Experts said Arctic sea ice would melt entirely by September 2016 - they were wrong

a reply to: luthier

I am all for a healthier environment . I think pollution is the real issue and don't consider CO2 a pollution as its essential for life . As far as looking at the guys papers I have no desire to do so and probably couldn't appreciate them but I do go to Climate Audit and look at what they discover in some of these scientific papers .

This so called expert is one of the experts Al Gore used in his inconvenient truth ,which had nothing to do with the truth but was a scam to convince us all to buy into AGW and accept the new taxes our corrupt politicians want to levy on us .

a reply to: the2ofusr1

I am with you. I think you can read my comments and see this.

However, if you want to be credible yourself while discrediting a scientists claims you have to address the entire claim and its reasoning. Otherwise whi cares. The guy made a claim somebody took a sound bite from and then tried to say the soundbite wasnt true.


Yeah the politicians like Al Gore have really put a bad light on intention. My wife is a university research professor. The biological impact studies are all I need to know we are really playing with fire with habitat collapse.

Which guess what....leads to climate change. We allow Brazil to not develop in a way that protects a massive global regulator of atmosphere and do tye same regionally across the world and the climate will certainly change.

All it takes is killing off microorganisms in the ocean to start a massive ripple. Since we have brains and consciousness and continue to do this we deserve what ever comes in my opinion .

Your right though habitat is key. Carbon is a fraction and really just a symptom of a consumption problem.

In my opinion lobby power in global power structures are the problem. Artifacts create for solutions or alternatives get burried by the good old boy system. Hence we love riding around in 150 year old technology while solutions already exist and have for some time. Those start up businesses were burried by the big boys and in some cases fake regulations that are meant to cripple competitors.

Surely GE can absorb a carbon tax, but what about there competitor?

Its science as a whole that needs auditing and your correct to look at that.

Its been said many time 50 percent of peer reviewed papers and drug trials can not be reproduced.

The NEJM chief editor has said some scary stuff. Like even diagnosis are totally false or fabricated and people get treated with dangerous drugs for false diagnosis on a regular basis.

Scary stuff greed is.

originally posted by: TrueAmerican

Dire predictions that the Arctic would be devoid of sea ice by September this year have proven to be unfounded after latest satellite images showed there is far more now than in 2012.

Scientists such as Prof Peter Wadhams, of Cambridge University, and Prof Wieslaw Maslowski, of the Naval Postgraduate School in Moderey, California, have regularly forecast the loss of ice by 2016, which has been widely reported by the BBC and other media outlets.

Prof Wadhams, a leading expert on Arctic sea ice loss, has recently published a book entitled A Farewell To Ice in which he repeats the assertion that the polar region would free of ice in the middle of this decade.

As late as this summer, he was still predicting an ice-free September.

Yet, when figures were released for the yearly minimum on September 10, they showed that there was still 1.6 million square miles of sea ice (4.14 square kilometres), which was 21 per cent more than the lowest point in 2012.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

Also:

It is the latest example of experts making alarming predictions which do not come to pass. Earlier this week environmentalists were accused of misleading the public about the "Great Pacific Garbage Patch" after aerial shots proved there was no "island of rubbish" in the middle of the ocean. Likewise, warnings that the hole in the ozone layer would never close were debunked in June.

This failure is why we must never, ever, trust anyone with AGW agenda. The earth has climate change in cycles. I am more inclined to believe we are headed towards another ice age. But first, we must make it through the increased moisture phase- like what is written in the geologic column.

Wasn't gone, but it didn't look too great:

Broken up ice real close to the north pole ain't a good sign.

The 'garbage island' is not what people say, nor is this really news to anyone who has been looking at it.
Vice went out there and it's mostly tiny bits of plastic or other man-made debris mixed everywhere. Scoop a glass of water out of the ocean there and you get all this multi-colored particles of refuse - without extensive filtering, most of it is not cleanable.

originally posted by: TrueAmerican
a reply to: yorkshirelad

And every single expert that said Arctic sea ice would melt entirely by September 2016 was wrong. When 2050 gets here and there is still plenty of Arctic sea ice, maybe by then the new generation will have all these crackpots jailed, with new laws against AGW freaks. Now that would be COOL. Icy, even.

How many experts have said this?
1%? 10%? 100%?

This projection has been an old one, back when Gore did his book / film.
It was the 'worst case scenario' projection then - many years ago.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
This is even news? We really should be getting used to failed predictions by now.

And you have to love this: "We might be wrong today, but just you wait! We'll be right tomorrow!" No, you made a prediction and it failed. You were wrong.

Wrong today, wrong tomorrow. Just wrong. Go back and try to get it right.

What about this one?
It's come and gone and been true.

a reply to: luthier

I see what you are saying about questioning the research in a technical way ,but I am not technical and so would require other geeks to do that part . In the AGW theory we are told that because CO2 is a greenhouse gas ,that adding more to the system would cause warming . The science to this is quite simple but what we have seen in reality is something different . ie. the 18 year pause that happened while CO2 levels were increasing .That and the fact that the "models" diverged from reality while tracking CO2 very well . This tells me that the science of what has and is happening is not settled .

