The North Pole could melt this year

[politicsezine]

You are saying that CO2 is causing global warming, when even highly qualified scientist aren't even sure. There are just as many scientist that debate AGW than support it. What I do have, is a lack of credibility of the IPCC...which is supported by numerous scientist who say that information was manipulated to fit an agenda. And that many scientists who asked to be taken off of the IPCC 4th report were not, and were included in the supposed 500 top scientist crap. The report also excluded many key statements by scientists that specifcally say that no information even supports man-made global warming, or supports that green-house gases (notable CO2) is the cause. These things were conveniently left out. WATER VAPOR is more of a green house gas than CO2... And the sun has more to do with global warming than CO2. CO2 from humans are not causing our other planets to warm also. No matter how much you would wish to be so.

The only scientists who disagree with the fact that greenhouse
gases are causing global warming are those paid by the oil and coal industries. Its a very small percentage of scientists who disagree, but they're getting extra press coverage because of who is paying their bills.

 

[jreeves]

The only scientists who disagree with the fact that greenhouse
gases are causing global warming are those paid by the oil and coal industries. Its a very small percentage of scientists who disagree, but they're getting extra press coverage because of who is paying their bills.

Sure like NASA doesn't get donations from oil and coal industries. But since a lot of scientist disagree with the man made global warming myth, it's their funding from oil and coal industries that gets questioned.....I see

 

[BrianH]

The only scientists who disagree with the fact that greenhouse
gases are causing global warming are those paid by the oil and coal industries. Its a very small percentage of scientists who disagree, but they're getting extra press coverage because of who is paying their bills.

These scientists include former members of the IPCC as well as the chairman of the National Academy of Sciences as well as numerous other scientists. These are not simply scientists from po-dunk that are uncredited. Go back and watch the vid I posted earlier.

 

[TopGunna]

One of my favorite topics, glad to know some familiar USMB personalities are still fighting the good fight. I'll offer my take.

Anthroprogenic Global Warming theory is just that, a theory. Scientific facts, on the other hand, come from testing hypotheses, not by convincing enough people to accept your theory.

Kirk, you are right that mankind has been pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere - no one will dispute that. But it is by no means a pollutant. It's plant food. It's what we and other mammals expel from our lungs when we exhale. It is not carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, or CFCs.

Can CO2 act as a greenhouse gas? Absolutely. But Brian is correct - it is a relatively weak GHG. In fact, there is a diminishing return relationship between increased atmospheric CO2 and temperature increase, that levels off logarithmically around 1.2 degrees C. That is the maximum warming possible from CO2 alone, and you can find that equation in the IPCC reports.

In An Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore's "really big charts" actually demonstrate an opposite relationship - temperature increases precede CO2 increases by about 800 years. This is because increased temperatures heat the oceans and cause CO2 to evaporate and enter the atmosphere. Don't believe me? Open 2 cans of soda, put one in the fridge, and leave one outside. See which one goes flat quicker.

So where do the doomsday scenarios come from? Assumptions that the Earth's climate is dominated by positive feedbacks (reduced ice albedo, more water evaporation, which is the key greenhouse gas, etc) that amplify the initial warming cause by CO2. AGW alarmists build climate models with assumptions that strong positive feedbacks dominate any negative feedbacks, or they ignore the negative feedbacks altogether (due to a lack of understanding... shocker). That's rather sloppy for supposedly "settled science."

Almost any natural process you can think of is kept in balance by negative feedbacks, and I believe the Earth's climate is as well. The Earth has warmed and cooled countless times, alternating between Ice Ages and Warm Periods like the Medieval Warm Period and the Roman Warming. Climate is constantly changing. Greenland has been farmed before. The Thames has frozen over in England. Thousands migrated to North America over the Bering Strait Land Bridge. If you can point to anecdotal evidence about the North Pole melting as proof of AGW theory, I would assume that I can point to similar anecdotal evidence to refute the claim. Climate is changing, absolutely, but there's no empirical evidence that CO2 is driving the change, or that it will lead to runaway warming.

