Really, does that work??
I can say the CIA found you to be a complete idiot and supply no references at all and then just say "Tell the CIA you are not an idiot""
You made an assertion based on no evidence other than RWNJ tom foolery and cannot back it up but it is important to you so you just shrug it off and task any challengers to look it up for themselves??
Pretty weak, even for you.
19M documents and you are too lazy to reveal a single one that is credible.
Yes you wasted 45 min looking tonight because no credible source for you fantasy exists.
Funny that you don't even show any documents in your *search* that even support your claim.
Also and slightly off topic, your fkc posts are hardly readable. Obviously you are consumed by emotion as you bank out your nonsense to the extend that it rarely even reads correctly as English. Is this on purpose in order to salt the post with "outing" mechanisms allowing you to twist language.
So I conclude there was no such document. You cannot prove with a reliable source that there ever was such a document. Yes I have taken away another of your warm and fuzzies. So cross it off your list and shdafkcup.
Ok, I think it was well know that heat that can melt ICE is coming from the Earth all over the planet. It may be news to you but not to anybody with a science degree.
Caught in a direct error and you call it unimportant minutiae ??
Well Ok, you are an emotionally driven half wit. I guess when you misunderstand yet again you can find a way to justify this as minutiae.
Simple fact. The UTA study was not at all related to climate change and actually builds upon the relative concern about thee.
But, the UTA study does absolutely nothing to alter the proposition that MMGW is melting the glacier.
So why do you think it relevant.
So what is wrong with the statement that the glacier is melting due to global warming.
In English this doesn't mean exclusively one cause. Learn to read it.
""volcanoes venting into sea water heats the water (pretty obvious) and contributes to melting.""
It does NOT say that this is happening under the glacier being discussed. It says the magma flow is increasing the thermal flux through the floor up to two tenths of a watt per square meter.
Maybe it was a lie. I know you are all too willing to believe nearly anything that fits your hyper emotional political agenda.
What you can't search for it now, but you can enter garbage on a stock message board ??
Isn't it possible that more than one thing can melt a glacier at a time.
Now give it some though and see if it doesn't make sense. Turn off the AM radio while trying to think, it will help you.
Yeah and some are even psyched about the tea party victory in Virginia. It takes a special kind of stupid to not see the writing on the wall.
Of course they might actually believe the propaganda put out by talk radio that the vast middle supports far right ideology. Talk radio may as well work for the democrats.
Where might one find a reference to these documents.
I searched and found nothing about your CIA documents.
Lots of people or computers who are deciding that future price movements will be upward.
Are you intentionally trying to look stupid.
Well there may be many causes if you want to mince words.
There have been reports of researchers throwing out their hot coffee onto the ice causing melting.
Maybe a plane flew over and through out some vodka that melted a little ice.
But the primary event occurring is the melting at the surface as a result of warmer temps.
I guess for you in this case it must have been "stupid"
""A main event your NJs have been using as evidence has a very likely other cause for being.""
Either a blatant lie on your part or a demonstration of vast stupidity.
Ocean temperatures are warmer. The two tenths of a watt per square meter of heat flowing up under the glacier is changing the base of it somewhat which could cause a collapse of the glacier into the warmer water. In no way did this paper even touch the well known fact of the glacier melting at the surface.
So which is it in you case - Lie || Stupid
Uh nope, 9/11 belongs to bush, despite your illogical OPINION about their motives.
Why would they wait during the supposed weak Clinton presidency and then launch the attack after a republican evangelical religious nut takes the presidency who will be sure to respond strongly.
Nope it's more likely they waited until there was a thick headed idiot in the office who would take the bait. The goal was to involve the US in a costly middle east war.
All considered the attacks during the Clinton presidency cost much less to the USA than the absurd attempts to democratize the middle east through war as was done by boosh.