The problem for the modellers seems to be able to hind cast as well as forecast ,or at least to any significant degree .The other part to the science that seems to be a problem they have not perfected yet is the signals they find using the proxies . Most proxy generated studies have issues and it would seem that they are the choice of a lot of studies only because they can cherry pick the data they use .Climate Audit does a great job auditing them and have found both cherry picked research as well as statically non-significant results . It would seem that the authors of these studies are more concerned with producing hockey stick charts then producing good studies .

I guess a lot of it has to do with trust as well .That is where the climate gate Emails play a important roll .imo

a reply to: Greven

I am not sure if there has been a study on ice breakers and the effect they have on Arctic ice but could imagine there is a impact .They keep building bigger and badder ones every year .

originally posted by: TrueAmerican
a reply to: yorkshirelad

And every single expert that said Arctic sea ice would melt entirely by September 2016 was wrong. When 2050 gets here and there is still plenty of Arctic sea ice, maybe by then the new generation will have all these crackpots jailed, with new laws against AGW freaks. Now that would be COOL. Icy, even.

No they didn't but hey ho you like to live in la la land so what the hell. No point in arguing. In fact yes yes you are absolutely correct why would I question the armchair computer climate expert over people freezing their balls of in sub zero temperatures. Silly me.

a reply to: Greven

No, it wasn't accurate.

TheRedneck

Expert Predicts Cooling Over Past 14 Years.

www.skepticalscience.com...

Expert wrong. It's been getting warmer.

data.giss.nasa.gov...

Nice diversion with the sea ice thing though.

nsidc.org...

A gathering of the world's top experts in meteorology have reached a consensus:

The weather is changing and the results will be permanent.

The science is undisputable, changing weather is a real phenomenon and the race is on to determine the right response.

Unfortunately the hypothesis has no quantifiable value, and all attempts at prediction beyond a few days have proven false by observation.

However, the consensus has proven the hypothesis to be true and a dire warning has been issued.

The weather will change, permanently from the moment of now, and we must act before it is too late.

a reply to: TrueAmerican

Although a quick glance at NSIDC satellite data going back to 1981 shows an undeniable downward trend in sea ice over the past 35 years, scientists have accused Prof Wadhams and others of "crying wolf" and harming the message of climate change through "dramatic", "incorrect" and "confusing" predictions.

In your own reference: www.telegraph.co.uk...

originally posted by: Phage
Expert Predicts Cooling Over Past 14 Years.

www.skepticalscience.com...

Expert wrong. It's been getting warmer.

data.giss.nasa.gov...

 

Nice diversion with the sea ice thing though.

nsidc.org...

You tell them!!! Exactly my thoughts

originally posted by: TrueAmerican
Experts said Arctic sea ice would melt entirely by September 2016 - they were wrong.

How pathetic to attack the prediction of the date, while the event is happening all around us.
Climate change deniers are those with, for whatever emotional and/or mental 'reason', have their butts in the air and their heads in the sand!
Read the reports from the folks at the space stations on how blue the pole has become, almost "unrecognizable" from the extant maps! It was just in the headlines!
More 'conspiracy', I guess, to steal your grandma's cookie recipe...

Enjoy your 'sand'wich...

(Bye the by, it has been my experience that anyone calling themselves a "True American", has been insane, and most often violently so. Just sayin'... *__- )

a reply to: namelesss

Hypothesis, observation, results.

The results of observation don't fit my prediction. Wait...
If I alter temperature the data temperature just a little...

Aha! I was right! The observation was false, but by correction it proves my prediction was actually right!

And besides who really cares! The hypothesis is truth by consensus, it shouldn't matter if it can't be tested.

a reply to: feelingnothing

If I alter temperature the data temperature just a little...

Does that apply to Roy Spencer too?

originally posted by: namelesss

originally posted by: TrueAmerican
Experts said Arctic sea ice would melt entirely by September 2016 - they were wrong.

How pathetic to attack the prediction of the date, while the event is happening all around us.
Climate change deniers are those with, for whatever emotional and/or mental 'reason', have their butts in the air and their heads in the sand!
Read the reports from the folks at the space stations on how blue the pole has become, almost "unrecognizable" from the extant maps! It was just in the headlines!
More 'conspiracy', I guess, to steal your grandma's cookie recipe...

Enjoy your 'sand'wich...



(Bye the by, it has been my experience that anyone calling themselves a "True American", has been insane, and most often violently so. Just sayin'... *__- )

So even when you are proven wrong, you are still right? That is usually referred to as a delusion.

a reply to: Phage

Of course it doesn't. Are you a denialist now?

a reply to: feelingnothing

No.

Based upon this chart, as we enter the home stretch, it looks increasingly like 2016 might be a new record-warm year (since the satellite record began in 1979) in the UAH dataset.

www.drroyspencer.com...

Seems, as much as he would like otherwise, no matter how much he tweaks his model. The world is warming.
His model says ... warming.
www.drroyspencer.com...

a reply to: Phage

The data is simply wrong, appropriate corrections to render it pristine by the factors creating distortion will prove the validity of his theory