Climate Change Deniers are Almost Extinct

[flacaltenn]

To all you science dummies................

How Democrats have shifted on climate, energy since 2008


Been saying it for two years..........this shit doesnt matter anymore due to economic realities on the ground. Real always trumps fantasy when it comes down to most things

Only the bonafide k00k alarmist doesnt recognize he's on the escalator down......and sometimes, I split my sides laughing about it when I think of this forum. ANd after November, I'll be laughing even harder!!! The only things these meatheads have to hang their hats on is the next lawsuit!!

Interesting article.. I clipped this portion of the DEM platform for later use..

We know that global climate change is one of the biggest threats of this generation – an economic, environmental, and national security catastrophe in the making. We affirm the science of climate change, commit to significantly reducing the pollution that causes climate change, and know we have to meet this challenge by driving smart policies that lead to greater growth in clean energy generation and result in a range of economic and social benefits.

They think POLLUTION CAUSES Global Warming!!! Or that's what they WANT people to start parroting with the very CO2 being exhaled from their lungs as they say it... They can't FACE the science in the beginning of the sentence without perverting science to end the sentence..

These people need to be stopped... If they think that LYING is gonna save their cause -- they must be stupid or desperate or both..

 

[PredFan]

Why do democrats hate science I wonder?

 

[Old Rocks]

..and the eastern antarctic ice sheet, the largest in the world, keeps on cooling and growing larger.

and the largest ice sheet in the world by far, the eastern antarctic, keeps on growing in size and dropping in temperature because of manmade global warming.

Oh dear.

Antarctic sea ice anomalies have roughly followed the pattern of warming, with the greatest declines occurring off the coast of West Antarctica. East Antarctica sea ice has been increasing since 1978, though not at a statistically significant rate.

In recent years, ice shelves on the Antarctic Peninsula and along the northern coast of Canada have experienced rapid disintegration. In March 2008, the Wilkins Ice Shelf in Antarctica retreated by more than 400 square kilometers (160 square miles). Later that summer, several ice shelves along Ellesmere Island in Northern Canada broke up in a matter of days.

Quick Facts on Ice Shelves

The total mass of Antarctic ice is actually decreasing.

If you want to understand why the eastern sa ice is slowly increasing while western ice rapidly drecreasing, here it is:

The general trend shows that a warming climate in the southern hemisphere would transport more moisture to Antarctica, causing the interior ice sheets to grow, while calving events along the coast will increase, causing these areas to shrink. A 2006 paper derived from satellite data, measures changes in the gravity of the ice mass, suggests that the total amount of ice in Antarctica has begun decreasing in the past few years.[9] Another recent study compared the ice leaving the ice sheet, by measuring the ice velocity and thickness along the coast, to the amount of snow accumulation over the continent. This found that the East Antarctic Ice Sheet was in balance but the West Antarctic Ice Sheet was losing mass. This was largely due to acceleration of ice streams such as Pine Island Glacier. These results agree closely with the gravity change


Please acknowledge this point.

Oh my oh my, the masters of cherry picking are at it again....Below are just TWO of the dozens of sites that show categorically you're full of horse dung. And one of them is one of your very own warmist sites...FAIL.

"What about the ice mass of Antarctica? Along with land based ice, which can raise sea levels when melted into the ocean, another significant indicator of polar temperature is the extent of floating sea ice. As the above table prepared by researchers at the University of Illinois indicates, the actual sea ice surrounding Antarctica is well above average. The black line represents the last 12 months of sea ice area, based on satellite data. You can see the sea ice reached a peak of 15 million square kilometers around September, during the peak of the southern winter. You can see it dropped to a low of 2 million square kilometers in mid-February, at the height of the southern summer. Currently the sea ice surrounding Antarctica is 7 million square kilometers and rising. The red line, however, is what is significant, because the red line indicates whether or not the sea ice is above or below the historical norm. And as you can see, as of May 2009, Antarctic sea ice is about 1.0 million square kilometers above normal."

The Real Facts on Increasing Antarctic Ice | Environmental News, Articles & Information | Global Warming News | EcoWorld


"Antarctic sea ice has shown long term growth since satellites began measurements in 1979. This is an observation that has been often cited by skeptics as proof against global warming. However, in all the skeptic articles I've read, not one has raised the crucial question: why is Antarctic sea ice increasing?"

Why is Antarctic sea ice increasing?

