ImranCan,
If I called your post "ridiculous," "patently absurd," and just plain "rubbish," would it carry as much weight as when you call a published article, about some scientific research, those same things?
btw...also from that article, fyi (...von Frese, leader of the project and a professor of earth sciences at Ohio State University) ...must be an elitist.
"Crustal heat flow is still one of the unknowns --
and it's a fairly significant one, according to our preliminary
results."
JohnMR,
You've not responded to any of the points about the most recent, comprehensive, GRACE data on net ice-mass gain/loss.
I'm still looking into the thermodynamics of CO2, but I could look through some old (Fall/Winter, '07/08) Threads to find the links, if you're interested. Please feel free to fisk my few, clearly defined, points (post #26337) above, about ice. I think that would be a lot easier than me trying to fisk that host of unrelated points you've made (again, and previously addressed) about ice extent, height, humidity, and location (and polar bears? LOL).
Melting came into this thread with the point about it cooling the oceans. Levitus (2003) has accounted for this in his Ocean Temp. calculations, as I've noted on another Topic.
But you're right; "melting theory/observations" is fairly off-topic, and should be continued elsewhere on either a new Topic or one of the older Topics on ice/melting/extent/etc., but not bears!
~Later
