KillingtonZone.com

Mister Moose wrote:

Coydog wrote:

Mister Moose wrote:This goes to what I addressed several dozen pages ago. I suspect the current understanding of climate change is limited by the scope of our view. The geocentrists were not wrong, they were limited in scope. and completely wrong

If the origin of your coordinate system is a point on earth (completely mathematically valid) the sun does travel across the sky. Go outside and watch it.

The sun does not sit still in the galaxy, and the galaxy does not sit still in the universe. Yet you are clinging to a heliocentric coordinate system, proclaiming that a geocentric based one is "completely wrong".

The modern heliocentric model does not require nor imply the sun be at rest. It states the sun and planets revolve around their respective centers of mass. Since the center of mass is located within the diameter of the sun, the planets essentially rotate about the sun though someone viewing our solar system from outside of it would see our sun wobble slightly. Beyond that, the system as a whole can and does move as well.

You seem to be confusing a method of coordinate computation with a physical model. And I'm not gonna debate this further without a beer or three in hand.

Coydog wrote: The modern heliocentric model does not require nor imply the sun be at rest. It states the sun and planets revolve around their respective centers of mass. Since the center of mass is located within the diameter of the sun, the planets essentially rotate about the sun though someone viewing our solar system from outside of it would see our sun wobble slightly. Beyond that, the system as a whole can and does move as well.

You seem to be confusing a method of coordinate computation with a physical model. And I'm not gonna debate this further without a beer or three in hand.

So now we have modern heliocentrists vs pre-Copernican heliocentrists. What's the difference between the two? Scope.

No confusion between coordinate systems and physical models at all.

Friday just went cloudy with late afternoon improvement. While this forecast represents a consensus of meteorologists, it does not portray the future with certainty. Whereas the certainty of us having a beer is a known and predictable result of lifts turning and sunny afternoons.

Mister Moose wrote:

Coydog wrote: The modern heliocentric model does not require nor imply the sun be at rest. It states the sun and planets revolve around their respective centers of mass. Since the center of mass is located within the diameter of the sun, the planets essentially rotate about the sun though someone viewing our solar system from outside of it would see our sun wobble slightly. Beyond that, the system as a whole can and does move as well.

You seem to be confusing a method of coordinate computation with a physical model. And I'm not gonna debate this further without a beer or three in hand.

So now we have modern heliocentrists vs pre-Copernican heliocentrists. What's the difference between the two? Scope.

No confusion between coordinate systems and physical models at all.

Friday just went cloudy with late afternoon improvement. While this forecast represents a consensus of meteorologists, it does not portray the future with certainty. Whereas the certainty of us having a beer is a known and predictable result of lifts turning and sunny afternoons.

Mister Moose wrote: Friday just went cloudy with late afternoon improvement. While this forecast represents a consensus of meteorologists, it does not portray the future with certainty. Whereas the certainty of us having a beer is a known and predictable result of lifts turning and sunny afternoons.

Well, from my perspective, having a few beers always leads to a witty, insightful and productive exchange of ideas that generally helps to improve the human condition (at least by the third beer). But broaden the scope to include spouses and the consensus changes dramatically.

All right I’ll bite and I'm in full support of the scientific consensus that the cause of climate change is Russian Meddling.

Report says trees in east are moving north and west because of global warming. I've kept an eye on my trees tonight and they haven't moved at all. I'll keep an eye on them.

Guy in Shorts wrote:All right I’ll bite and I'm in full support of the scientific consensus that the cause of climate change is Russian Meddling.

Me too. Hahah.ha..ahh...ha...!

freeski wrote:Report says trees in east are moving north and west because of global warming. I've kept an eye on my trees tonight and they haven't moved at all. I'll keep an eye on them.

This is because the entire universe spins around your trees.

killyfan wrote:

Guy in Shorts wrote:All right I’ll bite and I'm in full support of the scientific consensus that the cause of climate change is Russian Meddling.

Me too. Hahah.ha..ahh...ha...!

What is wrong with you people?????
The IPCC has already settled the science:

Russian Meddling is CAUSED by global warming!!

Sgt Eddy Brewers wrote:

killyfan wrote:

Guy in Shorts wrote:All right I’ll bite and I'm in full support of the scientific consensus that the cause of climate change is Russian Meddling.

Me too. Hahah.ha..ahh...ha...!