LOL. Just too funny. Yes, in 2009, Antarctic sea ice was 1 million square kilometers more than in 1979. But in 2008, it was about the same as in 1979.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.area.antarctic.png

And if you look at the global sea ice area, you see a dramatic decrease from 1979 to the present. Especially after 2000.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/global.daily.ice.area.withtrend.jpg

If you look at the Antarctic sea ice anomoly, it runs from a -1.8 million square kilometers in 1980, to a positive 1.9 square kilometers in 2008. It stands at present at 0.559 square kilometers.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.anomaly.antarctic.png

In the Arctic, the highest postive anomoly was in 1997 at about 1.3 million square kilometers, the negative anomoly was -0.2 in 1980. Since 2005, the anomoly has never been in positive territory, and stands today at -2.435

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.anomaly.arctic.png

One can see from this graph that the increase of Antarctic sea ice has been about 0.5 million square kilometers.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.area.antarctic.png

While the loss of Arctic sea ice has been about 3 million square kilometers.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.area.arctic.png

However, that is sea ice. The continental icecaps, both Greenland and Antarctica are losing ice by the tens of gigatons. There is a differance between the sea ice and the continental ice caps, as much as you would like to pretend there is not.

 

[westwall]

Oh dear.

Antarctic sea ice anomalies have roughly followed the pattern of warming, with the greatest declines occurring off the coast of West Antarctica. East Antarctica sea ice has been increasing since 1978, though not at a statistically significant rate.

In recent years, ice shelves on the Antarctic Peninsula and along the northern coast of Canada have experienced rapid disintegration. In March 2008, the Wilkins Ice Shelf in Antarctica retreated by more than 400 square kilometers (160 square miles). Later that summer, several ice shelves along Ellesmere Island in Northern Canada broke up in a matter of days.

Quick Facts on Ice Shelves

The total mass of Antarctic ice is actually decreasing.

If you want to understand why the eastern sa ice is slowly increasing while western ice rapidly drecreasing, here it is:

The general trend shows that a warming climate in the southern hemisphere would transport more moisture to Antarctica, causing the interior ice sheets to grow, while calving events along the coast will increase, causing these areas to shrink. A 2006 paper derived from satellite data, measures changes in the gravity of the ice mass, suggests that the total amount of ice in Antarctica has begun decreasing in the past few years.[9] Another recent study compared the ice leaving the ice sheet, by measuring the ice velocity and thickness along the coast, to the amount of snow accumulation over the continent. This found that the East Antarctic Ice Sheet was in balance but the West Antarctic Ice Sheet was losing mass. This was largely due to acceleration of ice streams such as Pine Island Glacier. These results agree closely with the gravity change


Please acknowledge this point.

Oh my oh my, the masters of cherry picking are at it again....Below are just TWO of the dozens of sites that show categorically you're full of horse dung. And one of them is one of your very own warmist sites...FAIL.

"What about the ice mass of Antarctica? Along with land based ice, which can raise sea levels when melted into the ocean, another significant indicator of polar temperature is the extent of floating sea ice. As the above table prepared by researchers at the University of Illinois indicates, the actual sea ice surrounding Antarctica is well above average. The black line represents the last 12 months of sea ice area, based on satellite data. You can see the sea ice reached a peak of 15 million square kilometers around September, during the peak of the southern winter. You can see it dropped to a low of 2 million square kilometers in mid-February, at the height of the southern summer. Currently the sea ice surrounding Antarctica is 7 million square kilometers and rising. The red line, however, is what is significant, because the red line indicates whether or not the sea ice is above or below the historical norm. And as you can see, as of May 2009, Antarctic sea ice is about 1.0 million square kilometers above normal."

The Real Facts on Increasing Antarctic Ice | Environmental News, Articles & Information | Global Warming News | EcoWorld


"Antarctic sea ice has shown long term growth since satellites began measurements in 1979. This is an observation that has been often cited by skeptics as proof against global warming. However, in all the skeptic articles I've read, not one has raised the crucial question: why is Antarctic sea ice increasing?"

Why is Antarctic sea ice increasing?

