[Zipperfish]

Quote:

The bulk of evidence we have suggests pretty clearly that currently more glaciers appear to be shrinking than growing, and it's been that way for some time, however your link does not show what you suggest. It does not show "a mass balance on the world's glaciers". It shows a preliminary estimate for the mass balance of 90 glaciers.

The WGI (world glacier inventory) which I believe is connected with the WGMS keeps an inventory of over 100,000 glaciers. Mass balance is calculated on a tiny section of them. As they explain, "Measuring glaciers is a labor intensive process that employs traditional field surveys in hard-to-access and sometimes hazardous places. For this reason only a small percentage of the world's glaciers have been measured at all."

http://nsidc.org/data/docs/noaa/g01130_ ... inventory/

So you see, I made no broad assertions from a small sampling of data. You however did. Which one of us is really cherry-picking?

I stand corrected. Their conclusion is based on a representatvie sample size. Kind of like when a poll finds that Canadians are cooling to global warming, they don't actually ask every Canadian.

And I wonder why you would go to the trouble of defending your cherry picking when, as you've stated in ther past, you hold that we are warming up from the last ice age, in which case you'd expect glaciers to be receding. Whya argue against your own thesis?

It seems you've argued yourself into a corner again. Time to hit the reset button.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

But the AGW proponents and the media don't help the situation when they deliberately mislead people. One example was a report form The Antarctic claiming that some of the glaciers have disappeared completely. The problem was, the report was from an island NORTH of the mainland(or would it be mainice? lol) where glaciers have never been since man first discovered the Antarctic. And to make the point even more ridiculous, they went there during the summer period.
I'm not saying that this one example is proof that gobal warming isn't happening, but when people and organizations lie to us to get their point across, it has to make you wonder how truthful they've been about all of it.
When someone lies in an attempt to get me to believe something, it makes me think they don't have much in the way of facts to base their arguments on.

[Zipperfish]

PublicAnimalNo9 wrote:

But the AGW proponents and the media don't help the situation when they deliberately mislead people. One example was a report form The Antarctic claiming that some of the glaciers have disappeared completely. The problem was, the report was from an island NORTH of the mainland(or would it be mainice? lol) where glaciers have never been since man first discovered the Antarctic. And to make the point even more ridiculous, they went there during the summer period.
I'm not saying that this one example is proof that gobal warming isn't happening, but when people and organizations lie to us to get their point across, it has to make you wonder how truthful they've been about all of it.
When someone lies in an attempt to get me to believe something, it makes me think they don't have much in the way of facts to base their arguments on.

You are surrounded by lies. Get used to it. When you are flooded by newspapers and cable news and network news and blogs and a torrential downpour of factoids stripped of context then truth itself becomes subjective. You can pick your "truth" and have it verfied through your choice of news channels and blogs.

The irony is that the more information we get, the less capable we are of making a decision.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Oh hey, I'm used to being lied to But that's exactly my point. When a proponent for something feels the need to lie to make their point, then how factual or reliable is any information from that source?

I can certainly agree with your last sentence though. Too much info falls under the same category as " a little knowledge". Both of 'em can be dangerous.

[N_Fiddledog]

Zipperfish wrote:

It seems you've argued yourself into a corner again. Time to hit the reset button.

I always know when I'm scoring points, because you start jumping about, waving you're little sword, and claiming victory.

Ever seen Monty Python and the Grail? Remember that bit with the Black Knight? "Just a flesh wound"

You always remind me of the Black Knight.

We agree on the basic facts though, right? Yes, it appears more glaciers are currently receding than advancing. However not all glaciers are shrinking, some are growing, or remaining static.

[BartSimpson]

PublicAnimalNo9 wrote:

But the AGW proponents and the media don't help the situation when they deliberately mislead people. One example was a report form The Antarctic claiming that some of the glaciers have disappeared completely. The problem was, the report was from an island NORTH of the mainland(or would it be mainice? lol) where glaciers have never been since man first discovered the Antarctic. And to make the point even more ridiculous, they went there during the summer period.
I'm not saying that this one example is proof that gobal warming isn't happening, but when people and organizations lie to us to get their point across, it has to make you wonder how truthful they've been about all of it.
When someone lies in an attempt to get me to believe something, it makes me think they don't have much in the way of facts to base their arguments on.

Myself, I was utterly shocked to find that the glaiciers in Tahiti had disappeared.

[Zipperfish]

N_Fiddledog wrote:

Zipperfish wrote:

It seems you've argued yourself into a corner again. Time to hit the reset button.

I always know when I'm scoring points, because you start jumping about, waving you're little sword, and claiming victory.

Ever seen Monty Python and the Grail? Remember that bit with the Black Knight? "Just a flesh wound"

You always remind me of the Black Knight.

We agree on the basic facts though, right? Yes, it appears more glaciers are currently receding than advancing. However not all glaciers are shrinking, some are growing, or remaining static.

It's nothing but a flesh wound!

No, seriously, I don't have a vested political interest in this. I know that is seen popularly as a left-right issue, and I'm a lefty whether I like the label or not, but for me, I'm just interested in the science. I hated Kyoto, I generally don't have much respect for anything the UN does, and I fail to see how transferring a good chunk of our wealth to Africa is going to fix global warming. AS far as the policy response to global warming, I'm actually a conservative.

And yes, we're agreed on glaciers.