Record return of Arctic ice cap as it grows by 60% in a year

page: 2
41
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 9 2013 @ 06:32 AM
link   
This confirms what I have been saying about AGW for years.The proponents of this farce are now becoming less and less credible day by day.
Witness their change in description AGW and Global Warming to Climate Change.
Climate Change is being influenced by the higher energies of the sun and possible release of deep sea methane.
Antarctic Ice growth is occurring naturally as described in Antarctic ice core samples, and yes the Arctic is warming more quickly than first imagined.
The ice growth is offsetting the ice loss and may indeed shut down the warming of Eastern European countries resulting in the next Ice Age.
The IPCC is now been proven to be another group of fear mongering Leftist wingnuts interested in one thing only - Carbon Taxation.
edit on 9-9-2013 by Cynic because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 9 2013 @ 06:47 AM
link   
Nothing to see here, just media publications with an agenda attempting to misrepresent a science they know nothing about.

This explains the sort of reasoning behind such poorly researched articles:




posted on Sep, 9 2013 @ 06:51 AM
link   
I prefer to call it "climate change", and changes in the climate are definitely happening.

The ice caps may be returning every winter, but the glaciers are rapidly disappearing.
You should watch the documentary film "chasing ice". The last ten mins are pretty intense.
edit on 9-9-2013 by SalientSkivvy because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2013 @ 06:52 AM
link   
Whatever.
You are wrong.
It has happened before over millions of years.
Sorry for your own ignorance of the matter.



posted on Sep, 9 2013 @ 06:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cynic
Whatever.
You are wrong.
It has happened before over millions of years.
Sorry for your own ignorance of the matter.


No one is claiming that the climate is not capable of changing by itself, nor that it has changed in the past. The argument is over the cause of the current episode of change. The fact that it was warmer in the Cretaceous or cooler in the Pre-Cambrian means absolutely nothing with regards to our current problem.

Hundreds of climate models have consistently failed to reproduce the warming we've seen in the past century without taking human emissions of greenhouse gases into consideration. Every natural forcing has been ruled out and the greenhouse effect is a scientific fact.



posted on Sep, 9 2013 @ 07:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cynic
This confirms what I have been saying about AGW for years.The proponents of this farce are now becoming less and less credible day by day.

You keep saying it based on cherry picked evidence and the immensly ignorant "analysis" by the cherry pickers. You can say it as loudly and as often as you like, folks who can read and who genuinely want to understand HAVE to read the original scientific documents. It requires thinking and understanding of the concepts and mechanisms at play.


Witness their change in description AGW and Global Warming to Climate Change.

What on earth are you blabbering about. The term depends on the context and they are all inter related terms. But hey let's not let understanding of the english language get in the way, so moving on we now have:


Climate Change is being influenced by the higher energies of the sun and possible release of deep sea methane.

If a warming sun was responsible for the increase in temperature then I'm afraid you and I would not be here, we would be fried. Oh hang on you have just admitted that the world is getting warmer....progress indeed. (You see that's problem with being wrong you tend to contradict yourself). One thing you are correct about ALL the warming is due to heat from the sun. The problem with the skeptic is they don't understand that the vast majority of heat coming from the sun irradiates back out into space. It's the balance between the two that is changing.


Antarctic Ice growth is occurring naturally as described in Antarctic ice core samples, and yes the Arctic is warming more quickly than first imagined.

Yet again, read the goddam literature and not the cherry picked snippets that support the incorrect assertion. FYI Antarctic ice AREA is increasing as you say but only because the ice is melting !!! The ice sheets are melting and the freshwater is floating to the top of the seawater (because of its lower density, that's called Physics !!) and the freshwater is freezing on top of the seawater. The ice coverage is greater in area but much thinner. The overall volume of ice as measure by satellites is decreasing. Now that is one paragraph with 3 physical mechanism being described which is probably two more than a skeptic can cope with.


The ice growth is offsetting the ice loss and may indeed shut down the warming of Eastern European countries resulting in the next Ice Age.

That's an assertion based on a flawed assumption as to the reason for the ice "growth". See above.