LOL. Just too funny. Yes, in 2009, Antarctic sea ice was 1 million square kilometers more than in 1979. But in 2008, it was about the same as in 1979.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.area.antarctic.png

And if you look at the global sea ice area, you see a dramatic decrease from 1979 to the present. Especially after 2000.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/global.daily.ice.area.withtrend.jpg

If you look at the Antarctic sea ice anomoly, it runs from a -1.8 million square kilometers in 1980, to a positive 1.9 square kilometers in 2008. It stands at present at 0.559 square kilometers.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.anomaly.antarctic.png

In the Arctic, the highest postive anomoly was in 1997 at about 1.3 million square kilometers, the negative anomoly was -0.2 in 1980. Since 2005, the anomoly has never been in positive territory, and stands today at -2.435

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.anomaly.arctic.png

One can see from this graph that the increase of Antarctic sea ice has been about 0.5 million square kilometers.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.area.antarctic.png

While the loss of Arctic sea ice has been about 3 million square kilometers.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.area.arctic.png

However, that is sea ice. The continental icecaps, both Greenland and Antarctica are losing ice by the tens of gigatons. There is a differance between the sea ice and the continental ice caps, as much as you would like to pretend there is not.

How about addressing your sceptical science buddies there olfraud. Even THEY admit that the Antarctic ice is increasing and has been for YEARS!

 

[Saigon]

Even THEY admit that the Antarctic ice is increasing and has been for YEARS!

Jesus wept.

How hard can this be to understand?

The amount of ice in Eastern Antractica is increasing slightly.

The amount of ice in Wesnert Antarctica is decreasingly significantly.

The total amount of ice is thus falling.

Antarctic ice sheet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please read the material and acknolwdge the facts.

 

[RollingThunder]

Oh my oh my, the masters of cherry picking are at it again....

You are, of course, referring to yourself and your denier cult butt-buddies.

Below are just TWO of the dozens of sites that show categorically you're full of horse dung. And one of them is one of your very own warmist sites...FAIL.

That's another one of your many delusions, walleyedretard. In fact, neither one of those sites shows anything of the sort. The first site you quoted is a denier cult blog and it is totally full of crap about everything. Your second citation explains why the sea ice is growing slightly around Antarctica due to climate change. Here's the actual facts that debunk the lies and misinformation on that denier cult blog.

Ice Shelves - Disintegration
National Snow and Ice Data Center
State of the Cryosphere
(excerpts)
Over the past several decades meteorological records have revealed atmospheric warming on the Antarctic Peninsula, and the northernmost ice shelves on the peninsula have retreated dramatically (Vaughan and Doake 1996). The most pronounced ice shelf retreat has occurred on the Larsen Ice Shelf, located on the eastern side of the Antarctic Peninsula's northern tip. The shelf is divided into four regions from north to south: A, B, C, and D. In January 1995, after several decades of warming and years of gradual retreat, the Larsen A Ice Shelf underwent a type of retreat that was, at that time, unprecedented. The breakup pattern in the Larsen A, in which roughly 1,500 square kilometers suddenly disintegrated rapidly into small sliver-shaped icebergs, appeared to indicate a new style of ice shelf response to pronounced climate warming. To the south, the Larsen B saw the calving of a 70- by 25-kilometer iceberg. This ordinary calving event received more public attention but the disintegration event was more significant to researchers studying the area. (See Antarctic Ice Shelves and Icebergs: Events in the Northern Larsen Ice Shelf and Their Importance.) In 2002, satellites recorded an even larger disintegration than what occurred in 1995 (see Larsen Ice Shelf Breakup Events: Larsen B Ice Shelf Collapses in Antarctica). Between 31 January and 5 March 2002, approximately 3,250 square kilometers of the Larsen B shattered, releasing 720 billion tons of ice into the Weddell Sea. It was the largest single disintegration event in 30 years of ice shelf monitoring. Preliminary studies of sediment cores suggest that it may have been this ice shelf's first collapse in 12,000 years (see Larsen Ice Shelf Breakup Events: Seafloor Evidence of Larsen Ice Sheet Breakup).

