- Banned
- #461
Actually, it was the NASA data collection people that put out the truth...
NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses
NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses
2016 Arctic sea ice thread
- Thread starter ScienceRocks
- Start date
RollingThunder
Gold Member
- Mar 22, 2010
- 4,818
- 525
- 155
You've posted that article before....of course it is hilariously ironic that you cite NASA after you have rejected and denied ALL of the other climate science they publish......but back in posts 421 & 422 it was pointed out to you that the study you quote is disputed by other climate scientists for a variety of reasons, including that the data used in that study was eight years out of date. Also that study does not in any way refute global warming, as you moronically seem to imagine.
Your post #421
- Banned
- #463
There is a difference between DATA and FUDGE, but you have yet to figure that out...
Earth is not warming, according to the highly correlated RAW DATA from satellites and balloons.
The oceans are not rising, because there is no net ice melt ongoing, which is why the TIPPYs use islands right on the lip of the Pacific Ring of Fire to claim they are "sinking" because of "ocean rise." You didn't catch that one either...
RollingThunder
Gold Member
- Mar 22, 2010
- 4,818
- 525
- 155
Oh, LaDumbshit, your drivel got debunked but you're too retarded to realize that fact and too much of a troll to admit it.
The Earth IS rapidly warming according to all of the scientific temperature data and according to a wide variety of hard physical evidence, no matter what your fraudulent crackpot denier cult myths tell you, you poor dumbshit reality denier. The ice all around the world IS melting, the sea levels ARE rising, and your head IS jammed way far up your ass.
RollingThunder
Gold Member
- Mar 22, 2010
- 4,818
- 525
- 155
More vacuous, reality-denying, anti-science nonsense, based entirely on cultic delusions, from the imbecilic troll LaDumbshit.
jc456
Diamond Member
- Dec 18, 2013
- 150,842
- 34,766
- 2,180
but spot on.
RollingThunder
Gold Member
- Mar 22, 2010
- 4,818
- 525
- 155
And another imbecilic troll agrees with the first one....no surprise and no significance.
In reality....The Earth IS rapidly warming according to all of the scientific temperature data.
- Banned
- #469
Why does one Earth polar circle, the Antarctic, have 9 times the ice of the other, the Arctic?
If CO2 is melting Arctic Sea Ice, why is Antarctic Sea Ice growing?
During the past million years, North America thawed while Greenland froze, all at the same time with the same atmosphere with the same amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, which proved what about CO2 and climate change??
LMAO!!!
Being a PARROT does not mean one is intelligent, it means 180 degrees in the opposite direction...
If CO2 is melting Arctic Sea Ice, why is Antarctic Sea Ice growing?
During the past million years, North America thawed while Greenland froze, all at the same time with the same atmosphere with the same amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, which proved what about CO2 and climate change??
LMAO!!!
Being a PARROT does not mean one is intelligent, it means 180 degrees in the opposite direction...
WG-I, AR5, Chapter 2, Observations: Atmosphere and Surface
Atmospheric Composition
It is certain that atmospheric burdens of the well-mixed greenhouse gases (GHGs) targeted by the Kyoto Protocol increased from 2005 to 2011. The atmospheric abundance of carbon dioxide (CO2) was 390.5 ppm (390.3 to 390.7)1 in 2011; this is 40% greater than in 1750. Atmospheric nitrous oxide (N2O) was 324.2 ppb (324.0 to 324.4) in 2011 and has increased by 20% since 1750. Average annual increases in CO2 and N2O from 2005 to 2011 are comparable to those observed from 1996 to 2005. Atmospheric methane (CH4) was 1803.2 ppb (1801.2 to 1805.2) in 2011; this is 150% greater than before 1750. CH4 began increasing in 2007 after remaining nearly constant from 1999 to 2006. Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) all continue to increase relatively rapidly, but their contributions to radiative forcing are less than 1% of the total by well-mixed GHGs. {2.2.1.1}
Last edited:
Temperature