What is wrong with you people?????
The IPCC has already settled the science:

Russian Meddling is CAUSED by global warming!!

Could be true I suppose....

freeski wrote:Report says trees in east are moving north and west because of global warming. I've kept an eye on my trees tonight and they haven't moved at all. I'll keep an eye on them.

I can confirm this report. When my three trees came down two weeks ago they fell to the WNW.

Its truly terrible what global warming has done to spring skiing in the US...makes you want to cry. Closing dates will soon be in March or even February if this continues!

They're skiing powder @ A-basin......
(May 18th, 2017)

http://arapahoebasin.com/ABasin/snow-conditions/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

IS THIS JUST WHAT THE BEDWETTERS PREDICTED??

Thick Arctic ice pack traps boats, triggers rescue operation off Newfoundland

http://atlantic.ctvnews.ca/thick-arctic ... -1.3448987" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

“Unusually heavy Arctic pack ice has trapped multiple vessels, stymied the fishing season and triggered a high-stakes rescue operation from a sinking ship off Newfoundland.”

Scary how things are now that we have achieved the world Al Gore warned us of.

“Meanwhile, Hodgson said the Coast Guard's icebreakers, which usually aren't required after mid-April, continue to escort commercial vessels and ferries through the thick Arctic pack ice.”

Too much ice for the bears?

“Earlier this week, a polar bear carcass washed ashore on the Avalon Peninsula, sparking concerns about the unusually heavy pack ice and its impact on sea life.”

Sgt Eddy Brewers wrote:IS THIS JUST WHAT THE BEDWETTERS PREDICTED??

Thick Arctic ice pack traps boats, triggers rescue operation off Newfoundland

http://atlantic.ctvnews.ca/thick-arctic ... -1.3448987" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

“Unusually heavy Arctic pack ice has trapped multiple vessels, stymied the fishing season and triggered a high-stakes rescue operation from a sinking ship off Newfoundland.”

Scary how things are now that we have achieved the world Al Gore warned us of.

“Meanwhile, Hodgson said the Coast Guard's icebreakers, which usually aren't required after mid-April, continue to escort commercial vessels and ferries through the thick Arctic pack ice.”

Too much ice for the bears?

“Earlier this week, a polar bear carcass washed ashore on the Avalon Peninsula, sparking concerns about the unusually heavy pack ice and its impact on sea life.”

You may want to read past the headline before claiming this as a denialist victory. This is exactly what was predicted and now you look foolish.

Woodsrider wrote:

Sgt Eddy Brewers wrote:IS THIS JUST WHAT THE BEDWETTERS PREDICTED??

Thick Arctic ice pack traps boats, triggers rescue operation off Newfoundland

http://atlantic.ctvnews.ca/thick-arctic ... -1.3448987" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

“Unusually heavy Arctic pack ice has trapped multiple vessels, stymied the fishing season and triggered a high-stakes rescue operation from a sinking ship off Newfoundland.”

Scary how things are now that we have achieved the world Al Gore warned us of.

“Meanwhile, Hodgson said the Coast Guard's icebreakers, which usually aren't required after mid-April, continue to escort commercial vessels and ferries through the thick Arctic pack ice.”

Too much ice for the bears?

“Earlier this week, a polar bear carcass washed ashore on the Avalon Peninsula, sparking concerns about the unusually heavy pack ice and its impact on sea life.”

You may want to read past the headline before claiming this as a denialist victory. This is exactly what was predicted and now you look foolish.

OK. Please find me a consensus scientist posting a prediction of an "unusually heavy arctic ice pack?" by about this year 2017.

...and if ...one of them... predicted this...because the vast majority predicted thinning of arctic sea ice...it was one on the hallmark indicators of "climate change"... then please find me ONE climate event which WAS NOT predicted by a climate scientist.

Climate science seems to be so broadly inclusive, by certain readings, that ANYTHING that happens (warming cooling, floods, droughts) seems to have been predicted! Amazing.

Like this:
U.S. drought reaches record low as r*in reigns
https://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/ ... 100971018/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Drought in the U.S. fell to a record low this week, with just 6.1% of the lower 48 states currently experiencing such dry conditions
That's the lowest percentage in the 17-year history of the weekly U.S. Drought Monitor report.

So find where consensus scientists predicted the LOWEST drought conditions in the US EVER recorded...
was this also predicted???

...awaiting your response.