Even the Pope sides with Futurecurrents

Please show us NASA's data re Antarctica's ice mass.

 

NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddar...ns-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses

 

Ok, but is NASA a good authority on it?

 

There was a consensus that there was a big bang/singularity. Now a new quantum model is predicting that there was no big bang and the universe has existed forever. Hell they even taught us about the big bang in school.

http://phys.org/news/2015-02-big-quantum-equation-universe.html

 

Do you think NASA is a good authority?

 

You brought them up, are they trustworthy?

 

You need to differentiate reliable information put out by NASA and its employees at nasa.gov which is totally different than the nonsense put out by the California Institute of Technology at the climate.nasa.gov website.

 

I kind of thought you'd go this route, since we've been there before. Sorry, you got my pawn but I take your bishop. You have no authority greater than NASA to say that one division of NASA is publishing nonsense but another division is not.

 

Once again, climate.nasa.gov is not part of NASA and involves no NASA employees. In fact, a good number of NASA employees have demanded that NASA shut down the California Institute of Technology website because it detracts from the good work that NASA does.

 

Yes, Ricter, don't you know? NASA is not reliable. Bunch of space cadets.

For the real science of "globull warming" you need to go with the petroleum geologists.