Antarctica Melting FASTER!

They went to NIWA site. Used the official graph and were given access to the raw data.

CSC(climate science coalition does not provide the raw data to show how they got their graph either? WTF

The fact that NIWA makes the raw data available to groups like this is significant. It also makes the data available to the Public.

So they have nothing to Hide. Are Hiding Nothing.

NIWA climate scientists have previously explained to members of the Coalition why such corrections must be made. NIWA’s Chief Climate Scientist, Dr David Wratt, says he’s very disappointed that the Coalition continue to ignore such advice and therefore to present misleading analyses.

NIWA's analysis of measured temperatures uses internationally accepted techniques, including making adjustments for changes such as movement of measurement sites. For example, in Wellington, early temperature measurements were made near sea level, but in 1928 the measurement site was moved from Thorndon (3 metres above sea level) to Kelburn (125 m above sea level). The Kelburn site is on average 0.8°C cooler than Thorndon, because of the extra height above sea level.

In their own words, NIWA describe their logic thus.

Where there is an overlap in time between two records (such as Wellington Airport and Kelburn), it is a simple matter to calculate the average offset and adjust one site relative to the other.
Wellington Airport is +0.79°C warmer than Kelburn, which matches well with measurements in many parts of the world for how rapidly temperature decreases with altitude.
Thorndon (closed 31 Dec 1927) has no overlap with Kelburn (opened 1 Jan 1928). For the purpose of illustration, we have applied the same offset to Thorndon as was calculated for the Airport.
The final “adjusted” temperature curve is used to draw inferences about Wellington temperature change over the 20th century. The records must be adjusted for the change to a different Wellington location
Now, it may be that there was a good and obvious reason to adjust Wellington temps. My question remains, however: is applying a temperature example from 15km away in a different climate zone a valid way of rearranging historical data?

And my other question to David Wratt also remains: we'd all like to see the metholdology and reasoning behind adjustments on all the other sites as well.

Originally posted by masqua

Well, maybe...

Nothing like alarmist statements. I never said that, by the way. I'm more concerned about dwindling potable water, global food production and rising sea levels than I am about desertification and milder weather north of the 49th parallel.
............

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
ALL of the above causes changes in the Earth, including Climate Changes.

We can only adapt to what is happening, NO ONE can "save the Earth."

The Earth doesn't need saving, it is going through a process that has occurred before and there is nothing we can do about it except adapt and survive.

Originally posted by masqua

That was a good post and I agree with much of what you've said. Not too sure about the increased greenery you suggested, what with the massive deforestration happening worldwide, but it's food for thought.
.............

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
The United States also introduced the Lacey act in 2008 which was the first country to introduce a law banning all wood from illegal deforestation. Several months later the EU introduced a similar bill.

With the addition of a new forest reserve in Manitoba, Canada has now set aside 250 million acres of its vast boreal forest as parks or preserves, prohibiting logging, mining or oil drilling in these areas.

e360.yale.edu...

The problem is that third world nations are going to continue illegal deforestation and they will sell it to those who buy it. From the Middle East, to China, to Russia, etc.

How is anyone going to make these people stop deforestation?

How is anyone going to stop China, Russia, India and others from polluting the world without any regards for the environment, when all they want is to control the world economy, or at least to be a big part of such control.

China, Russia, India and others have emphatically stated they will NEVER accept any emission caps.

The worse polluters in the world are these countries, yet the UN, and environmentalists want for western nations to be the ones to pay for what others are doing. At the end the bill will be paid by the PEOPLE, meanwhile there is more control over people and countries like China, Russia, India, and some others keep polluting the world.

The Kyoto protocol and other similar protocols the UN, and environmentalists want to introduce will not do anything in favor of the environment, it will just distribute wealth to the rich elites in countries that will never accept any emission caps, or any environmental problems to get in their way.

How is that going to help anyone?

China announced plans Thursday to cut its carbon emissions by up to 45 percent as measured against its economic output – a target aimed at keeping its surging growth while still reining in pollution.

en.cop15.dk...

Are scientists underestimating nature's ability to absorb CO2?

Posted On: November 10, 2009 - 6:50pm

New data show that the balance between the airborne and the absorbed fraction of CO2 has stayed approximately constant since 1850, despite emissions of CO2 having risen from about 2 billion tons a year in 1850 to 35 billion tons a year now.