It is certain that Global Mean Surface Temperature has increased since the late 19th century. Each of the past three decades has been successively warmer at the Earth’s surface than all the previous decades in the instrumental record, and the first decade of the 21st century has been the warmest. The globally averaged combined land and ocean surface temperature data as calculated by a linear trend, show a warming of 0.85 [0.65 to 1.06] °C, over the period 1880–2012, when multiple independently produced datasets exist, and about 0.72°C [0.49°C to 0.89°C] over the period 1951–2012. The total increase between the average of the 1850–1900 period and the 2003– 2012 period is 0.78 [0.72 to 0.85] °C and the total increase between the average of the 1850–1900 period and the reference period for projections, 1986−2005, is 0.61 [0.55 to 0.67] °C, based on the single longest dataset available. For the longest period when calculation of regional trends is sufficiently complete (1901–2012), almost the entire globe has experienced surface warming. In addition to robust multidecadal warming, global mean surface temperature exhibits substantial decadal and interannual variability. Owing to natural variability, trends based on short records are very sensitive to the beginning and end dates and do not in general reflect long-term climate trends. As one example, the rate of warming over the past 15 years (1998–2012; 0.05 [–0.05 to +0.15] °C per decade), which begins with a strong El Niño, is smaller than the rate calculated since 1951 (1951–2012; 0.12 [0.08 to 0.14] °C per decade). Trends for 15-year periods starting in 1995, 1996, and 1997 are 0.13 [0.02 to 0.24], 0.14 [0.03 to 0.24] and 0.07 [–0.02 to 0.18], respectively. Several independently analyzed data records of global and regional land-surface air temperature (LSAT) obtained from station observations are in broad agreement that LSAT has increased. Sea surface temperatures (SSTs) have also increased.
Intercomparisons of new SST data records obtained by different measurement methods, including satellite data, have resulted in better understanding of uncertainties and biases in the records. {2.4.1, 2.4.2, 2.4.3; Box 9.2}
It is unlikely that any uncorrected urban heat-island effects and land use change effects have raised the estimated centennial globally averaged LSAT trends by more than 10% of the reported trend. This is an average value; in some regions with rapid development, urban heat island and land use change impacts on regional trends may be substantially larger. {2.4.1.3}
Confidence is medium in reported decreases in observed global diurnal temperature range (DTR), noted as a key uncertainty in the AR4. Several recent analyses of the raw data on which many previous analyses were based point to the potential for biases that differently affect maximum and minimum average temperatures. However, apparent changes in DTR are much smaller than reported changes in average temperatures and therefore it is virtually certain that maximum and minimum temperatures have increased since 1950. {2.4.1.2}
Based on multiple independent analyses of measurements from radiosondes and satellite sensors it is virtually certain that globally the troposphere has warmed and the stratosphere has cooled since the mid-20th century. Despite unanimous agreement on the sign of the trends, substantial disagreement exists among available estimates as to the rate of temperature changes, particularly outside the NH extratropical troposphere, which has been well sampled by radiosondes. Hence there is only medium confidence in the rate of change and its vertical structure in the NH extratropical troposphere and low confidence elsewhere. {2.4.4}
It is certain that Global Mean Surface Temperature has increased since the late 19th century. Each of the past three decades has been successively warmer at the Earth’s surface than all the previous decades in the instrumental record, and the first decade of the 21st century has been the warmest. The globally averaged combined land and ocean surface temperature data as calculated by a linear trend, show a warming of 0.85 [0.65 to 1.06] °C, over the period 1880–2012, when multiple independently produced datasets exist, and about 0.72°C [0.49°C to 0.89°C] over the period 1951–2012. The total increase between the average of the 1850–1900 period and the 2003– 2012 period is 0.78 [0.72 to 0.85] °C and the total increase between the average of the 1850–1900 period and the reference period for projections, 1986−2005, is 0.61 [0.55 to 0.67] °C, based on the single longest dataset available. For the longest period when calculation of regional trends is sufficiently complete (1901–2012), almost the entire globe has experienced surface warming. In addition to robust multidecadal warming, global mean surface temperature exhibits substantial decadal and interannual variability. Owing to natural variability, trends based on short records are very sensitive to the beginning and end dates and do not in general reflect long-term climate trends. As one example, the rate of warming over the past 15 years (1998–2012; 0.05 [–0.05 to +0.15] °C per decade), which begins with a strong El Niño, is smaller than the rate calculated since 1951 (1951–2012; 0.12 [0.08 to 0.14] °C per decade). Trends for 15-year periods starting in 1995, 1996, and 1997 are 0.13 [0.02 to 0.24], 0.14 [0.03 to 0.24] and 0.07 [–0.02 to 0.18], respectively. Several independently analyzed data records of global and regional land-surface air temperature (LSAT) obtained from station observations are in broad agreement that LSAT has increased. Sea surface temperatures (SSTs) have also increased.
