Ocean rise and ice melt accelerating....

[Old Rocks]

Sea Ice Volume
Arctic Sea Ice Volume 1979-2016 (aka "The Ice Volume Death Spiral")
This graph divides each calendar year into 12 "slices", one for each month. Arctic sea ice volume is plotted for each day of the year,
moving clockwise around the graph and taking one full year to complete a circuit. The volume of sea ice on a particular
day is represented by that plot's distance from the center of the graph; as shown by the vertical axis, more ice volume places the plot
farther from the center of the graph, while less ice volume places the plot closer to the center. Past years are represented by thin gray
lines, while decadal averages and the current year are thicker and color-coded as detailed in the legend.

Arctic Sea Ice Volume 1979-2016 (aka "The Ice Volume Death Spiral") - Zoom In

Arctic Sea Ice Volume Monthly Averages as a Percentage of 1979 Values

Sea Ice Volume - Pettit Climate Graphs

Yep, slight uptick for Jan and Feb, 2018.

 

[SSDD]

Sea Ice Volume
Arctic Sea Ice Volume 1979-2016 (aka "The Ice Volume Death Spiral")
This graph divides each calendar year into 12 "slices", one for each month. Arctic sea ice volume is plotted for each day of the year,
moving clockwise around the graph and taking one full year to complete a circuit. The volume of sea ice on a particular
day is represented by that plot's distance from the center of the graph; as shown by the vertical axis, more ice volume places the plot
farther from the center of the graph, while less ice volume places the plot closer to the center. Past years are represented by thin gray
lines, while decadal averages and the current year are thicker and color-coded as detailed in the legend.

Arctic Sea Ice Volume 1979-2016 (aka "The Ice Volume Death Spiral") - Zoom In

Arctic Sea Ice Volume Monthly Averages as a Percentage of 1979 Values

Sea Ice Volume - Pettit Climate Graphs

Yep, slight uptick for Jan and Feb, 2018.

And why does your chart begin in 1979 you lying sack? Because if you go back any further you start seeing a decrease in the ice...talk about cherry picking...you think it is just coincidence that you wack jobs pick the peak ice year to begin? Epic dishonesty...and you are so damned good at it...

And while you are fabricating your bullshit response, how about you tell us what you think the present state of the arctic ice looks like when compared to most of the past 10,000 years....

Arctic ice death spiral...what a large steaming pile of bullshit...you are laughable rocks...and among the most dishonest people on this board...or maybe you are so stupid that you don't even realize the level of dishonesty you are engaging in.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Even in best-case emission scenarios, sea levels may still rise until 2300

 

[whitehall]

Average high in my area is 56 for tomorrow. The weather channel predicts 37. You have to disregard your senses and intellect to believe in global warming and trust the guru, Al Gore, who doesn't even have a science background. Therefore global warming qualifies as a cult.

 

[Old Rocks]

Image 3 of 6 (play slideshow) Download

Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis | Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag

You are not the only place on this planet.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Image 3 of 6 (play slideshow) Download

Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis | Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag

You are not the only place on this planet.

And you fail to show your error bars.... Why would that be? I know why.... Its due to the +/- 2 million Kilometers^2 error bar which tells us your methodology is so bad that it could be at the 30 year average but you choose the low end to reproduce..

I hate shoddy science like this...

 

[Sunsettommy]

Even in best-case emission scenarios, sea levels may still rise until 2300

Gosh even to year 2300, only 282 years into the future!

The stupid reliance in the many untestable models continues in the alarmist camp.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Notice the use of the worst possible arctic ice data set, PIOMAS is all model driven crap. Try Masie instead or even Bremen which use better datasets.

Meanwhile the decline stopped after 2006, as shown here:

 

[Sunsettommy]

Huston has been flooded many times since the founding back in the 1830's.

Yep! And it has been hot before somewhere! Therfore...global warming is a hoax!

You are too ignorant to know since you didn't even try to know it at all. The city was founded in a swampy very flat area.

Significant Houston Area Floods

LINK

==================

Then we have this long known problem in the Houston area:

August 29, 2017

Ana Campoy David Yanofsky

Houston’s flooding shows what happens when you ignore science and let developers run rampant

Excerpt:

Since Houston, Texas was founded nearly two centuries ago, Houstonians have been treating its wetlands as stinky, mosquito-infested blots in need of drainage.

Even after it became a widely accepted scientific fact that wetlands can soak up large amounts of flood water, the city continued to pave over them. The watershed of the White Oak Bayou river, which includes much of northwest Houston, is a case in point. From 1992 to 2010, this area lost more than 70% of its wetlands, according to research (pdf) by Texas A&M University.