As a last note, below is a chart that James Hansen presented to Congress 20 years ago, with his predictions for future temperatures based on his climate models. The red, orange, and yellow lines are his predictions based on differing CO2 production forecasts (our actual production would put his forecast somewhere between the red and orange lines).

And though actual temperatures are far below his projections, he sticks to his original theory instead of rethinking his hypothesis. Who's the real denier?

 

[Zoomie1980]

That's all you have is that they used a misleading graph? The facts are still the same. The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has increased by one third in the last 200 years. We are pumping 8 billion metric tons of CO2 into the air every year. We are using the earth's atmophere as a big lab experiment.

CO2 is a TRACE component of our atmosphere. Even a DOUBLING of CO2 still makes it a TRACE component.

We have endured the coldest two winters, back to back in 30 years in the US and in 42 years in China. 2005 saw the coldest winter in recorded history in eastern Europe and Russia, even colder than the famous winter of 1941-1942 that stopped Hitler in his tracks.

Global warming is a myth.

 

[Charles_Main]

hey lets ban carbon Dioxide, or shit wait if we do that the Plants will all die.

Do you global warming alarmist know that nearly every climate model ran to date, ASSUMES carbon dioxide amounts will double?

Charles

 

[BrianH]

hey lets ban carbon Dioxide, or shit wait if we do that the Plants will all die.

Do you global warming alarmist know that nearly every climate model ran to date, ASSUMES carbon dioxide amounts will double?

Charles

Carlos Mencia claims vegetarians are responsible for global warming....they eat the plant-life that converts CO2 into oxygen for humans to breath.

 

[Chris]

CO2 is a TRACE component of our atmosphere. Even a DOUBLING of CO2 still makes it a TRACE component.

We have endured the coldest two winters, back to back in 30 years in the US and in 42 years in China. 2005 saw the coldest winter in recorded history in eastern Europe and Russia, even colder than the famous winter of 1941-1942 that stopped Hitler in his tracks.

Global warming is a myth.

The poles are melting because the earth is getting warmer. This is indisputable.

 

[Chris]

Your pushing the global warming myth is akin to my daughter stating she knows Santa exists.

First you state that wildfires are on the rise....I proved that one false.

Then you state, droughts are on the rise.....I proved that one false.

Then you state that CO2 is causing detriment to the enviroment....I proved that one false.

You use information from some StopExxon.org website without actually providing links to your information. I wonder why?

Lmao...

You really haven't proven anything.

 

[Chris]

These scientists include former members of the IPCC as well as the chairman of the National Academy of Sciences as well as numerous other scientists. These are not simply scientists from po-dunk that are uncredited. Go back and watch the vid I posted earlier.

Global warming 'is three times faster than worst predictions'

By Geoffrey Lean
Sunday, 3 June 2007

Global warming is accelerating three times more quickly than feared, a series of startling, authoritative studies has revealed.


They have found that emissions of carbon dioxide have been rising at thrice the rate in the 1990s. The Arctic ice cap is melting three times as fast - and the seas are rising twice as rapidly - as had been predicted.

News of the studies - which are bound to lead to calls for even tougher anti-pollution measures than have yet been contemplated - comes as the leaders of the world's most powerful nations prepare for the most crucial meeting yet on tackling climate change.

The issue will be top of the agenda of the G8 summit which opens in the German Baltic resort of Heiligendamm on Wednesday, placing unprecedented pressure on President George Bush finally to agree to international measures.

Tony Blair flies to Berlin today to prepare for the summit with its host, Angela Merkel, the German chancellor. They will discuss how to tackle President Bush, who last week called for action to deal with climate change, which his critics suggested was instead a way of delaying international agreements.

Yesterday, there were violent clashes in the city harbour of Rostock between police and demonstrators, during a largely peaceful march of tens of thousands of people protesting against the summit.

