Glacier National Park removes signs that glaciers gone by 2020

[ObamacareForever]

Ask NASA
https://www.anonews.co/nasa-warns-solar-minimum-could-lead-to-mini-ice-age/

You do know that site is satire?

 

[ObamacareForever]

Not according to NASA
https://www.anonews.co/nasa-warns-solar-minimum-could-lead-to-mini-ice-age/

Your site is literal fake news. You fell for it, hook line and sinker.

 

[Winston]

You do know that site is satire?
View attachment 43156

*Edited* alert the NASA site has the same info

Try again *edited*
https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/news-articles/solar-minimum-is-coming

 

[Winston]

Your site is literal fake news. You fell for it, hook line and sinker.

So you are calling NASA fake news now

Retard alert, hook line and sinker

I love suckers
https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/news-articles/solar-minimum-is-coming

 

[ObamacareForever]

*Edited* alert the NASA site has the same info

Try again *edited*
https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/news-articles/solar-minimum-is-coming

Yea... those 2 websites don't define solar minimum the same:
From ANOnews.co, I can't tell if they are lying or just plain ignornant:

From NASA.gov:


A solar minimum doesn't mean their less heat reaching the earth.

 

[Winston]

Do tell us what a solar minimum is?

The solar minimum is a measure of how dumb you are since you never heard of it.

https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/news-articles/solar-minimum-is-coming

 

[Dawg]

I guess the park doeskin believe in 'settled science'...lol.

Gorebal Warming they fell for

 

[Nostra]

And now with the solar minimum upon us the glaciers will expand again as they always do

Is this the coming Ice Age the Cult was predicting in the '70s?

 

[Nostra]

The glaciers in the Artic and Antarctica do not support your theory at all!

They are against expanding? Link?

What, are they on a diet?

 

[Winston]

Is this the coming Ice Age the Cult was predicting in the '70s?

Nah this is a new one, the full cycle is 22 years. When temps are down next winter they will say that it's only because the Sun is less active.....

Duh they mean normal

 

[EatTheRich]

• Glacier National Park quietly removed a visitor center sign saying its iconic glaciers will disappear by 2020 due to climate change.
• Several winters of heavy snowfall threw off climate model projections the glaciers would all disappear by 2020, according to federal officials.
• A blogger first noticed the signage change and noted other signs warning of “impending glacier disappearance have been replaced.”

The National Park Service (NPS) quietly removed a visitor center sign saying the glaciers at Glacier National Park would disappear by 2020 due to climate change.

As it turns out, higher-than-average snowfall in recent years upended computer model projections from the early 2000s that NPS based its claim glaciers “will all be gone by the year 2020,” federal officials said.

“Glacier retreat in Glacier National Park speeds up and slows down with fluctuations in the local climate,” the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), which monitors Glacier National Park, told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

“Those signs were based on the observation prior to 2010 that glaciers were shrinking more quickly than a computer model predicted they would,” USGS said. “Subsequently, larger than average snowfall over several winters slowed down that retreat rate and the 2020 date used in the NPS display does not apply anymore.”

https://dailycaller.com/2019/06/07/national-park-glacier-warnings/

More incorrect computer modeling. Amazing huh?
Maybe these things aren’t so easily predicted? Maybe the models have incomplete and incorrect data for calculating such things??
I don’t think anyone is surprised by incorrect predictions. What’s surprising is that people find this “settled science” and yet it still not reliable to pick dates, temperatures, precipitation levels or general trends.

Being off by 10 years means nothing in the kind of geologic time on which changes of the nature taking place now are measured.

 

[EatTheRich]

Yea... those 2 websites don't define solar minimum the same:
From ANOnews.co, I can't tell if they are lying or just plain ignornant:
View attachment 43157
From NASA.gov:
View attachment 43158

A solar minimum doesn't mean their less heat reaching the earth.

Less of the short-wavelength radiation in the visible light spectrum that is reflected in the infrared range, contributing to global warming, though.

 

[Dino]

Being off by 10 years means nothing in the kind of geologic time on which changes of the nature taking place now are measured.

Problem is when you’re off by ten years then just make a new sign adding another ten years you begin to run out of credibility.

 

[EatTheRich]

Problem is when you’re off by ten years then just make a new sign adding another ten years you begin to run out of credibility.

Yes, which is why of the thousands of studies, literature reviews, government comments, and press releases from people who accept AGW that come out every month, every six months or so when one of these is found to have made a mistake, it’s all you talk about for the next six months.

 

[Dino]

Yes, which is why of the thousands of studies, literature reviews, government comments, and press releases from people who accept AGW that come out every month, every six months or so when one of these is found to have made a mistake, it’s all you talk about for the next six months.

You think one is wrong and all the rest are right and basically parrot the same findings, theories, data, and predictions?
Everyone knows that’s not even close to the truth. So why even try it?
Face it, the studies, models and prognosticators of every examples of extreme climate catastrophe have been wrong. It’s hard to pretend there’s any sort of widespread agreement on anything other than that man influences the climate negatively.

 

[Mick]

A weatherman can be wrong so many times and still gets paid!

He also keeps his job?

The same with Democrats. Amazing that you and your ilk keep falling for it and giving these psychos jobs. They prey on the low IQ masses.

 

[Winston]

You think one is wrong and all the rest are right and basically parrot the same findings, theories, data, and predictions?
Everyone knows that’s not even close to the truth. So why even try it?
Face it, the studies, models and prognosticators of every examples of extreme climate catastrophe have been wrong. It’s hard to pretend there’s any sort of widespread agreement on anything other than that man influences the climate negatively.

There are no models that have been correct.

But you go on ignoring your 85 iq

 

[David J Spetch]

It was a sign to trigger kids and very dumb leftists (my base)

lol the role play thingy is a chuckle

 

[Mick]

There are no models that have been correct.

But you go on ignoring your 85 iq

Precisely. Every single one of the models from several years ago that projected what conditions would be in 2019 or 2020 have failed. The models fail because they are attempting to model something they have zero precedent for replicating in Earth's history (man' s influence). Therefore, it's crackpot science. We cannot uproot our economy, our standard of living, our way of life because some left wing nuts think farting cows could ruin the climate.

 

[David J Spetch]

Precisely. Every single one of the models from several years ago that projected what conditions would be in 2019 or 2020 have failed. The models fail because they are attempting to model something they have zero precedent for replicating in Earth's history (man' s influence). Therefore, it's crackpot science. We cannot uproot our economy, our standard of living, our way of life because some left wing nuts think farting cows could ruin the climate.

A stop must be put to this globalist garbage asap