Intercomparisons of new SST data records obtained by different measurement methods, including satellite data, have resulted in better understanding of uncertainties and biases in the records. {2.4.1, 2.4.2, 2.4.3; Box 9.2}
It is unlikely that any uncorrected urban heat-island effects and land use change effects have raised the estimated centennial globally averaged LSAT trends by more than 10% of the reported trend. This is an average value; in some regions with rapid development, urban heat island and land use change impacts on regional trends may be substantially larger. {2.4.1.3}
Confidence is medium in reported decreases in observed global diurnal temperature range (DTR), noted as a key uncertainty in the AR4. Several recent analyses of the raw data on which many previous analyses were based point to the potential for biases that differently affect maximum and minimum average temperatures. However, apparent changes in DTR are much smaller than reported changes in average temperatures and therefore it is virtually certain that maximum and minimum temperatures have increased since 1950. {2.4.1.2}
Based on multiple independent analyses of measurements from radiosondes and satellite sensors it is virtually certain that globally the troposphere has warmed and the stratosphere has cooled since the mid-20th century. Despite unanimous agreement on the sign of the trends, substantial disagreement exists among available estimates as to the rate of temperature changes, particularly outside the NH extratropical troposphere, which has been well sampled by radiosondes. Hence there is only medium confidence in the rate of change and its vertical structure in the NH extratropical troposphere and low confidence elsewhere. {2.4.4}
RollingThunder
Gold Member
- Mar 22, 2010
- 4,818
- 525
- 155
Your complete ignorance about science and dumbfounded disbelief in science do not actually constitute an argument, LaDumbshit. They just demonstrate what a clueless crackpot you are.
Since that drivel is complete bullshit, it "proved" only that you are a delusional retard, LaDumbshit.
One reason that everybody knows that you are an utter retard, you moronic parrot.
Meanwhile, on topic and in the real world....
Arctic sea ice melt “like a train wreck” says US scientist
Arctic feels like late June or July say experts as sea ice shrinks to what many believe will be a record low
ClimateHome
By Ed King
23/05/2016
(excerpts)
Arctic sea ice levels are on course to hit a new record low as warming at the North Pole accelerates. Snowmelt has started at the earliest date yet in 73 years, according to the US government’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. “It looks like late June or early July right now,” said David Douglas, research biologist with the US Geological Survey. “Polar bears are having to make their decisions about how to move and where to go on thinner ice pack that’s mostly first-year ice.”
US climate agency: 2016 on course to be hottest on record
Veteran Arctic biologist George Divoky described the change as a “train wreck you can’t look away from” warning an early spring would impact wildlife and tundra plants. “You never know what you’re going to see and this year’s as big a mystery as any,” he added. Temperatures in Alaska hit 11C above average this winter. In December a storm sent what experts described as a “pulse” of heat to the region, spiking mercury from -30C to freezing. “Satellite photos from mid-May depict an early sea-ice breakup with an ominous series of openings, known as leads, extending deep into the Arctic,” said a statement from NOAA.
Last edited:
skookerasbil
Platinum Member
Except Ledexter is pwning your shit s0n!!
Nobody cares about an increase of .2 degrees!! Only the emotional hemophiliacs get all hysterical.
You are representing about 1% of the population!!
jc456
Diamond Member
- Dec 18, 2013
- 150,842
- 34,766
- 2,180
this is hilarious:
"Snowmelt has started at the earliest date yet in 73 years, "
Which therefore means it isn't the earliest ever. And means historically, the past was as warm or warmer than today. Ooops.....
- Banned
- #475
False. The surface temp of GROWING URBAN AREAS has increased. The surface of Greenland, Antarctica, Siberia, and many other undeveloped places has not warmed at all, neither has the atmosphere or the oceans...