The IPCC is now been proven to be another group of fear mongering Leftist wingnuts interested in one thing only - Carbon Taxation.
edit on 9-9-2013 by Cynic because: (no reason given)

AHA! there it is. Politics. Your politcal ideology prevents you from accepting that we are responsible for Climate Change otherwise we would be compelled to do something about it. Whatever we choose to do does not fit in with a right wing capitalistic agenda.



posted on Sep, 9 2013 @ 07:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Kali74
 


Kali74 are you saying those who do not want to push their climate agenda do not cherry pick ? Have you seen any of the emails that were hacked and exposes the expulsion of any data that does not agree with a predetermined/wanted outcome by the very same people who are pushing this agenda?? iceagenow.info...

Climategate 2.0: Thousands of new emails from ‘confirm great man-made global warming scare is not about science but about political activism’, says Morano.


notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com...
QUOTE:•
Firstly, atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) has its greatest absorption of infrared radiation (IR) at sub-zero temperatures, as its absorption bands lie in the 12-16 micron wavelength band, corresponding to the wavelength of strongest IR surface emission from polar ice and snow. At higher temperatures, the typical wavelength of the strongest IR surface transmission is less than 12 microns, and therefore less affected by CO2. At temperatures near the average surface temperature of the Earth (c. 15°C), the strongest emission wavelength is around 10 microns, a wavelength which is largely unaffected by greenhouse gases. This is the so-called `radiation window’ of the atmosphere where IR radiation from the surface escapes freely to the space.

Secondly, by far the most powerful atmospheric greenhouse gas is water vapour. Water vapour shares many overlapping absorption bands with CO2 and therefore an increase or decrease in atmospheric CO2 has limited effect on the overall rate of IR absorption in those overlapping regions, if water vapour is present in sufficient quantity. In the Polar Regions , the air is dry due to prevailing low temperatures, allowing CO2 to exert a much greater influence than would be possible in warmer and moister air masses at lower latitudes. Here water vapour saturates the absorption wavebands to the point where changes in CO2 have little effect. In addition to the enhanced greenhouse effect, Arctic climate is influenced by a powerful positive feedback mechanism, the temperature-albedo feedback, tending to amplify any initial temperature change. Rising temperatures will usually increase melting of snow and sea ice, reducing surface reflectance, thereby increasing solar absorption, which raises temperatures, and so on. Conversely, if climate cools, less snow and ice melts in summer, raising the albedo and causing further cooling as more solar radiation is reflected rather than absorbed. END QUOTE:


First, let’s have a look at the UAH satellites, that cover 60S to 85S. Since satellites began monitoring temperatures in 1979, there has actually been a small but declining trend (see green line).
In the artic

So we now have:-
Over all Declining temperatures with temporary warm spikes in other areas
Increasing sea ice
Advancing glaciers
Increasing ice sheet mass.

On every count, the models and predictions of the IPCC and WMO have failed.

Meanwhile, alarmists tie themselves into ever more complicated knots, trying to explain record levels of Antarctic sea ice on global warming!

iceagenow.info...

www.climatedepot.com... ric-chemistry-and-physics/

Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 8879-8914, 2013www.atmos-chem-phys.net/13/8879/2013/doi:10.5194/acp-13-8879-2013

This actual scientific study says the models used to scare everyone are off by as much as 100%...no room to post it here...There are differences between Cherry picking studies that disagree with a false agenda and the partial lies and bad data the agenda was built around. Yet there are many who still want to believe in fudged data and those who have been caught lying and deleting data that does not agree with their research funding preconceived/wanted outcome...

Actually Kali74 I do respect your research on this subject and in many ways I could agree with your findings but as I said to you in another thread long ago...The science is not in and the studies are not complete; no reason to go running off and believe everything you read or hear especially when there is serious money behind a program to possibly foster incomplete/hidden data or lies .

When those who are pushing this stuff are caught lying then: It's OK to let a fool kiss you; but don't let a kiss fool you. How many times do we have to be kissed by the fools to finally figure out they are not to be trusted?

As far as Climate depot and Ice Age now they are a central clearings house who bring attention to articles and research (sources are linked) that disagree with the whole agenda 21 Global Warming/ Climate Change propaganda...



posted on Sep, 9 2013 @ 09:45 AM
link   
Increasing methane in the atmosphere traps in the sun’s heat at 20 times that of CO2. There are many causes to the increasing methane from man made reasons such as landfills, cattle, rice paddies, fracking to natural causes such as the increasing amount of volcanoes. Once the heat increases, the more methane releases. As methane builds up in the atmosphere it traps the sun’s heat. Long wave infrared from the sun enters our atmosphere and heats up the surface of the planet but it safely bounces back out to space as short wave infrared, but with the build up of methane, it is trapping in the short wave infrared, thus causing an increase in global temperature much worse than CO2, possibly causing a more rapid global warming.