Also on the Antarctic Peninsula, southwest of the Larsen Ice Shelf, is the Wilkins Ice Shelf. In 1998, the northern part of that ice shelf broke up, although the ice fragments remained in place for the next decade. In 2008, three significant breakups occurred. The first breakup began in late February 2008, on the western part of the shelf, between Charcot and Latady Islands. This breakup style was very similar to the event previously seen on the Larsen A and B. The event occurred during the Southern Hemisphere summer, after an extensive melt season, although no melt ponds were observed. Beginning in May 2008, the western part of the shelf underwent further retreat, again in the disintegration style, despite cold autumn surface conditions. Later in June and July, a substantial portion of the northern part of the shelf also broke up. The breakups occurring between May and July 2008 were especially significant because they happened during the Southern Hemisphere's cold season. The Wilkins Ice Shelf had broken up in 1998, but the ice blocks remained frozen in place for a decade, held together partly by the accumulation of snowfall. Radar images acquired in 2008 showed a darkening in the areas between ice blocks, followed by the gradual disappearance of these snowy, icy areas. The 2008 imagery indicated thinning between ice blocks, despite winter conditions, and suggested melting from beneath, due to warm water under the ice shelf. As a result of ice loss to the north, rifts south of the 1998 breakup area began to widen, leading to a series of rapid moderate to large iceberg calvings. Through late winter of 2008, the remaining two-thirds of the shelf stabilized between Latady and Alexander Islands, although fresh cracks appeared on the shelf in late November 2008. In April 2009, the ice bridge connecting the remnant shelf to ice fragments around Charcot Island gave way.

You so funny! No one, and I mean NO ONE, reads your mindless drivel.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.......too funny.....what you're basically saying, Walleyed, is that you stick your fingers in your ears and shout la-la-la-la-la whenever you're shown the scientific evidence that debunks your braindead denier cult myths and superstitions. And then you're deranged enough to fantasize that everyone else is doing the same thing and therefore they aren't aware that you just got your ass kicked again, like you always do in these debates, you clueless bamboozled retard.

 

[daveman]

The link in your OP leads to a denier cult blog which cherry-picks, mangles and distorts the science it picks up from other sites. The interpretation they put on it has nothing to do with the actual science.

Since you start off with a falsehood, everything that follows may be safely discarded.

Yeah, that's what everybody says about your fraudulent posts, davedumb.

You started off by linking this thread to one of the idiotic ones you started and claiming that you had just "shredded" the claim that climate models do a good job. I pointed out that I had immediately debunked your thread right after you started it. You're too retarded to comprehend what happens so you're in denial about the fact that your OP was a bunch of phony balony from a denier cult blog misleadingly called "CO2Science" that is run by a couple of denier cult wack-jobs. Now, even more idiotically, you're trying to deny that your OP links to a denier cult blog. Here's is the link in your OP:

Heavy Precipitation Over the US: Has it Increased as Some have Predicted it Should?

It takes you to this totally discredited "CO2Science" blog.

Koch Industries Climate Denial Front Group
"Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change"

$60,000 received from Koch foundations 2005-2010 [Total Koch foundation grants 1997-2010: $85,000]

The Center is run by Sherwood Idso and his sons Craig and Keith, long-time climate science deniers. The Center runs the climate science denial site CO2science.org.


FACTSHEET: Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, Center for the Study of CO2 and Climate Change

The Center means of disseminating information, their magazine and website CO2 Science, includes articles both questioning the existence of climate change as well as touting the benefits to the biosphere from carbon dioxide enrichment. All aspects of climate change and its predicted effects - from melting ice caps to species extinction, to more severe weather - are criticized by the Center and either refuted or presented as beneficial. Fred Palmer, head of Western Fuels, said about the center: "The Center's viewpoint is a needed antidote to the misleading and usually erroneous scientific claims emanating from the Federal scientific establishment and adopted by leading politicians, such as Vice President Al Gore." The Center has since tried to distance itself from the Western Fuels Association, however, the Center is run by Keith and Craig Idso, along with their father, Sherwood. Both Idso brothers have been on the Western Fuels payroll at one time or another. Keith Idso, then a doctoral candidate at the University of Arizona, was a paid expert witness for Western Fuels Association at a 1995 Minnesota Public Utilities commission hearing in St. Paul, MN, along with MIT's Richard Lindzen, Patrick Michaels, and Robert Balling (The Heat is On). According to news from Basin Electr ic, a Western Fuels Association member, Craig Idso produced a report, "The Greening of Planet Earth." Its Progression from Hypothesis to Theory," in January 1998 for the Western Fuels Association (Basin Electric Latest News no date given).

Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change has received $100,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.

If you guys put as much effort into climate science as you do in figuring out who's funding the skeptics, the science really WOULD be settled.

Yeah. Meanwhile, still nothing to rebut the science in the article referenced in the OP, huh?

 

[RollingThunder]

Since you start off with a falsehood, everything that follows may be safely discarded.

Yeah, that's what everybody says about your fraudulent posts, davedumb.

