Arctic sea ice will be gone in decades.

What has always amused me is that everyone seems to be unaware that the level of the oceans is controlled by more than how much ice is out there. We have freshwater springs in the ocean--and I doubt they vent the same amount of water into the ocean each and every year. Here

I think it would do everyone some good to actually figure out how much snow there is on any given continent, and how much ice there is at either pole every year, on average, verses how much snow-melt there is on any given year month by month averages, verses what the average level of the oceans were at those given points. It won't tell us what the sea level would be if all the ice were to melt, like everyone fears, but the discrepancies and the variations would give us an idea of how much the level of the oceans change from season to season. I haven't seen a paper like this, so it wold take a long time for me to figure out.

reply to post by Atzil321


I remember many of these same scientists claiming we were entering a new ice age back in the '70's.

They're scare-mongering to get more funding in my opinion.

There are those who say that the IPCC is flawed and only leans one way, to that of global warming.

I don't buy it. As George Carlin said, "It's pretty arrogant to think that man can screw up the earth this fast."

Earth will do what earth has always done. It will go through various degrees of warming and cooling. We can just measure it better now and people are using the data and fear to make a profit off of it.

Originally posted by rwfresh
I know one thing.. if i can give all my money to Al Gore and allow him to throw myself and my family in a prison camp to be tortured the earth will be appeased and the ice will melt much slower.

I'm good with that

Originally posted by Atzil321
reply to post by Essan

 

All the scientists working in the Arctic are unanimous in their findings and data, and say that summer ice cover will disappear entirely by 2030, leaving nothing but heat-trapping "blue ocean," What makes you qualified enough to question the solid scientific findings and decades of data collection? Do you have a phd in climatology or oceanography? Have you dedicated decades of your life living in the high Arctic doing valuable reseach into the effects of climate change? Or do you just believe that 97% of the worlds scientists are invoved in some kind of absurd conspiracy because your political leanings mean you can't accept something lefties believe in?........... wake up and get real people.

People used to believe the earth was flat, the center of the universe and only 6000 years old.. They even thought that creationism was a viable alternative to evolution. Some people -- non scientists -- think that man has no effect on climate change. Silly when you think of it.

Originally posted by spyder550

Originally posted by Atzil321
reply to post by Essan

 

All the scientists working in the Arctic are unanimous in their findings and data, and say that summer ice cover will disappear entirely by 2030, leaving nothing but heat-trapping "blue ocean," What makes you qualified enough to question the solid scientific findings and decades of data collection? Do you have a phd in climatology or oceanography? Have you dedicated decades of your life living in the high Arctic doing valuable reseach into the effects of climate change? Or do you just believe that 97% of the worlds scientists are invoved in some kind of absurd conspiracy because your political leanings mean you can't accept something lefties believe in?........... wake up and get real people.

People used to believe the earth was flat, the center of the universe and only 6000 years old.. They even thought that creationism was a viable alternative to evolution. Some people -- non scientists -- think that man has no effect on climate change. Silly when you think of it.

And scientists, for a long time, didn't believe that Salamanders "grew wool" and could walk out of fires unscathed because they are amphibians. Scientist can be right, but not all things that scientists conclude from their data is right. I really wish scientists would focus more on the data and less on their conclusions--but the system's not set up that way.

sure there is a human factor but it might be a different one then old odd weather,
has anyone of them considered that they are them self the problem ?

i mean what would "happen" if they just stopped braking the ice with their boats and just let the thinner sheets
grow ?

Originally posted by CynicalDrivel
And scientists, for a long time, didn't believe that Salamanders "grew wool" and could walk out of fires unscathed because they are amphibians. Scientist can be right, but not all things that scientists conclude from their data is right. I really wish scientists would focus more on the data and less on their conclusions--but the system's not set up that way.

And there you have it in its essence -- scientists know a lot more about salamanders -- and some of them have great salamander conventions where thye discuss wooly salamanders -- these discussions lead to the publishing and the publishing leads to discussion in all areas of wooly salamanders and thus the old concept bites the dust. Science has discovered enough proof to conclude that salamanders don't grow wool and stroll out of fires -- sometimes it takes a while but knowledge evolves one mutation at a time.

That is the beauty of the scientific method -- there are politics, feuding, personalities, involved but eventually facts prevail, they always prevail -- I love it!!

I don't understand the data conclusions thing -- the reason one collects data is to eventually draw a conclusion and conclusions are ALWAYS modifiable by new data.