This suggests that terrestrial ecosystems and the oceans have a much greater capacity to absorb CO2 than had been previously expected.
The results run contrary to a significant body of recent research which expects that the capacity of terrestrial ecosystems and the oceans to absorb CO2 should start to diminish as CO2 emissions increase, letting greenhouse gas levels skyrocket. Dr Wolfgang Knorr at the University of Bristol, UK, found that in fact the trend in the airborne fraction since 1850 has only been 0.7 ± 1.4% per decade, which is essentially zero.

The strength of the new study, published online in Geophysical Research Letters, is that it rests solely on measurements and statistical data, including historical records extracted from Antarctic ice, and does not rely on computations with complex climate models.

Surprise In Earth's Upper Atmosphere: Mode Of Energy Transfer From The Solar Wind

www.sciencedaily.com
"Its like something else is heating the atmosphere besides the sun. This discovery is like finding it got hotter when the sun went down," said Larry Lyons, UCLA professor of atmospheric and oceanic sciences and a co-author of the research, which is in press in two companion papers in the Journal of Geophysical Research.

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Did you know that increased level of CO2 allow for plants to use water more efficiently? At about 1,200ppm to 1,500ppm plants, trees, and entire green ecosystems use less water, and still grow up to 60% bigger, and produce more harvests.

Remember that part of the goal the Socialist elites have is for "population control." What better way to control the population than by not allowing enough food to be produced because of lack of atmospheric CO2?

Climate Change is happening. Perhaps you remember that back in 2004 I was urging people to move out of coastlines, under the name Muaddib. But the thing is MOST people won't move. Look at New Orleans, people should be LEAVING that area yet even after knowing what can happen they stay there.

It would create millions of jobs if cities like New Orleans were moved, or build inland to avoid flooding, but that is not going to happen until New Orleans is destroyed by nature. It is the nature of many people.

The same happens with people in California. I have visited California and lived there for a week during a vacation and I would never move to that place. It is a ticking bomb.

But the fact of the matter is that mankind is not the cause of Climate Change.

There have been several threads posted by others and myself that show the Earth's magnetic field an dthe large fluctuations it is going through haven't occurred for tens of thousands of years.

The interplanetary field of the Solar System is weaker than it has been for a long time, and it is allowing more charged particles and radiation to enter the Solar System and to affect planets like Earth, including the climate.

Scientists found that even when the Sun's defenses are down SOMETHING ELSE is warming the Earth's atmosphere, and it is happening because of the weakened interplanetary magnetic field, as well as the weakened magnetic field of Earth.

Not only that but more interstellar dust, alongside more charged particles, more plasma, etc is entering the Solar System and their levels are increasing exponentially.

ALL of the above causes changes in the Earth, including Climate Changes.

We can only adapt to what is happening, NO ONE can "save the Earth."

The Earth doesn't need saving, it is going through a process that has occurred before and there is nothing we can do about it except adapt and survive.

Originally posted by Graybeard
It...Is?

Published Sunday in Nature Geoscience, the same study shows that the smaller but less stable West Antarctic icesheet is also shedding significant mass.
Scientists worry that rising global temperatures could trigger a rapid disintegration of West Antarctica, which holds enough frozen water to push up the global ocean watermark by about five metres (16 feet).

Originally posted by grail
the planet has been cooling for 10 years now.... the ice sheets in the antarctic are being pushed off into open water ...they are breaking off and floating north towards new zealand and oz...

Ok.NOTHING THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA SAYS ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING IS TRUE........

global warming is one the major lies in their end game plan to depopulate the planet by 80/90 per cent...without the global warming hoax there is no carbon tax etc.....

Originally posted by Eurisko2012
reply to post by atlasastro

 

Oh No!!!! The ice is melting!!

Let's hurry up and throw 200 million people out of work worldwide
and see if that helps.

Let's also raise everyones taxes and spend it on whatever.

Maybe then the ice will stop melting in Antarctica.

I think we should build a new prison on Antarctica.
Put those lying liberal scientists in it for 20 years.

So while you are happy to accept their explanation, I believe they've got far more explaining to do.

Especially when other sites raw data show a mild NEGATIVE trend over thier lifespan, then unexplained adjustments show warming?

Originally posted by atlasastro
The whole gist of my original reply is that the group you got your belief from does not explain how they got their graph. You don't ask them to explain it. Why?