In the false-color satellite images below, plants and other vegetation appear green, while urbanized and developed areas appear blue and purple. Drag the slider to see how northwest Houston has changed since 1986.

LINK

 

[SSDD]

None of these graphs include the last three years. If they did, you would see an even higher spike at the right on the graph.

Unfortunate that you are living under the mistaken belief that correlation equals causation...that isn't science rocks..it isn't anything like science...science is interested in finding out the reason for the correlation...can you show any actual measured evidence that establishes a coherent relationship between the absorption of IR by a gas and warming in the atmosphere? Any at all?



Here rocks...have a look at some very interesting correlations?...Do you think any of them at all have anything whatsoever to do with causation?...and my graphs show a better correlation than yours..

When you start suggesting that correlation equals causation it becomes clear that you are just another dupe...one more useful idiot spouting the warmist dogma lacking the intellectual wattage to question anything you are told to say.

 

[Crick]

Very entertaining. All made up (note the dual vertical scales on each), but very entertaining.

I have to tell you Shit, seeing you still using that quote in your sig when I haven't been here in months just swells my breast with pride. I guess I saved you the unbearable mental strain of finding something else you could take out of context.

BTW, ocean level rise and ice melt rates are accelerating. That would indicate we were right and you were wrong. Must be rough.

 

[SSDD]

Very entertaining. All made up, but very entertaining.

Not made up at all, but then you have consensus so you don't have to defend your position......

I have to tell you Shit, seeing you still using that quote in your sig when I haven't been here in months just swells my breast with pride. I guess I saved you the unbearable mental strain of finding something else you could take out of context.

Pitiful name calling still all you have? Unsurprising. As to the quotes, you raised the bar on stupid....stupid on that magnitude has a long shelf life. When you say something that abysmally stupid, it takes a very long time for someone else to surpass it.

Interesting that you would be so concerned about your suggestion that skeptics be killed off that you would still be plying infantile psychological strategies in an attempt to get me to delete it when the quote regarding your your position on debating the facts and why should be much more troubling to you. Rarely has the mind set of climate science, and its wack job acolytes ever been enunciated in such an eloquent and unreserved statement.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Their use of the word "Consensus" while discussing science is a tell that we're dealing with a Moonbat Fringe Cult.

 

[PredFan]

Climate-change–driven accelerated sea-level rise detected in the altimeter era

Observations show sea levels rising, and climate change is accelerating it - CNN

More accurate methods show us these things are happening faster than we thought. Now expected to pass 2 feet rise by 2100.

Normal natural events that have been happening since this planet came into existence. Stop being a gullible fool and get an education ffs.

 

[SSDD]

Their use of the word "Consensus" while discussing science is a tell that we're dealing with a Moonbat Fringe Cult.

Of course it does...but then look at who said it.

 

[SSDD]

Climate-change–driven accelerated sea-level rise detected in the altimeter era

Observations show sea levels rising, and climate change is accelerating it - CNN

More accurate methods show us these things are happening faster than we thought. Now expected to pass 2 feet rise by 2100.

Normal natural events that have been happening since this planet came into existence. Stop being a gullible fool and get an education ffs.

I keep asking him for a single piece of observed, measured data that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability.....and like all warmer wackos...and all of climate science, he can't produce a single piece of observed, measured data that supports his claims.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Climate-change–driven accelerated sea-level rise detected in the altimeter era

Observations show sea levels rising, and climate change is accelerating it - CNN

More accurate methods show us these things are happening faster than we thought. Now expected to pass 2 feet rise by 2100.

Normal natural events that have been happening since this planet came into existence. Stop being a gullible fool and get an education ffs.

I keep asking him for a single piece of observed, measured data that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability.....and like all warmer wackos...and all of climate science, he can't produce a single piece of observed, measured data that supports his claims.

Not surprised as I see this same warmist behavior in other forums and blogs I visit. They run quickly to using the same boring consensus, funding, authority fallacies, with a lot of snotty name calling, that has NOTHING to do with the subject at hand.

When they do that over providing reasonable arguments, then I know they have nothing.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Why sea ice matters:

How does sea ice affect global climate?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I keep asking him for a single piece of observed, measured data that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability.

Because you are a dishonest, embarrassing little know nothing that thinks he scores a point by asking someone on a message board for scientific research.

Here's a hint, dummy: ask the scientists . What's the matter....don't like their answer? Tough shit, crybaby.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Why sea ice matters:

How does sea ice affect global climate?

What a bare article with ZERO science research mentioned.

Already posted several times, using real published science papers showing little to no summer ice for a few thousand years, the last time was during the MWP, yet Polar Bears are here, yet the world is full of life and all around the 260-280 ppm level.

You still have nothing worth pondering over.