Antarctic sea ice 2016: Historic lows

[ding]

Why yes, the models have been proven wrong. Far too conservative. The melting of the ice at both poles is proceeding far faster than the 'alarmists' predicted.

Latched onto 'very rapid change'? That is the terms the scientists that are studying the climate are using. You are entitled to your own opinion, not your own facts.

That is a hilarious. I have not heard that one before. Is that why Hansen has said we don't have to do anything right now? Because the models have been too conservative?

 

[ScienceRocks]

For Dec. 18th JAXA has posted 7,529,128 km2 for SIE around Antarctica.

Down by 156,225 km2.

 

[SSDD]

Their climate models have been proven wrong. The amplifying feedbacks have been proven wrong. Then it was severe weather events. As soon as one is proven wrong you people latch onto something else. You dismiss your defeats and ignore your incongruities. Now you have latched on to "very rapid change" as your new battle cry. When that folly is shown to be false it will be something else. You are the worst kind of stupid.

It will soon be time for these people to pay the piper.....I am damned interested in seeing the very public debate between climate science and skeptics that is looming very large on the horizon...a debate in which answers to the hard questions that climate science and their useful idiots have been conveniently allowed to ignore for the past few decades. Pretty soon, everyone but the terminally stupid are going to know that the emperor has, in fact, been wearing no clothes.

 

[SSDD]

Why yes, the models have been proven wrong. Far too conservative. The melting of the ice at both poles is proceeding far faster than the 'alarmists' predicted.

Latched onto 'very rapid change'? That is the terms the scientists that are studying the climate are using. You are entitled to your own opinion, not your own facts.

That is a hilarious. I have not heard that one before. Is that why Hansen has said we don't have to do anything right now? Because the models have been too conservative?

It is like his head is not buried in the sand, but in concrete...concrete reinforced with rebar....

I wonder if the very public debate between climate pseudoscience and skeptics that will be coming very soon will be enough to drag him back to reality?

 

[Crick]

Tell us SID, where do you see this debate taking place?

 

[Old Rocks]

The global sea ice is now 5 standard deviations from the norm. That is one in a 2 1/2 million chance of being natural variance. In physics, 5 standard deviations is the golden standard for surety.

 

[SSDD]

Tell us SID, where do you see this debate taking place?

Why in the EPA...where climate science gets vetted...publicly in the coming administration. Don't want to keep the AGW scam secret forever do we?

 

[Old Rocks]

I do not see it being debated there at all. I simply see the scientists being fired, or told to shut up. Plain old Lysenkoism, is the best tradition of Trump's biggest supporter. The American voter was not Trump's biggest support, 2.7 million more of them voted for Clinton.

 

[ScienceRocks]

For Dec. 19th JAXA has posted 7,313,591 km2 for SIE around Antarctica.

Down by 215,537 km2.

 

[SSDD]

I do not see it being debated there at all. I simply see the scientists being fired, or told to shut up.

That would be because you do not see science being vetted there....nor have you, for a very long time...when people don't do their jobs, they should be replaced with people who do....for a very long time, the EPA has been nothing but a mouthpiece for the administration's anti capitalism agenda.

Plain old Lysenkoism, is the best tradition of Trump's biggest supporter. The American voter was not Trump's biggest support, 2.7 million more of them voted for Clinton.

Which part of this map are you having problems understanding? Other than Mass, NH, RI, and CT, which states did Hillary actually win? We live in a representative republic rocks...have you lived these 40+ years not knowing that?

 

[Crick]

A more accurate representation would show the entire country shades of purple with very little deviation in color.

 

[ScienceRocks]

For Dec. 20th JAXA has posted 7,149,895 km2 for SIE around Antarctica.

Down by 163,696 km2.

 

[SSDD]

A more accurate representation would show the entire country shades of purple with very little deviation in color.

It is a county by county counting crick...with the gerrymandering of districts that goes on every state, a county by county count is about as real a representation of how we vote as is possible...sour grapes over losing is the response of an undeveloped brain...it is the response of a child...

 

[Crick]

We all know what it is. It is a depiction of a winner-take-all system. It is NOT a representation of how the citizens of this nation voted. How else do you explain Trump winning when he lost the popular vote by over 2,800,000 votes? Gerrymandering was responsible in large part. So is the dominance of "state's rights" over the rights of the individual. Trump wasn't elected by the people, he was elected by a flawed system.

Now then

Year-to-year variability in East Antarctic sea ice seas | Open-i

 

[ScienceRocks]

For Dec. 24th JAXA has posted 6,441,674 km2 for SIE around Antarctica.

Down by 259,740 km2.

 

[ding]

5) Isn’t the Melting of Arctic Sea Ice Evidence of Warming?Warming, yes…manmade warming, no. Arctic sea ice naturally melts back every summer, but that meltback was observed to reach a peak in 2007. But we have relatively accurate, satellite-based measurements of Arctic (and Antarctic) sea ice only since 1979. It is entirely possible that late summer Arctic Sea ice cover was just as low in the 1920s or 1930s, a period when Arctic thermometer data suggests it was just as warm. Unfortunately, there is no way to know, because we did not have satellites back then. Interestingly, Antarctic sea ice has been growing nearly as fast as Arctic ice has been melting over the last 30+ years. Roy Spencer

 

[ScienceRocks]

For Dec. 25th JAXA has posted 6,285,842 km2 for SIE around Antarctica.

Down by 155,832 km2.

 

[Old Rocks]

5) Isn’t the Melting of Arctic Sea Ice Evidence of Warming?Warming, yes…manmade warming, no. Arctic sea ice naturally melts back every summer, but that meltback was observed to reach a peak in 2007. But we have relatively accurate, satellite-based measurements of Arctic (and Antarctic) sea ice only since 1979. It is entirely possible that late summer Arctic Sea ice cover was just as low in the 1920s or 1930s, a period when Arctic thermometer data suggests it was just as warm. Unfortunately, there is no way to know, because we did not have satellites back then. Interestingly, Antarctic sea ice has been growing nearly as fast as Arctic ice has been melting over the last 30+ years. Roy Spencer

No, you stupid ass, 2012 was the worst decline in Arctic Sea Ice. And what is the driving force for the increase in heat? Can't be the sun, the TSI is declining. Since GHGs retain more heat that otherwise would be retained, and we have added more than 120 ppm of CO2, and more than 1000 ppb of CH4, stands to reason that is the present driving force behind the warming.

 

[ding]

5) Isn’t the Melting of Arctic Sea Ice Evidence of Warming?Warming, yes…manmade warming, no. Arctic sea ice naturally melts back every summer, but that meltback was observed to reach a peak in 2007. But we have relatively accurate, satellite-based measurements of Arctic (and Antarctic) sea ice only since 1979. It is entirely possible that late summer Arctic Sea ice cover was just as low in the 1920s or 1930s, a period when Arctic thermometer data suggests it was just as warm. Unfortunately, there is no way to know, because we did not have satellites back then. Interestingly, Antarctic sea ice has been growing nearly as fast as Arctic ice has been melting over the last 30+ years. Roy Spencer

No, you stupid ass, 2012 was the worst decline in Arctic Sea Ice. And what is the driving force for the increase in heat? Can't be the sun, the TSI is declining. Since GHGs retain more heat that otherwise would be retained, and we have added more than 120 ppm of CO2, and more than 1000 ppb of CH4, stands to reason that is the present driving force behind the warming.

You do realize that ice will melt when temperatures are below freezing, right?

 

[Old Rocks]

Are you talking of sublimation? Or of pressure affecting the temperature of phase changes? A very general statement with almost no meaning in this context.