Originally Posted by 8gv (Post 310023)

So we are still on track for 4/22 at 3pm then.

I shall prepare my acceptance speech. ;)

Originally Posted by joey2665 (Post 310037)

Are we really to the point that we do not believe anything anymore? We are questioning the agenda of an article written almost 100 years ago.

Originally Posted by FlyingScot (Post 310056)

No on both counts--



It is the agenda of people using the article today that has been questioned.



It is climate change deniers who have a hard time believing things in the face of overwhelming evidence.

Originally Posted by Bear Islander (Post 310036)

Did you start with your own beliefs then look for data or articles that support your ideas? That's hardly "scientific".

Perhaps that article was written to support a political position. Perhaps it was just wrong. Perhaps the author was simply tying to create a sensational article that would create interest. It succeed in sparking your interest 97 years later. Perhaps the author, like you, started with a preconceived notion and looked for data or reports to support that belief.

Originally Posted by FlyingScot (Post 310024)

It's kind of silly to suggest that because somebody may have been wrong a hundred years ago that the entire scientific community is wrong today. And it's ironic to use a fact check site that may show one article in favor of climate change denial when that same site likely shows about a thousand (a million?) other references that support climate change

Originally Posted by sladd (Post 310062)

Yesterday after I drive on Rte 11 from Alton to Meredith and didn’t see any ice. Anyone know how Wolfboro looks?


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Originally Posted by MAXUM (Post 310069)

Guaranteed it will "sink" by mid week ;)

Originally Posted by FlyingScot (Post 310024)

It's kind of silly to suggest that because somebody may have been wrong a hundred years ago that the entire scientific community is wrong today. And it's ironic to use a fact check site that may show one article in favor of climate change denial when that same site likely shows about a thousand (a million?) other references that support climate change

Originally Posted by Top-Water (Post 310071)

Would you know how long it takes for Marine Patrol to have the sunken ice marked off. :D: What color buoys do they use for sunken ice. ;);)

Originally Posted by TiltonBB (Post 310064)

Your presumptions could not be more incorrect. And I assume you know what is often said about people who assume things. The article was emailed to me by a friend. I laughed when I read it because of the last sentence and I shared it because I though other people would too. It's that simple.



I am not sure when you had the time to interview "the entire scientific community" but you must have missed a few scientists. I can assure you that there are plenty of scientists that disagree with a lot of the global warming or climate change (or whatever they call it this week) theories.

I don't know what is right at this time but it is pretty obvious the the person quoted in the article was wrong about climate change 100 years ago. Most of the predictions never came true.

From another source:

The Great Global Warming Swindle

The Great Global Warming Swindle is a polemical documentary film that suggests that the scientific opinion on climate change is influenced by funding and political factors, and questions whether scientific consensus on global warming exists.

The film, made by British television producer Martin Durkin, presents scientists, economists, politicians, writers, and others who dispute the scientific consensus regarding anthropogenic global warming. The programme's publicity materials assert that man-made global warming is "a lie" and "the biggest scam of modern times."


So, sometimes when you only listen to people who agree with you it tends to skew your opinions, and if what is said confirms your opinions, you feel it validates them.

In life, and in politics, that can often work against you.

And then there is this:

31,487 American scientists have signed this petition, including 9,029 with PhDs (Must be some of the scientists missed by FlyingScot) :)

Originally Posted by webmaster (Post 310076)

Just posted by Emerson Aviation:

Originally Posted by TiltonBB (Post 310064)

Your presumptions could not be more incorrect. And I assume you know what is often said about people who assume things. The article was emailed to me by a friend. I laughed when I read it because of the last sentence and I shared it because I though other people would too. It's that simple.



I am not sure when you had the time to interview "the entire scientific community" but you must have missed a few scientists. I can assure you that there are plenty of scientists that disagree with a lot of the global warming or climate change (or whatever they call it this week) theories.

I don't know what is right at this time but it is pretty obvious the the person quoted in the article was wrong about climate change 100 years ago. Most of the predictions never came true.