The study, published by the US National Academy of Sciences, shows that carbon dioxide emissions have been increasing by about 3 per cent a year during this decade, compared with 1.1 per cent a year in the 1990s.

The significance is that this is much faster than even the highest scenario outlined in this year's massive reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) - and suggests that their dire forecasts of devastating harvests, dwindling water supplies, melting ice and loss of species are likely to be understating the threat facing the world.

The study found that nearly three-quarters of the growth in emissions came from developing countries, with a particularly rapid rise in China. The country, however, will resist being blamed for the problem, pointing out that its people on average still contribute only about a sixth of the carbon dioxide emitted by each American. And, the study shows, developed countries, with less than a sixth of the world's people, still contribute more than two-thirds of total emissions of the greenhouse gas.

On the ground, a study by the University of California's National Snow and Ice Data Center shows that Arctic ice has declined by 7.8 per cent a decade over the past 50 years, compared with an average estimate by IPCC computer models of 2.5 per cent.

 

[jreeves]

You really haven't proven anything.

Well, I showed you where droughts aren't on the rise, in response you post a 5 day drought forecast claiming its more up to date. When my post takes the last 100 years...


You state that wildfires are on the rise due to global warming....myth busted by the fact that 4 out of 5 wildfires are caused by human carelessness..

Then you claim that CO2 is causing global warming which was disproven by the world's leading CO2 researcher.

What else do I have to prove to you?
Btw I understand, my daughter still believes in Santa as well.

 

[Chris]

Well, I showed you where droughts aren't on the rise, in response you post a 5 day drought forecast claiming its more up to date. When my post takes the last 100 years...


You state that wildfires are on the rise due to global warming....myth busted by the fact that 4 out of 5 wildfires are caused by human carelessness..

Then you claim that CO2 is causing global warming which was disproven by the world's leading CO2 researcher.

What else do I have to prove to you?
Btw I understand, my daughter still believes in Santa as well.

Your article was from 2 years ago. A lot has changed in the last two years. California is now experiencing the driest fire season on record, and we haven't even hit late July and August.

The North Pole will soon melt, and then what will you say?

"I am sorry, Santa has no place to stay, my daughter?"

 

[jreeves]

Your article was from 2 years ago. A lot has changed in the last two years. California is now experiencing the driest fire season on record, and we haven't even hit late July and August.

The North Pole will soon melt, and then what will you say?

It would seem since enviromentalist claim that droughts are a result of global warming, we should have seen an increase before 2 years ago. Btw when did the industrial revolution take place?

Here we go with the wildfires again, 4 out of 5 wildfires are caused by human carelessness.

 

[jreeves]

Your article was from 2 years ago. A lot has changed in the last two years. California is now experiencing the driest fire season on record, and we haven't even hit late July and August.

The North Pole will soon melt, and then what will you say?

"I am sorry, Santa has no place to stay, my daughter?"

Good article about yourself and the enviromental wackos.
Sure, the North Pole is Melting. So What?: Newsroom: The Independent Institute
It is fashionable these days to blame almost everything on man-made global warming. So it comes as no great surprise to read in a recent New York Times story that “leads” of open water in ice fields near the North Pole filled cruise passengers on a Russian icebreaker with a “sense of alarm” about impending climate disasters. Two scientists-lecturers aboard, a Harvard zoologist and an American Museum paleontologist (experts on animals and fossils, but not on meteorology) were “shocked,” as ABC News reported, to find “Santa’s workshop underwater.”

I am a veteran of two Arctic expeditions with the US Navy, and I can testify that icebreakers always search for leads to make their way through the ice. After a long summer of 24-hour days it is not unusual to find open leads all over the place, especially after strong winds break up the winter ice.

Nor is this a recent phenomenon. In a 1969 Dutch atlas the following passage appears: “The Northern Ice Sea is never completely frozen; 3- to 30-meter thick ice floes continue moving slowly around the pole. At the North Pole the winter temperature is never lower than -35 degrees Celsius. Summer temperatures can rise to 10 to 12 degrees Celsius.” Those last temperatures are well above freezing.