I’ve never been a believer in the global warming carbon tax issue, I drive an SUV myself, but as I’ve studied more and more about the release of methane, I’ve become a firm believer that we are facing a major situation and it isn’t helping any of us when we continue to ignore it. Read my dangerous gas threads in my signature. There is plenty of information in there about the methane and hydrogen sulfide problem we face.

Methane and hydrogen sulfide pluming into the air at a rapid rate is the real culprit of our record-setting heat waves plaguing the planet. Read my previous post on this thread for some links to just a few of those heat waves. There is no mini Ice Age, only rising temperatures. We are trending towards more hot weather extremes and fewer cold weather extremes.



posted on Sep, 9 2013 @ 09:52 AM
link   
An inconvenient Reality?



This thread should probably be moved to the RANT forum... ALL of the 'global warming'... Oh! I'm sorry... the 'Climate Change' true believers definitely protest too much!

It NEVER ceases to amaze me at the lack of understanding demonstrated by these wannabe saviors of mankind...

They can't get ANYTHING right...

Not even the fact that the melting of the ice would cause sea levels to go DOWN...

Oops! THAT is some climate model you got there!




posted on Sep, 9 2013 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by pikestaff

Originally posted by rickymouse
Ahhh Rats. I was wishing global warming would give us nicer winters here. This is a depressing thread, the ice is getting closer to the great lakes again. I need to start building a campfire every evening and sit around it with a beer to help reverse this trend. Between the smoke and the methane in my beer farts, that should put us back on the warming track.

According to QI America, humans fart hydrogen sulphide, which is why the damn gas stinks!


Okay, the intention is not to derail this thread, but to bring some light to a very important controversy that has been established. Below you will find some facts that may indicate both of you are right.

The composition of fart gas is highly variable. Most of the air we swallow, especially the oxygen component, is absorbed by the body before the gas gets into the intestines. By the time the air reaches the large intestine, most of what is left is nitrogen. Chemical reactions between stomach acid and intestinal fluids may produce carbon dioxide, which is also a component of air and a product of bacterial action. Bacteria also produce hydrogen and methane. But the relative proportions of these gases that emerge from our anal opening depend on several factors: what we ate, how much air we swallowed, what kinds of bacteria we have in our intestines, and how long we hold in the fart. The longer a fart is held in, the larger the proportion of inert nitrogen it contains, because the other gases tend to be absorbed into the bloodstream through the walls of the intestine. A nervous person who swallows a lot of air and who moves stuff through his digestive system rapidly may have a lot of oxygen in his farts, because his body didn't have time to absorb the oxygen. According to Dr. James L. A. Roth, the author of Gastrointestinal Gas (Ch. 17 in Gastroenterology, v. 4, 1976) most people (2/3 of adults) pass farts that contain no methane. If both parents are methane producers, their children have a 95% chance of being producers as well. The reason for this is apparently unknown. Some researchers suspect a genetic influence, whereas others think the ability is due to environmental factors. However, all methane in any farts comes from bacterial action and not from human cells.



posted on Sep, 9 2013 @ 11:07 AM
link   
Well Joe Schmuck says;

Looks like Mother Nature is still alive and kick'n !!

Still doing Her job successfully.

And She doesn't even have a PhD after Her name !

But Joe still wants to hear from 'experts' about that claim back in 2007.

The one about all the ice going away. It's in the OP story.



posted on Sep, 9 2013 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by 727Sky
 


Climategate was a complete farse.

Insightful article at the Guardian



posted on Sep, 9 2013 @ 02:02 PM
link   
David Rose is to factual reporting on climate issues what 20 donuts a day are to a careful calorie controlled diet ....

And he seems to have a very poor grasp of basic English and Maths: 'could' does not mean the same as 'will' and there has been no ice growth at all, simply less melt this year than we saw last year - and still considerably more than model were predicting a few years back (which I guess does prove that climate models are not to be relied upon!)



posted on Sep, 9 2013 @ 02:17 PM
link   
It was only in the 70's when these very same climatologists were telling us we were heading for a new ice age.

