Who’s introducng the word ‘troll’ here?
John Hopkins
13

Wow. Talk about the Pot calling the Kettle black!

There is no video on your post, but I assume it was a “guilt by association” piece blaming all opposition to your views as being in the pay of Exxon Mobil.

My information did not come from Exxon Mobil; it came from Freeman Dyson, perhaps you could read it rather than assuming it is funded by the evil ogres of Big Oil: http://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2015/10/benefits1.pdf

Melting sea-ice already displaces its weight in water, so cannot cause sea levels to rise, even if all sea-ice were to melt. You then ask “What sort of physics is that?

It is real Physics: if all the icebergs and ice-shelves floating at the North Pole or off the coast of Antarctica were to melt tomorrow, the sea-level would not change one iota. Look up Archimedes and why he said “Eureka!” This is high-school Physics that everyone should know. Only Land-based ice melting can raise the sea level.

The worst-case scenarios the IPCC are trotting out amount to 4°C: I doubt we will ever get more than 1°C this millennium but it doesn’t matter: at an average temperature of -30°C, even 4 degrees won’t make the ice-caps melt. You should be able to understand this:

  1. Only ice that is not already displacing its weight of seawater can raise the sea-level. Not floating ice, land-based icecaps must melt.
  2. The projected worst case scenario warming will leave both ice-caps (Greenland and Antarctica) well below 0°C virtually all the time.
  3. 0°C is the freezing point of water. The ice caps won’t melt.

“ This is as logical as stating that frozen food is useless because it is inedible.” No it has nothing in common with that; it is more like “Your frozen food won’t melt if you keep it in the freezer.” This is the dumbest straw man argument I’ve ever seen.

Show your support

Clapping shows how much you appreciated Al Black’s story.