Mailbag 2 - Hurricanes, atolls and coral
Uploader Comments (potholer54)
Video Responses
All Comments (292)
-
I love you potholer!
-
I think its high time a new youtube award was introduced......
"The Golden Monocle"
The inaugural winner..... Potholer!!
-
"That worldwide "20 foot mark" is like the 300 million one on mountains"
as in they are from plate tectonics driving them 20 feet above current sea level
remember the creationist thinks the custation fossils and watermarks and ocean sediments on mountains,also put up there from plate tectonics, "proves" Noah's flood
Just as Ridiculous to think a 20 foot water mark prove "AGW Armageddon" flooding could happen that high unless we raise taxes on oil/gas,use 1 sheet tp,and use mercury filled cfcs
-
"For water waves (blah,blah,blah)"
Ah but how is it relative to only 1% of the worlds water being fresh water, the majority of it being locked in the Glaciers and put their by the evaporation/precipitation cycle and therefore melting and rebuilding of glacier ice is ongoiing and een if there was a full melt down (unlikely) 1% of 300 million trillion tons of water couldn't raise the oceans 3feet let alone Al Gore's "20 feet"
That worldwide "20 foot mark" is like the 300 million one on mountains
-
"post basic scientific facts in order to demonstrate my amazing knowledge, hoping everyone will ignore the giant non sequitor to my conclusion that AGW isn't real"
Never said Antropological Global Warthing Hypothesis isn't real...said it isn't verified and tested and falsified yet and is only a consensus of opinion hypothesis that still needs years of data collection to verify,test,and falsify..which is why the consensus was needed to ask governments for funding to do "impact stuidies"
-
@potholer54 I got several suggestions for proper science magazines now which I'm going to look up that will sum up the conclusions for a layman like me. I humbly thank you for taking out the time to give me a reply.
What should people like me, who are too suspicious to take you for your word, but too lazy to actually read the scientific papers, do?
mrdaym 1 year ago 6
@mrdaym = who are too suspicious to take you for your word, but too lazy to actually read the scientific papers, do? = First, not taking my word for it doesn't mean you're suspicious, it means you are healthily skeptical. I expect people to check my sources, which is why I list them all. I make it as easy as I possibly can, by giving titles, names, dates, publications and URLs. But if clicking a mouse is too hard, you can follow the science by reading reputable science magazines.
potholer54 1 year ago 6