From another source:

The Great Global Warming Swindle

The Great Global Warming Swindle is a polemical documentary film that suggests that the scientific opinion on climate change is influenced by funding and political factors, and questions whether scientific consensus on global warming exists.

The film, made by British television producer Martin Durkin, presents scientists, economists, politicians, writers, and others who dispute the scientific consensus regarding anthropogenic global warming. The programme's publicity materials assert that man-made global warming is "a lie" and "the biggest scam of modern times."


So, sometimes when you only listen to people who agree with you it tends to skew your opinions, and if what is said confirms your opinions, you feel it validates them.

In life, and in politics, that can often work against you.

And then there is this:

31,487 American scientists have signed this petition, including 9,029 with PhDs (Must be some of the scientists missed by FlyingScot) :)

Originally Posted by Bear Islander (Post 310080)

It's incredible how people can get sucked into internet fakes. That "Petition" has been circulated for more that twenty years. Snopes declare it to be false. Included as signatories are the Spice Girls band and most of the character in Star Wars. And the funding originated with the oil industry.

It only takes a few seconds to check out things on Snopes BEFORE you post.

Originally Posted by DEJ (Post 310093)

:offtopic:
This is a thread about ice conditions on the lake, please stay on topic or start another thread.

Originally Posted by Bear Islander (Post 310100)

Are you suggesting that global warming has no connection with ice conditions on the lake?

I disagree. It seems to me that ice out is getting later over time. However that observation is anecdotal and not scientific.

Originally Posted by Bear Islander (Post 310100)

Are you suggesting that global warming has no connection with ice conditions on the lake?

I disagree. It seems to me that ice out is getting later over time. However that observation is anecdotal and not scientific.

Originally Posted by LIforrelaxin (Post 310101)

I agree .....

However your stance of ice out getting later over time, indicates not necessarily global warming, but rather a shift in the timing of the season, in our "calendar year"..... These things can be shown or not scientifically, however screaming global warming has a much better chaotic effect to it.

I am not saying that global warming isn't a real thing.... but I also believe with more study we might find some additional shifts and re-alignments going on, as mother natures determines and figures out how to deal with the biggest environmental challenge on earth "MAN"

Yep I just went there............

Originally Posted by Bear Islander (Post 310100)

Are you suggesting that global warming has no connection with ice conditions on the lake?

I disagree. It seems to me that ice out is getting later over time. However that observation is anecdotal and not scientific.

Originally Posted by JasJackson (Post 310144)

With the latest view from Center Harbor Inn, it looks as though the Mount Washington can leave her winter port and head back to The Weirs...

https://centerharborinn.com/winnipesaukee-webcam/

Ice out 4/23/19 @ 6:10a? Wakey wakey eggs ‘n bakey Emerson Aviation!

Originally Posted by webmaster (Post 310113)

The problem is that this thread is for Ice-Out updates. If you want to start another thread about Climate Change and the lake you are welcome to do so but this thread should be about the status of the lake ice during this period.

For those interested in that other topic check the data on our Ice-Out page that shows the Ice-Out dates for the last 130 or so years.

Originally Posted by Bear Islander (Post 310100)

Are you suggesting that global warming has no connection with ice conditions on the lake? I disagree. It seems to me that ice out is getting later over time. However that observation is anecdotal and not scientific.

Originally Posted by Bear Islander (Post 310100)

Are you suggesting that global warming has no connection with ice conditions on the lake?

I disagree. It seems to me that ice out is getting later over time. However that observation is anecdotal and not scientific.

Originally Posted by nj2nh (Post 310181)

Earliest ice out ever was in 2016. So much for it getting later.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Originally Posted by Fever29 (Post 310175)

Emerson just posted an update... looks like ice out could be this afternoon!

"Closing in on ice out. As of 11:00 Center Harbor is holding on but just barely."

Originally Posted by Bear Islander (Post 310100)

Are you suggesting that global warming has no connection with ice conditions on the lake?

I disagree. It seems to me that ice out is getting later over time. However that observation is anecdotal and not scientific.

Originally Posted by pondguy (Post 310190)

It could sink any minute now ! :emb: