View Single Post
  #66  
Old 10-22-2018, 09:21 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 11,083
Quote:
Originally Posted by doorhinge View Post
Thanks for the video. It didn't my question because, according to it's caveat at 18:35, "This video is only looking at the consequences of climate change over the next 100 years __". Thanks for trying.
If all the polar ice melted, sea level would rise by over 200 feet from water volume alone. Thermal expansion is an even bigger factor. And bigger still is the loss of albedo from polar and boreal ice and snow cover, which greatly accelerates warming in the northern latitudes. All these amplification factors work together.
Quote:
Originally Posted by doorhinge View Post
I also noticed that at 06:43 the author stated, "Secondly, I don't use the IPCC as a source." Which is interesting because I don't use the IPCC as a source either.
Of course you don't. It's always good to have a denier present to prove my earlier point:
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfpup View Post
The position of what are called "climate change deniers" is actually much less nuanced and much more insidious than you imply ... these folks believe [the IPCC assessments] are exaggerated or entirely wrong and are politically motivated. There is no subtlety here.
But in fact, the IPCC is not a "source". Each series of assessments is just a synthesis of thousands of peer-reviewed papers. Rejecting those conclusions because you don't like them is not saying "I don't use the IPCC as a source", it's saying "I reject science as a source".

Last edited by wolfpup; 10-22-2018 at 09:24 PM. Reason: Forgot the link