Either they don't know what they're talking about or they bend whichever way the political winds tell them to.



posted on Sep, 9 2013 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Power_Semi
 


It was only in the 70s that astronomers were telling us that Pluto was the most distant large object orbiting the sun.

So yes, science (unlike religion) is constantly changing as new data comes to light.

And some scientists in the 70s did think at the time that we were due a new ice age (although many thought at the time that rising CO2 levels would counter this) - but since then we have a better understanding of the Milankovitch Cylcles and the causes of ice ages and now projections have changed accordingly. Although some of those who promoted an imminent catastrophic ice age in the 70s are still doing so .....



posted on Sep, 9 2013 @ 03:22 PM
link   
The general complaint I've heard about the 'global warming' theory is that it is based on a lack of data. Then when for the records available, it can be shown beyond a doubt that warming is going on, the complaint becomes, 'there's no proof it's caused by man'. There is coincidental data, and a physics model that back this up, but it is harder to prove. However, it is a complex topic with no means of producing case-control data.

However, to cherry pick 2 data points, this August 2012 and last August 2013 and claim that this is enough to invalidate the global warming hypothesis is truly an absurd amount of jumping to conclusions. Stop it. It only weakens any hope you had of arguing against the global warming hypothesis, by demonstrating a huge amount of ignorance on the topic. On the other side of this, newspapers making predictions that all ice will be gone by 2013 demonstrate an equal amount of ignorance about random walk time series.

First of all, without resorting to time series analysis techniques, one can simply look at statistical overlays and the difference between 2012 and 2013 is obvious here (nsidc.org...). Now, select the 2 standard deviation outline of your choice. 2012 was a very exceptional year. 2013, not as much, but still over 2 standard deviations from the average when compared with 1979-2000.

The mistake (for those predicting no ice, and those now saying there is no global warming both) is assuming that the warming occurs monotonically. It's an ebb and flow random walk type of process. There will be still be periods of colder weather. The overall trend is still "warmer". The current data is quite strong in that regard. 20 years ago, I used to go snow-skiing near where I went to high school, (Renegade Ski resort), and now there is rarely snow in the winter at all. A man in the local bar once showed me a photo of 60 years ago, when he drove his car across the ice on the river. I've never seen ice on the river, ever. Yet, will it snow this year. It just might, or it might not--but I doubt that anyone is opening a ski resort anytime soon nearby.

The current debate is not that global warming is taking place, it's about the cause and the consequences of it.



posted on Sep, 9 2013 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


Sorry I had trouble taking the article seriously with half naked pictures of Miley Cyrus and Bakini bodies in the "Other News" side bar..


edit on 9-9-2013 by MDDoxs because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2013 @ 10:35 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


Hey, I'm an average Joe citizen! Who am I supposed to believe? How about common sense? The world is going through changes, just like it has countless times before. The doom and gloom regarding the weather is bunk designed to get someone, somewhere rich. I'm all for going green though, even though we may not be responsible for the weather, we're certainly responsible for all the junk in our oceans. Like plastics, oil and all that "stuff".



posted on Sep, 10 2013 @ 07:31 AM
link   

xuenchen

And now it's global COOLING! Record return of Arctic ice cap as it grows by 60% in a year



]







url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2415191/Global-cooling-Arctic-ice-caps-grows-60-global-warming-predictions.html]And now it's global COOLING! Record return of Arctic ice cap as it grows by 60% in a year


this is disingenuous at best. i had thought it was common knowledge that the phenomena you refer to is actually called 'global climate change'.

this is only the 'tip of the iceberg' so to speak... we cannot address the issue if 'we' are caught up in the semantics of 'warming' vs 'cooling'

cant you see that it is a period of cooling followed by a period of warming, or vice versa, each escalating the severity of the next?? cant you see that humans are basically lynching themselves, or at best turning a blind eye while greed rapes this planet? its like you are trying to describe a hillside with a blindfold on, man.

you appear to be caught up in the politics and the banter. you appear to be happy with slandering figures you don't agree with...

yes, climate change can and has been used for political gain and manipulation, but i can assure you there is no partisanship in natural disasters.
edit on 10-9-2013 by wickedso because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2013 @ 07:53 AM
link   
double
edit on 10-9-2013 by wickedso because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
41
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join