RollingThunder
Gold Member
- Mar 22, 2010
- 4,818
- 525
- 155
Nope! It means that 73 years ago is when they STARTED keeping snow cover records at Barrow, Alaska. It also means that you are once again clearly demonstrating that you are an incredibly clueless retard, JustCrazy, too stupid to get the facts by simply opening the link in the article to the source of that quote. And no, you moronic nutjob, "historically the past was" NOT "as warm or warmer than today", or people would have noticed the ice melting or a score of other consequences if the recent past (before 73 years ago) had indeed been supposedly "warmer than today" . The depth of your stupidity still can astonish. Not to mention the instrumental temperature records that go back 137 years, or the proxy records that provide a good indication of the global temperatures for (at least) the last ten thousand years, all of which clearly indicate that temperatures now are hotter that they have ever been for at least 6000 years, or possibly since the last interglacial period over 120,000 years ago.
Arctic set for record-breaking melt this summer
NOAA
(excerpts)
The record heat baking Alaska is poised to smash a host of climate records in 2016, including the earliest snowmelt date at NOAA’s Barrow Observatory, the northernmost point in the nation. Staff at NOAA’s Barrow Observatory reported snowmelt occurred May 13, the earliest snowmelt date in 73 years of record keeping, beating the previous mark set in 2002 by a full 10 days. The early melting follows a record-setting winter that saw temperatures average more than 11 degrees above normal for the 49th State, shattering the previous record set in 2015. At 320 miles north of the Arctic Circle, Barrow is usually one of the last places in the United States to lose snow cover.
Snow’s not the only thing that’s vanishing. Preliminary data from the National Snow and Ice Data Center indicate 2016 will set the record for minimum winter sea-ice extent, eclipsing the 2015 mark. Satellite photos from mid-May depict an early sea-ice breakup with an ominous series of openings, known as leads, extending deep into the Arctic.
Last edited:
RollingThunder
Gold Member
- Mar 22, 2010
- 4,818
- 525
- 155
LOLOLOLOL......you keep making those kind of anti-science, bullshit claims, LaDumbshit, but you can never back anything up with any evidence supporting your fraudulent delusional nonsense.
All you've got is your own hot air and your insanity.
It is called GLOBAL WARMING for a reason, you poor crackpot shithead.
Observed trend in temperature from 1900 to 2012; yellow to red indicates warming, while shades of blue indicate cooling. Gray indicates areas for which there are no data. There are substantial regional variations in trends across the planet, though the overall trend is warming. Map from FAQ appendix of the 2014 National Climate Assessment. Originally provided by NOAA NCDC.
***
jc456
Diamond Member
- Dec 18, 2013
- 150,842
- 34,766
- 2,180
so since you have no records before that, you have no idea. So how is it I was in error? It still says exactly the same thing and does not prove anything.
RollingThunder
Gold Member
- Mar 22, 2010
- 4,818
- 525
- 155
So....you're still as retarded and clueless as always, JustCrazy. Too bad you're too stupid to comprehend what is said to you.
- Banned
- #480
For the 115th time...
Key Argument for Global Warming Critics Evaporates
"While surface thermometers have clearly shown that the Earth's surface is warming, (highly correlated) satellite and weather balloon (raw) data have actually suggested the opposite, that the atmosphere was (microscopically) cooling."
And that was a big big problem for the Tippys. Two and only two measurements of atmospheric temperature both showing NO WARMING in highly correlated fashion. What is a Tippy to do?
A: FUDGE
Fudge the satellites with a bogus "orbit wobble" argument, and fudge the balloons with a "thermometers were just wrong" weasel.
To fall for that type of fudging, you have to be pathetically stupid, devoid of any intent to be objective etc...
Key Argument for Global Warming Critics Evaporates
"While surface thermometers have clearly shown that the Earth's surface is warming, (highly correlated) satellite and weather balloon (raw) data have actually suggested the opposite, that the atmosphere was (microscopically) cooling."
And that was a big big problem for the Tippys. Two and only two measurements of atmospheric temperature both showing NO WARMING in highly correlated fashion. What is a Tippy to do?
A: FUDGE
Fudge the satellites with a bogus "orbit wobble" argument, and fudge the balloons with a "thermometers were just wrong" weasel.
To fall for that type of fudging, you have to be pathetically stupid, devoid of any intent to be objective etc...
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
-
-
-
Filed under "Duh": Democrats "rattled" by new book they hid Biden's frailty.- Started by odanny
- Replies: 9
