The science against climate change

[westwall]

LOL........where the ice is expanding!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Except for a tiny area in the western part of Antarctica, the whole fucking thing is expanding faster than Oprah coming off her twinkie diet.........the dickhead scientist conveniently ignores that though!!!

You are a silly, pathetic little child, really, aren't you Skooks?

The Antarctic as a whole IS losing ice. Fact.

"Gravity data collected from space using NASA's Grace satellite show that Antarctica has been losing more than a hundred cubic kilometers (24 cubic miles) of ice each year since 2002. The latest data reveal that Antarctica is losing ice at an accelerating rate, too."

NASA - Is Antarctica Melting?

An honest poster would admit this, and thus come a little closer to understanding something of the topic- Do you have those kind of balls?

Let's see.

Parts of the Antarctic peninsula may indeed be losing ice. However, the vast bulk of Antarctica is gaining ice. So much so that there is a net positive increase in the ice on the continent.

An honest poster would admit this.


Even Nat Geo admits it...so why don't you?


"Satellite data show that, over the past 30 years, Arctic sea ice has declined while Antarctic sea ice has mysteriously expanded, according to study leader Jiping Liu, a research scientist at Georgia Tech in Atlanta."

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

Why Antarctic Sea Ice Is Growing in a Warmer World

 

[Saigon]

No answer from Skooks there I see. What a surprise.

It just amazes me that posters would rather mouth of and be wrong and then get up to speed and be right.

Westwall -

And yes - the Antarctic is losing LAND ice. It's a plain, simple verifable fact, and one I think we can assume you know yourself. How often do we see that on these threads?

I don't understand at all what posters like yourself gain by pursuing arguments you know full well have no merit whatsoever. It's just so mindless - particularly when you must realise anyone with google can establish that you are either stupid or lying in about 1.5 seconds.

For anyone actually interested in the topic, here is an overview:

Estimates of recent changes in Antarctic land ice range from losing 100 Gt/year to over 300 Gt/year. Because 360 Gt/year represents an annual sea level rise of 1 mm/year, recent estimates indicate a contribution of between 0.27 mm/year and 0.83 mm/year coming from Antarctica. There is of course uncertainty in the estimations methods but multiple different types of measurement techniques (explained here) all show the same thing, Antarctica is losing land ice as a whole, and these losses are accelerating quickly.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/antarctica-gaining-ice.htm

 

[konradv]

Check this out boys.........the k00ks are back at it this am..........

Arctic Ice Melt, Sea Level Rise May Pose Imminent Threat To Island Nations, Climate Scientist Says

And what a surprise............always talking about the Arctic ice. As if the south pole doesnt exist!!!

How about reading an article once in a while? Antarctica IS mentioned. FAIL!!!

LOL........where the ice is expanding!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Except for a tiny area in the western part of Antarctica, the whole fucking thing is expanding faster than Oprah coming off her twinkie diet.........the dickhead scientist conveniently ignores that though!!!

Hardly the point. You said Antarctica wasn't mentioned, but it was. So, either you didn't read the article or you lied. Either way it puts all your posts in question.

 

[Saigon]

Konrad -

I think the fact that Skooks can't read or write might also reflect on the credibiity of his threads...!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Ice continues to melt as part of the recent overall warming trend that melted the ice off of North America and all of Canada.

Shocking, I tell you.

 

[Saigon]

Frank -

It is shocking, but I think we both realise that you lack the honesty and balls to discuss the issue.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Frank -

It is shocking, but I think we both realise that you lack the honesty and balls to discuss the issue.

See how the blue temperature line starts to spike up 20,000 years ago? That melted an entire continent of ice off of northern America and all of Canada

The temperature today is still in the "Melting a continent of ice" range of 8 degrees warmer than it was 20,000 years ago.

That's what's melting the ice.

 

[mamooth]

Er, no. The warmup ended 8,000 years ago, as your own graph clearly shows. Natural cycles had the earth in a very slow temperature decline. Until very recently, when the earth suddenly flipflopped into fast warming.

The AGW side has an explanation for that which matches all the observed data, accounts for all natural cycles, and which has made accurate predictions for decades. That's why AGW theory has credibility.

To have credibility yourself, you need to have a theory that explains the observed data. Your "natural cycles" theory fails completely in that regard.

 

[westwall]

Er, no. The warmup ended 8,000 years ago, as your own graph clearly shows. Natural cycles had the earth in a very slow temperature decline. Until very recently, when the earth suddenly flipflopped into fast warming.

The AGW side has an explanation for that which matches all the observed data, accounts for all natural cycles, and which has made accurate predictions for decades. That's why AGW theory has credibility.

To have credibility yourself, you need to have a theory that explains the observed data. Your "natural cycles" theory fails completely in that regard.

Wrong again buckwheat. You and Saigon love to state untruths about how we won't "discuss" the issues, yet it's you who won't address historical fact and current scientific papers that refute your POV.

You two, instead, wish to discuss nothing you merely wish to spew invective AT people.

There is no discussion in anything you present.

For your info mamooth, 8000 years ago witnessed a warming spike that is called the HOLOCENE THERMAL MAXIMUM. Amazingly enough it was MUCH warmer than it is today and no CO2 drove it. In fact CO2 levels began to spike hundreds of years AFTER the fact.

You wish to "discuss" things? Start with that.

