer reviewed papers that suggest such a thing. Hence why this thread is a joke. There is a reason people like Don S and wxtrix have not said word one in this thread. They would never associate with such a crackpot theory. Skier did drop in but basically to call some of you out on how ridiculous the claims are.
-
The warming impact of CH4 is minimal to near nil and most anyone with credibility will tell you the warming from CH4 is nearly non -existent. Also the idea that methane is venting from cracks in the ice is very weak. Unless the methane is right below the large cracks it's not venting from them. We have no idea exactly where the methane is being vented so the idea that it's hitting one of these very small areas with large cracks is a huge stretch. This thread is still a joke and I'd be embarrassed to be pushing the "CH4! OMG we are all going to die!" agenda. This thread needs to be closed and if you guys really wanted to have an honest discussion about methane a new thread should be created free of alarmism. Right now this thread is not helping current perceptions about alarmism.
-
It can't be coming from the arctic, specifically the ESAS which got so much attention last year. Methane is not going to get through meters of ice. The readings are a blip and don't mean much, if anything for the moment. Alarmists will be alarmists... The thread title is just as much of a joke now as it was when the thread was created. It's really pretty embarrassing and should be shut down. If someone wants to talk seriously about CH4 a good start would be to stop posting in this ridiculous thread and start one that has a more reasonable title.
-
Are you guys reading the same subtitle I am? But you really think that? huh... what a fooking joke. It's people like Vergent and TerryM who give the Climate Change subject such a terrible name. Crisis; critical cryospheric carbon clathrate causation. catastrophic climatic calamity could commence.
-
Not the best thread to post this comment in considering mainstream science thinks this thread is an abomination.
-
There is a word for it and it's called weather. I'll explain it to you. Winds which are caused by high and low pressure systems break apart thin ice. This is a weather board, you can't seriously be missing this.
-
I'm still trying to figure out what this has to do with the thread.
-
Do you see the sporadic pixels that aren't 1870+ interlace in there. That's why this is just silly.