You started off by linking this thread to one of the idiotic ones you started and claiming that you had just "shredded" the claim that climate models do a good job. I pointed out that I had immediately debunked your thread right after you started it. You're too retarded to comprehend what happens so you're in denial about the fact that your OP was a bunch of phony balony from a denier cult blog misleadingly called "CO2Science" that is run by a couple of denier cult wack-jobs. Now, even more idiotically, you're trying to deny that your OP links to a denier cult blog. Here's is the link in your OP:

Heavy Precipitation Over the US: Has it Increased as Some have Predicted it Should?

It takes you to this totally discredited "CO2Science" blog.

Koch Industries Climate Denial Front Group
"Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change"

$60,000 received from Koch foundations 2005-2010 [Total Koch foundation grants 1997-2010: $85,000]

The Center is run by Sherwood Idso and his sons Craig and Keith, long-time climate science deniers. The Center runs the climate science denial site CO2science.org.


FACTSHEET: Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, Center for the Study of CO2 and Climate Change

The Center means of disseminating information, their magazine and website CO2 Science, includes articles both questioning the existence of climate change as well as touting the benefits to the biosphere from carbon dioxide enrichment. All aspects of climate change and its predicted effects - from melting ice caps to species extinction, to more severe weather - are criticized by the Center and either refuted or presented as beneficial. Fred Palmer, head of Western Fuels, said about the center: "The Center's viewpoint is a needed antidote to the misleading and usually erroneous scientific claims emanating from the Federal scientific establishment and adopted by leading politicians, such as Vice President Al Gore." The Center has since tried to distance itself from the Western Fuels Association, however, the Center is run by Keith and Craig Idso, along with their father, Sherwood. Both Idso brothers have been on the Western Fuels payroll at one time or another. Keith Idso, then a doctoral candidate at the University of Arizona, was a paid expert witness for Western Fuels Association at a 1995 Minnesota Public Utilities commission hearing in St. Paul, MN, along with MIT's Richard Lindzen, Patrick Michaels, and Robert Balling (The Heat is On). According to news from Basin Electr ic, a Western Fuels Association member, Craig Idso produced a report, "The Greening of Planet Earth." Its Progression from Hypothesis to Theory," in January 1998 for the Western Fuels Association (Basin Electric Latest News no date given).

Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change has received $100,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.

If you guys put as much effort into climate science as you do in figuring out who's funding the skeptics, the science really WOULD be settled.

The science is settled, retard. It is so typical of you deranged denier cultists that when the facts are shown to you proving that your sources are corrupt stooges being paid by the fossil fuel industry to push propaganda and misinformation about AGW, you shrug it off with a braindead comment like that one. LOLOLOL. You fools are such gullible dupes.

Yeah. Meanwhile, still nothing to rebut the science in the article referenced in the OP, huh?

What traces of actual science there are in your OP are OK, but the misinterpretation and spin supplied by the denier cult blog are totally wacked. The rebuttal of those misinterpretations has already been done, davedumb. Here and here for starters.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Tuning on the Weather Channel and posting a link to here saying, "See that!? Manmade Global Warming" is NOT how science is done

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It's a mild September Day today here in NY (because of AGW, right?)

 

[flacaltenn]

Tuning on the Weather Channel and posting a link to here saying, "See that!? Manmade Global Warming" is NOT how science is done

You heartless cretin.. The GRAPES ARE DYING in Australia !!!

Australia 2011 harvest 'too big', says winemaker federation | Daily wine news - the latest breaking wine news from around the world | News | decanter.com

Australia 2011 harvest 'too big', says winemaker federation
Wednesday 15 June 2011 by Rebecca GibbComments (2)


The huge Australian harvest this year is 'out of step' with the realities of sustainable production, a senior executive has said.

Yields from the 2011 Australian and New Zealand harvests have exceeded all expectations.

Australia has recorded a larger crop than 2010 despite disease ravaging the country's wine regions while New Zealand has announced another record-breaking vintage.

The estimated Australian crush of 1.63m tonnes is a 1% increase compared to 2010, representing another blow for the country's producers, already battling with a wine glut and depressed prices.

Stephen Strachan, the Winemakers' Federation of Australia chief executive, said, 'The vintage is too big. It may seem harsh, given the year many people have had, to focus on the longer term rather than the demands of the present, but a harvest in excess of 1.6m tonnes is out of step with the realities of sustainable production and the market opportunity for premium Australian wine.'

 

[westwall]

Even THEY admit that the Antarctic ice is increasing and has been for YEARS!

Jesus wept.

How hard can this be to understand?

The amount of ice in Eastern Antractica is increasing slightly.