 

[flacaltenn]

Er, no. The warmup ended 8,000 years ago, as your own graph clearly shows. Natural cycles had the earth in a very slow temperature decline. Until very recently, when the earth suddenly flipflopped into fast warming.

The AGW side has an explanation for that which matches all the observed data, accounts for all natural cycles, and which has made accurate predictions for decades. That's why AGW theory has credibility.

To have credibility yourself, you need to have a theory that explains the observed data. Your "natural cycles" theory fails completely in that regard.

That's not much different from honestly saying that for 10 or 12 years, the CURRENT warming has ceased.. We both know in both cases -- we're sitting at RELATIVE thermal maximums for those periods.

You say the warming ended 8000 years ago --- then I can say the current warming ended in 1998. Both of us would playing fast and loose with math and science, but neither of us are lying...

And BTW --- AGW attempts to HIDE and OBSCURE any "natural cycle" that doesn't sign their checks. The 1.2W/m2 solar TSI increase since 1700 is ALSO at a relative MAXIMUM.
The time to reach equilibrium in the oceans is??????

 

[Saigon]

Westwall, Flac -

Before moving on, would both of you mind acknowlding that Antarctica is experiencing net loss of land ice?

This might mean we don't have to go through the same nonsense on the next thread.

 

[IanC]

Westwall, Flac -

Before moving on, would both of you mind acknowlding that Antarctica is experiencing net loss of land ice?

This might mean we don't have to go through the same nonsense on the next thread.

why on earth would anyone acknowledge that??????????

when satellite altimetry was started the first figures were along the lines of 50GT/yr loss plus or minus 60GT/yr.

then we got the moving rivers of ice graphics with claims of unprecedented ice loss to the tune of up to 300GT/yr with a sea level rise of almost 1mm/yr just from the Antarctic alone.

and who could forget Steig's cover story in Nature showing warming all over Antarctica? too bad they wouldnt print the rebuttal paper that showed the calculations were wrong in a very Mann-like way, with typical principal components screwups.

and the oceans melting the land-footed ice sheets from below. as if the oceans hadnt always melted the ice from below.

H. Jay Zwally is an alarmist scientist who wrote many of those papers claiming doom from out of control sea level rise via Antarctica melting, and shrilly announced that the Artic would be ice free by 2012 after the 2007 minimum. what does he say about Antarctic melting now? in 2011(http://www.waisworkshop.org/presentations/2011/Session4/Zwally.pdf ) he had seemingly reversed his direction and said there was a 38GT/yr
increase. and in 2012(http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20120013495_2012013235.pdf) that increase has gone up to 49GT/yr.

personally I think ice shrinkage or growth at both of the poles is governed by natural variation and is certainly not proof or disproof of AGW. but to ask people to acknowledge the factual nature of Antarctic ice decrease (at lease you didnt describe it as the rapidly accelerating decrease) is preposterous.

 

[flacaltenn]

Westwall, Flac -

Before moving on, would both of you mind acknowlding that Antarctica is experiencing net loss of land ice?

This might mean we don't have to go through the same nonsense on the next thread.

Oh -- I guess I forgot that this ENTIRE thread is nothing but a theatrical inquisition and not a debate..

I've seen YOUR standards of proof -- and they suck...

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Er, no. The warmup ended 8,000 years ago, as your own graph clearly shows. Natural cycles had the earth in a very slow temperature decline. Until very recently, when the earth suddenly flipflopped into fast warming.

The AGW side has an explanation for that which matches all the observed data, accounts for all natural cycles, and which has made accurate predictions for decades. That's why AGW theory has credibility.

To have credibility yourself, you need to have a theory that explains the observed data. Your "natural cycles" theory fails completely in that regard.

How did the warm up "end" if its still 8 degree warmer than when the trend started?

Did you mean to say that the warming that melted the ice, the same trend that melted the ice sheet shown below, continues and has plateaued in a + or - 1 degree range that is still 8 degrees warmer than when the trend started?

The sudden "flip flop" into warming started 20,000 years ago, was not driven by CO2 and uncovered Northern USA and all of Canada

 

[Dot Com]

I have it up to HERE w/ Deniers!!!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I have it up to HERE w/ Deniers!!!

600,000 year data set is a denier! Tear into the chart! Let the butthurt flow through you! A Warmer draws his strength from his hatred of science

 

[westwall]

I have it up to HERE w/ Deniers!!!

I AGREE! You science and history DENIERs piss me off! Read a darned book and educate yourselves. You are so woefully ignorant of the science and actual historical fact it is offensive.

Opinion is one thing. Uniformed opinion, such as yours, is an abomination!

 

[Bigfoot]

Westwall, Flac -

Before moving on, would both of you mind acknowlding that Antarctica is experiencing net loss of land ice?

This might mean we don't have to go through the same nonsense on the next thread.

LOL, that is untrue. Just this morning I was reading that the antarctic ice pack was increasing and that global warmists were blaming the increase in antarctic ice on global warming! You guys are killing me here!

 

[skookerasbil]

meh on all of this shit......the south pole ice is expanding except for a tiny area of the western shelf........

Anybody notice that the k00ks ALWAYS post up North Pole photos????!!!

 

[flacaltenn]

I have it up to HERE w/ Deniers!!!

Cool.. Where exactly are you up to?