But all this proves little about climate change or about enhanced greenhouse warming. For this purpose we use instruments: thermometers at weather stations, radiosondes carried into the atmosphere by weather balloons twice daily and, of course, Earth-circling weather satellites, that sense atmospheric temperatures remotely. And all of these agree that the polar regions have not warmed appreciably in recent decades.

Climate models do call for a warming trend as levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide rise because of the burning of fossil fuels. Hence the dilemma: Do we believe theoretical models of the atmosphere or the atmosphere itself? I prefer to believe in the atmosphere and the actual observations that show no current warming. If this clashes with the accepted popular wisdom and media hype, so be it. I go with published data.

The Earth did warm between about 1900 and 1940, with the climate recovering from a previous cold period that climate experts refer to as the Little Ice Age. As a result of these changes, which have nothing to do with human influences, it is warmer now than it was 100 years ago. This has had an influence on polar ice, which has been slowly thinning, as it melts from beneath. And the ice will continue to thin for some time to come even though the climate is no longer warming. Moral: It takes a lot of time to melt ice.

Weather satellites tell us that polar ice cover is shrinking—likely a delayed effect of the pre-1940 warming. The Northeast Passage has opened up, allowing ships to sail from London to Japan along the coast of Siberia. It’s all part of a natural climate cycle and need not cause concern. Recall that 1000 years ago the climate was so warm that Vikings settled Greenland and grew crops there for a few centuries. Just imagine: Santa’s reindeers would have had to swim to get here from the North Pole.

 

[jreeves]

Your article was from 2 years ago. A lot has changed in the last two years. California is now experiencing the driest fire season on record, and we haven't even hit late July and August.

The North Pole will soon melt, and then what will you say?

"I am sorry, Santa has no place to stay, my daughter?"

Really alot has changed in two years can you point out on the graphs exactly what has changed in drought conditions in the last two years?

http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/orders/CDODiv7659511442236.txt

 

[editec]

Not everything is as it seems editec. I agree that global warming is happening, but it's not because of humans. The IPCCs credibility is being questioned, as well as the information in its reports....

YouTube - The IPCC removes the Hockey stick

Yes, I understand that the CAUSE of global wierding is still something that is debatable.

What is NOT debatable, however, is the FACT of global wierding.

It takes a serious case of magical thinking for us to deny that the preponderance of evidence is wrong about this.

And the preponderance of evidence we are given from the worlds experts is that the Northern ice cap is melting.

And you know...it is either is or it isn't.

You can't really debate that point, you know? Yet we have people on this very board telling us this is NOT happening.

How the hell do they know?

The experts tell me it is melting.

I have no reason to think they're lieing to me.

 

[Foxfyre]

Yes, I understand that the CAUSE of global wierding is still something that is debatable.

What is NOT debatable, however, is the FACT of global wierding.

It takes a serious case of magical thinking for us to deny that the preponderance of evidence is wrong about this.

And the preponderance of evidence we are given from the worlds experts is that the Northern ice cap is melting.

And you know...it is either is or it isn't.

You can't really debate that point, you know? Yet we have people on this very board telling us this is NOT happening.

How the hell do they know?

The experts tell me it is melting.

I have no reason to think they're lieing to me.

But it seems to me that it is reasonable to explore whether such melting is something that is 'normal' or 'reoccuring' within large scale climate cycles or whether the current melt is being used by unscrupulous 'experts' to maintain a crisis to a) protect their reputations and/or b) keep their funding intact.

 

[BrianH]

Global warming 'is three times faster than worst predictions'

By Geoffrey Lean
Sunday, 3 June 2007

Global warming is accelerating three times more quickly than feared, a series of startling, authoritative studies has revealed.


They have found that emissions of carbon dioxide have been rising at thrice the rate in the 1990s. The Arctic ice cap is melting three times as fast - and the seas are rising twice as rapidly - as had been predicted.