The amount of ice in Wesnert Antarctica is decreasingly significantly.

The total amount of ice is thus falling.

Antarctic ice sheet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please read the material and acknolwdge the facts.

Yes, Jesus weeps whenever you anti science fanatics open your traps. The Western PENINSULA is warming very slightly. The rest of Antarctica is either cooling or remaining steady.

Why, oh why do you find it neccessary to lie about everything?

 

[mamooth]

Saigon's information is accurate. Westwall's is not.

Accelerated Antarctic ice loss from satellite gravity measurements
---
Accurate quantification of Antarctic ice-sheet mass balance and its contribution to global sea-level rise remains challenging, because in situ measurements over both space and time are sparse. Satellite remote-sensing data of ice elevations and ice motion show significant ice loss in the range of -31 to -196Gtyr-1 in West Antarctica in recent years, whereas East Antarctica seems to remain in balance or slightly gain mass, with estimated rates of mass change in the range of -4 to 22Gtyr-1. The Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) offers the opportunity of quantifying polar ice-sheet mass balance from a different perspective. Here we use an extended record of GRACE data spanning the period April 2002 to January 2009 to quantify the rates of Antarctic ice loss. In agreement with an independent earlier assessment, we estimate a total loss of 190+/-77Gtyr-1, with 132+/-26Gtyr-1 coming from West Antarctica. However, in contrast with previous GRACE estimates, our data suggest that East Antarctica is losing mass, mostly in coastal regions, at a rate of -57+/-52Gtyr-1, apparently caused by increased ice loss since the year 2006.
---

Westwall, you uttered a falsehood when you accused him of lying. Was that due to ignorance on your part, or were you deliberately lying? Either way, you owe Saigon an apology.

 

[Saigon]

Yes, Jesus weeps whenever you anti science fanatics open your traps. The Western PENINSULA is warming very slightly. The rest of Antarctica is either cooling or remaining steady.

Why, oh why do you find it neccessary to lie about everything?

Why, or why could you not find a credibly link to back up your claim?!

It i not only a western "peninsula" - it is Western Antarctica which is warming "significantly". Eastern Antarctica is remaining steady or cooling slightly, and we also know why that is. (explained in th Wiki page linked).

I linked my facts, and am happy to provide more details here:

Antarctic ice melting from below, reveals satellite (+video) - CSMonitor.com

You won't look at them.

 

[skookerasbil]

You are, of course, referring to yourself and your denier cult butt-buddies.




That's another one of your many delusions, walleyedretard. In fact, neither one of those sites shows anything of the sort. The first site you quoted is a denier cult blog and it is totally full of crap about everything. Your second citation explains why the sea ice is growing slightly around Antarctica due to climate change. Here's the actual facts that debunk the lies and misinformation on that denier cult blog.

Ice Shelves - Disintegration
National Snow and Ice Data Center
State of the Cryosphere
(excerpts)
Over the past several decades meteorological records have revealed atmospheric warming on the Antarctic Peninsula, and the northernmost ice shelves on the peninsula have retreated dramatically (Vaughan and Doake 1996). The most pronounced ice shelf retreat has occurred on the Larsen Ice Shelf, located on the eastern side of the Antarctic Peninsula's northern tip. The shelf is divided into four regions from north to south: A, B, C, and D. In January 1995, after several decades of warming and years of gradual retreat, the Larsen A Ice Shelf underwent a type of retreat that was, at that time, unprecedented. The breakup pattern in the Larsen A, in which roughly 1,500 square kilometers suddenly disintegrated rapidly into small sliver-shaped icebergs, appeared to indicate a new style of ice shelf response to pronounced climate warming. To the south, the Larsen B saw the calving of a 70- by 25-kilometer iceberg. This ordinary calving event received more public attention but the disintegration event was more significant to researchers studying the area. (See Antarctic Ice Shelves and Icebergs: Events in the Northern Larsen Ice Shelf and Their Importance.) In 2002, satellites recorded an even larger disintegration than what occurred in 1995 (see Larsen Ice Shelf Breakup Events: Larsen B Ice Shelf Collapses in Antarctica). Between 31 January and 5 March 2002, approximately 3,250 square kilometers of the Larsen B shattered, releasing 720 billion tons of ice into the Weddell Sea. It was the largest single disintegration event in 30 years of ice shelf monitoring. Preliminary studies of sediment cores suggest that it may have been this ice shelf's first collapse in 12,000 years (see Larsen Ice Shelf Breakup Events: Seafloor Evidence of Larsen Ice Sheet Breakup).

