quote:

Originally posted by Dr Chango:
In Zorroland.

In Reality, since Gore did not say what you alleged, that makes you the "fraud."

Score one for Gore.

Sure: Gore never even hinted that the northpole ice would melt. The fact that we would be short ice breakers and be having to slam through several hundred miles of 8 foot thick ice to rescue Nome, yup, Gore was all over that.

Gore's source replies to Gore's claim:

quote:

'It's unclear to me how this figure was arrived at,” Dr. Maslowski said. 'I would never try to estimate likelihood at anything as exact as this.'

Gore is a liar.

 
Gore never made a declaritive sentence saying the North Pole would be completely melted this year... to continue to say Gore said this makes you the liar.

*CJ

quote:

to continue to say Gore said this makes you the liar.

No it doesn't. He is a liar. His own source for the statement says he would never make the declarative statement Gore says he did. Gore like the rest of the eco-liars are pursuing social policy goals. They make scary statements, scary predictions meant to stampeded opinion and fiscal policy. Along with this, they include "fine print" so when their predictions prove to be false, it can be claimed, why events didn't falsify their claims at all! If you want to pretend that is "telling the truth" by all means be my guest. Little hint for you, when your case requires you to view reality through a series of keyholes, lined up just right? You are defending a lie.

Who is defending a lie, Zorro? For the FOURTH time, Gore's source DID say what Gore reported. Here is the actual publication:

http://freshnor.dmi.dk/handout_freshnor.pdf

Here is what was said:

quote:

However, models indicate that sea ice thickness
and volume have decreased possibly twice as much during the same period (Maslowski et al., 2007). Should the present
trend of sea ice melt continue, some models suggest that the Arctic Ocean could become near ice free in the summer
time within one decade.
Modeled

The reference is to this paper:

Maslowski, W., State and Future Projections of Arctic Sea Ice, Changes of the Greenland Cryosphere Workshop and the Arctic Freshwater Budget International Symposium, Nuuk,
Greenland, 25-27 August, 2009.

Again, from my original link:

quote:

[Climate Depot's Editor's Note: The issue of whether Gore cited Maslowski's work accurately is a very serious one scientifically and ethically. It appears Maslowski did indeed tout his extreme model predictions of a nearly ice-free Arctic within a decade or less and that Gore accurately cited his work.

Now, Zorro, past history suggests clearly that will ignore this post as you've ignored the other ones, and continue to say that Gore lied. You won't deal with the facts--the PUBLISHED facts in the literature of the time. Maslowski doesn't want to talk about the issue. The closest thing I can find to a retraction of his comment is

quote:

Dr Maslowki said that his latest results give a six-year projection for the melting of 80 per cent of the ice, but he said he expects some ice to remain beyond 2020.

He added: “I was very explicit that we were talking about near-ice-free conditions and not completely ice-free conditions in the northern ocean.”

Source:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ear...ting-prediction.html

And from the same source:

quote:

Average global temperatures have increased by 1.3F (0.74C) in the past century, but the mercury has risen at least twice as quickly in the Arctic.

Scientists say the make up of the frozen north polar sea has shifted significantly in recent years as much of the thick year-round ice has given way to thin seasonal ice.

In the summer of 2007, the Arctic ice cap dwindled to a record low minimum extent of 1.7 million square miles in September. The melting in 2008 and 2009 was not as extensive, but still ranked as the second and third greatest decreases on record.

To Zorro, those facts should be ignored. No danger there. Only a fraud and a liar would think those numbers are significant, I guess.

Jeff

quote:

Gore's source DID make the claim

In your own link he denied it. And you seem to have missed this, again from your source, verifying that they are both a couple of liars:

Climate Depot Editor's Note:

quote:

The "prediction" of an ice-free Arctic is not "evidence" of anything other than an apparent attempt to gain media attention by Maslowski and Gore. When real world data fails to scare, make an alarming prediction.

Now you want to claim these liars are truthful? Meanwhile the Arctic is so choked with ice, Nome needed a rescue? Tell me about how this is entirely consistent with the "scientific" snake oil being pushed by these clowns?

Deceive, distort and divert.

quote:

“I was very explicit that we were talking about near-ice-free conditions and not completely ice-free conditions in the northern ocean.”

And how are they doing?

Jan. 6, 2012:

quote:

The Coast Guard Cutter Healy breaks ice around the Russian-flagged tanker Renda 250 miles south of Nome. The Healy is the Coast Guard’s only currently operating polar icebreaker. The vessels are transiting through ice up to five-feet thick in this area. The 370-foot tanker Renda will have to go through more than 300 miles of sea ice to get to Nome

That strike you as "nearly ice-free"? Does that strike you as the conditions describe by either Gore or the clown he quoted?

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012...tricken-alaska-city/

The only question here is whether Al Gore correctly stated what Maslowski told him. He did.

It's irrelevant to the issue whether there's a lot of ice there now. Since the models used allowed for that possibility, you can't even say that the models were incorrect. (Again: 70% chance of rain tomorrow, but it doesn't rain. Does that imply meteorology science is wrong and has to be discarded? Of course not.)

Jeff

quote:

It's irrelevant to the issue whether there's a lot of ice there now.

Sure, sure, scary story after scary story, even pretend photos of stranded polar bears forlornly trapped on melting icebergs and now we have so damned much ice that it takes ours and Russia's best icebreakers, to bust through 5 feet of ice for hundreds of miles to rescue Nome and suddenly ice is "irrelevant" to the issue? Isn't that convenient.

So if Gore's prediction of an ice free pole had come true, I suppose that would have been 'irrelevant to the issue' as well?

Libs are so full of crap, and yet they wonder why they are held in such disdain.