News of the studies - which are bound to lead to calls for even tougher anti-pollution measures than have yet been contemplated - comes as the leaders of the world's most powerful nations prepare for the most crucial meeting yet on tackling climate change.

The issue will be top of the agenda of the G8 summit which opens in the German Baltic resort of Heiligendamm on Wednesday, placing unprecedented pressure on President George Bush finally to agree to international measures.

Tony Blair flies to Berlin today to prepare for the summit with its host, Angela Merkel, the German chancellor. They will discuss how to tackle President Bush, who last week called for action to deal with climate change, which his critics suggested was instead a way of delaying international agreements.

Yesterday, there were violent clashes in the city harbour of Rostock between police and demonstrators, during a largely peaceful march of tens of thousands of people protesting against the summit.

The study, published by the US National Academy of Sciences, shows that carbon dioxide emissions have been increasing by about 3 per cent a year during this decade, compared with 1.1 per cent a year in the 1990s.

The significance is that this is much faster than even the highest scenario outlined in this year's massive reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) - and suggests that their dire forecasts of devastating harvests, dwindling water supplies, melting ice and loss of species are likely to be understating the threat facing the world.

The study found that nearly three-quarters of the growth in emissions came from developing countries, with a particularly rapid rise in China. The country, however, will resist being blamed for the problem, pointing out that its people on average still contribute only about a sixth of the carbon dioxide emitted by each American. And, the study shows, developed countries, with less than a sixth of the world's people, still contribute more than two-thirds of total emissions of the greenhouse gas.

On the ground, a study by the University of California's National Snow and Ice Data Center shows that Arctic ice has declined by 7.8 per cent a decade over the past 50 years, compared with an average estimate by IPCC computer models of 2.5 per cent.

All you're doing is repeating findings and theory. LIke I've said a million times on these threads. I would believe that the earth may be warming, but I do not believe that it's man-made or caused by CO2. Like I said, Wator-vapor makes up 60 times more of the atmosphere than CO2. CO2 is like a a drop in the bucket. If you wish to pump all your money into carbon credits, go ahead. I think that the earth should GO GREEN and find better and cleaner ways to use energy, but AGW alarmists are not going to get me to quit driving my truck....high gas prices will.

 

[BrianH]

Yes, I understand that the CAUSE of global wierding is still something that is debatable.

What is NOT debatable, however, is the FACT of global wierding.

It takes a serious case of magical thinking for us to deny that the preponderance of evidence is wrong about this.

And the preponderance of evidence we are given from the worlds experts is that the Northern ice cap is melting.

And you know...it is either is or it isn't.

You can't really debate that point, you know? Yet we have people on this very board telling us this is NOT happening.

How the hell do they know?

The experts tell me it is melting.

I have no reason to think they're lieing to me.

LOL, I know the North Pole is Melting, I'm not debating that. Do I think humans are the cause??? No. I believe humans contribute, but are not even remotely the cause. What we've learned in our life is that humans cannot control the weather, what makes us think we can control the climate?

 

[Angel Heart]

Oh I don't know maybe this might effect the ice a bit:

Fire Under Arctic Ice: Volcanoes Have Been Blowing Their Tops In The Deep Ocean

Fire Under Arctic Ice: Volcanoes Have Been Blowing Their Tops In The Deep Ocean

ScienceDaily (June 26, 2008) — A research team led by the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) has uncovered evidence of explosive volcanic eruptions deep beneath the ice-covered surface of the Arctic Ocean. Such violent eruptions of splintered, fragmented rock--known as pyroclastic deposits -- were not thought possible at great ocean depths because of the intense weight and pressure of water and because of the composition of seafloor magma and rock.


Researchers found jagged, glassy rock fragments spread out over a 10 square kilometer (4 square mile) area around a series of small volcanic craters about 4,000 meters (2.5 miles) below the sea surface. The volcanoes lie along the Gakkel Ridge, a remote and mostly unexplored section of the mid-ocean ridge system that runs through the Arctic Ocean.

More...