Also on the Antarctic Peninsula, southwest of the Larsen Ice Shelf, is the Wilkins Ice Shelf. In 1998, the northern part of that ice shelf broke up, although the ice fragments remained in place for the next decade. In 2008, three significant breakups occurred. The first breakup began in late February 2008, on the western part of the shelf, between Charcot and Latady Islands. This breakup style was very similar to the event previously seen on the Larsen A and B. The event occurred during the Southern Hemisphere summer, after an extensive melt season, although no melt ponds were observed. Beginning in May 2008, the western part of the shelf underwent further retreat, again in the disintegration style, despite cold autumn surface conditions. Later in June and July, a substantial portion of the northern part of the shelf also broke up. The breakups occurring between May and July 2008 were especially significant because they happened during the Southern Hemisphere's cold season. The Wilkins Ice Shelf had broken up in 1998, but the ice blocks remained frozen in place for a decade, held together partly by the accumulation of snowfall. Radar images acquired in 2008 showed a darkening in the areas between ice blocks, followed by the gradual disappearance of these snowy, icy areas. The 2008 imagery indicated thinning between ice blocks, despite winter conditions, and suggested melting from beneath, due to warm water under the ice shelf. As a result of ice loss to the north, rifts south of the 1998 breakup area began to widen, leading to a series of rapid moderate to large iceberg calvings. Through late winter of 2008, the remaining two-thirds of the shelf stabilized between Latady and Alexander Islands, although fresh cracks appeared on the shelf in late November 2008. In April 2009, the ice bridge connecting the remnant shelf to ice fragments around Charcot Island gave way.

You so funny! No one, and I mean NO ONE, reads your mindless drivel.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.......too funny.....what you're basically saying, Walleyed, is that you stick your fingers in your ears and shout la-la-la-la-la whenever you're shown the scientific evidence that debunks your braindead denier cult myths and superstitions. And then you're deranged enough to fantasize that everyone else is doing the same thing and therefore they aren't aware that you just got your ass kicked again, like you always do in these debates, you clueless bamboozled retard.

but still losing s0n!!!!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Mild early September day here in NY, leaves already starting to turn, the hummingbirds probably headed back south today. Last year the hummingbirds didn't leave until the week of Sept 14 ....and I can only assume that AGW played some diabolical part in the unprecedented yellowing of the leaves this early, the mild weather and the hummingbird fleeing in terror at the approach of AGW!

One day, you Warmers are going to get booted to the curb at every real college and University on the planet.

You'll always have East Anglia

 

[mamooth]

Let's get back to the point Frank is trying so hard to evade, which is that he and his crank denialist buddies are considered outright laughingstocks over most of planet earth, and are doing their Custer's Last Stand thing here in the USA.

Why is it that nearly every denialist is a right-wing nutball who constantly spouts retarded right-wing conspiracy theories on every topic imaginable? Why, it's because denialism is purely a right-wing political cult. In direct contrast, AGW scientists come from all facets of the political spectrum. And they don't spout deranged conspiracy theories, being they can simply point to the data.

 

[flacaltenn]

Let's get back to the point Frank is trying so hard to evade, which is that he and his crank denialist buddies are considered outright laughingstocks over most of planet earth, and are doing their Custer's Last Stand thing here in the USA.

Why is it that nearly every denialist is a right-wing nutball who constantly spouts retarded right-wing conspiracy theories on every topic imaginable? Why, it's because denialism is purely a right-wing political cult. In direct contrast, AGW scientists come from all facets of the political spectrum. And they don't spout deranged conspiracy theories, being they can simply point to the data.

"".... being they can simply point to the data"" OR any other random act of weather and declare the gods have spoken.. They can declare the MWP not important because they DECLARED it was not global, but a drought in New Zealand -- that's global...

Those AGW scientists can always chose the BEST numbers from a huge RANGE of possibilities to keep the faith in the theory. And IGNORE actual past climatological history when it doesn't support the theory..

They can resolve that Natural forces got us in and out of Ice Ages but don't play any significant role today. They can FLOOD THE PRESSES with headlines about how CO2 is killing the oysters in Washington farms, but never retract the story when science proves them wrong. They can lose, mangle and hide their data with impunity. And they RUSH to use math as a weapon to impress the public with numbers that make no physical sense.

And they have SUPPORTERS that believe the entire earth is a GIGANTIC fuel-air bomb whose fuse is gonna be lit by a 0.5degC increase in temperature.. YET --- they have so much self esteem that they think they are winning..

They are one talented cult.. That's for sure..

 

[Katzndogz]

Warmists will just make their affected areas ever smaller.

The Antarctic ice is melting. It's not. So it's the East Antarctic ice is growing, but it's melting in the West. Soon it will be "See this little ice berg here, it's melting."

Antarctic ice melts every year. It melts so much that it all but disappears. This is another perfectly normal occurrence that the warmist cult points to as evidence of warming.

Is Antarctica losing or gaining ice?

In glaciology and particularly with respect to Antarctic ice, not all things are created equal. Let us consider the following differences. Antarctic land ice is the ice which has accumulated over thousands of years on the Antarctica landmass itself through snowfall. This land ice therefore is actually stored ocean water that once fell as precipitation. Sea ice in Antarctica is quite different as it is generally considered to be ice which forms in salt water primarily during the winter months.

In Antarctica, sea ice grows quite extensively during winter but nearly completely melts away during the summer (Figure 1). That is where the important difference between antarctic and arctic sea ice exists. Arctic sea ice lasts all the year round, there are increases during the winter months and decreases during the summer months but an ice cover does in fact remain in the North which includes quite a bit of ice from previous years (Figure 1). Essentially Arctic sea ice is more important for the earth's energy balance because when it melts, more sunlight is absorbed by the oceans whereas Antarctic sea ice normally melts each summer leaving the earth's energy balance largely unchanged.

 

[RollingThunder]

Mild early September day here in NY, leaves already starting to turn, the hummingbirds probably headed back south today. Last year the hummingbirds didn't leave until the week of Sept 14 ....and I can only assume that AGW played some diabolical part in the unprecedented yellowing of the leaves this early, the mild weather and the hummingbird fleeing in terror at the approach of AGW!

One day, you Warmers are going to get booted to the curb at every real college and University on the planet.

You'll always have East Anglia

LOLOLOLOLOL......oh CrazyFruitcake, you are soooo funny.....bird migration timing is indeed changing due to global warming but once again you've managed to get it ass backwards.

You deluded denier cultists have already been kicked to the curb by every University, Scientific Society, National Academies of Science or other climate research organization on Earth.

But you'll always have Rush Limpdick.

Meanwhile, here's the facts.

Climate Change, Increasing Temperatures Alter Bird Migration Patterns
ScienceDaily
Feb. 23, 2012
(excerpts)
Birds in eastern North America are picking up the pace along their yearly migratory paths. The reason, according to University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill researchers, is rising temperatures due to climate change. Using migration information collected in eBird, a citizen science program database containing 10 years' worth of observations from amateur birdwatchers, assistant professor of biology Allen Hurlbert, Ph.D., and his team in the UNC College of Arts and Sciences analyzed when 18 different species of birds arrived at various points across their migration journeys. Since 2002, eBird has collected more than 48 million bird observations from roughly 35,000 contributors. The study results were published in the journal PLoS ONE on Feb. 22.

Hurlbert's team focused on bird species that occur over the entire breadth of the eastern U.S. By reviewing the recorded temperatures and the exact dates on which bird watchers first noticed certain species in their areas, the researchers determined how closely bird migration tracks year-to-year variation in temperature. On average, each species reached various stopping points 0.8 days earlier per degree Celsius of temperature increase. Some species' schedules accelerated by as much as three to six days for each rising degree. To date, the Northeast has experienced more relative warming than the Southeast.


Climate Adaptation Difficult for Europe's Birds
ScienceDaily
Jan. 17, 2012
(excerpts)
For the past 20 years, the climate in Europe has been getting warmer. Species of bird and butterfly which thrive in cool temperatures therefore need to move further north. However, they have difficulty adapting to the warmer climate quickly enough, as shown by new research published in the journal Nature Climate Change. Åke Lindström is Professor of Animal Ecology at Lund University, Sweden. Together with other European researchers he has looked at 20 years' worth of data on birds, butterflies and summer temperatures. During this period, Europe has become warmer and set temperatures have shifted northwards by 250 km. Bird and butterfly communities have not moved at the same rate. "Both butterflies and birds respond to climate change, but not fast enough to keep up with an increasingly warm climate. We don't know what the long-term ecological effects of this will be," says Åke Lindström.


Global Warming and Birds
The Audubon Society